Today in Trump

[walrus]

It's specifically targeting black voters because a lot of them don't have ID.

And there you have it folks the bigotry of low expectations on display for all to see. Bravo Kirkland, you're SUCH the champion for them, they can't speak or do for themselves, so lucky they are for as great a champion as you


I think the law is specifically targeting VOTERS in general because not 1 fucking person is expected to produce something not expected of another.

I'm going to go with the Supreme Court's view on this.

And also the view of lawyers representing North Carolina in a court case concerning their voter laws. Here they are admitting in court that North Carolina shut down Sunday voting because counties with high levels of Sunday voting were disproportionately black:



https://twitter.com/haroldpollack/st...57219899617280

and


The decision overturned a district court ruling upholding the state voter ID law. Writing for the 4th Circuit, Judge Diana Gribbon called the prior decision “erroneous”:

Socioeconomic disparities establish that no mere “preference” led African Americans to disproportionately use early voting, same-day registration, out-of-precinct voting, and preregistration. Nor does preference lead African Americans to disproportionately lack acceptable photo ID. Yet the district court refused to make the inference that undeniably flows from the disparities it found many African Americans in North Carolina experienced. Registration and voting tools may be a simple “preference” for many white North Carolinians, but for many African Americans, they are a necessity.

According to Gribbon, the 4th Circuit court concluded “that the General Assembly would not have eliminated same-day registration entirely but for its disproportionate impact on African Americans,” and said that parts of the law amounted to solutions in search of a problem:

The only clear factor linking these various “reforms” is their impact on African American voters. The record thus makes obvious that the “problem” the majority in the General Assembly sought to remedy was emerging support for the minority party. Identifying and restricting the ways African Americans vote was an easy and effective way to do so. We therefore must conclude that race constituted a but-for cause of SL 2013-381, in violation of the Constitutional and statutory prohibitions on intentional discrimination.

and a whole bunch of Republicans in various different states admitting their voter laws are to target minority voters here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/u...ical-gain.html

Kirk, my state has voter ID. I must show ID to vote. Why is that ok and legal? In states that have no ID laws you must go up to someone who has a check list and tell them ur name and address. Why do that? Isn’t that discriminating against the homeless? You are citing cases for particular states. Do you realize 33 states, out of fifty, require some form of ID which yes, the Supreme Court ruled is perfectly fine. You are crazy and have little grasp on the US. How is it in your country Kirk? Must u show ID? I don’t know I never voted in your country you idiot


As you can see u are cherry picking court rulings ignoring what doesn’t match your trolling. Again u refuse to use your own logic other than “ that’s racist” the cry of those who have no backing.

[walrus]

As u parrot Kirk repub manipulate votes the push for no ID is pushed by Dems. The rest of the world requires ID to prevent fraud. Are they protesting?

[walrus]

Rasmussen reports.

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 49% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Forty-nine percent (49%) disapprove.

The latest figures include 36% who Strongly Approve of the way Trump is performing and 39% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -3. (see trends).

[El Kabong]

As u parrot Kirk repub manipulate votes the push for no ID is pushed by Dems. The rest of the world requires ID to prevent fraud. Are they protesting?

Even nations with black people?!?!?!?! Those rrrrrrracists!!!!!!


Canada has voter ID, France has voter ID, Mexico has voter ID....odd, I thought it was virtually impossible for those folks to obtain any form of identification. Northern Ireland has voter ID, Bromley, Gosport, Swindon, Watford and Woking have done voter ID.


Guess they're all racists the fucking racists.





Push for no borders, push for no identification, push "migrants" from the third world.......gee @Kirkland Laing, I hope you have enough slave labor to keep making your ends meet.

[walrus]

As u parrot Kirk repub manipulate votes the push for no ID is pushed by Dems. The rest of the world requires ID to prevent fraud. Are they protesting?

Even nations with black people?!?!?!?! Those rrrrrrracists!!!!!!


Canada has voter ID, France has voter ID, Mexico has voter ID....odd, I thought it was virtually impossible for those folks to obtain any form of identification. Northern Ireland has voter ID, Bromley, Gosport, Swindon, Watford and Woking have done voter ID.


