And when was "The Civil Rights Era"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
Printable View
And when was "The Civil Rights Era"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
:cwm20:Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Upside down smilie.
Texas Electric Bills Were $28 Billion Higher Under Deregulation
Texas’s deregulated electricity market, which was supposed to provide reliable power at a lower price, left millions in the dark last week. For two decades, its customers have paid more for electricity than state residents who are served by traditional utilities, a Wall Street Journal analysis has found.
Nearly 20 years ago, Texas shifted from using full-service regulated utilities to generate power and deliver it to consumers. The state deregulated power generation, creating the system that failed last week. And it required nearly 60% of consumers to buy their electricity from one of many retail power companies, rather than a local utility.
Those deregulated Texas residential consumers paid $28 billion more for their power since 2004 than they would have paid at the rates charged to the customers of the state’s traditional utilities, according to the Journal’s analysis of data from the federal Energy Information Administration.
The crisis last week was driven by the power producers. Now that power has largely been restored, attention has turned to retail electric companies, a few of which are hitting consumers with steep bills. Power prices surged to the market price cap of $9,000 a megawatt hour for several days during the crisis, a feature of the state’s system designed to incentivize power plants to supply more juice. Some consumers who chose variable rate power plans from retail power companies are seeing the big bills.
None of this was supposed to happen under deregulation.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/texas-e...d=hp_lead_pos5
Trump's tax returns and related records turned over to Manhattan district attorney
Tax records that former President Donald Trump tried to keep secret for years are now in the hands of the New York district attorney.Prosecutors obtained the records on Monday, just hours after the US Supreme Court denied Trump's last-ditch effort to keep the records private, a spokesperson for the district attorney said.
The millions of pages of documents, sources say, contain Trump's tax returns spanning from January 2011 to August 2019, as well as financial statements, engagement agreements, documents relating to the preparation and review of tax returns, and work papers and communications related to the tax returns.
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/25/p...nce/index.html
It's not like I asked because I didn't know, I asked for a reason. It was 100 years after the Civil War ergo the monuments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingQuote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
:cwm20:Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Upside down smilie.
Texas def screwed up, I went thru it personally this month. I am not for wild, unregulated, business deals that hurt others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongIt's not like I asked because I didn't know, I asked for a reason. It was 100 years after the Civil War ergo the monuments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingQuote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
:cwm20:Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Upside down smilie.
It was nothing to do with any anniversary date. It was about showing Black people their proper place by a bunch of white folks terrified that they might be about to gain equal rights, part of an ongoing campaign to do this that went on right through the Jim Crow era.
“Eventually they started to build [Confederate] monuments,” he says. “The vast majority of them were built between the 1890s and 1950s, which matches up exactly with the era of Jim Crow segregation.” According to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s research, the biggest spike was between 1900 and the 1920s.
“All of those monuments were there to teach values to people,” Elliott says. “That’s why they put them in the city squares. That’s why they put them in front of state buildings.” Many earlier memorials had instead been placed in cemeteries.
https://www.history.com/news/how-the...rate-monuments
Dennilson??? Is that you???Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingQuote:
Originally Posted by El KabongIt's not like I asked because I didn't know, I asked for a reason. It was 100 years after the Civil War ergo the monuments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingQuote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
:cwm20:Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Upside down smilie.
It was nothing to do with any anniversary date. It was about showing Black people their proper place by a bunch of white folks terrified that they might be about to gain equal rights, part of an ongoing campaign to do this that went on right through the Jim Crow era.
“Eventually they started to build [Confederate] monuments,” he says. “The vast majority of them were built between the 1890s and 1950s, which matches up exactly with the era of Jim Crow segregation.” According to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s research, the biggest spike was between 1900 and the 1920s.
“All of those monuments were there to teach values to people,” Elliott says. “That’s why they put them in the city squares. That’s why they put them in front of state buildings.” Many earlier memorials had instead been placed in cemeteries.
https://www.history.com/news/how-the...rate-monuments
Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongDennilson??? Is that you???Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingQuote:
Originally Posted by El KabongIt's not like I asked because I didn't know, I asked for a reason. It was 100 years after the Civil War ergo the monuments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingQuote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
:cwm20:Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Upside down smilie.
It was nothing to do with any anniversary date. It was about showing Black people their proper place by a bunch of white folks terrified that they might be about to gain equal rights, part of an ongoing campaign to do this that went on right through the Jim Crow era.
“Eventually they started to build [Confederate] monuments,” he says. “The vast majority of them were built between the 1890s and 1950s, which matches up exactly with the era of Jim Crow segregation.” According to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s research, the biggest spike was between 1900 and the 1920s.
