This time next year, President Trump moves back into the Whitehouse...

[Saga Lout]

Surely Trump's style of rambling, often incoherent, and "what if?" semi-aggressive rhetoric has already been taken, by some, as inciting violence?

So, yes,the chances of him saying something disputably stupid, again. is quite high.

As opposed to Harris. Everything she says makes perfect sense. Right?

Harris is the trapper, not the trapped. She lays traps for The Donald to walk right into, forget what he's been told to say and ramble off at all sorts of tangents.

Probably because she can imagine what can be, unburdened by what has been.

She probably thinks that makes her sound intelligent.

[demographic]

So, how are you with the convicted rapist and Epstien buddy part?

Who is the convicted rapist??

By Jove yer right old bean, he was convicted of Sexual Battery instead, which as we all know is much better isnt it? More cuddly isnt it?

Just so we are on the same page though, here's her version of it...

When Carroll first accused Trump of attacking her in her 2019 memoir, What Do We Need Men For?, she was very clear about the anatomical details of what had occurred in the mid-1990s.

“Still wearing correct business attire, shirt, tie, suit jacket, overcoat,” Carroll wrote, “he opens the overcoat, unzips his pants, and, forcing his fingers around my private area, thrusts his penis halfway — or completely, I’m not certain — inside me.”

Carroll was equally clear at the time that she was not going to call this attack a rape. Instead, she called it a fight.

“Every woman gets to choose her word,” she said on the New York Times podcast The Daily in June 2019. “Every woman gets to choose how she describes it. This is my way of saying it. This is my word. My word is fight. My word is not the victim word. I have not been raped. Something has not been done to me. I fought. That’s the thing.”


All of that ^ was From https://www.vox.com/life/23725947/e-jea ... definition

[mangocrazy]

As opposed to Harris. Everything she says makes perfect sense. Right?

Harris is the trapper, not the trapped. She lays traps for The Donald to walk right into, forget what he's been told to say and ramble off at all sorts of tangents.

Probably because she can imagine what can be, unburdened by what has been.

She probably thinks that makes her sound intelligent.

I'm not sure you know what you meant by that word salad.

I know I have absolutely no idea what it means..

[Screwdriver]

So, how are you with the convicted rapist and Epstien buddy part?

Who is the convicted rapist??

By Jove yer right old bean...

There's no need to keep telling me I'm right, from now on we'll assume it.

So you were talking about Trump who is in fact, not a convicted rapist.

It's not something I would make a joke about either.

Instead let's concentrate of the facts.

This alleged incident took place more than 20 years ago. Did the alleged victim report anything at the time (incidentally, I am going to be really annoying and ask rhetorical questions - the answer is obviously no). So if there is no crime reported; were there any witnesses? Again no. Were there any contemporary reports of this alleged attack being reported to any of her friends - no again.

Is there any evidence whatsoever? A date perhaps (not a window of opportunity). Is there any proof at all that either of the two parties were in the same general location at around the same general period in history? Nope. The case looks a bit weak tbh.

On top of that, surely this is well past it's sell by date. I mean twenty years ago, the trail has gone cold. Isn't there a statute of limitations which applies to historical allegations?

Oh yeah, hang on, those restrictions were lifted for some unspecified reason during the "me too" movement. So the law was changed and on the very day when the law was changed to allow alleged victims to sue the alleged perpetrator, was anyone 'ready to go"?

Yeah. Just one. Guess who...

Then apart from the rather obvious weaponisation of the justice system a.k.a. "get Trump", what do we know about the alleged victim?

Well, she is a fucking lunatic. Ohh you can't say that! That'll be $85,000,000 for being mean (to a lunatic).

Be honest with yourself, you know this woman is batshit crazy. If you can't see that, you're obviously not looking.

[Saga Lout]

Harris is the trapper, not the trapped. She lays traps for The Donald to walk right into, forget what he's been told to say and ramble off at all sorts of tangents.

Probably because she can imagine what can be, unburdened by what has been.

She probably thinks that makes her sound intelligent.

I'm not sure you know what you meant by that word salad.

I know I have absolutely no idea what it means..

Word salad? Yes, that's exactly right:

[Mr Moofo]

Who is the convicted rapist??

By Jove yer right old bean...

There's no need to keep telling me I'm right, from now on we'll assume it.

So you were talking about Trump who is in fact, not a convicted rapist.

It's not something I would make a joke about either.

Instead let's concentrate of the facts.

This alleged incident took place more than 20 years ago. Did the alleged victim report anything at the time (incidentally, I am going to be really annoying and ask rhetorical questions - the answer is obviously no). So if there is no crime reported; were there any witnesses? Again no. Were there any contemporary reports of this alleged attack being reported to any of her friends - no again.

Is there any evidence whatsoever? A date perhaps (not a window of opportunity). Is there any proof at all that either of the two parties were in the same general location at around the same general period in history? Nope. The case looks a bit weak tbh.

On top of that, surely this is well past it's sell by date. I mean twenty years ago, the trail has gone cold. Isn't there a statute of limitations which applies to historical allegations?

