The Biden Administration..V3

148,999 Views | 3157 Replies | Last: 11 hrs ago by caryking
Steve Videtich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

caryking said:

Packchem91 said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.




I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.
But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.
You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.


Hillary didn't have the power to declassify documents.
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Steve Videtich said:

Civilized said:

caryking said:

Packchem91 said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.




I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.
But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.
You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.


Hillary didn't have the power to declassify documents.
What if she is part of the Illuminati?
Steve Videtich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

Steve Videtich said:

Civilized said:

caryking said:

Packchem91 said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.




I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.
But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.
You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.


Hillary didn't have the power to declassify documents.
What if she is part of the Illuminati?


I'm not even sure what that is. Was that meant for me?
Packchem91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

Steve Videtich said:

Civilized said:

caryking said:

Packchem91 said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.




I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.
But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.
You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.


Hillary didn't have the power to declassify documents.
What if she is part of the Illuminati?
I always thought she was the evil witch on any of the Disney stories. Or the one from the West in Kansas.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

GuerrillaPack said:

hokiewolf said:

Switching topics, for you guys that lean to the right, I have a blind congressional candidate:

1. Fights for the forgotten little guy
2. Wants to bring/protect manufacturing jobs in America
3. Wants to bring back American Greatness and is America First
4. Is not an insider but is a hell raiser. Thinks that the establishment is ignoring his districts concerns.
5. Thinks there is over reach by the FBI
6. Is upset about the status of the Southern border
7. Is concerned about election integrity and thinks an election was stolen with illegal votes.

Would you vote for this guy?

Need more information. Some of the most important issues not covered. Does he support the Second Amendment, or does he support the Left's gun ban agenda? For or against abortion? For or against the insane transgender agenda and drag queen shows for school children? For or against mandating the covid vaxx? For or against lockdowns during another fake pandemic? For or against massive debt and spending that is causing inflation?
those are the top 7 issues for him. Seem like a viable candidate?
Hokie, to answer your question… Yes, this person appears viable. Now, GP is correct with understanding more about the persons policies. So, yes, I like those points; however, tell us more…
Sure, you just elected 1984 James Anthony Traficant Jr. Congrats!


Zzzzzzzz
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Steve Videtich said:

hokiewolf said:

Steve Videtich said:

Civilized said:

caryking said:

Packchem91 said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.




I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.
But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.
You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.


Hillary didn't have the power to declassify documents.
What if she is part of the Illuminati?


I'm not even sure what that is. Was that meant for me?
it was a joke. BTW Hillary as Sec of State had authority to classify and de-classify docs.
Steve Videtich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

Steve Videtich said:

hokiewolf said:

Steve Videtich said:

Civilized said:

caryking said:

Packchem91 said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.




I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.
But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.
You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.


Hillary didn't have the power to declassify documents.
What if she is part of the Illuminati?


I'm not even sure what that is. Was that meant for me?
it was a joke. BTW Hillary as Sec of State had authority to classify and de-classify docs.


I can't find anything that supports the ability of the Secretary of State to declassify documents. Only to classify. I see a lot of things saying the President has the authority to do so and no set protocol for the process.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

GuerrillaPack said:

hokiewolf said:

Switching topics, for you guys that lean to the right, I have a blind congressional candidate:

1. Fights for the forgotten little guy
2. Wants to bring/protect manufacturing jobs in America
3. Wants to bring back American Greatness and is America First
4. Is not an insider but is a hell raiser. Thinks that the establishment is ignoring his districts concerns.
5. Thinks there is over reach by the FBI
6. Is upset about the status of the Southern border
7. Is concerned about election integrity and thinks an election was stolen with illegal votes.

Would you vote for this guy?

Need more information. Some of the most important issues not covered. Does he support the Second Amendment, or does he support the Left's gun ban agenda? For or against abortion? For or against the insane transgender agenda and drag queen shows for school children? For or against mandating the covid vaxx? For or against lockdowns during another fake pandemic? For or against massive debt and spending that is causing inflation?
those are the top 7 issues for him. Seem like a viable candidate?
Hokie, to answer your question… Yes, this person appears viable. Now, GP is correct with understanding more about the persons policies. So, yes, I like those points; however, tell us more…
Sure, you just elected 1984 James Anthony Traficant Jr. Congrats!
He was ahead of his time…
The Administrative State - Rise of the Fourth Reich!!
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

caryking said:

Packchem91 said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

Steve Videtich said:

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.