“All of those monuments were there to teach values to people,” Elliott says. “That’s why they put them in the city squares. That’s why they put them in front of state buildings.” Many earlier memorials had instead been placed in cemeteries.
https://www.history.com/news/how-the...rate-monuments
You should take your own advice and learn about history. It would be good if you knew something about one of the subjects you keep pontificating about.
Ooooooh, how about this? Weisselberg was looking after the Trump Organisation books when Trump's dad was still running it and knows where all the bodies are buried. Now he can be subpoenaed and offered a deal to cooperate with the investigation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/01/n...?smid=tw-share
The investigators in Georgia are presenting evidence to a grand jury this week too in one of the other investigations into the disgraced former president.
Why should I learn anything when I can just ask you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I'm sure THIS TIME Donald Trump's goose is well and completely cooked.....there's no escape THIS TIME :rolleyes:
"Gooseland Laing"
by El Kabong
The man who talks in shadows lurk
Had spoke, had talked, had sang;
But he changed his name to Kirk
and his surname to Laing;
His goose was cooked and burnt
Or so he wished upon Trump
But for years Kirk has not learnt
Its a distance he just cannot jump!
But carries on, does Kirkland Laing:
Rightly twisted knickers made him sang.
I watched the recent Trump speech and enjoyed. Also hilarious to see it posted by the Indy and over a million views and overwhelmingly pro Trump.
Let them put up a Biden speech and see the response.
Texas AG Ken Paxton's office spent 22,000 hours looking for voter fraud and uncovered just 16 cases of false addresses on registration forms, according to The Houston Chronicle. Nearly 17M voters are registered in Texas.
No voter fraud in Texas then. And Texas is using their bullshit claims about voter fraud to :
Texas GOP launches avalanche of bills to curtail voting
Lawmakers are seeking to limit early voting and tighten ID requirements, among other restrictive measures.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ele...m_npd_nn_tw_ma
Show ID restrictive, I needed to show ID for my covid shot. How restrictive. If you buy alcohol or go to see your congressmen you show ID. If you don’t have ID in the US the police can detain you until they ascertain your identity, wtf is restrictive “ie racist” about IDQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
It is normal to need ID to vote, Kirk. What planet are you on? It is not a restriction. It is a means of proving who you say you are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by walrusShow ID restrictive, I needed to show ID for my covid shot. How restrictive. If you buy alcohol or go to see your congressmen you show ID. If you don’t have ID in the US the police can detain you until they ascertain your identity, wtf is restrictive “ie racist” about IDQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
You already had this explained to you relatively recently. Miles you may have missed it. The bottom line is that these voter ID laws are relatively new, at the turn of the century they were almost nonexistent in America. The first voter ID law that required a photograph was passed in 2004 in Indiana if I remember correctly. Since then they've gone nationwide due to the GOP increasingly struggling to win the popular vote.
Here's a quick recap to refresh your memories:
In 2000, four states--Arkansas, Georgia, Michigan and North Dakota--had enacted ID laws, none of them photo-based; they aimed to clarify voting rules, part of a trend that led to the Help America Vote Act, which was passed by a bipartisan vote in Congress in 2002. At the time, the idea of straightening out confusing differences in voting rules was noncontroversial: “why would any member of Congress oppose helping Americans vote?” the authors ask.
The atmosphere soon changed. In 2001, only 14 states required identification to vote, of which only four specified photo IDs; by 2014, 34 states had ID laws, including 17 photo ID laws. In 2011 alone, six states added a photo ID requirement.
What happened? The GOP, they say, recognized that its homogeneous white, male, older and Southern electoral base was competing against “a racially and ethnically diverse, younger, secular, liberal, and Northern-based Democratic Party.” Moreover, the demographic changes bringing more Latinos, African Americans, and Asians into the voting population were working strongly against the GOP and strengthening the Democratic coalition.
The GOP could have evolved to meet these voters on their turf, but chose not to. “Rather than altering issue positions as a means to attract new supporters, the GOP has turned to restrictive voter ID laws to disproportionately deter the participation of current Democratic Party supporters,” the researchers write.
In other words, appealing to a racial coalition was beyond the GOP’s capacity, so the party chose instead to disenfranchise the members of that coalition.
The researchers acknowledge that playing with voter turnout is traditional electoral strategy in both parties. But that doesn’t make suppression equivalent to getting out the vote. Voting is a constitutional right, and artificially restricting it is unconstitutional (as some federal judges have ruled).
To vote-suppressors in the Republican Party, photo ID laws are preferable to other restrictive rules in a couple of ways. One is that, in contrast to other suppressive rules, they appear to have a logical, neutral rationale.
Efforts to “cut back on early voting days, Election Day registration, or reducing the amount of time for completing voter registration drives...are easily viewed as blatant partisan power plays,” the researchers observed. By contrast, “restrictive voter ID legislation at least holds the appearance of ensuring the integrity of the voting process.”
