WestCanMan

Wrong. It's perfectly normal to make a reasonable or even an optimistic assumption, especially when there's nothing at stake. We didn't bet $50 grand on this. What's not normal, to the point of being considered cultist activity, is to flatly cling to ridiculous beliefs in the face of all evidence. You couldn't even name 1 thing Trump did that wasn't in America's best interests, Radio. I challenged you to name 1 thing to go along with your serious accusation and you refused to try. I could just make the exact same generic accusation that you just made, and swap your name in for Trump's, and both of our statements stand as equally accurate, because they both have the same amount of evidence. Look: That is because so much of what Trump is doing cannot be justified as "in the best interests of the country." That is because so much of what Radiorum is doing is "for the sake of legalizing pedophilia." My statement takes the exact same form as yours does: it's just a very serious criticism without even a hint of proof. Don't you think think that what I wrote on the second line needs a bit of proof to go along with it, now that the criticism is levelled against you instead of Trump? If I wrote that there in earnest wouldn't you demand that the mods take it down? Or that I get some sort of ban? Does a reasonable person look at what I wrote on the second line and jump to the conclusion that it is some kind of verifiable fact? So, again, where's your proof that "so much of what Trump does is not in the best interests of America"? Just say 1 thing, dude. Try to write down a factual supporting argument that I can't contradict. If you do, then you can at least say "Trump has done at least one thing as president that was not done with America's best interests in mind." I'm a guy who just requires some facts to go along with serious accusations, Radiorum, and apparently you aren't. So, do you suddenly just believe what was written about you there, or are you starting to see why people say "serious accusations come with a burden of proof"? No shit, Sherlock. It's about Trump. But it's also about "citing examples of presidents doing things that directly harm the country", so I used Obama as a prime example of that, while you were unable to do the same for Trump. You're not even 1% towards making that argument. You can't even make the claim that 1 of the alleged "319 Proj 2025 items that were put into action by Trump went against America's best interests." If Project 2025 had 319 great ideas in it, who's to say that he shouldn't do those things? If it has 11,269.5 great ideas in it, and he pushes through 319 of them, does that mean he must have gotten them from there? Isn't it possible that several different people could come up with the same great idea simultaneously? Or soon after each other? Would you expect Americans to say: "Dang, them's 319 swell ideas, cuz. It's too bad thayr in P2025, because I reckon they'd mek 'Murica a heckuva lot better." Lady: "OMG, there's a hole in the boat!" Conservative" "Let's patch the hole. I'll use this boat-hole patching kit!" Three minutes later, Leftist: "Maybe we should do something to stop water from coming through the hole, so the boat doesn't sink, and then we have to swim all the way to the far side of the lake. Let's put some butter in the hole." Two minutes later, Radiorum: "Wait. The conservative also wanted to fill the hole. Are you a Nazi too?"

Your "challenge" was silly. 1) I've seen Trump do a lot of things, try a lot of things, and promise a lot of things, all of them with America's best interests in mind. I'm perfectly happy to say that those 319 things were beneficial for America(ns), sight unseen. You can disagree with me if you want, but I'm not painting you a picture. 2) I don't really care about your challenge, you're not going acknowledge any truth in anything anyways. No, it's an example of what I challenged you to do. Like I said, it's pretty ludicrous to pretend that the actions of a sovereign were intentionally against their own country, so making that level of an accusation comes with a burden of proof that you haven't addressed. I've always said that Obama acted against his country, and I just backed up my statement. You're alleging that "Project 2025" was bad, and that Trump had a hand in it, and that these 319 things that Trump did are proof that Trump is doing the Bad project 2025 "stuff": the burden of proof goes to the accuser. You're the one accusing him of fulfilling the bad 2025 agenda. How bad was Proj 2025? How bad are these 319 things? How unlikely is it that those were just 319 good ideas that Trump of any other phenomenal leader would have acted on, whether they ever heard of Proj 2025 or not? Can you cite any real bad policies at all from P2025? Or any bad policies out of the alleged 319? Dude, you just made a serious and completely vague accusation.

And TBH, this is the portion of a president's career where they don't have to be all that popular, because it's neither election time nor mid-terms time, and what's more, he can't even run again. This is the part of his career where he could be letting terrorists out of jail, like Clinton did. Just wait until it's election time and Trump turns on the charm: Robo's panties are gonna hit the floor. SpaLOOSH!

