Sheriff Joe
DA
Millions Of Water Bottles Found Rotting In Puerto Rico As San Juan Mayor Continues To Bash Trump
3 hours ago
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...cQCQ&usg=AOvVaw1A-HjJcnlBrBaAAP--kV8l&cf=1
The Inevitable New The Inevitable Trump Mocking Thread
- Thread starter Nonononono
- Start date
Millions Of Water Bottles Found Rotting In Puerto Rico As San Juan Mayor Continues To Bash Trump
3 hours ago
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...cQCQ&usg=AOvVaw1A-HjJcnlBrBaAAP--kV8l&cf=1
Sheriff Joe
DA
It's all over but the shouting after the voting,
get the fuck over it. Ha.
William B. Plowman/NBC/NBC NewsWire via Getty Images
BREAKING: FBI Isn’t Investigating Brett Kavanaugh Over Content Of Vague Dianne Feinstein Document
by Ashe SchowSeptember 13, 2018
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has declined to investigate Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh over allegations sent to them by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
Matt Zapotosky of The Washington Post quoted an FBI official as saying: “Upon receipt of the information on the night of September 12, we included it as part of Judge Kavanaugh’s background file, as per the standard process.” He also reported that the agency was not opening a criminal investigation into what Kavanaugh may or may not have done as a high school student.
get the fuck over it. Ha.
William B. Plowman/NBC/NBC NewsWire via Getty Images
BREAKING: FBI Isn’t Investigating Brett Kavanaugh Over Content Of Vague Dianne Feinstein Document
by Ashe SchowSeptember 13, 2018
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has declined to investigate Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh over allegations sent to them by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
Matt Zapotosky of The Washington Post quoted an FBI official as saying: “Upon receipt of the information on the night of September 12, we included it as part of Judge Kavanaugh’s background file, as per the standard process.” He also reported that the agency was not opening a criminal investigation into what Kavanaugh may or may not have done as a high school student.
Nonononono
PREMIER
So where are we on the bottle, and whether or not you’ve chugged it down yet on Funk and Wagnall’s porch?
One of the usual gang of idiots has already posted from one of his idiotic news sources that the water is by now more than just putrid, but deadly.
Unless you drank a bottle and are dead.
Hüsker Dü
DA
That's the kind of water t and his ever vigilant supporters (or is that vigilante?) want Puerto Ricans to consume . . . like the rental space that opened up after 9/11 and the fact that t's building was once again the tallest or the business opportunities that t bragged about loving that came about due to the great recession, a smart (or absolutely despicable) business person could take advantage of such a situation as mass genocide . . . heck negotiations are under way for Trump Tower Aleppo, lots of opportunity in Syria if of course one has a friend with influence in that region.
Balderdash!
Post like this is what has earned you the f'n idiot of the kitchen....
This is why I give you grief.
Tee up another one Daffy....
Last edited:
Hüsker Dü
DA
LOL!
Nonononono
PREMIER
Does he even realize one of his crowd of the usual gang of idiots has already posted a conservative blathering internet “news” site (read, Russian bot) has already “reported” that billions of bottles of water from FEMA is putrid and contaminanted, hence the fault of Puerto Ricans for not timely distributing it throughout the island.
Whether any such FEMA communication of the airlift was actually made to Puerto Rican officials after Trump drained FEMA coffers of funding for communications, let alone supplies, Republican controlled congressional inquiries never conducted, we’ll likely never know for years to come.
Nonononono
PREMIER
Wouldn’t a written email or recorded statement in any permanent recordation, contemporaneous to the then-ongoing, or instant completion of this essential air drop of millions of bottles of then-potable fresh water supplies to PR by FEMA be an enormously corroborating piece of evidence to support the current unsupported wild opinions promulgated by right-wing (Russian bot) websites as fact, serve as incontrovertible evidence that Trump’s FEMA not only delivered the then-potable water, but unequivocally communicated this fact to the PR authorities, and/or the FEMA ground services to be picked up and distributed to the millions of American citizens on the island without potable water for days, if not weeks and months? Even if such water was even potable after several months in the baking, hot, bacterial producing rich environment in which they were left by Trump’s FEMA?
Nonononono
PREMIER
I see I and autocorrect failed to catch a typo in a post above. The House Oversight Subcommittee needs a referral to start the first of at least eight concurrent hearings. This is BIG.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Nikki Haley Torches UN: 'We Are No Longer Going To Give Money To People Who Are Against U.S.'
