Second ('Third') Trump Presidency Thread

zitothebrave said:
https://bsky.app/profile/kyledcheney.bsky.social%2Fpost%2F3lzch4tiwwr2k
Click to expand...

The funny thing is they have tainted this so much its Un prosecutable even if they could find something. Like usual their warped view of reality sets them up for dissapointment. They think Trump was charged over nothing therefore they can can charge whoever they want for nothing. But there was ample evidence against Trump and every charge that was adjudicated he was found guilty of. So even if one of Trumps lackeys tries to file a case it will be swiftly thrown out for being politically motivated citing all the times Trump has admitted it publicly. Then they will cry that its not fair because despite having no evidence whatsoever that any charge against Trump was politically motivated they say it as if its fact. You can believe it all you want and it might be true but the burden for proof is pretty high. Generally the only way they get caught is if they say it out loud publicly like Trump and his lackeys have done.
 
sturg33 said:
Like 10 days ago a bunch of trannies were posting that Charlie Kirk was about to have a bad day

Perhaps expect a bit better from the guy you will surely vote for in 3 years
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1969521197135380937

I don’t expect anything from Gavin Newsom or his team. I’ve found his team’s bit very politically effective and impressive, but this isn’t helping me want to vote for him and he’s still one of my least favorite politicians.

But the “bad day” for Noem was in response to a bill he was passing, and it’s fucking absurd to consider it a threat. Maybe a Twitter rando could see it that way, but Kristi Noem and the government know better.
 
mqt said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1969521197135380937

I don’t expect anything from Gavin Newsom or his team. I’ve found his team’s bit very politically effective and impressive, but this isn’t helping me want to vote for him and he’s still one of my least favorite politicians.

But the “bad day” for Noem was in response to a bill he was passing, and it’s fucking absurd to consider it a threat. Maybe a Twitter rando could see it that way, but Kristi Noem and the government know better.
Click to expand...
Yes Trump was referring a debate and Newsom was referring to them bragging about breaking federal law

Considering that leftists today are insane and embracing violence as legitimate response to words they don't like, its not appropriate to treat them as anything other than a violence risk
 
sturg33 said:
Yes Trump was referring a debate and Newsom was referring to them bragging about breaking federal law

Considering that leftists today are insane and embracing violence as legitimate response to words they don't like, its not appropriate to treat them as anything other than a violence risk
Click to expand...
The both sides position is one of desperation. Most people see the difference.
 
sturg33 said:
Yes Trump was referring a debate and Newsom was referring to them bragging about breaking federal law

Considering that leftists today are insane and embracing violence as legitimate response to words they don't like, its not appropriate to treat them as anything other than a violence risk
Click to expand...
The Governor of California is not about to assassinate Kristi Noem or privy to some plot to assassinate Kristi Noem. You’re taking the same dumb approach of that Trump attorney and pretending that *everything* in the discourse is a veiled reference to political violence. People have been saying it’ll be a “bad day for X” on social media for as long as social media has existed. It’s never been understood to be a threat of violence before and isn’t now just because it was also used by people doing violence.
 
sturg33 said:
i am entirely sure
Click to expand...
No, I mean it this time. I haven’t told you this to any of the prior jabs, have I? If the Dems select this absolute twat as their nominee because he effectively mocked Donald Trump’s awful political style for 4 years, I don’t think I can do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
thethe said:
The both sides position is one of desperation. Most people see the difference.
Click to expand...
I’d argue this is one of the circumstances in which the “both sides” position is being unfairly criticized. By attaching malicious, violent intent to a non-violent statement by Newsom, they’re just fabricating violent rhetoric against Noem while threatening Newsom with illicit legal action.
 
If you want to suffer through a fever because the guy who said this tells you your kid is gonna develop autism then that’s on you


"$1,300 for a shot of like an Ozempic, or the fact I call it the fat pill, or the fat drug.

Sometimes it works, I guess, for people.

The ones I've seen, it hasn't worked so well.

A lot of friends have fat. They said, yeah, I lost some weight.

I said, you don't look at it to me.

But they paid $1,300, $1,200, and they go to London, and they pay $88.

And they call me. What's this all about?

We subsidize in the rest of the world.

Well, stupidly, because there are a lot of stupid people in this country running things.

But to me, that's nothing compared to autism."
Click to expand...
 
mqt said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1969975033415012358

…at what point are we just officially at war with Venezuela? This is so shameful and illegal.
Click to expand...
I don’t disagree that it’s skirting the law, but Venezuela should have been controlling more of this. If they’re too busy spending cartel bribe money to police their cartels then I won’t get too upset about doing Donald using some 57mm rounds and Hellfire missiles to reduce the narcotics coming into the US.

If he really wanted to make a splash he could start boarding and searching the Chinese cargo ships sailing into South and Central America. That’s how most of the fentanyl gets here.
 
Jaw said:
I don’t disagree that it’s skirting the law, but Venezuela should have been controlling more of this. If they’re too busy spending cartel bribe money to police their cartels then I won’t get too upset about doing Donald using some 57mm rounds and Hellfire missiles to reduce the narcotics coming into the US.

If he really wanted to make a splash he could start boarding and searching the Chinese cargo ships sailing into South and Central America. That’s how most of the fentanyl gets here.
Click to expand...
This is sort of the whole rub right here. If Donald Trump bombed a Chinese target, we’d all recognize the act of aggression. Some might celebrate it, but it’d be seen as a clear military action worthy of tremendous scrutiny. I don’t accept it as less problematic conceptually just because the target’s country can’t adequately defend them because we just funded coups and destabilized the region for the past 100 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top