I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.
But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.
You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.
Ignorance is bliss…
The Administrative State - Rise of the Fourth Reich!!
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is a good read…

https://apple.news/Azzdws7FHRfilTwTcHyZYTg
The Administrative State - Rise of the Fourth Reich!!
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LOL... been a busy week or so at work...

Glad to see the same two water toting "independents" sniffing Sleepy Joe's jock strap as usual.

And most of all, not contributing a damn thing to the conversation......

What this administration is doing is nothing short of an outright attempted complete takeover of the government. And tonight, Sleepy Joe will rail against 74 million people that voted for President Trump.

Good job "Great Unifier."

Anyone that can support this clown has their head so far up their ass they aren't worth talking to.
Big Bad Wolf. OG...2002

"The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
- Thomas Jefferson
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Glad to see the gladiator back! Fight on brother!
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Werewolf said:

Glad to see the gladiator back! Fight on brother!
Had a work conference over the weekend, trade show until yesterday. Pulling 12 hour days since last Wednesday. Didn't feel like yammering with Pinocchio and his "libertarian" buddy.
Big Bad Wolf. OG...2002

"The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
- Thomas Jefferson
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Per the communist Left, arming the Taliban and arming 87,000 new IRS agents with AR-15s is good.

But they can't tolerate patriotic American citizens having AR-15s.

https://instagr.am/p/Ch94AWVMVJV
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
But does he hurt the little feewlings of lefty MARXISTS?

That's all that matters... oh... and making sure everyone gets a trophy!!
Big Bad Wolf. OG...2002

"The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
- Thomas Jefferson
PackFansXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/could-the-prospect-of-lower-gas-prices-be-motivating-bidens-revival-of-the-iran-deal/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=third

Quote:

It appears that we are days away from the revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), otherwise known as the Iran Deal, the infamous agreement on Iran's nuclear program between the Islamic Republic and the U.S., U.K., Russia, China, France, and Germany that the Trump administration withdrew from.

Restoring the accord would have grave geopolitical consequences for the wider region and be a boon for America's adversaries. But one unappreciated aspect of the pact's resurrection is how it could benefit Democrats politically.

As soon as the deal is inked, Iran can increase its oil production by as much as 900,000 barrels daily, easing supply pressures significantly and bringing down prices in global energy markets. If crude-oil prices drop, prices at the pump will come down with them.

Lower gas prices would be a much-needed reprieve for consumers, but would also benefit Democrats politically in the run-up to the midterms. And achieving that desired outcome in this manner strengthens a regime hostile to the U.S. while enabling Biden and Democrats to escape the blame for the consequences of their policies, which are hostile to U.S. energy independence and incentivize foreign energy producers over domestic fossil-fuel production.
What do y'all think? Would returning to the nuclear deal with Iran be worth a reduction at the pump?
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackFansXL said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/could-the-prospect-of-lower-gas-prices-be-motivating-bidens-revival-of-the-iran-deal/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=third

Quote:

It appears that we are days away from the revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), otherwise known as the Iran Deal, the infamous agreement on Iran's nuclear program between the Islamic Republic and the U.S., U.K., Russia, China, France, and Germany that the Trump administration withdrew from.

Restoring the accord would have grave geopolitical consequences for the wider region and be a boon for America's adversaries. But one unappreciated aspect of the pact's resurrection is how it could benefit Democrats politically.

As soon as the deal is inked, Iran can increase its oil production by as much as 900,000 barrels daily, easing supply pressures significantly and bringing down prices in global energy markets. If crude-oil prices drop, prices at the pump will come down with them.

Lower gas prices would be a much-needed reprieve for consumers, but would also benefit Democrats politically in the run-up to the midterms. And achieving that desired outcome in this manner strengthens a regime hostile to the U.S. while enabling Biden and Democrats to escape the blame for the consequences of their policies, which are hostile to U.S. energy independence and incentivize foreign energy producers over domestic fossil-fuel production.
What do y'all think? Would returning to the nuclear deal with Iran be worth a reduction at the pump?
Sure... following this administration's lead has worked wonders for this country.

As long as he doesn't send out any mean tweets am I right??
Big Bad Wolf. OG...2002

"The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
- Thomas Jefferson
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

This is a good read…

https://apple.news/Azzdws7FHRfilTwTcHyZYTg
I'm not sold on Rick Scott; I think he's a RINO. A lot of theater here would be my 1st thought.
jadawson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Werewolf said:



I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.


FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
jadawson said:

Werewolf said:



I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.


FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden
Not Hunter's wife?
jadawson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Werewolf said:

jadawson said:

Werewolf said:



I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.


FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden
Not Hunter's wife?