These laws are found acceptable by a majority of voters, in part because unwarranted fears of voter fraud have been stoked successfully by their proponents--even though “there simply is no widespread, concerted and systematic evidence that some voters go to the polls impersonating someone else.” Moreover, the cost of photo ID for many people isn’t understood by the average voter who has a driver’s license, and the partisan goals of the proponents hasn’t been widely understood--yet.
https://www.latimes.com/business/hil...20-column.html
This one is good. You'll remember that Trump made a big thing about absentee voting -- mail in ballots -- in the last election. This was the first time ever that the GOP have ever taken action against mail in ballots because during every previous election they've been a net plus for them. In 2020 the fact that many Democrats didn't want to risk catching the virus meant that they'd be a net benefit for Democrats so for the first time ever the GOP started bullshitting about mail in ballots instead of their usual bullshit about in person voter fraud:
In North Carolina, the legislature requested racial data on the use of electoral mechanisms, then restricted all those disproportionately used by blacks, such as early voting, same-day registration and out-of-precinct voting. Absentee ballots, disproportionately used by white voters, were exempted from the voter ID requirement. The legislative record actually justified the elimination of one of the two days of Sunday voting because “counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black” and “disproportionately Democratic.”
The documents acceptable for proving voters’ identity in North Carolina were the ones disproportionately held by whites, such as driver’s licenses, U.S. passports, and veteran and military IDs, and the ones that were left out were the ones often held by poor minority voters, such as student IDs, government employee IDs and public assistance IDs. The Texas voter ID law was designed the same way: There, officials accepted concealed-weapon licenses but not student or state employee IDs. The Texas legislature was repeatedly advised of the likely effect on minority voters but rebuffed nearly all amendments that would have eased its harsh impact.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...voter-id-laws/
And so on and so on.
Occasionally Republican officials even come out and admit the truth behind their actions:
https://www.kaporcenter.org/florida-...nd-voter-laws/
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/u...ical-gain.html
https://www.thedailybeast.com/republ...ocratic-voters
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT2q7cKB-4g
You need to watch at least until you hear "you know that we can hear you, right?"
It isn't normal at all. There wasn't a single state in America that required photo ID to vote before 2004 and only a handful of states before that required any kind of ID. And the laws passed since 2004 are nothing to do with fucking nonexistent voter fraud and everything to do with voter suppression. No voter ID is needed in Britain or most EU countries, you just need your polling card. You can read the post above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by walrusShow ID restrictive, I needed to show ID for my covid shot. How restrictive. If you buy alcohol or go to see your congressmen you show ID. If you don’t have ID in the US the police can detain you until they ascertain your identity, wtf is restrictive “ie racist” about IDQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
How do you feel about the fact that your bullshit media had you convinced that voter fraud stole the 2020 election yet it's becoming increasingly obvious that there wasn't any? Are you going to question the people who provide your news to you? Of course not, you're going to double down on the bullshit.
No doubt Donald Trump wins the election in 2024.
So true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Yup, as usual you're on your game:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingQuote:
Originally Posted by walrusShow ID restrictive, I needed to show ID for my covid shot. How restrictive. If you buy alcohol or go to see your congressmen you show ID. If you don’t have ID in the US the police can detain you until they ascertain your identity, wtf is restrictive “ie racist” about IDQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
You already had this explained to you relatively recently. Miles you may have missed it. The bottom line is that these voter ID laws are relatively new, at the turn of the century they were almost nonexistent in America. The first voter ID law that required a photograph was passed in 2004 in Indiana if I remember correctly. Since then they've gone nationwide due to the GOP increasingly struggling to win the popular vote.
Here's a quick recap to refresh your memories:
In 2000, four states--Arkansas, Georgia, Michigan and North Dakota--had enacted ID laws, none of them photo-based; they aimed to clarify voting rules, part of a trend that led to the Help America Vote Act, which was passed by a bipartisan vote in Congress in 2002. At the time, the idea of straightening out confusing differences in voting rules was noncontroversial: “why would any member of Congress oppose helping Americans vote?” the authors ask.
The atmosphere soon changed. In 2001, only 14 states required identification to vote, of which only four specified photo IDs; by 2014, 34 states had ID laws, including 17 photo ID laws. In 2011 alone, six states added a photo ID requirement.
What happened? The GOP, they say, recognized that its homogeneous white, male, older and Southern electoral base was competing against “a racially and ethnically diverse, younger, secular, liberal, and Northern-based Democratic Party.” Moreover, the demographic changes bringing more Latinos, African Americans, and Asians into the voting population were working strongly against the GOP and strengthening the Democratic coalition.
The GOP could have evolved to meet these voters on their turf, but chose not to. “Rather than altering issue positions as a means to attract new supporters, the GOP has turned to restrictive voter ID laws to disproportionately deter the participation of current Democratic Party supporters,” the researchers write.
