Anti-Trump Hysteria and Silliness

#9,301
#9,301
BowlBrother85 said:
I find it strange that a pro-life organization has hijacked the name "Susan B. Anthony" to begin with. For her time she was as liberal as a woman could possibly be. She fought hard for women's suffrage and against laws that gave husbands complete control over the finances of their wives. Per a leading academic authority on Anthony, Ann D. Gordon, Susan B. Anthony "never voiced an opinion about the sanctity of fetal life... and she never voiced an opinion about using the power of the state to require that pregnancies be brought to term". Based on other things we know about her though, it seems more than likely that she would have been pro-choice... but because she never argued one way or the other, this organization feels at liberty to use her name which (falsely) implies that she was well established as pro-life.
Click to expand...
Not any stranger than Leftists fighting for organizations that kill homosexuals and treat women like cattle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#9,306
#9,306
VolProf is about to slap Freak with a big lawsuit for preventing him from expressing his political views on VolNation. I’m sure evillawyer will help him with the paperwork
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,308
#9,308
If twitter is a public space, like a sidewalk, then they're going to have to reverse all of their bannings from the platform. Unleash the Russian bots!

Can't wait for the @TN_GOP account to come back.
 
#9,309
#9,309
golfballs said:
VolProf is about to slap Freak with a big lawsuit for preventing him from expressing his political views on VolNation. I’m sure evillawyer will help him with the paperwork
Click to expand...

The funny this is I remember, towards the end, VP was talking a lot about lawyering up. It had something to do with a belief that he'd been flagged to the NSA or something.
 
#9,310
#9,310
Orange_Crush said:
The funny this is I remember, towards the end, VP was talking a lot about lawyering up. It had something to do with a belief that he'd been flagged to the NSA or something.
Click to expand...

He may or may not be locked up in a padded room. That’s all I am at the liberty of saying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,311
#9,311
McDad said:
Twitter viewing access is a 1st amendment right?

No slippery slope there.
Click to expand...

What a time to be alive.

Twitter can ban you or block you for any reason, free speech does not apply. But the president must take all comers? Isn’t everyone involved using a privately owned system to communicate?
 
#9,312
#9,312
DancingOutlaw said:
What a time to be alive.

Twitter can ban you or block you for any reason, free speech does not apply. But the president must take all comers? Isn’t everyone involved using a privately owned system to communicate?
Click to expand...

Gonna be interesting how the political elites spin how a private company must give freedom of speech to tweeters but also freedom of sight to blocked readers.
 
#9,313
#9,313
McDad said:
Gonna be interesting how the political elites spin how a private company must give freedom of speech to tweeters but also freedom of sight to blocked readers.
Click to expand...

Looks like McWife is going to have to allow GV on her facebook,
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#9,314
#9,314
Obsessed said:
He may or may not be locked up in a padded room. That’s all I am at the liberty of saying.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
#9,316
#9,316
CBS "60 Minutes" correspondent Lesley Stahl has revealed a candid remark made to her by then President-elect Donald Trump in 2016. Stahl told a group of fellow journalists at the Deadline Club Awards Dinner in New York City earlier this week that Mr. Trump admitted his consistent attacks on the media were meant to "discredit" them so that the negative stories about him would not be believed. Per Lesley Stahl, their exchange went like this:

Lesley Stahl: "I said, You know, that this (attacking the media) is getting tired. Why are you doing this? You're doing it over and over. It's boring and it's time to end that,"

Donald Trump: "You know why I do it? I do it to discredit you all and demean you all so when you write negative stories about me, no one will believe you."

Unless you want to believe that Lesley Stahl is lying (I'm sure some of you will) then this is a clear sign that Trump's constant complaints about "fake news" are disingenuous. He does it because he believes that he has a base of support that will believe his attempts to discredit the negative news stories about him even when he provides no evidence to contradict the story itself. Trump could not win without a gullible and uneducated core base of support. He not only exploits the ignorance of his base... he counts on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,317
#9,317
BowlBrother85 said:
CBS "60 Minutes" correspondent Lesley Stahl has revealed a candid remark made to her by then President-elect Donald Trump in 2016. Stahl told a group of fellow journalists at the Deadline Club Awards Dinner in New York City earlier this week that Mr. Trump admitted his consistent attacks on the media were meant to "discredit" them so that the negative stories about him would not be believed. Per Lesley Stahl, their exchange went like this:

Lesley Stahl: "I said, You know, that this (attacking the media) is getting tired. Why are you doing this? You're doing it over and over. It's boring and it's time to end that,"

Donald Trump: "You know why I do it? I do it to discredit you all and demean you all so when you write negative stories about me, no one will believe you."

Unless you want to believe that Lesley Stahl is lying (I'm sure some of you will) then this is a clear sign that Trump's constant complaints about "fake news" are disingenuous. He does it because he believes that he has a base of support that will believe his attempts to discredit the negative news stories about him even when he provides no evidence to contradict the story itself. Trump could not win without a gullible and uneducated core base of support. He not only exploits the ignorance of his base... he counts on it.
Click to expand...

Again. You listen to him more than we do. Also all I have to do is turn on CNN, listen for about 30 seconds, and I’ve probably already uttered my first “well that’s bull ****...”
 
#9,318
#9,318
NorthDallas40 said:
Again. You listen to him more than we do. Also all I have to do is turn on CNN, listen for about 30 seconds, and I’ve probably already uttered my first “well that’s bull ****...”
Click to expand...