The account was deleted for impersonation. You can try searching for it. The foundation she chairs confirmed she has no Twitter account
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
jadawson said:

Werewolf said:

jadawson said:

Werewolf said:



I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.


FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden
Not Hunter's wife?


The account was deleted for impersonation. You can try searching for it. The foundation she chairs confirmed she has no Twitter account
10 4. I think they've got his laptop anyway.....so I hear anyway. No worries.
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
jadawson said:

Werewolf said:



I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.


FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden
So does the laptop and diary concern you?
Big Bad Wolf. OG...2002

"The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
- Thomas Jefferson
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I laugh at you MARXISTS that say that the reason you hate Trump is because of his "morals.."

Really shows who has CONVICTION and who doesn't.

Big Bad Wolf. OG...2002

"The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
- Thomas Jefferson
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BBW12OG said:

I laugh at you MARXISTS that say that the reason you hate Trump is because of his "morals.."

Really shows who has CONVICTION and who doesn't.


honestly surprised you follow Charlie Cooke on Twitter, since he's an establishment Rhino who hates Trump and all
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

BBW12OG said:

I laugh at you MARXISTS that say that the reason you hate Trump is because of his "morals.."

Really shows who has CONVICTION and who doesn't.


honestly surprised you follow Charlie Cooke on Twitter, since he's an establishment Rhino who hates Trump and all
A lot of RINO rhetoric is optics. Silent for a CAUSE. Its not easy to identify who is who on the R side.
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Don't you love it when trolls chime in and add NOTHING to the conversation other than to take a dig at a poster?

Damn shame people can't stick to the topic.............

Big Bad Wolf. OG...2002

"The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
- Thomas Jefferson
jadawson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BBW12OG said:

jadawson said:

Werewolf said:



I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.


FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden
So does the laptop and diary concern you?

Im just here reading through the thread, not gonna get dragged into any debates. Just noticed the tweet screengrab since a friend sent to me yestesrday and i found it interesting and looked into it. Just wanted to let the poster know it was just a fake since its hard to know what to believe on twitter sometimes.
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No problem.
Big Bad Wolf. OG...2002

"The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
- Thomas Jefferson
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
All the communist Democrat party does now is foam at the mouth to ban guns. Why don't they just change the name of their party to the "Gun Ban Party"?

This un-American traitorous communist trash now says that the speed of a bullet "justifies" banning the gun.

Of course, he LIES and spouts total nonsense, claiming that "the speed of a bullet from an AR-15 travels 5 times faster than the bullet from any other gun". Lmao

What lies WON'T these communist scum tell to push their agenda?? They lie about everything. But then you have all these Leftist idiot dupes who will believe these ridiculous lies. Because they fall for all the lies -- the 70+ genders, the "climate change" hoax, the covid scamdemic, "unborn children are not human", and on and on and on.

https://instagr.am/p/Ch7NLYWjNqZ
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
jadawson said:

BBW12OG said:

jadawson said:

Werewolf said:



I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.


FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden
So does the laptop and diary concern you?

Im just here reading through the thread, not gonna get dragged into any debates. Just noticed the tweet screengrab since a friend sent to me yestesrday and i found it interesting and looked into it. Just wanted to let the poster know it was just a fake since its hard to know what to believe on twitter sometimes.
U cool with me. Doing my best to share non-Corporate Media news.

I will tell all the guys on my side that TRUTH NEWS internet sites have become infested with fake sites and posters. Its caught me a couple of times here..........and this won't be the last . I could start sending my stuff to SNOPES.COM to fact check :-)
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rob Schneider on SNL: "Much late night comedy is less about being funny and more about Indoctrination by comedic imposition. People aren't really laughing at it as much as cheering on the rhetoric. It no longer resembles a comedy show, it's more like some kind of liberal Klan meeting"
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If anybody thinks that mess, by Biden, was acceptable; you are a lost individual…. That was the absolute worst speech I've ever heard, from a divisive standpoint, in the history of this country!!!

If anybody thinks that was ok, you are a sick person!!!!
The Administrative State - Rise of the Fourth Reich!!
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://instagr.am/p/Ch_B9WvD2qk

Quote:

This man is damn near declaring war on political opposition. This man has one of the lowest approval ratings in history. This man's press Secretary said, in summary, that the MAGA agenda is a threat to our democracy. This man's dangerous and divisive rhetoric is what the real threat is… this is borderline Stalin type rhetoric… very scary times
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
22 months on 9/3/2022. Looking for dicey times starting tomorrow or the next and for 3-4 months should be exciting times.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.