In other words, appealing to a racial coalition was beyond the GOP’s capacity, so the party chose instead to disenfranchise the members of that coalition.
The researchers acknowledge that playing with voter turnout is traditional electoral strategy in both parties. But that doesn’t make suppression equivalent to getting out the vote. Voting is a constitutional right, and artificially restricting it is unconstitutional (as some federal judges have ruled).
To vote-suppressors in the Republican Party, photo ID laws are preferable to other restrictive rules in a couple of ways. One is that, in contrast to other suppressive rules, they appear to have a logical, neutral rationale.
Efforts to “cut back on early voting days, Election Day registration, or reducing the amount of time for completing voter registration drives...are easily viewed as blatant partisan power plays,” the researchers observed. By contrast, “restrictive voter ID legislation at least holds the appearance of ensuring the integrity of the voting process.”
These laws are found acceptable by a majority of voters, in part because unwarranted fears of voter fraud have been stoked successfully by their proponents--even though “there simply is no widespread, concerted and systematic evidence that some voters go to the polls impersonating someone else.” Moreover, the cost of photo ID for many people isn’t understood by the average voter who has a driver’s license, and the partisan goals of the proponents hasn’t been widely understood--yet.
https://www.latimes.com/business/hil...20-column.html
This one is good. You'll remember that Trump made a big thing about absentee voting -- mail in ballots -- in the last election. This was the first time ever that the GOP have ever taken action against mail in ballots because during every previous election they've been a net plus for them. In 2020 the fact that many Democrats didn't want to risk catching the virus meant that they'd be a net benefit for Democrats so for the first time ever the GOP started bullshitting about mail in ballots instead of their usual bullshit about in person voter fraud:
In North Carolina, the legislature requested racial data on the use of electoral mechanisms, then restricted all those disproportionately used by blacks, such as early voting, same-day registration and out-of-precinct voting. Absentee ballots, disproportionately used by white voters, were exempted from the voter ID requirement. The legislative record actually justified the elimination of one of the two days of Sunday voting because “counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black” and “disproportionately Democratic.”
The documents acceptable for proving voters’ identity in North Carolina were the ones disproportionately held by whites, such as driver’s licenses, U.S. passports, and veteran and military IDs, and the ones that were left out were the ones often held by poor minority voters, such as student IDs, government employee IDs and public assistance IDs. The Texas voter ID law was designed the same way: There, officials accepted concealed-weapon licenses but not student or state employee IDs. The Texas legislature was repeatedly advised of the likely effect on minority voters but rebuffed nearly all amendments that would have eased its harsh impact.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...voter-id-laws/
And so on and so on.
Occasionally Republican officials even come out and admit the truth behind their actions:
https://www.kaporcenter.org/florida-...nd-voter-laws/
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/u...ical-gain.html
https://www.thedailybeast.com/republ...ocratic-voters
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT2q7cKB-4g
You need to watch at least until you hear "you know that we can hear you, right?"
Though state laws requiring some sort of identification at voting polls go back to 1950, no state required a voter to produce a government-issued photo ID as a condition for voting before the 2006 elections. Indiana became the first state to enact a strict photo ID law
I submit, I forgot that. I always showed my drivers license by assumption I had to. And I remember one year seeing a few people showing their utility bill as proof.
Meaning- before 2004, Republicans had no problem with no requirement of a photo ID, leading me to ask- hell, what happened?:confused: what changed?
Hey @Kirkland Laing you probably know this;D but I just mentioned your post to a coworker of mine and they just told me that some states (Republican-red) one doesn't need a photo id, just a carry permit.:-\
Damn I remember in Wisconsin college students were told, their id wasn't good enough.:mad:
But if a person has a got-dang gun permit, that shit is acceptable.
Total biased bigotry, wow.
In Texas, You Can Vote With a Concealed Handgun License—but not a Student ID
https://newrepublic.com/article/1199...ot-student-ids
While I agree withj @Gandalf in principle-one should have an indentification card, I have to recant on how it came to be.
They didn't give a rat's patooty about ids until this past decade, damn what changed...
THX for the info!O0
Wow, I have a whole new avenue in which to question the right wingers of America.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingIt isn't normal at all. There wasn't a single state in America that required photo ID to vote before 2004 and only a handful of states before that required any kind of ID. And the laws passed since 2004 are nothing to do with fucking nonexistent voter fraud and everything to do with voter suppression. No voter ID is needed in Britain or most EU countries, you just need your polling card. You can read the post above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Texas Prosecuted 15 Illegal Voting Cases, None Involving Impersonation
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/08...ses-none-invo/
Texas officials claim that the law is needed to prevent fraud, but only 15 cases have been prosecuted by the office of the attorney general of Texas between the 2012 primary election and July of this year, according to a News21 review of more than 360 allegations the office received in that time.