Oh yeah, hang on, those restrictions were lifted for some unspecified reason during the "me too" movement. So the law was changed and on the very day when the law was changed to allow alleged victims to sue the alleged perpetrator, was anyone 'ready to go"?

Yeah. Just one. Guess who...

Then apart from the rather obvious weaponisation of the justice system a.k.a. "get Trump", what do we know about the alleged victim?

Well, she is a fucking lunatic. Ohh you can't say that! That'll be $85,000,000 for being mean (to a lunatic).

Be honest with yourself, you know this woman is batshit crazy. If you can't see that, you're obviously not looking.

Do you know her?
Or are you allowing for third party sources to tell you she is a lunatic?

If so, you are doing exactly what you accuse everyone else of doing - listening to gossip and spin

[DefTrap]

]

What does surprise me however is the callous, offhand response to this further attempt. Is this really the sort of world you people want to live in? A government willing to murder their political opponent is just the sort of government you want? How do you suppose such a regime is going to treat you when the time comes...

Is there really the slightest evidence that either the guy that shot near to Trump's ear, or the guy who recently showed up with a rifle near Trump, or the one you imagined might probably might murder maybe Biden to eliminate "some other evidence" have been linked to a government plot? That would be massive.

I'm not sure it's callous to point out that your musings on the subject are probably bollocks by the way.
I'm in favour of not murdering presidents or ex presidents by the way, no matter how much they wouldn't be missed.

[ZRX61]

As opposed to Harris. Everything she says makes perfect sense. Right?

Her most recent interview (her 2nd since the coup) was the kind of rambling mess usually associated with the village drunk.

[Screwdriver]

Do you know her?
Or are you allowing for third party sources to tell you she is a lunatic?

If so, you are doing exactly what you accuse everyone else of doing - listening to gossip and spin

I have seen her performance on a number of videos out there.

It should take a rational human about 0.5 seconds to form an opinion on her mental state.

I'm guessing you haven't seen her in action.

[Screwdriver]

]
What does surprise me however is the callous, offhand response to this further attempt. Is this really the sort of world you people want to live in? A government willing to murder their political opponent is just the sort of government you want? How do you suppose such a regime is going to treat you when the time comes...

Is there really the slightest evidence that either the guy that shot near to Trump's ear, or the guy who recently showed up with a rifle near Trump, or the one you imagined might probably might murder maybe Biden to eliminate "some other evidence" have been linked to a government plot? That would be massive.

I'm not sure it's callous to point out that your musings on the subject are probably bollocks by the way.
I'm in favour of not murdering presidents or ex presidents by the way, no matter how much they wouldn't be missed.

I shouldn't have to keep prefacing my opinion with an advisory note that these are mere opinions. Other opinions are available.

It is of course mere luck that I just happen to express an opinion for it to manifest days later.

Luck or a morbid obsession with the wanton destruction of nationhood as the WEF accelerates their globalist agenda. The weaponisation of migration is merely one of the tools being used to subvert democracy. Sadly I fear there is no limit to the lengths the powers that be will go to to prevent an outsider (Trump) from taking office and spoiling their plans. They do not want peace to break out. The more war there is the better.

The story I laid out above about changing the law (on the statute of limitations - just for one year, just to get Trump) is one example of the myriad of dirty tricks which when you stand back and take an holistic view - persecution, prosecution, disinformation, impeachment, arrest, character assassination, attempted assassination... I mean, I really shouldn't have to point out these obvious tactics let alone have to argue over my own sanity because I'm sharing my opinion as to how this pans out. They are so fucking obvious even an idiot "conspiracy theorist" can see what they might do do next. After all, the democrat party is basically following a playbook right out of Mein Kampf or Stalins Marxist philosophy.

Kamala Harris 's father was a Marxist professor ffs. The WEF hold a globalist conference (Davos pt.II) every year in China. That is all of the worlds richest people, the global elites and they are planning on how they want our world to run. They admire how the CCP operates and are aiming for that level of control over all of us. This is not conspiracy theory, they are no longer hiding their agenda, you can see it for yourself on their website. You will own nothing and you will be happy.

It will not be to our benefit. Want to know why mass migration and flooding every developed nation in the world with economic migrants is a "net benefit"? You need to look at those "benefits" from the perspective of being a super rich multi millionaire/billionaire.

[Mr Moofo]

Do you know her?
Or are you allowing for third party sources to tell you she is a lunatic?

If so, you are doing exactly what you accuse everyone else of doing - listening to gossip and spin

I have seen her performance on a number of videos out there.

It should take a rational human about 0.5 seconds to form an opinion on her mental state.

I'm guessing you haven't seen her in action.

So vids edited and filmed by people who want.
Point still stands - you are being had in the same way you criticise others for. It’s all just 3rd party stirring.
You actually know no more about her than I do

[Screwdriver]

So vids edited and filmed by people who want.
Point still stands - you are being had in the same way you criticise others for. It’s all just 3rd party stirring.
You actually know no more about her than I do

Well no actually. Does the motivation for recording this video alter the content in any way?