Whatever your opinion of CNN (or any other media outlet) might be, Trump essentially admitted to Lesley Stahl in 2016 (unless you want to think she is lying) that he is just as fake and phony as they are. He makes accusations against others that he can't prove or doesn't even believe. That's worse than being fake news... that's being a fake person.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9,319
#9,319
BowlBrother85 said:
Whatever your opinion of CNN (or any other media outlet) might be, Trump essentially admitted to Lesley Stahl in 2016 (unless you want to think she is lying) that he is just as fake and phony as they are. He makes accusations against others that he can't prove or doesn't even believe. That's worse than being fake news... that's being a fake person.
Click to expand...

I don’t find her any more credible than I do him.
Yes she’s lying. Spends most of her time doing it. It’s what the press on both sides does except most call it spin.
 
#9,320
#9,320
Orangeslice13 said:
I don’t find her any more credible than I do him.
Yes she’s lying. Spends most of her time doing it. It’s what the press on both sides does except most call it spin.
Click to expand...

Is that a fact? Lesley Stahl has been a correspondent with "60 Minutes" for 27 years (1991- present). Prior to that, she was a moderator on "Face the Nation" for 8 years (1983-1991) and she got her start as a CBS News Reporter at age 29 in 1972 (which was unheard of for such a young woman at the time). Her first assignment was the Nixon/McGovern '72 election campaign and she was later assigned to covering the Watergate scandal. Finally, she has served as a White House correspondent under 3 different Presidents (Carter, Reagan and George H.W. Bush). She has had a very long and high profile career...

Can you cite even one specific example of where she lied or had to retract a report because it was found to be inaccurate? It shouldn't be hard to come up with just one specific example from such a lengthy career if she is the compulsive liar that you claim she is.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9,321
#9,321
Judge rules Trump can't block people on his personal Twitter account. Agree.

"A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the “interactive space” where people respond to President Trump’s tweets is a “designated public forum” covered by the First Amendment. As such, the White House cannot block users based on the viewpoints they express in their responses to Trump.

The suit was brought by seven individuals whose tweets got them blocked along with the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.

U.S. District Judge Naomi Buchwald in New York rejected the administration’s arguments that the president, in blocking the users, was simply exercising the right a private individual might have, to choose “not to engage” with the individuals who brought the lawsuit. The audience for a reply on Trump’s account isn’t just Trump, she ruled, rejecting the administration’s argument. It’s the entire audience of millions who were deprived of the ability to read the replies the plaintiffs in the case posted."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9,322
#9,322
OuterBanksVol said:
Judge rules Trump can't block people on his personal Twitter account. Agree.

"A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the “interactive space” where people respond to President Trump’s tweets is a “designated public forum” covered by the First Amendment. As such, the White House cannot block users based on the viewpoints they express in their responses to Trump.

The suit was brought by seven individuals whose tweets got them blocked along with the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.

U.S. District Judge Naomi Buchwald in New York rejected the administration’s arguments that the president, in blocking the users, was simply exercising the right a private individual might have, to choose “not to engage” with the individuals who brought the lawsuit. The audience for a reply on Trump’s account isn’t just Trump, she ruled, rejecting the administration’s argument. It’s the entire audience of millions who were deprived of the ability to read the replies the plaintiffs in the case posted."
Click to expand...

Of course you agree. A Manhattan judge declared a corporation’s communication software a “public forum” somehow. Trump and any other user can be kicked off for any reason Twitter sees fit, but it’s “public”. Lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#9,323
#9,323
BowlBrother85 said:
Whatever your opinion of CNN (or any other media outlet) might be, Trump essentially admitted to Lesley Stahl in 2016 (unless you want to think she is lying) that he is just as fake and phony as they are. He makes accusations against others that he can't prove or doesn't even believe. That's worse than being fake news... that's being a fake person.
Click to expand...

It’s not being a fake person..... he uses all that stuff to his advantage and it works out more times than not.... as for the media..... trump didn’t discredit them.... they discredited themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,324
#9,324
OuterBanksVol said:
Judge rules Trump can't block people on his personal Twitter account. Agree.

"A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the “interactive space” where people respond to President Trump’s tweets is a “designated public forum” covered by the First Amendment. As such, the White House cannot block users based on the viewpoints they express in their responses to Trump.

The suit was brought by seven individuals whose tweets got them blocked along with the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.

U.S. District Judge Naomi Buchwald in New York rejected the administration’s arguments that the president, in blocking the users, was simply exercising the right a private individual might have, to choose “not to engage” with the individuals who brought the lawsuit. The audience for a reply on Trump’s account isn’t just Trump, she ruled, rejecting the administration’s argument. It’s the entire audience of millions who were deprived of the ability to read the replies the plaintiffs in the case posted."
Click to expand...

That’s hilarious that people would file suit over being blocked on Twitter.... what a bunch of losers
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,325
#9,325
volbeast33 said:
It’s not being a fake person..... he uses all that stuff to his advantage and it works out more times than not.... as for the media..... trump didn’t discredit them.... they discredited themselves.
Click to expand...

Trump admitted to Stahl that he doesn't even believe what he says... that's being fake. Everything is strategic with Trump. Nothing is genuine - he stands for nothing. No principles, no values, just whatever assists him in the daily battles he engages in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top