So I doubled down by looking for cases (proven) to see how they compare or contrast with Donaldict Arnold's claim of millions - I went to their homebase A right wing think tank- proving cases of fraud are indeed on the rise- they are swelling in numbers
https://www.heritage.org/election-in...-fraud-america
1,285 Proven Cases of Voter Fraud in America while that is a significant number it falls short of the millions claim, by oh...millions.
Heritage makes the claim in their research thagt they are not biased and point out fraud on both sides, so when I clicked on the Republican link
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/...e-dead-letter/
Wasn't a gosh darn thing stated about them, but about Democrats and some guy whose dog voted 4 times.
On the Democrat link- they ran the gamut- pretty much letting their readers think all the 1,285 (about 26 per state) swelling cases are all democrats, hispanics and blacks.
They and they alone vote fraudulently..so an ID is needed...unless one is in a state where only a gun carry permit is needed.
Colleg voters with colle ID, not acceptablem, wow.
Today in Trump Land- He is still Pimpin' The $ out his worshippers.
When a person who claimed he didn't like PAC- said he was an outsider who doesn't need it...
https://youtu.be/rFf6vcmjerE
"SUPER PACS Nobody knows what they hell they are- its the dumbest thing I've ever seen.... they want to take these people like little puppets and say you do as I tell you"
--Donaldict Arnold 2016
But in 2021...
Former President Donald Trump’s call for supporters to donate all their contributions to his new political action group
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/don...09/id/1013188/
When one person can tell 70+ million YOU do as I say. YOU give it to ME. ALL to me.
That's pimpish.
When a so-called rich man can ask for donations for a campaign defense fund to challenge elections and not only do his supporters give it up, he allowed both rightwing and mainstream media to reveal a % goes to paying off his debts...and his voters ignore it and accept it?
That's Pimpish.
https://youtu.be/dydxd5VX-7Y
https://www.businessinsider.com/dona...n-debt-2020-11
Donations to Trump's election legal fund would also go towards paying off his campaign's debt
Trump's website linked to a donation paged for an "Official Election Defense Fund," while the fine print lower on the page said 60% of the donation would go towards "the retirement of general election debt."
Another donation page, for an "EMERGENCY Wisconsin Recount Fund," say in the fine print that 50% of the donation will go towards paying off campaign debt, with the other half going towards the campaign's recount account.
Trump Shifted Campaign-Donor Money Into His Private Business After Losing The Election
And the little guy and gal the middle class, how does he treat them? :confused:
The Trump campaign reportedly cheated donors who thought they were making a one-time contribution, collecting recurring donations
If his voters dont care how many people have had their bank accounts depleted, credit cards maxed out...because they didnt read the FINE PRINT THAT STATES THEIR DONATION WOULD REOCCUR...then why should I care?:confused:
While Democrats do this as well, my understanding is that there is a check box - if one checks it- then donations will continue. whereas with the Don- the box is autochecked. and then it went from monthly to bi-weekly...people whose finances have been screwed as a result.
all I can say - is that dude Pimps his voters.:-\
All the time.
https://www.businessinsider.com/trum...nations-2021-4
He whored the evangelical vote and now he pimps the poor whites and gullible minorities who vote republican with relative ease.
A person who refused to intervene in the murder of 5 people, over 100 people injured and millions of dollars worth of damage for two straight hours... is forgiven.
he tells his followers GO! Be forceful fight like hell and when the shit hits the fan...YOU defend me.
And they do just that? :o
Thats pimpin on a level never seen before.
I left this page due to the amount of non-trump posts here. 4 years str8, but @NoSavingByTheBell a very knowledgeable diehard boxing mofo- called me out. So I will cease the Donaldict posts on the Biden thread and bring it to where it belongs- the thread that the @Saddo mods should relabel to the "How To Pimp Americans" Thread.
The Trump 2020 campaign reportedly duped supporters into making recurring donations without their consent.
Consider, when a so-called billionaire allows recurring donations from cancer patients to poor white southerners thinking they were making a one-time contribution ended up making more.
No evangelical pastor, preacher, not a peep to speak out.
How is that not Pimpish?
The check box contained the following:
"Make this a monthly recurring donation."
Problem? :confused: The box had automatically been checked off as soon as donors landed on the page, the Times reported.