It's ridiculous for you to take the position that I have to prove why a president's policy/action doesn't benefit the country. The only realistic assumption is that would be the case. A better idea, why don't you give me an example of one of those Trump policies or actions that doesn't benefit the country? I'll do Obama as an example: When only 2 people on earth really knew why Trayvon Martin was shot, Obama decided to create the narrative that the only reason Martin was shot was because his skin was black: nothing else. He completely disregarded every detail of the story of the only person on earth who had any first-hand knowledge at all of what happened. Then photos of a 12-yr-old Trayvon were circulated, to make it seems as though he was a really cute little child, but Martin was over 17 yrs old at the time, and Obama smiled. (My son just turned 16 and he is over 6 feet tall right now, and he doesn't look like a 12-yr-old in any recent photos). Then, during all of the resulting violence, and the violence stemming from the false narrative surrounding the M Brown shooting, and the complete disregard of the videos showing Brown's rage attack from moments earlier, Obama just cheered on the rioting. So tell me, which of Trump's policies is bad? You have 319 to choose from.

Fixed it for ya. "Warren took $822,573 between 2019 and 2020 from employees or PACs affiliated with pharmaceutical and health product companies, though not from the companies themselves, according to Open Secrets." That's anywhere from 1 to 2 years, max, from her political career that spans decades, and that's just what they caught her on, it's not necessarily all the ill-gotten gains that she and her family have received over those 2 years. We can only guess how much money they've lavished on her family members that Open Secrets didn't manage to detect or prove. Eg, there's no law saying that her vastly underqualified daughter can't get hired as a secretary or consultant for Pfizer and make $400K/yr, or get $90K plus a huge pension, full medical and dental benefits, university scholarships for their kids, ample vacation time, work from home with no real expectations of work performed, access to corporate getaways and vacations for free, etc. It's like when Trudeau was offering WE millions of taxpayer dollars to host events, and in turn Trudeau's mom was paid $350K for speaking engagements there plus she received $150K in expenses, yet Morneau was the one deemed to have a conflict of interest because his daughter worked there 40 hrs a week for $30k/yr 🤣 Apparently working full-time for $30k/yr = proof of a scam, but getting paid $350K plus $150k in expenses for a few speaking engagements is entirely legit 🤣. You know that CBC never questioned how many times she spoke, and for how many hours, to make all that money? They never questioned how she racked up $150,000 in expenses? How mush does orange juice cost on her flights? Does she drink water that's distilled from virgin tears? Eyeball, hodad and the other cultists here are either completely ignorant or willing participants in basic evil.

Do you think it's better than the ad that Senator Mack, the Democrat Senator from Rhode Island, put on Tik Tock? "Vote Senator Mack!" 🤣

That's not all that's wrong with her post: she also said that he was "throwing out decades of established science", which is an absolute fabrication. The truth is that: RFKJr and his legion of concerned medical professionals (not just RFK) were "challenging decades of what appeared to be established science, with a mound of verified clinical data, which appears to debunk the aforementioned 'established' science. If the Elizabeth Warrens of the world were winning, then you'd still end up being exiled for saying that the earth goes around the sun, and we would still be treating half of our medical conditions with leeches and bat wings. And at the end of the day, it's just like you said... No one is being denied medication, that medication is just being downgraded to an "as needed" basis. It bears repeating what was said 1,000,000 times during covid: Questioning science is how you do science. If you are not allowed to question it, then it is not "science". Never let the mindless cultists and trolls on this forum make you question your beliefs or they way you research things. They have all the understanding of bugs looking up at the Sears Tower.

Just because there were 319 things mentioned in Project 2025 that were beneficial for the country doesn't mean that Trump created it. No doubt there are things in it which he doesn't appreciate at all. And be honest, if there were people astute enough to do so much good work, it makes sense that he would hire at least some of them.

That was Trudeau... You know, the guy you waved pom-poms for while he was forcing young people to take an improperly tested injection that they didn't need. Now do Trump.

I can names some who wouldn't: eyeball, exflyer, hodad, and everyone else with an IQ lower than their blood alcohol level.

In a timely manner. 😂🤣😂🤣😭

A couple months after he talked about that the town that he was practicing in, Lytton BC, burned to the ground, and as a result his patients were scattered far and wide.

They could explain it if they wanted to, but they can't explain it for the same reason that young adults can't quit their jobs to avoid taking pseudovaxes: financial ruin sucks.

