Haha he implicated Soros which leads directly back to HRC, BLM, Bernie protests, etc. I love it.
Bet the Anti-Trumpers are crying today...
- Thread starter Gazrok
- Start date
Help Support Doomsday Prepper Forums:
It was something that gazrok said (the best buddies thing)
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Looks like the republicans are eating their own today with all the criticism of the summit in Helsinki. Even Ryan is highly critical as well as several others.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Conservatives don't like Ryan and want him gone now. He has always been against anything Trump does. Not a good example.
Have you noticed the Left isn't mentioning the $400 million HRC received? And the ones yelling the loudest like Brennan is up to his eyes in trouble.
The truth will out.
It wasn’t just Ryan. Graham. McCain. Flake. McConnell. Romney. Hurd. LoBiondo. Ros-Lehtinen. Burr. Cornyn. Kinzinger. Sasse. Amash. Brennan. Steele. Abby Huntsman. All are decidedly not left or Democrats.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Mostly RINOS
Doreena, you just don't get it do you? The Washington establishment, both "D" and "R", has been against Trump from the start. And that is why he won. Americans are fed up with the establishment.
Just all progressives.
Brent S
Top Poster
Sorry guys, trump is completely outsmarted and out classed by Putin. For him to go against all of our intelligence agencies for Putin’s denial he has to be naive at best or blackmailed at worst. Can anyone here seriously believe putin didn’t intentionally help him win?
Someone has not been paying attention , every time the dumbacrats have said We got Him now the script flips back on Them .
I may not like some of His comments at the summit but thats just fluff . Who cares if someone bashes the CIA , FBI , IRS or . One comical part of it is now the liberals are taking up for the CIA .
The Democrats paid Russia for information to use aginst Trump but Your saying Russia helped Trump win ?
I can find alot of Trump supporters but I cant find anyone that says a Russian told them how to vote .
I may not like some of His comments at the summit but thats just fluff . Who cares if someone bashes the CIA , FBI , IRS or . One comical part of it is now the liberals are taking up for the CIA .
The Democrats paid Russia for information to use aginst Trump but Your saying Russia helped Trump win ?
I can find alot of Trump supporters but I cant find anyone that says a Russian told them how to vote .
We are fed up with the establishment, I agree. It is just that trump keeps putting establishment in places of power...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Exactly. I was thinking this AM that even if people are suspicious of the US intelligence agencies, why would they place more trust in Russian ones?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Doreena, Trump has had the Democrat establishment, the Republican establishment, the mainstream news media, the entrenched bureaucrats in the DOJ, and all the socialist governments in Europe and North America all lined up against him trying to thwart his every move. He has had to make some compromises, not all of which we like. But he still won, and he still has made incredible progress against them.
I have said before, he personally rubs me the wrong way and always has. But I'm willing to look past my personal bias and look at what he has accomplished against staggering odds.
I have said before, he personally rubs me the wrong way and always has. But I'm willing to look past my personal bias and look at what he has accomplished against staggering odds.
the Russians,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,funny our agencies have covered up everything Clinton did,,,,,,the Russians made it public knowledge all the under handed crap Clinton had done over the years ,and the Democrats have been screaming collusion ever since ,but maybe the Russians just like many here in the USA were worried about what Clinton would do if elected,,,,,
AND ONLY DID WHAT MANY OF US WOULD HAVE DONE IF WE HAD THE RESOURCES TO DO SO
I want to hear more about the $400m that went to HRC.
I'm not hearing about it on MSM. I'm shocked. Lol
Plus, an idiot Congressman from Memphis should be ousted for inciting a coup. He has embarrassed TN for years.
I'm not hearing about it on MSM. I'm shocked. Lol
Plus, an idiot Congressman from Memphis should be ousted for inciting a coup. He has embarrassed TN for years.