POLITICS | BENNY JOHNSON
'We are no longer going to give money to people who are against the U.S. Or say "Death to America."'
https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/13/nikki-haley-torches-un/
POLITICS | BENNY JOHNSON
'We are no longer going to give money to people who are against the U.S. Or say "Death to America."'
https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/13/nikki-haley-torches-un/
Sheriff Joe
DA
Liberals Don't Care about Character
TREVOR THOMAS
Through his deeds, Judge Kavanaugh is known and admired. And liberals just don't care.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/09/liberals_dont_care_about_character.html
TREVOR THOMAS
Through his deeds, Judge Kavanaugh is known and admired. And liberals just don't care.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/09/liberals_dont_care_about_character.html
So all you clever fellas, help me out here. "Conspiracy against the United States of America" to own the libs: bad thing or nah?
Paulie PleadingguiltytoConspiracyagainsttheUS is a lot of words to put on an orange jumpsuit!
I, however, am sanctimoniously laughing my paulie walnuts off! Kek!
Paulie PleadingguiltytoConspiracyagainsttheUS is a lot of words to put on an orange jumpsuit!
I, however, am sanctimoniously laughing my paulie walnuts off! Kek!
Oh the happy idiot huh?
Good for you.
Hüsker Dü
DA
You crack me up! Maybe I'm just now getting your humor. I can be a bit slow on the uptake. You take self-deprecating humor to whole new level and well beyond, bravo! You should be easier on yourself though . . . just saying.
Projecting once again...atta boy duck lips...
Sheriff Joe
DA
NYT: Can you believe Nikki Haley’s state-funded residence is getting $52,000 curtains?*
I mention all of that to help you understand the logic of this hit piece on Nikki Haley in the Times. It’s not perfectly analogous to the Twitter phenomenon I described: The truth is mentioned right here in the story itself. But it’s buried six paragraphs in, treated as an afterthought in a piece that’s clearly designed to buttress the narrative that Trump’s team of alleged swamp-drainers is running up exorbitant tabs on the taxpayer dime. Tom Price, Scott Pruitt, now Nikki Haley:
The State Department spent $52,701 last year buying customized and mechanized curtains for the picture windows in Nikki R. Haley’s official residence as ambassador to the United Nations, just as the department was undergoing deep budget cuts and had frozen hiring…
“How can you, on the one hand, tell diplomats that basic needs cannot be met and, on the other hand, spend more than $50,000 on a customized curtain system for the ambassador to the U.N.?” asked Brett Bruen, a White House official in the Obama administration.
Then there’s this in the sixth paragraph, the subject of the asterisk in my own headline:
A spokesman for Ms. Haley said plans to buy the curtains were made in 2016, during the Obama administration. Ms. Haley had no say in the purchase, he said.
Ah. That’s the Paper of Record’s concession that its own story is garbage, but garbage that’s too useful to Democratic talking points to be spiked completely. They’re sufficiently ethical that they’ll let you know that Haley’s not actually to blame for this supposedly shocking example of wasteful spending. In fact, the last Democratic administration is. But they’re sufficiently unethical when it comes to promoting their ideological interests that they’ll run it anyway and trust that many readers won’t notice that detail.
“But wait,” say critics, “it’s not like the Times saved that information for the very end of the story. It’s in paragraph six, towards the top. Readers are going to see it once they get past the headline.”
Are they? What if they … don’t want to get past the headline?
There were starving children in America during the Obama administration too, when the curtains were ordered. Don’t expect this Young Leader of Tomorrow to be too bothered about that. And before you say “He’s just a dumb kid,” note that the lefty attack dogs at Think Progress are also flogging the NYT story today, aghast that Trump’s State Department would slash diplomatic budgets while fulfilling the order for Haley’s curtains. It’s now a moral outrage, it seems, for a Republican administration not to reverse the worst examples of profligate spending ordered by a Democratic administration which Think Progress ardently supported. (This is strike three for TP this week, by the way. They breathlessly promoted the dubious Feinstein letter yesterday, then got dinged even by fellow liberals for whining when the Weekly Standard caught them dead to rights on another lie about Kavanaugh.) One thing it would have been useful for them or for the Times to address is whether the State Department could have canceled the order for the curtains even if it wanted to. The contract was signed in 2016; backing out now because the price was too high would be an actionable breach, one would think. Would it have been better if Team Trump reneged on a deal Obama had bound them to, then got sued and had to pay up anyway?
