Snowden has commented many times on this critical of Trump. Assange on the other hand is using Wikileaks for his personal motives.
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Snowden has commented many times on this critical of Trump. Assange on the other hand is using Wikileaks for his personal motives.
Well we may have to change that definition to something like 'electing Donald Trump
feck that guy asking the question. He only gave a shit about healthcare for others when he himself got sick. Typical fecking selfish republican.
feck that guy asking the question. He only gave a shit about healthcare for others when he himself got sick. Typical fecking selfish republican.
I know but my point is a different one. Both accused Clinton of being a puppet of Goldman Sachs but both keep quiet when Trump brings on 6 GS guys. Both have no integrity whatsoever.
He's infuriating. If he crashed into your car you would never get any compensation because he would just lie in greater ways as the conversation went on. "I didn't crash into you, I wasn't driving, I don't even have a car, I was never here to crash into your car"...
Specifically on Trump's Goldman Sachs picks? If so I missed that, my bad. But Snowden is naive if not stupid to not have know prior to the election that Trump personifies business establishment including investment banking.
A = Assange ?Just scrolled to "P" for donors and no Putin
F = Fancy Bears ?
K = Kremlin ?
L = Lavrov ?
M = Moskow ?
R = Russia ?
W = Wikileaks ?
Well, you only picked the things that work for your version. And even they don't really hold up to scrutiny.
Russia had absolutely no influence on BREXIT.
Russia couldn't annex Ukraine even if they wanted to, it's a country of 40 million people. Crimea is a special case, it's a peninsula with a population of a little over 2 million, vast majority of them always considered themselves a part of Russia.
'Geopolitical shocks' in Turkey. That's some fancy sounding BS. Again, neither Russians nor Turks have resources to do such things and have no reason for the time being. The relationsip between the two countries has always been very difficult and complex throughout history, plenty of wars, but neither is weak enough at the moment for the other to try and play some serious games in the other's territory.
The stuff about Russian special forces within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism and the dismantling of China are my personal favorites.
Georgia is the only example that he guessed right, but even crazy people get something right from time to time.
Last edited:
I don't have a clue about any of these things but is it not a bit odd that there is an absolute tonne of contributions all exactly $2,700? Is there a reason for that or just coincidence??
Edit - $400, $800 and $2,700. Was there a set amount on his website you could pledge?
There's a Priscilla Hoekstra on there - I picked that name out because it seems fairly uncommon. Searched on Facebook for her and found what might be her page and she's sharing "Thank You Obama" videos and anti-Trump videos
Last edited:
Season Yerasimides - surely a unique name? Had a look on her Facebook page and she's ridiculing both Trump and Clinton. It's definitely a bunch of fake names, laundering the money into his campaign.
$2,700 is the maximum an individual's allowed to donate to a campaign, not sure about 400 and 800.I don't have a clue about any of these things but is it not a bit odd that there is an absolute tonne of contributions all exactly $2,700? Is there a reason for that or just coincidence??
Edit - $400, $800 and $2,700. Was there a set amount on his website you could pledge?
There's a Priscilla Hoekstra on there - I picked that name out because it seems fairly uncommon. Searched on Facebook for her and found what might be her page and she's sharing "Thank You Obama" videos and anti-Trump videos
Perhaps but at least he seems to have realised his error. Sort of.
That makes sense, the maximum single donation I assume?
I don't have a clue about any of these things but is it not a bit odd that there is an absolute tonne of contributions all exactly $2,700? Is there a reason for that or just coincidence??
Edit - $400, $800 and $2,700. Was there a set amount on his website you could pledge?
There's a Priscilla Hoekstra on there - I picked that name out because it seems fairly uncommon. Searched on Facebook for her and found what might be her page and she's sharing "Thank You Obama" videos and anti-Trump videos
Careful now. It looks as though you're getting sucked into the kind of pointless yet time-consuming distraction that could only be of interest to someone who should be studying for his exams instead.
It's repubs in a nutshell. Things are only issues when they happen to them.
It's the most you're allowed to donate to a candidate's campaign fund per election, so even if you broke it into smaller amounts like 1.7 and 1k it would still be your limit. Though after that you can still donate to PACs (and Super PACs, which can take unlimited contributions) and national parties.
"We don't want people going poor or bankrupt" with medical bills.
Pretty bold statement coming from a party that opposes all forms of healthcare system that would eliminate medical bankruptcy.
Ah right, which is I guess why there are so many names repeated with that figure on the illegal list.
Paul Anka has announced that he had to back out of performing in an inauguration night event because of a scheduling conflict, but said his decision had nothing to do with his feelings toward his “old friend” Donald Trump.
heard of him
Mr. Anka made the statement Friday after Radar Online reported that the singer was going to perform “My Way” with the lyrics altered to fit Mr. Trump.
