Trump defenders have a full time job
(ibb.co)
Comments (59)
sorted by:
Do you always ask for proof when you see memes, or just memes you disagree with? I doubt Trump said this. But we know he said that he'd date his own daughter.
On Stern:
Here's a whole list.
As a father, I say it is creepy weird to say that about one's own daughter.
As far as "afraid Trump will win again," yes, I am. I believe he's part of a right-wing Christian (not "conservative," not "patriotic") plot to turn America into a Fascist Christian state.
This is from John Coleman's Conspirators' Hierarchy: The Committee of 300:
" I pursued my investigations, pressing on in the face of severe risks, attacks on myself and my wife, financial losses, continual harassment, threats and calumny, all part of a carefully-crafted and orchestrated program to discredit me, run by government agents and informers, embedded in the so-called Christian rightwing, the "Identity Movement" and rightwing "patriotic" groups. These agents operated, and still operate, under cover of strong and fearless outspoken opposition to Judaism their main enemy, they would have us believe."
It's these so-called "Christian" rightwing, Identity Movement people who are using Trump to destroy the Constitution. Do you think they will let just anyone have the right to bear arms? They will not care about any civil rights when they do away with democracy.
It's not so much Trump. He's just a useful and willing tool.
The "commie version of the people" is literally the working class. Read the Communist Manifesto.
I 100% agree with this goal. But what does building a wall, etc, have to do with that? What Trump actually does is divide the working class (and ok, the small businessman). His policies threw crumbs to us but totally enriched the corporate elites. The crumbs were just the bait for us to swallow the whole package.
And on the flip side, throw up some red, white, blue background, with stars and stripes and the Trump crowd is fine with it. Big Pharma makes the vaccine, but also makes ivermectin (for example).
You are stereotyping an entire religion. Islam has ruled areas for long periods of time and was mostly tolerant. That hasn't been the case lately, but I would argue that colonialism created the merger of authoritarian government with Islam in order to control those populations to enable the continued extraction of resources. For example, the Saudis are our friends but are just as brutal as any other Islamic state in the region.
I also don't think the left "embraces" Islam. I'd say they believe in freedom of religion. Big difference.
Your fear of the Muslim Brotherhood is much like my fear of Christian Identity in this country. We aren't much in danger from the Muslim Brotherhood. Christian Identity is bigger threat here.
I don't understand completely what's happening. Maybe this is just something that's been suppressed for a long time, but it isn't just like parents or liberals forcing kids to change sex. My own former nephew now niece identifies as female. I don't know why. It certainly wasn't because of her parents. My brother is a farmer and is befuddled and it's been hard for him to accept. I used to play Magic, Minecraft, D & D, build lego robots with my now niece who never seemed particularly feminine. So I don't understand completely either. But it came from her. That's all I know.
Nobody is going into Christian homes and changing children's sex or gender.
Tell me how liberals trample all over the first and second amendments? (Remember, those are amendments to the original Constitution, so they were changes made to the Constitution, which can be done, the Constitution allows for that).
So do Christians. 200 years of slavery here in the United States, by and large, condoned and even justified by Christians.
Islam has banned slavery, but, yes, it is still practiced even when officially abolished. I'm not a fan of Islam. I am merely saying that liberals haven't "embraced" Islam. In the US, we practice freedom of religion. That includes all religions, including Islam. Those religions though still have to follow our laws. So what we need to maintain and fight for is democracy. And I would be willing to bet that the vast, vast majority of Muslims in the US want democracy and don't support slavery.
Again, you say "they." It certainly isn't Muslims in the US killing Christians. And remember, Muslims are also persecuted in some parts of the world. Let me be clear: I oppose Muslims persecuting Christians, Buddhists persecuting Muslims, Christians persecuting Buddhists or whatever. I also 100% oppose any religious state. Religion and government should be entirely separate. You cannot have a democracy if there is a state religion or a religion based on a state. In those cases where Christians are persecuted, generally speaking, there is an Islamic state. Any authoritarian state scapegoats and murders minority populations. Germans killed Jews, Guatemala killed indigenous people, Vietnamese Christians killed Buddhists, Chinese communists kill Muslims, et etc etc. This is an aspect of authoritarianism. Take state power away from religions and they can't do that. (I know some of those I listed weren't theocracies, per se.)
Most liberals are Christians. 44% of mainline protestants are Democrats. 44% of Catholics are Democrats. 44% of Orthodox Christians are Democrats. 80% of Black Christians are Democrats. You need to use facts, not just whatever you think is true.
Under Islamic law as practiced by Islamic fundamentalists. But I agree there are some horrific Islamic states out there. I wouldn't say liberals "embrace" those states. In fact, it's conservatives who embrace states like Saudi Arabia, not liberals. It was Jared Kushner who cut a deal with Qatar to save his ass on the 666 Park Ave property. It's Trump and family who are literally friends with MBS who had a journalist, an American resident, hacked to pieces. I don't see liberals "embracing" Islam at all, other than to say we practice religious freedom in the United States and people should be persecuted based on their religion.