Absolutely right about skewed results, you can interpret a research project any way you want. There are tricks to it. That is why knowing how to read research for yourself and to know how to determine what is good and bad results, how it is done, sample sizes, and all the other things about it. Do not rely on someone elses interpretation of it. AND the media always puts their own spin on it. That is why some say, coffee is good for you and coffee is bad for you, eggs are healthy, eggs aren't healthy, the research is all the same, it is how you interpret it to others who don't know what the heck they are reading, they just believe what they are told. I used to be the same way until I took on research studies in college and it was a real eye opener!!Exactly.
I really wish we'd make Stats a mandatory class in High School. Because ANYONE who has taken a semester or two of it, will never be fooled by BS statistics again.
There's a reason stats are called "lies, damn lies".
Because given nearly ANY data set, a statistician can then determine what data to include/exclude (i.e. cherry pick) and whatever statistical analysis method they wish to use....to then generate a stat that supports one view or the other...and all with the same starting data set.
So, you then come to realize that unless you know all of the parameters of the data yourself, and do your OWN analysis of it, you are getting a SKEWED result, to serve whatever agenda is paying for the statistician's time.
How do you think all the news networks were so fooled and blinded during the 2016 election? From those stats (polls), it was made to make Hillary appear to have had it in the bag. Funny enough, this blatant propaganda backfired, keeping folks home instead of coming to the polls. So we, the public, have SEEN just how easily stats can be skewed, right in front of our faces, and yet we (as a whole) continue to be blinded by them.
It's actually kind of mind-boggling that ANYONE believes a poll anymore.
I found an article by researchers that traced the money and that this claim was false. About 125000 went to Hillary and maybe 1 m to the Democratic Party. The only claimants were not valid sources that are not vetted.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-pants-fire-claim-about-400-million-donation/
I am pretty sure that you will not like this link, but please provide me a link with a decent reputation.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Gazrok
A True Doomsday Prepper
Sadly, politifact and Snopes, etc. are often extremely liberally biased. (at least politifact is a bit less so though). But, we don't need to, as your own link actually reveals the truth of the matter, though it's in complete opposition to the headline.
The problem with reporting on anything money related, is that it is relatively simple to farm it out via various shell corps, and charities, etc. So while the "facts" could be "correct"...in essence, the money could STILL be going through her controls. Or, conversely, NOT. So it's a dicey claim for EITHER side to make.
Like our stats examples above, fact-checker sites also require that one look at the actual raw data, vs. relying on the biased interpretation of the data, by another. I seriously doubt though that we, (or the ones doing the so-called "fact-checking") had enough access to fully examine where exactly the money went, to safely conclude it one way or the other.
A prime example of how a fact-checking can be technically correct, but how the real truth can be the complete opposite. Semantics, really.
For example, your article says, "No. We found $17,700 donated to Clinton and another $297,000 to the Democratic National Committee."
Now, we know from Brazile and the leaked emails, that the Clinton campaign and its fundraisers, were basically controlling the DNC. So, it's semantics to say some went directly to HRC, and the majority went to the DNC (on her behalf). Isn't it? Not such a "pants on fire" claim at all.... Folks need to actually READ liberal articles, because often, the headline is the complete opposite of the actual article contents.
Last edited:
Gazrok
A True Doomsday Prepper
I'm curious as to which folks think that President Pence (if Trump were impeached) would be MORE liberal aligned than Trump.....
These idiots should really be careful what they wish for. Wanting to impeach Trump, is the equivalent of wanting gay marriage to be illegal, abortion to be illegal, and less separation of church and state. How is ANY of that desirable to a liberal voter? Answer, it isn't. But they are too busy thinking with their emotions, to exercise logic, and see what they are going to get if Trump was impeached. Absolute idiots that want to shoot themselves in the foot.
Gazrok
A True Doomsday Prepper
All you have to do is look at the comments during the election. Clinton was in favor of more US involvement in the Ukraine situation, and in keeping us involved in Syria.
Meanwhile, Trump opposed both. So it's pretty easy to see why Putin would favor one over the other. Sadly for him, Trump did a 180 on Syria, and escalated our involvement there. The banking cartels have spoken.
Similar threads
