Reply With Quote
It’s apples/apples you ing re . You and Winehole did the exact same thing
Like, I assume the "swamp" would be FBI/CIA in this scenario. Certainly the types of people who would arrange a crime with this idiotic pf a paper trail.
It’s apples/apples you ing re . You and Winehole did the exact same thing
The part I'm most baffled by is why the assailants would be black. Wouldn't the DNC try to orchestrate a false flag hate crime with rednecks wearing MAGA hats as the perpetrators?
It’s because the lib s are so brainwashed by BLM that they refuse to let white men have any role in their Soros-funded conspiracies!
If they were going to do that, I'm sure they would have used white guys and made sure it was in an area with video. And make sure Jussie was beat up...maybe even dead. And the white guys would disappear as well.
...I think even SpursTalk members could have pulled off a better fake hate crime.
Wrong.It’s apples/apples you ing re . You and Winehole did the exact same thing
I didn't leg hump anybody.
As to waiting for the FACTS to come in, ya I did so what.
But it's also fine to speculate on what it was as info came in, it's part of db culture including TrollTalk. Posters already put up he was an attention got seeking to work the system and how a bunch of liberal cucks like you swallowed his jiz. No need for me to point out the obvious.
I didn’t say about him, I waited for the facts like you and Winehole, you dip
Honestly the only deep state false flag conspiracy theory that would approach making any sense whatsoever is one where Smolette was set up for the purpose of being caught, but we know the InfoWars s won't go down that rabbit hole.
Now we get to hear the spin from got Jussies defense liarwyers.
This should be good.
Well, unless it gets covered up behind closed doors.
Best thing he can do is a mea culpa. But I'm sure his lawyers will convince him otherwise.Now we get to hear the spin from got Jussies defense liarwyers.
This should be good.
Well, unless it gets covered up behind closed doors.
Seems like the only thing they can do is say the brothers are lying. And I suppose there is the possibility that they don't have enough hard evidence to convict.
No complaints from me if this s her campaign over. She's an awful candidate who'd get decimated by Trump in a general election.
ask Trump about the Central Park Five.
crofl parading around with al sharpton.
harris and booker would be poor candidates imo. they're all about "trump sucks" and not nearly as policy oriented as sanders/warren
eh, nm
Last edited by Winehole23; 02-21-2019 at 10:51 PM.
Right?
No you just wish it was failed. Winehole is already headed down that path.Actively trying to sway the conversation into a place that fits your failed strawman now.
Kamala Harris's website still lacks a policy tab.
Exactly, and the policy they actually do claim to support doesn’t exactly align with their voting record, as both Harris/Booker have been pro Wall Street and pro Big Pharma when push comes to shove. It’s mostly just superficial progressive rhetoric about “Healthcare for all!” and “Higher taxes!” with no specifics. Fortunately I think Harris is peaking too early on and people are going to be bored with her when voting starts. IMO this is going to work like the 2012 Republican primary where there’s going to be a lot of candidates who have their 15 minutes of fame as the favorite by endlessly railing against the in bent president before they fade really quickly. Remember when Bobby Jindal was the up and coming candidate early on in the 2012 primary
Not even close.
If he was, you wouldn't have to try to lead him to that point.
Ding.Exactly, and the policy they actually do claim to support doesn’t exactly align with their voting record, as both Harris/Booker have been pro Wall Street and pro Big Pharma when push comes to shove. It’s mostly just superficial progressive rhetoric about “Healthcare for all!” and “Higher taxes!” with no specifics. Fortunately I think Harris is peaking too early on and people are going to be bored with her when voting starts. IMO this is going to work like the 2012 Republican primary where there’s going to be a lot of candidates who have their 15 minutes of fame as the favorite by endlessly railing against the in bent president before they fade really quickly. Remember when Bobby Jindal was the up and coming candidate early on in the 2012 primary
I'm still holding out hope for Gabbard but I don't see that happening.
The candidate who hasn't declared yet but is clearly going to and will be my top choice when he does is Sherrod Brown. I like Tulsi more but Brown actually has a real shot at winning imo.
He's always held the progressive views that every Democrat now wants to claim as their own but he's capable of discussing the specifics of how they would be implemented. He doesn't have the "intangibles" that you typically see (not a great public speaker and doesn't have a very polished appearance) but he's the most substance-heavy candidate there is. He would also swing the midwest back in the other direction because he doesn't have the Clintonian views on free trade that allowed Trump to steal rust belt states from Clinton in 2016.
”Hey, you see that path there? Walk down it!”
”nah”
”Mission Accomplished!”
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