“The president-elect is an old friend of mine for 50 years,” the 75-year-old told TMZ. “There was a dialogue to do it; ‘My Way’ was his favorite song.”
Mr. Anka explained that he’s currently entangled in a two-year custody battle over his son, Ethan, and a new schedule conflicted with the Jan. 20 inauguration, forcing him to cancel.
“I have a respect for the office of the presidency,” he said. “I was doing it in terms of what’s good for our country and respecting the presidency.”
Never heard of him. But even his z lists are getting cold feet.
heard of him
Mr. Anka made the statement Friday after Radar Online reported that the singer was going to perform “My Way” with the lyrics altered to fit Mr. Trump.
“The president-elect is an old friend of mine for 50 years,” the 75-year-old told TMZ. “There was a dialogue to do it; ‘My Way’ was his favorite song.”
Mr. Anka explained that he’s currently entangled in a two-year custody battle over his son, Ethan, and a new schedule conflicted with the Jan. 20 inauguration, forcing him to cancel.
“I have a respect for the office of the presidency,” he said. “I was doing it in terms of what’s good for our country and respecting the presidency.”
Never heard of him. But even his z lists are getting cold feet.
And now, the end is near...
An alternative view of this mess (not necessarily an endorsement):
so Trump has donations of between $72m and $90m , for his inauguration, what in gods name is that amount of money for, it is not just a case of standing on the steps of where ever and swearing on the bible, that is will do the job given to him.
It's quite a tribute to the totalitarian instincts of the left, isn't it?
I've never understood the Inauguration hoopla anyway. Most other countries manage to change their government without an orgy of self-congratulatory party-going. A massive binge where the rich, the famous and the powerful can dress up, hobnob, sexually liaise and consume vast quantities of caviar and champagne, all at taxpayers expense, seems a peculiar way to celebrate the changing of the guard in the world's greatest democracy.
Ooooooor people are allowed to not like people they don't like
You have my early vote for Caf awards Overstatement Of The Year, though. A bit like those goals that get scored in the first week of January...
A completely pointless thread of discussion. As if journos have some sort of insight as to what is going in inside the agencies.
Just had a look on The Donald subreddit and my mind was blown. I couldn't believe what I was reading.
Isn't that the point though?
Well they don't know and are presuming its some sort of institutional push back against Trump when in fact it could just be a few rogue insiders with an axe to grind. Cue the dramatic Greenwald proclaiming "deep state subversion".
Actually China is not that powerful as everybody try to paint, less nukes than France, their navy is a joke and probably UK has a stronger navy and besides having millions of soldiers - funny way to classify a country's military strength when Iraq was the "4th" largest army in the world and took US 1 or 2 weeks to run over them, so will be no war and China is digging their own hole anyway when they keep messing with Japan because soon or later the younger generation will say - feck it! and they will rebuilt their military power again with nukes and way better technology than China.
The thing is, it's all his own fault. It'd be a non story if his taxes were public. His obfuscation on that have made the more outlandish stories believable.
Just look at that one.
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald...dorsed_based_ll_bean/?st=ixw5ki8s&sh=a6613bde
That is a list of people who endorsed Obama, not the other way round. But they don't care. No source, missleading, just a screenshot. But of course it's gospel.
I actually called the OP of that out for his bullshit in a polite way, let's see how they react. If anyone want's to upvote my comment, feel free. It's kinda like a social experiment so the comment needs a bit of attention.
Edit: this one
You're basicaclly describing the China of 10-20 years ago. Todays China has extremely high level technology including some the US doesn't (such as their advanced anti-ship missile systems). As for the number of warheads they have, we don't actually know but even if the estimate of 'only' 260 is true, that's more than enough to wipe out most major population centres on earth.
The problem with trying to assert military power over China is that although in a worldwide conflict the US has more than the capability to win a direct conflict, in reality any conflict would have the goals of either protecting Taiwan or pushing back Chinese intentions in the South China Sea. Those conflicts would be right on China's doorstep, and are exactly what they have tailored their military to deal with. Trying to militarily restrain China just outside China's own borders would be close to impossible even if America was allowed full access to airbases and staging sites in Japan, Korea, Vietnam etc.
You are massively underrating China's military. Although it is not yet a match for the US military, some parts of it are really powerful.
For example, no European country can match is Navy, especially not the RN, which is sadly in an absolutely sorry state without carriers and, amazingly, sea target missiles ....
Ben Carson is funny.
I thought he was asleep.
China's navy is currently larger than that of the US, I think, though obviously technologically inferior. But to counter American aircraft carriers they have hundreds of submarines.
- Status