Who is actually calling the shots

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whether you like Trump or not, there is no doubt that he is the person in charge of whatever room he is in. Every decision made on his watch was either made or approved by Trump himself, or by somebody to whom he delegated, which Trump could explain and defend if asked.
With Biden, he has no clue what is going on, and the voters do not really know who they are voting for.

It doesn't give me any comfort at all to know that a petty, delusional, chaotic and vindictive guy with zero impulse control like Donald Trump is in charge and making decisions.

Oh vindictive? You are the guys using the court systems against political enemies. Using the IRS against political enemies.

You don't do shit, run shit, you f*k up everything you touch, but you know how to go after people to keep power.

Are you equally offended by calls from I-am-your-retribution Trump and other GOP members to go after Dems when they get back into power? Or is it going to be a-okay when they do it? Because they're talking openly about doing it: “We pledge to you that we will root out the communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country" (Trump).

Democrats opened a Pandora's box by relentlessly targeting Trump and his top folks with prosecution for things that have never been prosecuted before. Eric Holder did the same thing as Bannon, no prosecution. Bill Clinton paid out an accuser, Hillary and Biden stored classified at their homes, and scores of politicians have incited violent riots. So the precedent has been to let people get away with it.

And maybe that was the wrong answer. Maybe all this time, they should have been prosecuting. But now that there has been a change in precedent, we will see a lot more prosecutions of politicians on both sides, probably for the rest of our lifetimes. Candidate quality will degrade as a result. If you think these candidates are bad, give it 20 years. The type of people willing to run for office and open themselves up to political prosecution will be even worse than the kind of people we have now. And, people will become much more open to criminals in office since it will be presumed that criminals are standard issue politicians. If you clapped your hands in glee every time you heard a prosecutor vow to put Trump away, you are the one to break the seal. Typically you find a crime and that leads you to the criminal. Deciding that you want to prosecute someone and then figuring out a charge is a hallmark of corruption. So we already have corruption, and it will be applied equally and more liberally from now until we get this back in a box.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If China attacks Taiwan tomorrow and lobs a few shells at Guam, WHO is taking charge?

Anyone? Anyone? Anyone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If China attacks Taiwan tomorrow and lobs a few shells at Guam, WHO is taking charge?

Anyone? Anyone? Anyone?

WEF and Soros.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If China attacks Taiwan tomorrow and lobs a few shells at Guam, WHO is taking charge?

Anyone? Anyone? Anyone?

Dark Brandon. He needs those sunglasses so no one can see him starring into the distance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the White House, who is actually making decisions on policy. Is it Jill? Is it Kamala? Is it Jeff Zients? Someone else?

Not a Biden supporter but I will admit that my family has done fine under him the past few years. I just feel that as a taxpaying American citizen I deserve to know who is actually making decisions in the White House.

Who is the man and/or woman behind the curtain?

I have the same question regarding Trump. Ivanka? Melania? Who was calling the shots?

How about Reagan, who had dementia?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If China attacks Taiwan tomorrow and lobs a few shells at Guam, WHO is taking charge?

Anyone? Anyone? Anyone?

Apparently it takes a week and massive support team to get Biden up to speed.

Better hope he doesn't have a "cold" or he'll won't look good even then.

Can Taiwan hold out a week while they calibrate Biden's drugs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the White House, who is actually making decisions on policy. Is it Jill? Is it Kamala? Is it Jeff Zients? Someone else?

Not a Biden supporter but I will admit that my family has done fine under him the past few years. I just feel that as a taxpaying American citizen I deserve to know who is actually making decisions in the White House.

Who is the man and/or woman behind the curtain?

I have the same question regarding Trump. Ivanka? Melania? Who was calling the shots?

How about Reagan, who had dementia?

That dog doesn't hunt. We all saw Trump on stage. We hear him constantly. He is eccentric but lucid and shows no cognitive impairment.

[Anonymous]

Everyone I talk to this weekend is still stunned by the realization that this country has a “Weekend at Bernie’s” situation going on.

Our enemies have taken note. They are emboldened. This will get bloody. We thought our retreat from Afghanistan was bad. The debate should never have aired for national security reasons alone.

On the upside, Trump is likely to pick up another indictment. He savaged a defenseless elderly man on live television in a way that wasn’t even sporting.

[Anonymous]

Message to Putin and Xi..... DON'T

I have a cold.

Joe Robinette Biden

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone I talk to this weekend is still stunned by the realization that this country has a “Weekend at Bernie’s” situation going on.

Our enemies have taken note. They are emboldened. This will get bloody. We thought our retreat from Afghanistan was bad. The debate should never have aired for national security reasons alone.

On the upside, Trump is likely to pick up another indictment. He savaged a defenseless elderly man on live television in a way that wasn’t even sporting.

Trump destroyed Hillary and Biden


Saving America from scum

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whether you like Trump or not, there is no doubt that he is the person in charge of whatever room he is in. Every decision made on his watch was either made or approved by Trump himself, or by somebody to whom he delegated, which Trump could explain and defend if asked.
With Biden, he has no clue what is going on, and the voters do not really know who they are voting for.

It doesn't give me any comfort at all to know that a petty, delusional, chaotic and vindictive guy with zero impulse control like Donald Trump is in charge and making decisions.

