The Inevitable New The Inevitable Trump Mocking Thread

messy said:
Wait, you don’t know that they always defend the Nazis and the white nationalists and call Obama “Kenyan” because they’re the oppressed?!They’re the losers that Trump recognizes. Can’t keep up in a changing society and need someone “smaller” to blame. He’s played them perfectly. But he ain’t inviting them to Mar-a-lago!
Click to expand...
Did your husband leave the seat up again?
 
tenacious said:
With Stone being arrested I'd have to guess Muller is coming to the end of his investigation. At least Stone would appear to be someone who directly links the Trump campaign/ Trump's family to Russian interests. The investigation is now at the gates... and soon the public will learn the nature of the Trump campaign's relationship with Russian money and government sponsored hackers.
Click to expand...
IMG_5178.JPG
 
Sheriff Joe said:
So, is this stone thing all about oppo research and lying about it?
Please tell me there is more to the story.
Click to expand...

I don't know much about the man or why the FBI picked up Stone. My understanding is he's an inside player, and I've also seen him in the news giving tireless Trump supporter soundbites.

As to why he's important, think I heard something about he might have had some talks with that WikiLeaks guy hiding in that embassy over in London. You know, like if Team Trump was coordinating the release of stolen Dem emails with the Russian government... there would have had to been people coordinating between the hackers, Wikileaks, etc. Some people I think believe Stone may have been one of the "coordinators". Like let's pretend Jarred Kushner just met with Trump and think it's a good idea to release some damaging info. Who do you suppose he would have called to say it's go time...
 
tenacious said:
I don't know much about the man or why the FBI picked up Stone. My understanding is he's an inside player, and I've also seen him in the news giving tireless Trump supporter soundbites.

As to why he's important, think I heard something about he might have had some talks with that WikiLeaks guy hiding in that embassy over in London. You know, like if Team Trump was coordinating the release of stolen Dem emails with the Russian government... there would have had to been people coordinating between the hackers, Wikileaks, etc. Some people I think believe Stone may have been one of the "coordinators". Like let's pretend Jarred Kushner just met with Trump and think it's a good idea to release some damaging info. Who do you suppose he would have called to say it's go time...
Click to expand...
Everyone knows what stone is and how he works, no surprise here.
 
Tucker Carlson: Our borders are vulnerable, and Dems are trying to make the problem worse. That's the truth
carlson_tucker_2016.jpg

By Tucker Carlson | Fox News
close
Tucker: Democrats' border proposal would not secure border

Democrats' proposed bill only restores previous funding levels for Border Patrol and other existing programs.

So, what exactly is the Democratic border security proposal? Would it actually secure the border?



We had some time, so we checked. In a word, no, it would not.

The Democratic bill in the Senate simply restores previous funding levels for the border patrol and other existing programs. So you have to ask yourself, when you consider that, the following: Was the border secure in December, before the shutdown?

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM TUCKER CARLSON.

No, it was not. That’s why we’re having this debate right now. Then how will it be more secure after a bill that doesn’t change anything passes? Well, it wouldn’t be. That’s the point of the legislation -- to maintain the broken status quo.


Meanwhile, in the House, Homeland Security Committee Chair Bennie Thompson says he plans to introduce a bill that contains billions for border security, but nothing for a wall. Thompson has a brand new idea, he tells us. Thompson says we can secure the border with the marvels of technology. He recently told PBS that cutting-edge machines can help us “identify those vulnerabilities” on the border.

Thompson’s plan can expect enthusiastic support from the congresswoman from Tech Land, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE ENTIRE EPISODE.

"The positive, technological wall that can be built is what we should be doing," she has said. "Technology to scan the cars coming through the ports of entry ... and that is to detect guns. It’s like an electronic dog almost to detect drugs, guns and other contraband."

It’s really like an electronic dog that can detect contraband. On one level, it’s hilarious, and we’ve laughed about it before. But it’s also patronizing, really. You’d have to be totally ignorant of what’s happening at the border to believe that more surveillance is going to solve the problem. We have an awful lot of surveillance technology already. You have drones, cameras, sensors, radar, dirigibles.

We have it all there, in part, because the George W. Bush administration put it there. That administration spent more than a billion dollars on something called the Secure Border Initiative Network. It used technology to watch about 50 miles of our southern border. Congressman Bennie Thompson himself called that program a “grave and expensive disappointment.” Well, Thompson was right about that. What’s changed is that Democrats now support grave and expensive disappointments. They specialize in grave and expensive disappointments. They’re pushing one now.

