DiscoGary wrote:
You just keep telling yourself that stoking a race war is good politics.
It got Trump elected.
Do you want the next election to be White Nationalists vs. those against White Nationalism?
DiscoGary wrote:
You just keep telling yourself that stoking a race war is good politics.
It got Trump elected.
Do you want the next election to be White Nationalists vs. those against White Nationalism?
Flagpole wrote:
non Flagpole wrote:
He will finish his first term.
Just like with Hillary, no one is coming, politicians are almost like Teflon Don. Hillary lied under oath, that is factual, and walked away unscathed.
Name calling---a clown--- is immature regardless of how you look at it.
Sorry, but you are beyond being obsessed and quite desperate to be agreed with and proven right...who really cares?
1) Hillary did NOT lie under oath.
.
well maybe
she said things under oath that turned out not to be true
whether she knew at the time they were untrue is the question
the FBI basically decided not to accuse her, because they figured that HRC did not know enough about IT to be lying, and that it wasn't realistic to expect a sec state to read the bottom of every email to see if a tiny little c for confidential was there.
L L wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:
You just keep telling yourself that stoking a race war is good politics.
It got Trump elected.
Do you want the next election to be White Nationalists vs. those against White Nationalism?
That's right. Keep calling voters "White nationalists". That'll convince Trump voters to come over to your way of thinking.
DiscoGary wrote:
That's right. Keep calling voters "White nationalists". That'll convince Trump voters to come over to your way of thinking.
Ahem, only a small number of "voters" are White Nationalists. Maybe you meant Trump voters. With your warped thinking no one knows what you meant, not even you. What is true is: Almost all White Nationalists voted for Trump.
ReasonableOhioVoter wrote:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/06/04/trump-cancels-philadelphia-eagles-over-anthem-protest-event-will-now-honor-american-heroes/Suck on that, you democrat kneelers!!!!
Democrats lose again
DiscoGary wrote:
In Clinton’s case, however, the conduct underlying this hypothetical indictment occurred prior to her taking office. The House of Representatives, as far back as 1873, has determined that a person cannot be impeached based on conduct prior to them holding office. In other words, House precedent says a President Hillary Clinton could not be impeached as president for crimes related to the e-mail server or the Clinton Foundation.
Disco, you moron, Hillary is not president. Moot point.
L L wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:
Well those two in second picture are the ones holding up the "black power" fist.
And the white guy, who was cut out, had his hand on his teammate's back in support of the gesture.
They censored the white support of the black teammates to show a false racial divide.
And it seems to show how only Trump can stop the negro uprising.
Uprising? You mean the one he touts every month that the African American unemployment reaches record lows?
L L wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:
Well those two in second picture are the ones holding up the "black power" fist.
And the white guy, who was cut out, had his hand on his teammate's back in support of the gesture.
They censored the white support of the black teammates to show a false racial divide.
And it seems to show how only Trump can stop the negro uprising.
I would refrain from using the word, negro. That's bordering on racist.
DiscoGary wrote:
L L wrote:
It got Trump elected.
Do you want the next election to be White Nationalists vs. those against White Nationalism?
That's right. Keep calling voters "White nationalists". That'll convince Trump voters to come over to your way of thinking.
They had their fun in 2016.
The white nationalist types won't come back out to vote this fall. Especially since Trump is not on the ticket.
But anyone opposing Trump and who wants a congress that will not go along with him will vote this fall.
Everyone wins wrote:
L L wrote:
And the white guy, who was cut out, had his hand on his teammate's back in support of the gesture.
They censored the white support of the black teammates to show a false racial divide.
And it seems to show how only Trump can stop the negro uprising.
Uprising? You mean the one he touts every month that the African American unemployment reaches record lows?
LOL . . . FOOL!
The employment rate for African Americans went UP. The rate is 62.0% DOWN from 62.4% a year ago . The white participation rate went UP from 62.7% a year ago to 62.9% last month. What these numbers tell you is that African Americans are dropping OFF the employment "calculations" because they have found a job within the "required" time to be counted as not employed. Whites are getting jobs at the expense of African Americans.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t02.htmFILL SWAMP
DRAIN SWAMP
REPEAT...................
blahgovich wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
1) Hillary did NOT lie under oath.
.
well maybe
she said things under oath that turned out not to be true
whether she knew at the time they were untrue is the question
the FBI basically decided not to accuse her, because they figured that HRC did not know enough about IT to be lying, and that it wasn't realistic to expect a sec state to read the bottom of every email to see if a tiny little c for confidential was there.
She was not determined to have lied. That is all that is needed here.