One more thing. The chief defender of the curtains purchase in the Times story isn’t Haley or one of her mouthpieces, it’s Patrick Kennedy. Kennedy was appointed as a top management official in the State Department at the end of the Bush administration and spent the entirety of the Obama administration in the same job. Presumably he signed off on the purchase in 2016 when it was made, but either way he’s happy to defend it now. They’ll be used for years, he told the paper of the curtains, and it’s important to have a mechanized device so that the ambassador can close them quickly in case of a security threat. The State Department uses the building for entertaining foreign diplomats too; the decor isn’t a pure luxury for the ambassador herself. It’s much ado about nothing according to an Obama-era official, yet people like Hogg and TP are lunging at it because the premise of Republican budget-slashers being spendthrifts for their own creature comforts is irresistible to their prejudices. If they want to hammer Trump on profligacy, may I interest them in this instead?
I mention all of that to help you understand the logic of this hit piece on Nikki Haley in the Times. It’s not perfectly analogous to the Twitter phenomenon I described: The truth is mentioned right here in the story itself. But it’s buried six paragraphs in, treated as an afterthought in a piece that’s clearly designed to buttress the narrative that Trump’s team of alleged swamp-drainers is running up exorbitant tabs on the taxpayer dime. Tom Price, Scott Pruitt, now Nikki Haley:
The State Department spent $52,701 last year buying customized and mechanized curtains for the picture windows in Nikki R. Haley’s official residence as ambassador to the United Nations, just as the department was undergoing deep budget cuts and had frozen hiring…
“How can you, on the one hand, tell diplomats that basic needs cannot be met and, on the other hand, spend more than $50,000 on a customized curtain system for the ambassador to the U.N.?” asked Brett Bruen, a White House official in the Obama administration.
Then there’s this in the sixth paragraph, the subject of the asterisk in my own headline:
A spokesman for Ms. Haley said plans to buy the curtains were made in 2016, during the Obama administration. Ms. Haley had no say in the purchase, he said.
Ah. That’s the Paper of Record’s concession that its own story is garbage, but garbage that’s too useful to Democratic talking points to be spiked completely. They’re sufficiently ethical that they’ll let you know that Haley’s not actually to blame for this supposedly shocking example of wasteful spending. In fact, the last Democratic administration is. But they’re sufficiently unethical when it comes to promoting their ideological interests that they’ll run it anyway and trust that many readers won’t notice that detail.
“But wait,” say critics, “it’s not like the Times saved that information for the very end of the story. It’s in paragraph six, towards the top. Readers are going to see it once they get past the headline.”
Are they? What if they … don’t want to get past the headline?
There were starving children in America during the Obama administration too, when the curtains were ordered. Don’t expect this Young Leader of Tomorrow to be too bothered about that. And before you say “He’s just a dumb kid,” note that the lefty attack dogs at Think Progress are also flogging the NYT story today, aghast that Trump’s State Department would slash diplomatic budgets while fulfilling the order for Haley’s curtains. It’s now a moral outrage, it seems, for a Republican administration not to reverse the worst examples of profligate spending ordered by a Democratic administration which Think Progress ardently supported. (This is strike three for TP this week, by the way. They breathlessly promoted the dubious Feinstein letter yesterday, then got dinged even by fellow liberals for whining when the Weekly Standard caught them dead to rights on another lie about Kavanaugh.) One thing it would have been useful for them or for the Times to address is whether the State Department could have canceled the order for the curtains even if it wanted to. The contract was signed in 2016; backing out now because the price was too high would be an actionable breach, one would think. Would it have been better if Team Trump reneged on a deal Obama had bound them to, then got sued and had to pay up anyway?
One more thing. The chief defender of the curtains purchase in the Times story isn’t Haley or one of her mouthpieces, it’s Patrick Kennedy. Kennedy was appointed as a top management official in the State Department at the end of the Bush administration and spent the entirety of the Obama administration in the same job. Presumably he signed off on the purchase in 2016 when it was made, but either way he’s happy to defend it now. They’ll be used for years, he told the paper of the curtains, and it’s important to have a mechanized device so that the ambassador can close them quickly in case of a security threat. The State Department uses the building for entertaining foreign diplomats too; the decor isn’t a pure luxury for the ambassador herself. It’s much ado about nothing according to an Obama-era official, yet people like Hogg and TP are lunging at it because the premise of Republican budget-slashers being spendthrifts for their own creature comforts is irresistible to their prejudices. If they want to hammer Trump on profligacy, may I interest them in this instead?
Sheriff Joe
DA
Yes, that is perfect.