Democrats have become extremists on the question of borders. You’d never know that from watching television or reading the paper. The media won’t say it. Nor will most Republicans, by the way. Even in the Trump administration, some officials seem intent on making Nancy Pelosi’s case for her, that Republicans are the real extremists here.

That’s shortsighted. Leaving the politics aside, it’s not a good idea because our southern border is one of America’s most dangerous vulnerabilities. That’s not a talking point. It’s literally true. Here’s why: As of this week, Mexico is an intact country. Will it remain an intact country? Maybe. But maybe not.

Mexico is a deeply unstable place. That’s not an attack on the Mexican people; it’s an acknowledgment of what anyone who knows anything about the country will tell you. The national murder rate is five times ours. Since 2006, more than 250,000 people – that’s a quarter million – have been murdered in Mexico, including hundreds of politicians and judges. There’s a war going on in Mexico, and it’s spurred by drug cartels that reach into the highest levels of the Mexican government. That's not an exaggeration.

The attorney general of an entire Mexican state recently pleaded guilty to drug trafficking charges. A governor of a state on the U.S. border took bribes to let cartels operate freely, which they did. And just the other day, the country’s previous president was credibly accused by a witness at trial, in court, of taking a $100 million bribe from El Chapo Guzman

In effect, Mexico has become a narcostate. But it’s not even the most volatile country in the region. Nicaragua is in severe turmoil. That gets no coverage, but it’s real. Parts of El Salvador are largely controlled by gangs. Venezuela, meanwhile, is literally falling apart. A recent Brookings Institution report predicted that a total collapse in Venezuela, which could happen any day, might create 8 million refugees. For perspective, that’s more refugees than the ones that fled the entire Syrian Civil War. Keep in mind, that flood of humanity upended all of Europe.

Something similar could easily happen here, to us. It likely will if we ignore the problem, which we are doing. And yet the position of Democrats in Washington is that everything is fine, and you’re nuts if you disagree. Nothing needs to be done. That’s the definition of recklessness. In fact, it’s worse than recklessness. It’s like letting your kids play in traffic. You wouldn’t do that to people you cared about. You’d prevent it from happening.

Democrats have become extremists on the question of borders. You’d never know that from watching television or reading the paper. The media won’t say it. Nor will most Republicans, by the way. Even in the Trump administration, some officials seem intent on making Nancy Pelosi’s case for her, that Republicans are the real extremists here.

Video
Here’s what Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said when asked on another cable news newtwork about workers who aren’t being paid during the shutdown: "The people might have to pay a little bit of interest, but the idea that it's paycheck or zero is not a really valid idea," he said. "There have been ads run by a number of the public-sector credit unions ... Those have announced very, very low interest-rate loans to bridge people over the gap."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

So, more debt? More interest payments? That’s the solution? No. Those are the last things most Americans need. It was an idiotic thing to say. Look for Wilbur Ross’s words to be aired every day for the next three years on CNN. They know a propaganda win when they see one.

And it’s a shame. It’s also a distraction because it doesn’t change the fundamental nature of this crisis. Our borders remain vulnerable, and the stakes are higher than they’ve ever been, thanks to the chaos just south of them. Leaders who cared about the country would be staying up late trying to fix the problem. Democratic leaders are trying to make it worse. That’s the bottom line truth
 
Sheriff Joe said:
Tucker Carlson: Our borders are vulnerable, and Dems are trying to make the problem worse. That's the truth
carlson_tucker_2016.jpg

By Tucker Carlson | Fox News
close
Tucker: Democrats' border proposal would not secure border

Democrats' proposed bill only restores previous funding levels for Border Patrol and other existing programs.

So, what exactly is the Democratic border security proposal? Would it actually secure the border?



We had some time, so we checked. In a word, no, it would not.

The Democratic bill in the Senate simply restores previous funding levels for the border patrol and other existing programs. So you have to ask yourself, when you consider that, the following: Was the border secure in December, before the shutdown?

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM TUCKER CARLSON.

No, it was not. That’s why we’re having this debate right now. Then how will it be more secure after a bill that doesn’t change anything passes? Well, it wouldn’t be. That’s the point of the legislation -- to maintain the broken status quo.


Meanwhile, in the House, Homeland Security Committee Chair Bennie Thompson says he plans to introduce a bill that contains billions for border security, but nothing for a wall. Thompson has a brand new idea, he tells us. Thompson says we can secure the border with the marvels of technology. He recently told PBS that cutting-edge machines can help us “identify those vulnerabilities” on the border.

Thompson’s plan can expect enthusiastic support from the congresswoman from Tech Land, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE ENTIRE EPISODE.