I don't know what you mean. The first part: no, I don't think that was much of a problem and isn't what has led us to where we're at. What's led us to where we are it is the marriage of conservative Evangelical Christianity with the Republican Party.
I don't know what you mean about the intolerance on the left. Can you be more specific?
Aborting a fetus isn't harming a living being, at least if we follow Roe v Wade guidelines. At that point, the fetus isn't a separate living being. I remember when I was a young Catholic arguing with Protestants about this from the other point of view. I remember them saying it was "just a bunch of cells." But when the GOP starting pushing abortion as a wedge issue, protestants switched their position on it. They did convince me first though.
Everything else I agree with, except the caveat of children who want to transition. I'm still not sure what to think about that.
Can you site in Marx where he says "the government owns everything?"
Can you explain Marx's theory of capital accumulation and what do you think about it?
Both sides are corrupt, I agree. So is Trump. Trump is an utter fraud. Look, his "university" got shut down and he had to pay out $25 million to students he defrauded. His "charity" got shut down for misusing funds. He has a history of cheating workers. Why would you think Trump isn't as corrupt as anyone else?
But following Trump doesn't get the country back. What precise step has Trump taken to take power out of the hands of the corporate elite? He gave them a huge tax break, his advisors were full of Goldman Sachs types. Trump is like the Pied Piper and you are all conned by his false promises. He just says whatever he thinks will rile people up by "owning the libs." That's all he does. If people are woken up and herded off the cliff, that's not helping much.
Have you looked into this? I did because it was extremely concerning. It could be that here we have a mother trying to force her son to be a girl. I don't know. Apparently, it's difficult to assess what the child wants. But this is one case that's being litigated and is also part of a complex custody battle. It's not typical. There aren't liberals going into that house making the boy a girl. The mother herself claims the boy wants to be a girl. The father denies that. I don't have special insight into who is right and who is wrong.I can see where the child could be manipulated by either parent while in that parent's custody. Obviously with the father, I'm sure there's massive approval when boy behaviors are selected.
Do you have any sources for this. I don't believe there is a single school in the USA trying to talk kids into transitioning. Not a single one. If there were, that staff would be immediately fired (rightfully so).
Can you give me one example of schools pushing kids into transitioning?
I'm not sure about cartoons. Would you consider having trans characters in a cartoon "pushing kids into transitioning?" I am unaware of cartoons with trans characters and highly doubt that there are mainstream cartoons that encourage transitioning. I could imagine that there are cartoons that show it's ok to transition. I think that is important for kids who really do want to transition, they should be supported and not ostracized, don't you think?
Yeah, I'm concerned about kids making those choices so early in their lives. But then, when are they supposed to make that choice? I don't know. I don't have the answers. I know people who transitioned and are very happy with their choice to do so. So what's the big deal? It's their life, not mine. But, yeah, as far as kids making that decision, I'm not an expert but I think that there really have to be really careful steps to take or guidelines to follow or something to assess if the child really does in their heart identify as the opposite sex. I don't know what that process is. My own nephew/niece hasn't transitioned yet but apparently wants to. I said earlier that they weren't particularly feminine, but I do remember that in Minecraft, they (I should say "she" because she does want she/her pronouns, I guess) always chose a female avatar. I didn't think that much about it, but now thinking back on that, it might have meant something that I missed.
What do you that it is "even in the tablets they are given?" You mean it is part of the classes that do through their tablets? I don't understand. I can assure you that there is nothing that "pushes" students or encourages them to transition. If you can find something, a primary document, showing opposite then I will believe it. But I won't believe it just from someone saying it's there.
What is taught to them? Would it be wrong to teach kids about trans people? Trans people are people, still deserving of respect and love just like anyone else. In most states, pre-k isn't even public, so if it is in pre-k, that's something to do with that particular pre-school. In public school, I do not believe there is anything "pushing" students to transition. I could see students at some level, particularly high school, being taught about trans people. It's part of the world we live in, so it probably should be addressed.
So you don't agree with red flag laws, but are they really trampling on the Constitution? Hasn't the Supreme Court ruled that, in both speech and right to arms, that the right isn't absolute.
I believe that the way the process works is that there is a hearing within 24 hours after a claim is submitted to the Court. A judge then makes a determination as to whether there is an actual threat. The onus is on the petitioners to present facts to support the claim that there is a danger to the individual or the public. Only then are the weapons turned over. So it's pretty clear there is a due process and it isn't as much of an overstep as you see to believe. If it saves lives, isn't it a good idea?
Also, not just anyone can file the petition. It has to be law enforcement, immediate family, or someone living in the household.
Here's an example: Oregon Red Flag Law
Here is a red state Red Flag law: Indiana Red Flag Law
In the case of Indiana, the petition comes from law enforcement only.
So what specifically do you think is wrong with these laws?
This isn't true at all. When "assault weapons" were banned, owners were allowed to keep their pre-ban weapons. The were even called "pre-bans."
Law enforcement could do that, yes, but we trust the Blue, right? Otherwise, the government would have to get an immediate family member or someone living in the house to do it. Also, there is judicial oversight.