Honestly, you know it's time for some serious reflection in this part of the world when Drs can't even talk about extremely important health issues that they've witnessed first-hand dozens of times, without facing criminal charges, but a 17-yr-old high school dropout from Sweden can be considered a race relations expert in America just because she identifies as one of the world's preeminent climatologists. These leftists here who fling ridiculous CBC propaganda around like it's a monkey poop-fight at the DNC are actually taken more seriously by our government than trained, experienced doctors are. FACT: CBC/CNN and our governments would let Greta or eyeball/robo go on national TV to peddle long-debunked propaganda about the safety and efficacy of the jabs as if they're some sort of experts, but if an actual doctor in BC talks on his own FB page about a kid that he saw killed by the covid jab, he WILL go to jail. Aside from that, everything's fine here.

I don't know how you managed to pull that off with robo and herbie here, but you finally did it. Congrabulations. Go to the CBC now and get your MP ticket punched. And hey, you forget to acknowledge this: Buddy, did you see the ass-licking CBC gave Trudeau, after the billions of election-time/public-purse-dollars he gave to them and other members of the MSM? Buddy, did you see the ass-licking CBC gave Trudeau while they were busy ignoring his scandals? Buddy, did you se the ass-licking CBC and CNN gave Biden, when he was clearly daft? Buddy, you accused all Trump supporters of being CNN-level cultists, not just a few cabinet members.

You filthy lying piece of shit. 1) Nothing that I said here is "conspiratorial", at all. It is all 100% true, and your only defence of any of it is to deny everything out of hand because you can't mount any semblance of a reasonable challenge to a single fact that I cited. 2) This topic is not limited to the US. I don't give a F about the US, but our TVs put Fauci's disinformation and lies on our TV screens. And when I say "Fauci's lies", again, I'm not making an accusation, I'm referring to established facts that you have been made aware of dozens of times. 3) A Canadian doctor was rung up on charges of spreading medical disinformation relating to the symptoms that dozens of his patients experienced which resulted from their covid pseudovaccinations. He was accused of disinformation for talking about the symptoms of dozens of his patients, period. Not for "daring to consider that there was any other possible way to treat covid than the pseidovax" you ignorant m0r0n. The only defence that the Commie Physicians and Surgeons could come up with for their accusation was "the defendant's evidence should all be refused entry into the court for no other reason than "Health Canada said that the jabs are safe". As if that's a standard that can never be challenged until the end of time. And at the end of the day, our gov't didn't choose sensibility, they just went silverback against the possibility of doctors speaking out in the future, by putting $200,000 fines and jailtime into the equation. And the thing about fines is, they just get levied, then the onus is on you to prove that you shouldn't have to pay them, or you might be forced to pay up front and then fight to get your money back.

To this day there has never been a credible accusation of Trump being any kind of pedo, nor a rapist. Not from a single person alive or dead. That's just a fact that you have a lot of trouble dealing with for some reason, and I think it's weird that you fantasize that someone was an actual victim of a sex crime. It's pretty sick, if you really think about it. On the other hand, there are a lot of specific, persistent, and very plausible accusations stemming from Trudeau's sketchy departure from his part-time teaching job at West Point Grey Academy. It's not unlikely that he had sex with a minor there. It's also known that Trudeau once groped a female reporter, and when she objected and told him who she was, his reply was “I’m sorry. If I had known you were reporting for a national paper, I would never have been so forward.” In other words, if she was just a common woman, then groping her would have been entirely acceptable. So, if you wanna persist with the notion that saying "I just grab 'em by the ****" is proof that Trump committed a crime, then you also have to acknowledge that Trudeau himself is 100% guilty of that exact same crime. However, no one has ever complained about Trump doing it, and Trudeau had a complainant go on record the very day he committed his "crime". If you wanna re-litigate the Bergmann's slut's story: she admitted that 1) she consented to go model lingerie for him, then 2) she brought him into the changeroom with her, and 3) she just giggled when he was sexually aggressive with her, and 4) she giggled again when he stuck his fingers in her cooter. Then, while wearing 4" high heels, she was able to push him off with one hand and leave the changeroom. In other words, she was fully consenting at every turn, even brought him into the room where she was going to change into lingerie, and then at the first sign that she wanted to leave, he let her go without any resistance. That's not a rape, dummy. All of the above is from Bergmannslut's own story. She's the one who said every single one of those things, exactly the way I descried them to you. It was a just an attempt at some "50 Shades of Grey" nookie that she gave every indication that she was into, for quite some time, until she changed her mind, then she left. https://globalnews.ca/news/4309277/justin-trudeau-reporter-grope/: Fact: The same editorial quotes a “day-late” apology from Trudeau himself: “I’m sorry. If I had known you were reporting for a national paper, I would never have been so forward.”