"The positive, technological wall that can be built is what we should be doing," she has said. "Technology to scan the cars coming through the ports of entry ... and that is to detect guns. It’s like an electronic dog almost to detect drugs, guns and other contraband."

It’s really like an electronic dog that can detect contraband. On one level, it’s hilarious, and we’ve laughed about it before. But it’s also patronizing, really. You’d have to be totally ignorant of what’s happening at the border to believe that more surveillance is going to solve the problem. We have an awful lot of surveillance technology already. You have drones, cameras, sensors, radar, dirigibles.

We have it all there, in part, because the George W. Bush administration put it there. That administration spent more than a billion dollars on something called the Secure Border Initiative Network. It used technology to watch about 50 miles of our southern border. Congressman Bennie Thompson himself called that program a “grave and expensive disappointment.” Well, Thompson was right about that. What’s changed is that Democrats now support grave and expensive disappointments. They specialize in grave and expensive disappointments. They’re pushing one now.

Democrats have become extremists on the question of borders. You’d never know that from watching television or reading the paper. The media won’t say it. Nor will most Republicans, by the way. Even in the Trump administration, some officials seem intent on making Nancy Pelosi’s case for her, that Republicans are the real extremists here.

That’s shortsighted. Leaving the politics aside, it’s not a good idea because our southern border is one of America’s most dangerous vulnerabilities. That’s not a talking point. It’s literally true. Here’s why: As of this week, Mexico is an intact country. Will it remain an intact country? Maybe. But maybe not.

Mexico is a deeply unstable place. That’s not an attack on the Mexican people; it’s an acknowledgment of what anyone who knows anything about the country will tell you. The national murder rate is five times ours. Since 2006, more than 250,000 people – that’s a quarter million – have been murdered in Mexico, including hundreds of politicians and judges. There’s a war going on in Mexico, and it’s spurred by drug cartels that reach into the highest levels of the Mexican government. That's not an exaggeration.

The attorney general of an entire Mexican state recently pleaded guilty to drug trafficking charges. A governor of a state on the U.S. border took bribes to let cartels operate freely, which they did. And just the other day, the country’s previous president was credibly accused by a witness at trial, in court, of taking a $100 million bribe from El Chapo Guzman

In effect, Mexico has become a narcostate. But it’s not even the most volatile country in the region. Nicaragua is in severe turmoil. That gets no coverage, but it’s real. Parts of El Salvador are largely controlled by gangs. Venezuela, meanwhile, is literally falling apart. A recent Brookings Institution report predicted that a total collapse in Venezuela, which could happen any day, might create 8 million refugees. For perspective, that’s more refugees than the ones that fled the entire Syrian Civil War. Keep in mind, that flood of humanity upended all of Europe.

Something similar could easily happen here, to us. It likely will if we ignore the problem, which we are doing. And yet the position of Democrats in Washington is that everything is fine, and you’re nuts if you disagree. Nothing needs to be done. That’s the definition of recklessness. In fact, it’s worse than recklessness. It’s like letting your kids play in traffic. You wouldn’t do that to people you cared about. You’d prevent it from happening.

Democrats have become extremists on the question of borders. You’d never know that from watching television or reading the paper. The media won’t say it. Nor will most Republicans, by the way. Even in the Trump administration, some officials seem intent on making Nancy Pelosi’s case for her, that Republicans are the real extremists here.

Video
Here’s what Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said when asked on another cable news newtwork about workers who aren’t being paid during the shutdown: "The people might have to pay a little bit of interest, but the idea that it's paycheck or zero is not a really valid idea," he said. "There have been ads run by a number of the public-sector credit unions ... Those have announced very, very low interest-rate loans to bridge people over the gap."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

So, more debt? More interest payments? That’s the solution? No. Those are the last things most Americans need. It was an idiotic thing to say. Look for Wilbur Ross’s words to be aired every day for the next three years on CNN. They know a propaganda win when they see one.

And it’s a shame. It’s also a distraction because it doesn’t change the fundamental nature of this crisis. Our borders remain vulnerable, and the stakes are higher than they’ve ever been, thanks to the chaos just south of them. Leaders who cared about the country would be staying up late trying to fix the problem. Democratic leaders are trying to make it worse. That’s the bottom line truth
Click to expand...
Tucker is definitely your kind of guy. Just look at the suit and the smirk. I bet he gets invited to Mar-a-Lago.
 
messy said:
I wonder why? They didn’t do Manafort or the others like that. But we know you don’t like the FBI...you like the KGB guys like Putin. Welcome to America, pal! And welcome to the great state of California! Congrats.
Click to expand...
They did manafort the same way I believe.
Have you observed the FBI top brass being fired or suspended?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top