I tried my best to find the alternative story of the NY Times, I tried OAN, Newsmax, FOX...they're more interested in the deletion of (Mr.) from Mr. Potato head. :-\
And then I found one article using specific words in their search and got this::o:rolleyes:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gangsters-paradise
WHEW! Gangster's Paradise, finally they do a story on Pimp skills of the Don!;D so I thought...:-\
It starts off like a really objective new piece with the following:
On the roster: Gangsters’ paradise? - Barr to Trump: No evidence of significant fraud - Trump’s ‘election defense fund’ feeds his own super PAC - Georgia Republicans brace for Trump rally - Nancy was not amused
And after that it is all about Democrats. talk about click bait:mad: Not a - nada jack about Don's donation pimp-a-thon scam.
somehow they found pretzel logic to talk about Joe Manchin, Democrat -W.Va., Mark Warner, Democrat-Va, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer Kyrsten Sinema, Democrat-Ariz
and when they named some republicans, they were the ones who at some point voted against donald for something, anything.
This column ended with : Biden is sending every signal that he wants to see a 90s-style revival of budget and fiscal horse trading.
Yup a search for Donald donations recur on FOX brought up a gangster paradise article in which they wrote about everything but what the search claimed. donations for donaldict.
When I went to OAN- I got the following:
Search Results For Donald Trump Donations
Sorry, but nothing matched your search terms. Please try again with different keywords.
But they did have an article on the impeachment of Joe Biden: “One America News Investigates – The Ukraine Hoax: Impeachment, Biden Cash, and Mass Murder with Michael Caputo” to air this Saturday and Sunday at 10 pm ET, 7 pm PT
Front page OAN also defends the right of (ITALIANS) to defer vaccination. At first I thought that was a great BIG fuck you to the rest of the Europeon Americans.
https://www.oann.com/italians-who-re...ccine-adviser/
When I clicked on the link I then realized it was about Italy, not Italians in America, yet one can ask: Why is Italian news front page for One America?
Their stories were all antiBiden, anti AOC, anti-kamala Harris. Headlines that doesnt allow the reader to do anything other than come to a conclusion without reading: they all aint worth a gosh darn like-
1. Under Biden, China Sweeps into Iran – Shifting Power Dynamics
2.Rep. Ocasio-Cortez ranked one of the least effective Dem lawmakers
3. Calif. military base becomes third to house unaccompanied migrant children
if I read stories like that nonstop, I too would be filled with hate. especially if they're speculatory posing as facts.
Reading how every Trump supporter on this site claims mainstream media is unfair, I then tried NEWSMAX - as always and they had one article on trump donation- stating it may divide the party if he asks for all PAC money...but who cares if its the RINOS that are being shown the exit?
The rest of NEWSMAX Front page news for reall Americans seeking real news? Story #
1. GOP Lawmakers Calling for End to MLB's Antitrust Laws
2. Trump Urges MLB Boycott After All-Star Game, Draft, Pulled
3. Curt Schilling to Newsmax TV: MLB'S Decision to Pull All-Star Game from Georgia Will Backfire
4. Former Rep. Pete King Hits MLB For Pulling All-Star Game From Atlanta
5. Baseball's Decision to Move All-Star Game Is Cheered and Jeered
6. MLB Moving All-Star Game, Draft Out of Ga. Amid Outcry Over Voting Law
seams as if the people who said if Kopernick takes a knee, we see that as hate and bad protesting, unlike their peaceful protest Jan 6th.
Resolve?
Many right wing articles, blogs , radio said BOYCOTT THE NFL- FUCK THEM! How dare they allow a 1/2 black to take a knee during the anthem
well, now that MLB took a stand on laws they deem as vote suppresion, the same crowd in USA are now ready to do to MLB what they did to the NFL-- boycott them, make their viewers hate baseball.
Headline I found most interestinfg Biden Calls Ukraine as Russia Begins Massive Military Buildup on Border
I thought wow, so Russia isnt pro Trump but does no buildup under his tenure...then under Biden they're buidling up? What for?
Since right wing talk radio, websites, blogs, cable stations have no concern on how much money don raised in the name of politics, in the name of Republican party and in the name of paying off his debt...they made it clear to me, Pinnochio Don can't lie enough.:smilie_pinoc::smilie_pinoc:
Meanwhile NEWSMAX, FOX & OAN all vying for the top :cheerleader::cheerleader: All voters BOW DOWN to the Don.:bowdown::bowdown:
All hail :allhail: to the Master of the Pussy Grab :yay2:
Pimpin Don :pimp2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
Well..... I personally refuse to let the bogus, copycat, and obviously "tit-for-tat" Biden thread catch up with the original, one-and-only Trump thread. :cool: :D ;D
Although in all honesty... if you extrapolate the number of posts over the coming four years... the Biden thread should easily surpass the Trump thread. :work33: :teacher:
Yup. And how many views do you reckon a Jo Jorgensen would get? You remember her don’t ya? After all, you voted for her!Quote:
Originally Posted by NoSavingByTheBellSo true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Ouch!Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraYup. And how many views do you reckon a Jo Jorgensen would get? You remember her don’t ya? After all, you voted for her!Quote:
Originally Posted by NoSavingByTheBellSo true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTraeWow, I have a whole new avenue in which to question the right wingers of America.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingIt isn't normal at all. There wasn't a single state in America that required photo ID to vote before 2004 and only a handful of states before that required any kind of ID. And the laws passed since 2004 are nothing to do with fucking nonexistent voter fraud and everything to do with voter suppression. No voter ID is needed in Britain or most EU countries, you just need your polling card. You can read the post above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Texas Prosecuted 15 Illegal Voting Cases, None Involving Impersonation
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/08...ses-none-invo/
Texas officials claim that the law is needed to prevent fraud, but only 15 cases have been prosecuted by the office of the attorney general of Texas between the 2012 primary election and July of this year, according to a News21 review of more than 360 allegations the office received in that time.