Guess they're all racists the fucking racists.





Push for no borders, push for no identification, push "migrants" from the third world.......gee @Kirkland Laing, I hope you have enough slave labor to keep making your ends meet.

but kabonger, they are anti fraud measures and like Kirk says it’s a one in a million chance someone would steal your vote. The rest of the world must be stupid and Kirk is right. He won’t mention Justice Paul Stephens, the liberal Supreme Court judge who wrote in his opinion ID laws are not racist, he will just look at the first ten pages of google with the liberal spins and look no further. Shit no wonder younger people only process one side with no critical thinking, they let google and faceberg think for them

[walrus]

#bringbackbeanz we need more balanced views.

[Gandalf]

So is Kirkland saying that black people are too stupid to get photo ID so need some kind of exception? This sounds racist.

Lyle is right. Proud boys are rude, but hardly a an extremist hate group. Basically they believe when a thug harrasses you kick them in the balls. Sounds fair.

Trump impeached? Thought not.

[p4pking]

I don’t really understand this issue. Surely if someone, for whatever reason, won’t get photo ID, they may as well not get to vote?

[El Kabong]

People wonder why workers haven't seen a real wage increase well when you flood the market with cheap labor the cost of Labor is not going to increase.... but I'm sure Kirkland has other ideas on how and why that has happened and it's probably due to racism really.

[El Kabong]

Gee somebody sure is selling off a bunch of GOOG stock

[El Kabong]

John Podesta
Is Ready to
Talk About Pizzagate
https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...zagate-766489/


Huh...well seems an interesting time to cover this what with both Podesta and Alefantis saying 'Finally we can get back to normal'.....and the article answers no questions any of the Pizzagate folks have, they cover NOTHING that lead folks to the conclusion that Podesta and Alefantis are pedophiles and/or into the trafficking of minors. The article paints Podesta as a victim, saying his emails were "stolen by Russians".....which isn't the case at all, his email got phished and Wikileaks put out the information...information which he has never been directly asked about (by any reporter for the mainstream media) and he's never answered a single question posed to him from the unwashed masses.

Pizzagate wouldn't have ever been a thing had these folks just answered a few questions....Alefantis may only have a sick sense of humor, Podesta may indeed have handkerchiefs with "pizza related maps on them" but if they never say "Hey listen, you're asking about my taste in artwork and that's perfectly fine, I enjoy some weird stuff and here's why". I personally am a fan of many artists, I can explain my reasoning as to why I enjoy their works for the most part. In fact, art would be a subject I'd be happy to discuss with people of ANY political background. Why won't Podesta? Seems logical that he'd explain himself to avoid such horrible accusations, but I guess not.


I certainly hope with the Clinton Foundation investigation and all going on/being over recently and now hitting the news that certain folks aren't attempting to head revelations off at the pass....that wouldn't be good.

Did Clinton Foundation Mislead IRS? State Filings Suggest So
https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/42...ngs-suggest-so


Ruh Roh

[El Kabong]

Sorry for the back to back posts but there's a lot of info rolling out recently....like how when Hillary was interviewed by the FBI she had 9 lawyers with her (and aide Cheryl Mills who she said was another of her lawyers) and when General Michael Flynn was "interviewed"...


Memo: FBI recommended Michael Flynn not have lawyer present during interview, did not warn of false statement consequences
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...form=hootsuite
...In addition, FBI officials, along with the two agents who interviewed Flynn, decided specifically not to warn him that there would be penalties for making false statements because the agents wanted to ensure that Flynn was "relaxed" during the session.


...The message of the sentencing memo is clear: Flynn, his lawyers suggest, was surprised, rushed, not warned of the context or seriousness of the questioning, and discouraged from having a lawyer present.


Hmmm, well I mean OBVIOUSLY this signals Russian Collusion and not another fuck up from the FBI who was attempting to steer a certain form of justice, certainly not one that was true or pure.