The Fokus wrote:
Racket wrote:
They are obfuscating the entire investigation to the public. I believe Giuliani is intentionally contradicting himself and the president so they can keep it in the media cycle and thus induce a sort of war weariness in the American people. It won't take long before dozens of different accounts have been offered on the infamous Trump Tower meeting and Republicans will feel safe putting political pressure on Mueller to finish rapidly or face dismissal.
There certainly is a degree of showing confusion within Trump's circle. Giuliani's comments over the weekend of essentially "who can remember what they said?" fits a pattern of contradicting comments, information, etc followed by "see, nobody can remember."
The thought that there could be story weariness from the American people is one that is legit.
Though they may achieve instilling a state of confusion, it is not by design and by simple lack of competence and coordination.
Flagpole wrote:
blahgovich wrote:
well maybe
she said things under oath that turned out not to be true
whether she knew at the time they were untrue is the question
the FBI basically decided not to accuse her, because they figured that HRC did not know enough about IT to be lying, and that it wasn't realistic to expect a sec state to read the bottom of every email to see if a tiny little c for confidential was there.
She was not determined to have lied. That is all that is needed here.
well technically it was decided not to indict on perjury charges. That's the most we can say. Prosecutorial discretion is very wide in these things.
Rush Limbaugh just said liberals...I think maybe a specific liberal (I didn't catch it) think that Trump is "Rough around the edges and not of good cheer."
Um, no, we think he's a criminal and an a$$hole.
Mueller is coming.
The clown is done.
blahgovich wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
She was not determined to have lied. That is all that is needed here.
well technically it was decided not to indict on perjury charges. That's the most we can say. Prosecutorial discretion is very wide in these things.
Because it was determined she didn't lie. Saying something that later turns out not to be true is not a lie. You have to know it is a lie and then say it for it to be a lie. Legally in all ways, she is innocent here.
Trump lies all the time...says stuff that is not true that he KNOWS is not true. That is the definition of a lie.
unrecorded lows wrote:
Everyone wins wrote:
Uprising? You mean the one he touts every month that the African American unemployment reaches record lows?
LOL . . . FOOL!
The employment rate for African Americans went UP. The rate is 62.0% DOWN from 62.4% a year ago . The white participation rate went UP from 62.7% a year ago to 62.9% last month. What these numbers tell you is that African Americans are dropping OFF the employment "calculations" because they have found a job within the "required" time to be counted as not employed. Whites are getting jobs at the expense of African Americans.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t02.htm
Nice try, bro. Look at the chart.
Also, try not to deflect too much, as the point of my post was to note that he is happy about everyone doing well, and not "trying to stop the [black] uprising."
http://blackdemographics.com/economics/unemployment/Flagpole wrote:
blahgovich wrote:
well technically it was decided not to indict on perjury charges. That's the most we can say. Prosecutorial discretion is very wide in these things.
Because it was determined she didn't lie. Saying something that later turns out not to be true is not a lie. You have to know it is a lie and then say it for it to be a lie. Legally in all ways, she is innocent here.
Trump lies all the time...says stuff that is not true that he KNOWS is not true. That is the definition of a lie.
there is a lot of prosecutorial discretion on perjury. Not every perjurer gets indicted - it's a difficult crime to prosecute since you have to know what was in the perjurer's mind. There is a good chance HRC perjured herself but got away with it.
In any case, she was foolish and wrong to answer questions she didn't know the answer to.
Everyone wins wrote:
unrecorded lows wrote:
LOL . . . FOOL!
The employment rate for African Americans went UP. The rate is 62.0% DOWN from 62.4% a year ago . The white participation rate went UP from 62.7% a year ago to 62.9% last month. What these numbers tell you is that African Americans are dropping OFF the employment "calculations" because they have NOT found a job within the "required" time to be counted as not employed. Whites are getting jobs at the expense of African Americans.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t02.htmNice try, bro. Look at the chart.
Also, try not to deflect too much, as the point of my post was to note that he is happy about everyone doing well, and not "trying to stop the [black] uprising."
0/10
bls.gov is the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data has been produced by the US government for years. The table is known as "Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, and age."
You are too stupid to understand that a decrease in the overall percentage of a section of the population means that people are dropping of the employment calculations. Overall white employment has increased. Overall black employment has decreased.
Now go back to you troll hole, moran.
trumpers going to trump
a cabinet level officer using his office to enrich his family. again. I f any, any democrat did any of this, you GOPers would be saying Obama was behind it and this is clear evidence of treason and corruption. But you won't say that now. Why?