STFU, dummy. They're not actually "crimes" if there is no conviction, and/or victim, and Russian collusion was just a witch-hunt, your alleged victim in the bank case said that they weren't a victim in any way. LMAO. Trump isn't a con-man, whiner. Trudeau was the only actual con-man/traitor elected in Canada or the US recently. Carney probably is, at least he seems to be one, and his conflicts of interest are quite extreme, but it's too early to say that he actually is one yet. If the worst you've got on Trump is the 99% accurate and completely inconsequential "lie": "He said that it didn't rain but a high-def camera showed that it drizzled for approximately 15 seconds out of 17 minutes 😭", then you ain't got shit. Here's an example of an actual "lie". And not just a lie, but one of consequence (2, I guess): Carney said that "he played no role in moving Brookfield to NY", he also said that "it happened after he left". The truth is that he was the chairman of the board when they unanimously voted to move, and he also wrote a letter to shareholders advising them to ratify it. That's not like your assertion that "99% accuracy for Trump constitutes a lie", Carney's statements were both 100% false. They were textbook lies right out of the dictionary. Fabrications, to be exact. He made up a story he knew was 100% false and told it to the media. And there's no chance that he was just wrong, because what he was talking about was extremely significant and had happened only recently. The difference between me and you is that when I say that someone is a liar, they are an actual liar, and have been caught red-handed lying. When you call someone a liar, it means that you don't like something that they said but you either can't refute it, or know that it is true. By leftist standards you're about average, but by conservative standards, your credibility has been reduced to zero by the frequency & severity of your lies.

Buddy, did you see the ass-licking CBC gave Trudeau, after the billions of election-time/public-purse-dollars (those are also known as bribery dollars, just FYI) he gave to them and other members of the MSM? Buddy, did you see the ass-licking CBC gave Trudeau while they were busy ignoring his scandals? Buddy, did you se the ass-licking CBC and CNN gave Biden, when he was clearly daft? Buddy, you accused all Trump supporters of being CNN-level cultists, not just a few cabinet members.

No, he told me "the truth (😂) as CBC propagandizes", and that's pathetic. CBC doesn't have a problem 1) "with Poilievre's alleged negativity, 2) his alleged lack of meaningful contributions as leader of the opposition, or 3) his alleged lack of a solid private-sector resume from before he became a politician", the only thing that the CBC has a problem with is "any criticism of Trudeau and the LPOC, regardless of its merit": Remember when Trudeau was the leader of the opposition? He was far more negative than PP is, he was FAR more angry and bitter, and the CBC loved it. They actually worshipped the ground that he walked on while he was acting like that. In case you've forgotten, Trudeau's main/only contribution in the HoC as Opp Leader was just b1tching loud and long about $90k duffygate, and after 3 years of CBC leading off their primetime news with all that b1tching about an actual non-scandal, they referred to the 2015 as "a referendum on Duffygate". Does that jive with "the CBC doesn't like negativity from the leader of the opposition", or does it jive with "the CBC doesn't like criticism of their chosen leaders"???? 😉 As far as Trudeau's positive contributions go, none of his policy positions were adopted by the CPC gov't because none of them were worthwhile. By contrast, the LPOC turned some of Poilievre's most unpopular policy positions, which were hated by the CBC when PP was saying them, into actual gov't policies which were then adored by the CBC and used as election slogans. Trudeau had nothing on his resume aside from "snowboard instructor" (silver spoon much?) and "substitute drama teacher at a school where he wore blackface and had to quit because of a scandal with an underage girl". The CBC didn't consider that insufficient. Joe Biden was a career politician who never did jack spit before he was elected, and the CBC never questioned his credentials either. So how is it that "a leader of the opposition who has enough foresight to create policy positions which are initially hated by CBC and the gov't, but have enough merit to eventually become adopted by the gov't, adored by the CBC, and then become elections slogans for the gov't", is considered to be unworthy of the PMO due to "his lack of snowboard instructor experience and substitute drama teacher experience"? 😘 Barqy, no intelligent, politically aware Canadian that's over the age of 35 believes that any of the CBC's criticisms of Poilievre come from a place of honesty or integrity. They also never arrived at those random, blatantly false conclusions on their own either. That is "nothing but garbage CBC propaganda coming from the mouth of a person who should actually know better". I.e., it's someone who was successfully/completely brainwashed by the CBC. Do you honestly believe that Poilievre is negative compared to a circa 203 Justin Trudeau? 🤣 Do you honestly believe that Trudeau's resume was any more PMO-worthy than Poilievre's? Buddy, Trudeau's rise to prominence in the LPOC came mainly from 1) riding his daddy's coattails and 2) CBC propaganda, while Poilievre's rise to prominence in the CPC was 100% due to his hard f'ing work and what he achieved both as a politician and in the HoC. Do you believe that Poilievre contributes nothing? If that's the case, then why were Poilievre's "unpopular policy positions" turned into "the only LPOC actions in the last ten-plus years which were worthy of becoming campaign slogans"? Barqy: try to actually think about those things, verify their accuracy if you need to, and come up with on-point, meaningful answers. This will actually help you grow as a concerned citizen and voter. Think.