[Spicoli]

Pain me to say but the Crypt keeper really turned him over her knee yesterday in that live tv infomercial. Watched it unfold and I just don't think he understands how votes total. It'll rile the base on name association alone but having reliable targets can only solidify so much before actual substance is needed. I hope theatrical shat shows like that are not whatsoever in store, all of them need to get off camera and do work.

[Kirkland Laing]

It's specifically targeting black voters because a lot of them don't have ID.

And there you have it folks the bigotry of low expectations on display for all to see. Bravo Kirkland, you're SUCH the champion for them, they can't speak or do for themselves, so lucky they are for as great a champion as you


I think the law is specifically targeting VOTERS in general because not 1 fucking person is expected to produce something not expected of another.

I'm going to go with the Supreme Court's view on this.

And also the view of lawyers representing North Carolina in a court case concerning their voter laws. Here they are admitting in court that North Carolina shut down Sunday voting because counties with high levels of Sunday voting were disproportionately black:



https://twitter.com/haroldpollack/st...57219899617280

and


The decision overturned a district court ruling upholding the state voter ID law. Writing for the 4th Circuit, Judge Diana Gribbon called the prior decision “erroneous”:

Socioeconomic disparities establish that no mere “preference” led African Americans to disproportionately use early voting, same-day registration, out-of-precinct voting, and preregistration. Nor does preference lead African Americans to disproportionately lack acceptable photo ID. Yet the district court refused to make the inference that undeniably flows from the disparities it found many African Americans in North Carolina experienced. Registration and voting tools may be a simple “preference” for many white North Carolinians, but for many African Americans, they are a necessity.

According to Gribbon, the 4th Circuit court concluded “that the General Assembly would not have eliminated same-day registration entirely but for its disproportionate impact on African Americans,” and said that parts of the law amounted to solutions in search of a problem:

The only clear factor linking these various “reforms” is their impact on African American voters. The record thus makes obvious that the “problem” the majority in the General Assembly sought to remedy was emerging support for the minority party. Identifying and restricting the ways African Americans vote was an easy and effective way to do so. We therefore must conclude that race constituted a but-for cause of SL 2013-381, in violation of the Constitutional and statutory prohibitions on intentional discrimination.

and a whole bunch of Republicans in various different states admitting their voter laws are to target minority voters here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/u...ical-gain.html

Kirk, my state has voter ID. I must show ID to vote. Why is that ok and legal? In states that have no ID laws you must go up to someone who has a check list and tell them ur name and address. Why do that? Isn’t that discriminating against the homeless? You are citing cases for particular states. Do you realize 33 states, out of fifty, require some form of ID which yes, the Supreme Court ruled is perfectly fine. You are crazy and have little grasp on the US. How is it in your country Kirk? Must u show ID? I don’t know I never voted in your country you idiot


As you can see u are cherry picking court rulings ignoring what doesn’t match your trolling. Again u refuse to use your own logic other than “ that’s racist” the cry of those who have no backing.

I'm not cherry picking anything. A whole bunch of Republican politicians, lawyers acting for states run by Republicans and the entire federal court system don't agree with you on this. The fucking Supreme Court found that voter ID laws are racist. What part of this don't you understand? Why aren't you as upset with the millions of black votes that are disenfranchised every election as you are with nonexistent in person voter fraud?

[Kirkland Laing]

Rasmussen reports.

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 49% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Forty-nine percent (49%) disapprove.

The latest figures include 36% who Strongly Approve of the way Trump is performing and 39% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -3. (see trends).

Scott Rasmussen ran the GOP's polling operation for years. He now acts as a cheerleader for the GOP in the runup to elections. His MO is to have the GOP far ahead compared to every other polling company and then to retreat into the middle of the pack a couople of days before the election so he can claim he gets similar results to other polling companies. It's actually illegal to do this and after various lawsuits were threatened by electoral commissions after 2016 he's had to stop doing it. The first election was the midterms and he had the GOP up by four points. They lost by eight plus. Approval rating is the same thing. Trump is high thirties or low forties with every other firm.