So I doubled down by looking for cases (proven) to see how they compare or contrast with Donaldict Arnold's claim of millions - I went to their homebase A right wing think tank- proving cases of fraud are indeed on the rise- they are swelling in numbers
https://www.heritage.org/election-in...-fraud-america
1,285 Proven Cases of Voter Fraud in America while that is a significant number it falls short of the millions claim, by oh...millions.
Heritage makes the claim in their research thagt they are not biased and point out fraud on both sides, so when I clicked on the Republican link
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/...e-dead-letter/
Wasn't a gosh darn thing stated about them, but about Democrats and some guy whose dog voted 4 times.
On the Democrat link- they ran the gamut- pretty much letting their readers think all the 1,285 (about 26 per state) swelling cases are all democrats, hispanics and blacks.
They and they alone vote fraudulently..so an ID is needed...unless one is in a state where only a gun carry permit is needed.
Colleg voters with colle ID, not acceptablem, wow.
That's 1200 cases in forty years of elections, not just presidential elections. Thirty cases a year in all state and local and national elections and evenly split between Democratic and Republican fraud and half or most of it happening in uncompetitive states as regards presidential elections. So basically zero voter fraud. All the hundred of previous and future bills passed by GOP legislatures to suppress voting however does actually affect millions of votes. So there is very effective voter fraud going on and it's been done legally by the GOP for many decades now and affects every single election.
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingQuote:
Originally Posted by SlimTraeWow, I have a whole new avenue in which to question the right wingers of America.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingIt isn't normal at all. There wasn't a single state in America that required photo ID to vote before 2004 and only a handful of states before that required any kind of ID. And the laws passed since 2004 are nothing to do with fucking nonexistent voter fraud and everything to do with voter suppression. No voter ID is needed in Britain or most EU countries, you just need your polling card. You can read the post above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Texas Prosecuted 15 Illegal Voting Cases, None Involving Impersonation
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/08...ses-none-invo/
Texas officials claim that the law is needed to prevent fraud, but only 15 cases have been prosecuted by the office of the attorney general of Texas between the 2012 primary election and July of this year, according to a News21 review of more than 360 allegations the office received in that time.
So I doubled down by looking for cases (proven) to see how they compare or contrast with Donaldict Arnold's claim of millions - I went to their homebase A right wing think tank- proving cases of fraud are indeed on the rise- they are swelling in numbers
https://www.heritage.org/election-in...-fraud-america
1,285 Proven Cases of Voter Fraud in America while that is a significant number it falls short of the millions claim, by oh...millions.
Heritage makes the claim in their research thagt they are not biased and point out fraud on both sides, so when I clicked on the Republican link
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/...e-dead-letter/
Wasn't a gosh darn thing stated about them, but about Democrats and some guy whose dog voted 4 times.
On the Democrat link- they ran the gamut- pretty much letting their readers think all the 1,285 (about 26 per state) swelling cases are all democrats, hispanics and blacks.
They and they alone vote fraudulently..so an ID is needed...unless one is in a state where only a gun carry permit is needed.
Colleg voters with colle ID, not acceptablem, wow.
That's 1200 cases in forty years of elections, not just presidential elections. Thirty cases a year in all state and local and national elections and evenly split between Democratic and Republican fraud and half or most of it happening in uncompetitive states as regards presidential elections. So basically zero voter fraud. All the hundred of previous and future bills passed by GOP legislatures to suppress voting however does actually affect millions of votes. So there is very effective voter fraud going on and it's been done legally by the GOP for many decades now and affects every single election.
Today in Trump land:
the Republicans once unified under Reagan's Thou shalt not speak ill of a Fellow Republican is null and void.
Under Trump era: Thous shalt insult, label & lie.
After former house speaker John Boehnor called Ted Cruz a reckless asshole & lucifer in the flesh, cruz using his fiery powers, tweeted a photo of Boehner's memoir in the fireplace, which he called its "appropriate place."
https://www.businessinsider.com/john...edium=referral
https://news.yahoo.com/ted-cruz-put-...010140538.html
Dan Bongino and Geraldo Rivera both republicans got into a verbal spat akin to 2 lovers growing a part exchanging wordse like:
“I want to see the country burn?” Rivera repeated incredulously. “You son of a bitch! I want to see the country burn? You punk! You’re nothing but a punk!”
