gatomontes99

I'll just leave this here: H

Is it? This is what they did to Trump: They literally took out important context that painted Biden in a negative light to make Trump's answers seem incoherent. In reality, his answers were really damaging to Joe. Now watch the Kackler: She starts with an incoherent, disjointed word salad. When she finally comes around to something that sounds somewhat plausible, they cut to that. In the second clip, they edited out the parts where she sounded unsure, scared and weak to the seconds where she sounded somewhat authoritative. The evidence is there. They were editing their interviews to create opinion rather than editing them for time.

Dollars to doughnuts the flying pilot was new to jets.

The win is the fact they are actually trying to stop waste rather than just throwing the money down the toilet and asking for more because they are out.

Keep doing it. See what happens.

Full List of Lawsuits Filed Against Donald Trump This Week The left is painting themselves into a corner. They have three major issues as a result of filing lawsuits. The first is money. These lawsuits require money from both sides. However, Trump has the almost unlimited resources of the federal government. The democrats have to raise money. Every dollar they spend on this lawfare is money they can't spend on campaigns in the midterm elections. More important than the money is the appearance of what they are doing. They are fighting to keep corruption. That is the perception. This holds in polling that shows Democrats with a 59% disapproval in the polls. The thing that will hurt them the most is the results of the lawsuits. Every lawsuit that they lose will codify the Preisdent's power. Those EOs won't need to be made legislation. The EOs they manage to cancel will need to be legislation. The end result is the Democrats will have helped Trump determine what he had to prioritize for legislation and what he didn't. When it comes to the budget process in September, they will have to use less political capital to get the reconciliation bill passed because they will know what must be prioritized what can be left as an EO.

So you completely ignore the fact that NAZIs were censored? You completely ignore the violence that Biden and Obama incited? And they actually incited it, Obama more so than Biden. And from that, some how you think that pardons prove he wanted J6 to happen? Then why did he approve 20,000 NG troops to assist in securing DC days ahead of J6? You arguments fail to hold up to scrutiny.

He's also illegally taking money from it, allegedly.

You mean Obama, right? Or maybe you meant Biden? Both men fanned those flames. I don't see you holding them accountable. Why not? Notice how these guys actually defend the indefensible. It reminds me of how the death panels talking point got so much traction that libs started saying they didn't want to love past 75 any way. It's absurd what they will say to try and gain power.

You do it everyday.

$107B

Wow. Just wow. Did you not take history in school or was it utterly and embarrassingly woeful? Because the rise of Nazi power occurred under the same vein of censorship that Germany, the EU and American liberals endorse: Would censorship have stopped the rise of the Nazis? Weimar Germany had laws banning hateful speech (particularly hateful speech directed at Jews), and top Nazis including Joseph Goebbels, Theodor Fritsch and Julius Streicher actually were sentenced to prison time for violating them. The efforts of the Weimar Republic to suppress the speech of the Nazis are so well known in academic circles that one professor has described the idea that speech restrictions would have stopped the Nazis as “the Weimar Fallacy.” A 1922 law passed in response to violent political agitators such as the Nazis permitted Weimar authorities to censor press criticism of the government and advocacy of violence. This was followed by a number of emergency decrees expanding the power to censor newspapers. The Weimar Republic not only shut down hundreds of Nazi newspapers — in a two-year period, they shut down 99 in Prussia alone — but they accelerated that crackdown on speech as the Nazis ascended to power. Hitler himself was banned from speaking in several German states from 1925 until 1927. Far from being an impediment to the spread of National Socialist ideology, Hitler and the Nazis used the attempts to suppress their speech as public relations coups. The party waved the ban like a bloody shirt to claim they were being targeted for exposing the international conspiracy to suppress “true” Germans.

3 years and 11 months of this to go. Loving every moment.

Rules 1 and 2. They are 1 and 2 for a reason. They frequently have nothing so they frequently attack the source or the person they are "debating."

Dude...delete the excessive returns. Wtf man.

Let this thread stand as the perfect example of hypocrisy. On one hand, liberals like Margaret Brennan are blaming free speech for the Holocaust and on the other they are claiming Trump is censoring people for not paying them for their thoughts. But they don't care that they are hypocrites. Please understand this. They don't care. All they care about is control and they don't care if they are hypocrites or are seen as hypocrites. As long as the argument they make is perceived as gaining power and control, they will make it. When they say Trump is censoring scientists and lack of censorship caused the Holocaust, they don't mean Trump is doing the right thing and they believe both can exist in the same world as intellectually acceptable.

Most Trusted Name In News I would say this is batshit crazy and that she is expressing an extreme view, but in her circles this is normal. In fact, she uses most of my debate rules for liberals. She's angry. She's trying to blame/smear Trump. She's also running from the topic.

Fair point. But they don't want to cut the spending, just the purpose.

Notice, they don't attack the validity of most of the money spent. They mostly attack that the money is being cut. It comes down to the notion that government expenditures are sacred. That belief is backed by their insistence that government spending has a positive outcome in ALL cases.

We need to end this obsession with race. Race is no different than hair or eye color. If you read this article, you'll see the author twists and turns trying to justify his racist position that choosing an emoji is a difficult socio-politocal decision. In reality, it should be no different than selecting an eye color.

Not when it's a presidential candidate and not when they are concealing her true thoughts. What they did was complete and total propaganda for her campaign. It's even worse than the Killian documents that killed Dan Rather's career. If that show had any integrity they would have fired Bill Whitaker. Rule #3. Just pretending you didn't say it was eliminated and unconstitutional? But it wasn't eliminated, was it? There was nothing unconstitutional, was there?

One more step and we reach fascism! 2025 is so going to be a great year. Fùck it. They believe we think that no matter what we say. Might as well have some fun with it.

No it isn't. No one is owed government promotion. Cmon man. Use your brain not your feelings.

Because if guys are sucking dicks and pretending to be girls, cucumber sales drop. That is why.

61 minutes. They added extra time to edit Kamala's interview to make it seem somewhat coherent. And Trump didn't eliminate the USAID, he downsized it and moved the offices into the state department. The state department was administering USAID, so it is constitutional.