If you just go back and weigh the merits of those two replies, you'll see that your word isn't worth shit here. FYI what I said wasn't propaganda. You know that the US put Zelensky on the throne, that's an established fact, and you know that he was putting NATO on 3,000 km of Russia's doorstep. It was simply too much. Also, you know that the "not one inch past Germany" was a US/NATO promise, and the fact that it was just people like James Bakes saying it, and they didn't get it signed in blood, doesn't mean that those promises don't matter. The US needs to get rid of their Sec of State if his words are meaningless. I have no need to go further, your dishonest comments aren't worthy of a reply.

That makes it even worse, because you're accessing a source which has all the information that you need, but you're using it like a pigeon with a Rubik's Cube. Again, it was an appropriate reply to your "WTF?" It's called turnabout, silly boy. Don't cry. CNN owns your head. They're the ones flapping your gums for you. It literally says "Kultist" above your eyebrows. Buddy, this thread is just nothing but your opinion, and I just showed what your opinion is actually worth. When Trump said that Biden was mentally finished, people like you said that he was wrong, and that it was actually Trump that was senile. You guys were even saying that he was senile during his first term, and clearly that has not come to pass yet. ^^That^^ paragraph, right ^^there^^, is a perfect example of just what your opinion is actually worth. In case you forgot, RadioDumb, Biden's diminished mental capacity was on full display during the debates. With him being left out in the open like that, on live TV, it left no room for debate: his goose-brain was cooked. Prior to that, his team had done a good job of limiting his weekly appearances to a single pre-scripted, carefully choreographed ice cream cone question (it's like a softball question, only easier) in front of a bunch of actors, so that he could attempt his weak answer on multiple takes. Maybe it was enough to fool rubes like you, or maybe you were lying because you were happy to have nameless, faceless DNC powerbrokers pulling all the strings, but in either case, your credibility is entirely shot. Your opinions are known to be completely useless. Sorry bro, you're the one who said all that shit, now your chickens have come home to roost.

There isn't a left4rd here who admits to watching CNN, yet you all parrot all of their talking points verbatim. Hmmmm... Huh? Shiver me timbers! Gosh golly! Lol! Kinda like the Brown/Floyd false narratives struck a nerve with you, right? 🤣 I see what's going on here dude: you can't talk about all the times that you got played by CNN, so you have to evade the topics entirely. The OP wasn't intelligent or meaningful, it was all just mindless drivel that was predicated on your own false assertions, so why should I address your random imaginings? You accused conservatives of being boondoggled by Trump, and then alluded to some BS from your imagination, so I brought up countless examples of actual "news" headlines that were blatantly false, yet which you believed with all your heart and soul. I'm sorry that you've been played, non-stop, for 20 years now. But at some point your answer has to be "OK, I will take a moment to consider what I see on CNN now", instead of "NOPE!!! THEY WERE RIGHT ALL ALONG! BIDEN WAS STILL A GENIUS IN 2024!!!!!"

I've been saying that they were like slaves for years: they do all the shittiest jobs receive ridiculously low wages for them they can only afford to live in shitty, cramped homes they work for the wealthiest people. they don't get voting rights they don't get full access to services, etc If you compare how slaves lived 2,000 years ago to the way illegals live in the US today it's not all that different.

Do you really think that what you're saying works, when it's just coming from a CNN cultist? You watched Russian collusion with bated breath, you watched the covid-death ticker and parroted all of CNN's "Bad Twumpie" narratives, you pretended that Biden adding 4 SCJ's was a normal consideration, you pretended that Floyd and Brown were gentle giants and then cheered on years worth of rioting and murders because of their stupidity, you cried manly tears of justice-rage for Jussie, you pretended to see a "pandemic of the unvaccinated" when the vaxed were dropping like flies, and you pretended that Biden was mentally healthy for years when he was clearly not... And now you wanna call other people credulous 🤣 Buddy, I've taken sh1ts with more intelligence than your whole family. And I don't just mean your immediate family, I'm including your cousins, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, plus the ones who identify as dragons and kittens.