Well, you could give me an example, which is what I asked for. If it's out there, then it shouldn't be very hard to demonstrate. It's not out there, that's why you resort to 'you don't know what to tell you' schtick. You just don't have anything to tell.
I'll look at that site. I'm not hopeful that there will be anything but propaganda there.
EDIT: First thing I looked at was this: Russian Ammo Ban
First, I 100% support taking action against Russia and Putin for poisoning Aleksey Navalny. Why wouldn't we all support the democratic opposition to authoritarian and totally corrupt Putin? This isn't stopping anybody from purchasing all manner of ammo.
I'm turned off already. As if being able to by ammo specifically from Russia (shouldn't we support American manufacturers anyway?) is more important that human rights. Putin hasn't only poisoned and imprisoned Navalny, he has killed people on our soil and in Britain using poison. He's murdered journalists in Russia.
Here's a list of people probably killed on Putin's orders.
I'm disturbed by conservatives turning to eastern European dictatorships or authoritarians as role models, like Tucker Carlson going to Hungary and extolling Orban. Hungary is only considered "partially free" by Freedom House. Why would we want to be like Hungary? Yet that's exactly what Tucker said. CPAC is going to hold a conference there. Why? Why are conservatives attracted to these authoritarians?
Link to Freedom House. Interestlingly, for some reason Hungary was upgraded from 69 to 70 in this year's rating. When I checked a few weeks ago it was a 69 (partially free). Very interesting that it somehow bumped up to 70. ( I put in an inquiry.)
So, yeah, I don't have time for this sort of sensationalism. Embargoing Russian ammos isn't "trampling on the Constititution."
Would that change how you feel if there was? Or would you say "what he really meant was..."?
Yes it would. All I've seen so far is shills doing what you are accusing his supporters of doing with the,
But that is par for the course with you Rules for Radicals types.
Don't knock rules for radicals. Use them.
Be aware of what they are doing and call them out on their lies.
Agreed.
He said it on Howard stern. There is audio out there.
Sure there is. Honk honk.
During the grab them by the pussy taping?
Fuck off back to Reddit
Fuck reddit and fuck pedo defenders like you.
Why do you all always say that? What are you afraid of?
Like Joe Biden who’s daughter said in her diary he took showers with her? Scumbag
Yes. Exactly like that. Trump and Biden are both gross. Don't you agree?
Yep.
He never said that. He is living rent free in your head though.
he says, without irony, on an offshoot of a Donald Trump fanclub
Not in a fan club. Just despise retards posting lies. Makes u no better than some nigger Jew
He literally said this. Out loud. On Howard stern. But keep defending scum.
No he didn’t.
Yes, that was understandably without irony. YOU are the one with the grudge.
So what.
Why ban someone you disagree with?
Nobody is talking about Paris Hilton you subhuman faggot. He said it about his own daughter. Which is WAAYYYYYYYYYYYYY WORSE.
He said he'd date her if he wasn't married and, oh yeah, if she weren't his daughter.
He said she's got a great body.
When asked what he and she had in common, he said he was thinking "sex."
He has said a lot of creepy things about Ivanka.
Huh.
Pictures at socialite parties mean very little. Not like the Clinton's that are photographed at the island with underage girls, or in the Lolita express with underage girls, or together with Ghislain Maxwell at their daughters private wedding.
The Real Trump-Epstein Relationship - While Former President Clinton Partied with Epstein on Orgy Island - Citizen Trump's Relationship Was Mostly Adversarial
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7258023/Jeffrey-Epsteins-pilot-poses-80M-fleet-planes-new-pics-Lolita-jet-emerge.html
Trump is noted on the flight logs once in 1997 only.
Once. When his plane broke down and he hitched a ride with a small plane from one US city to another US city.
Trump never went to the Epstein island, unlike the clintons that went there something like 28 times, on many of those trips bill and hillary ordered the secret service to not accompany them.
The narrative is that trump flew on the lolita express, but the logs don't prove that.
https://www.insider.com/donald-trump-jeffrey-epstein-flight-logs-unsealed-2019-8
The facts are that Trump was the only one willingly cooperating with the investigators of the case surrounding Epstein. The investigators reported they got good information they could act on from him and was very pleased with the willingness to donate time and effort from Trump.
Trump also outed Epstein as a shady character and banned him from his hotels. My guess is Trump is no fan of Epstein.
Here is the lawyer for the girls suing Epstein talking about interactions with Trump in 2009
Called out Bill, Epstein and the "famous island" in 2015. Start at 22:30 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOktR-FbzvU&feature=youtu.be
Here's a tweet he made in 2012 - Trump tweet (2012) - Got to do something about these missing chidlren grabbed by the perverts. Too many incidents--fast trial, death penalty.
Trump Was 'Only One' To Help Prosecutor In 2009 Epstein Case
Fusion GPS Tried And Failed To Link Trump To Jeffrey Epstein
The documents released from the Ghislain Maxwell case also show that witnesses testify that Trump was not involved with the Epstein enterprise.