OingoBoingo responded: "Geraldo, take a Valium. You’ve been talking forever. You really gotta pipe down. My gosh, you’re a 70-year-old-man. Calm down. Get ahold of yourself.”
Recently Republicans Anthony Scaramucci, Ana Navarro & Amanda Carpenter, the former senior communications adviser for Ted Cruz were supposed to be interviewed for their show of support for the party.. within minutes shit got wild!
"how smart Scaramucci is hard to say, Well, he worked for Trump, so I don’t know.”
Lemon, the liberal host was all too hapy to egg Scaramucci on & he did:
“You worked for Ted Cruz. a full-on traitor. What are you talking about? You don’t have any standing to say that,” Scaramucci countered.
“Excuse me? Excuse me, Anthony Scaramucci. You want to go there?”
The angry chick told the big Mucci to " Get lost!”
“Don’t be a hypocrite on national TV,”
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2021/01...other-1012880/
Republicans censuring all who didnt bow to Donnie from . Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, Sens. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.), and Reps. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and two members from Washington state.
Republicans petitioned to remove a fellow republican, not a Democrat. Liz Cheney- she beat it, but boy O boy how often do we see such self afflicted wounds?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...19d_story.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1791938.html
Ask the Don- he seems set on creating the MAGA Party not to challenge bad republicans, but those disloyal to him.
He wants his own website to counter all else.
He wants his own social platform.
Thats what's on his mind not the idea of bringing his party together, but to weed out all who still think for themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
This sums up Trump nicely. It's been in his DNA from birth.
Amazing how some within his Party hung onto their loyalty till the very end, and... when shit like bogus election fraud claims and a revolt on the Capitol became too much for them to stomach... Trump turned on them and abused them like the puppets they've always been.
The "amazing" part is seeing how much humiliation these folks willingly subject themselves to.
Seems like we've neglected the Trump thread as of late.
So anyway, the following Tweet from Travis Allen, Vanderbilt engineer, regarding this year's Kentucky Derby winner... Medina Spirit.
BREAKING: Derby winner Medina Spirit turns down an invitation to Mar-a-Lago. Asked why, they said “If I wanted to see a horse’s ass, I would’ve finished second!”
:D :D
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57166735
So is this anything interesting?
Numerous legal battles looming on the horizon. From the sounds of it he'll be too busy fending those off to think about a run in 2024.
Trump is slowly losing his grip and influence on the Republican Party. They seem to be getting a back bone.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-57180679
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
In most cases, I don't think it's a matter of them getting a backbone. It's a matter of them knowing where the current of public opinion is flowing... and having that survival instinct that makes rats abandon a sinking ship. My apologies to rats everywhere for my analogy. They backed Trump through 4 years of lousy... scratch that... non-existent leadership. They backed Trump through 4 years of fear-mongering and divisive tactics which have brought the country to where it is today. They backed Trump through horrible management of the COVID crisis. They backed Trump through The Big Lie. They winked and said January 6th didn't happen.
But now... as opponents press forward... and it looks like Trump will be facing criminal charges as well as incompetence issues... they see the writing on the wall.
Backbone is something you have or you don't have. Liz Cheney and Mitt Romney are a couple that has always had one. Clowns like Ted Cruz, Mitch McConnell, and Lindsey Graham have NEVER had one.
Yer ma
I think it gets blocked in the senate though, American politics seems to be set up to get nothing done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
He's not losing his grip. He's increasing his grip. It's his party. If he decides to run in 2024 he'll walk the nomination.
In this case over eighty percent of GOP congresspeople voted not to investigate a fucking insurrection. People who voted against doing it include the brother of the vice president who the insurrectionists were trying to hang. They are no profiles in bravery.
Quote:
Originally Posted by palmerq
For any case involving numbers to have any chance with a jury prosecutors would need somebody senior at the Trump Organisation to flip on Trump and testify against him.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/a...xes-for-months
This is the guy they're going after. If they can get him to flip and testify against Trump they have a real chance with a jury.
Trump should be facing election fraud charges in Georgia too. What he did is the text book definition of breaking the law. Except recently I read that it might come down to how he really felt when he was breaking the law. If he felt he wasn't breaking the law then apparently he isn't guilty. I think bank robbers should try that defence when they get caught.
It's almost like these rich old white fuckers wrote all the laws to suit themselves in the first place eh. See also the endless shit that Trump is bang to rights guilty of in New York but can't be prosecuted for due to a whole bunch of reasons like this, statutes of limitations etc etc.