She "looks" drunk and is more like an embarrassing relative at a wedding than a presidential character.

I do not recall where I saw clips of E. Jean Carroll, probably an ABC interview. She said something like "rape is sexy" before the host had to cut her off. So no, I do not accept that the motivation behind shooting a video or sharing it has any impact on it's content. It is what it is.

You may choose to believe her story, I don't. It's a free world. Fact is there is no evidence behind her claims. Not one single shred of it.

[Wossname]

Gunman hides in bushes for 12 hours.

Trump makes “last minute” decision to play golf, causing havoc among security staff.

Several shots fired.

No injuries reported.

Gunman safely apprehended miles away without his weapon.

What am I missing here? Or is it just me?

[Mr. Dazzle]

What am I missing here? Or is it just me?

Nah all the people with guns missed too.

Seems to be a bit of a theme.

[Mr Moofo]

So vids edited and filmed by people who want.
Point still stands - you are being had in the same way you criticise others for. It’s all just 3rd party stirring.
You actually know no more about her than I do

Well no actually. Does the motivation for recording this video alter the content in any way?



She "looks" drunk and is more like an embarrassing relative at a wedding than a presidential character.

I do not recall where I saw clips of E. Jean Carroll, probably an ABC interview. She said something like "rape is sexy" before the host had to cut her off. So no, I do not accept that the motivation behind shooting a video or sharing it has any impact on it's content. It is what it is.

You may choose to believe her story, I don't. It's a free world. Fact is there is no evidence behind her claims. Not one single shred of it.

You are still selecting your newsfeed to see and hear the stuff you want !
You are seeing other people's reportage - nobody reports facts, just their opinions. You are bright enough to know that. And you want to believe Q-Anon rubbish.

That clip - so what was the context? If she was abit worse for wear, it doesn’t mean she is a lush. It may had been an off the record humour. I seem to remember Orange Don saying that "he likes to grab women's pussy, and they allowed him to”. The Russians have videos of him and hookers doing Golden Showers. Both a little more odd than that

As for E Jean Carroll - you have absolute no idea what went on unless you were there. And the court decided, with all the evidence - not with you presumption that she was asking for it.

[mangocrazy]

I'd say that, on the basis of the evidence available, it's not just Trump who's getting increasingly rattled by Harris, but Screwd and ZRX61 are as well...

[Hoonercat]

So vids edited and filmed by people who want.
Point still stands - you are being had in the same way you criticise others for. It’s all just 3rd party stirring.
You actually know no more about her than I do

Well no actually. Does the motivation for recording this video alter the content in any way?



She "looks" drunk and is more like an embarrassing relative at a wedding than a presidential character.

Had you watched the full vid I very much doubt you would have even picked up on the above snippet (it's very easy to find on YouTube - in fact someone in the comments links to it.) But you didn't, happier to be taken in by an out-of-context snippet that's clearly been published to show her in a negative light.
Glad you posted it though. Having watched most of the full speech she's gone up in my estimation

[Mr Moofo]

Gunman hides in bushes for 12 hours.

Trump makes “last minute” decision to play golf, causing havoc among security staff.

Several shots fired.

No injuries reported.

Gunman safely apprehended miles away without his weapon.

What am I missing here? Or is it just me?

You are not just thinking this may be a PR stunt?
God forbid (it worked well last time)

[gremlin]

Gunman hides in bushes for 12 hours.

Trump makes “last minute” decision to play golf, causing havoc among security staff.

Several shots fired.

No injuries reported.

Gunman safely apprehended miles away without his weapon.

What am I missing here? Or is it just me?

I think it shows that America has a very divisive political system, a divisive candidate, more guns than could possibly be considered healthy and a large number of people with mental health problems, some of them willing to do something stupid.

This isn't a Trump thing, or a Harris thing, nor a Democrat/Republican thing. This is now the political norm for the U.S. What is it, 14 attempts on Presidents in history? Four successful? Now factor in the damage that social media is doing to society in terms of radicalising and provoking people, with the ever increasing sophistication of weaponry available to carry out an attack.

Get used to it.

[JamJar]

Gunman hides in bushes for 12 hours.

Trump makes “last minute” decision to play golf, causing havoc among security staff.

Several shots fired.

No injuries reported.

Gunman safely apprehended miles away without his weapon.

What am I missing here? Or is it just me?

I think it shows that America has a very divisive political system, a divisive candidate, more guns than could possibly be considered healthy and a large number of people with mental health problems, some of them willing to do something stupid.

This isn't a Trump thing, or a Harris thing, nor a Democrat/Republican thing. This is now the political norm for the U.S. What is it, 14 attempts on Presidents in history? Four successful? Now factor in the damage that social media is doing to society in terms of radicalising and provoking people, with the ever increasing sophistication of weaponry available to carry out an attack.

Get used to it.

President of the United States is technically the most dangerous job in the US because 8 out of the 45 have died in office (18%).