Oh vindictive? You are the guys using the court systems against political enemies. Using the IRS against political enemies.

You don't do shit, run shit, you f*k up everything you touch, but you know how to go after people to keep power.

Are you equally offended by calls from I-am-your-retribution Trump and other GOP members to go after Dems when they get back into power? Or is it going to be a-okay when they do it? Because they're talking openly about doing it: “We pledge to you that we will root out the communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country" (Trump).

Democrats opened a Pandora's box by relentlessly targeting Trump and his top folks with prosecution for things that have never been prosecuted before. Eric Holder did the same thing as Bannon, no prosecution. Bill Clinton paid out an accuser, Hillary and Biden stored classified at their homes, and scores of politicians have incited violent riots. So the precedent has been to let people get away with it.

And maybe that was the wrong answer. Maybe all this time, they should have been prosecuting. But now that there has been a change in precedent, we will see a lot more prosecutions of politicians on both sides, probably for the rest of our lifetimes. Candidate quality will degrade as a result. If you think these candidates are bad, give it 20 years. The type of people willing to run for office and open themselves up to political prosecution will be even worse than the kind of people we have now. And, people will become much more open to criminals in office since it will be presumed that criminals are standard issue politicians. If you clapped your hands in glee every time you heard a prosecutor vow to put Trump away, you are the one to break the seal. Typically you find a crime and that leads you to the criminal. Deciding that you want to prosecute someone and then figuring out a charge is a hallmark of corruption. So we already have corruption, and it will be applied equally and more liberally from now until we get this back in a box.

This is utter and complete nonsense. Trump committed crimes, and those are MOST DEFINITELY crimes that have routinely been prosecuted before. Anyone telling you that prosecuting someone for the crimes Trump committed is somehow unheard of, unprecedented, never happed before is LYING. The only thing that's new is that it's a former president who stands accused of those crimes.

Please stop with the garbage narrative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone I talk to this weekend is still stunned by the realization that this country has a “Weekend at Bernie’s” situation going on.

Our enemies have taken note. They are emboldened. This will get bloody. We thought our retreat from Afghanistan was bad. The debate should never have aired for national security reasons alone.

On the upside, Trump is likely to pick up another indictment. He savaged a defenseless elderly man on live television in a way that wasn’t even sporting.

Biden is a national security risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the White House, who is actually making decisions on policy. Is it Jill? Is it Kamala? Is it Jeff Zients? Someone else?

Not a Biden supporter but I will admit that my family has done fine under him the past few years. I just feel that as a taxpaying American citizen I deserve to know who is actually making decisions in the White House.

Who is the man and/or woman behind the curtain?

I have the same question regarding Trump. Ivanka? Melania? Who was calling the shots?

How about Reagan, who had dementia?

That dog doesn't hunt. We all saw Trump on stage. We hear him constantly. He is eccentric but lucid and shows no cognitive impairment.

I wouldn't call rambling on and on about how boats will sink because they have batteries and that there's a big existential decision to make about whether to be electrocuted or jump in with a shark to be lucid or lacking cognitive impairment. It's delusional, and lacking any cogent logic whatsoever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone I talk to this weekend is still stunned by the realization that this country has a “Weekend at Bernie’s” situation going on.

Our enemies have taken note. They are emboldened. This will get bloody. We thought our retreat from Afghanistan was bad. The debate should never have aired for national security reasons alone.

On the upside, Trump is likely to pick up another indictment. He savaged a defenseless elderly man on live television in a way that wasn’t even sporting.

Biden is a national security risk.

Trump is a national security risk. https://www.rawstory.com/trump-russia-plane-two-days-isolated/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whether you like Trump or not, there is no doubt that he is the person in charge of whatever room he is in. Every decision made on his watch was either made or approved by Trump himself, or by somebody to whom he delegated, which Trump could explain and defend if asked.
With Biden, he has no clue what is going on, and the voters do not really know who they are voting for.

It doesn't give me any comfort at all to know that a petty, delusional, chaotic and vindictive guy with zero impulse control like Donald Trump is in charge and making decisions.

Oh vindictive? You are the guys using the court systems against political enemies. Using the IRS against political enemies.

You don't do shit, run shit, you f*k up everything you touch, but you know how to go after people to keep power.

Are you equally offended by calls from I-am-your-retribution Trump and other GOP members to go after Dems when they get back into power? Or is it going to be a-okay when they do it? Because they're talking openly about doing it: “We pledge to you that we will root out the communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country" (Trump).

Democrats opened a Pandora's box by relentlessly targeting Trump and his top folks with prosecution for things that have never been prosecuted before. Eric Holder did the same thing as Bannon, no prosecution. Bill Clinton paid out an accuser, Hillary and Biden stored classified at their homes, and scores of politicians have incited violent riots. So the precedent has been to let people get away with it.

And maybe that was the wrong answer. Maybe all this time, they should have been prosecuting. But now that there has been a change in precedent, we will see a lot more prosecutions of politicians on both sides, probably for the rest of our lifetimes. Candidate quality will degrade as a result. If you think these candidates are bad, give it 20 years. The type of people willing to run for office and open themselves up to political prosecution will be even worse than the kind of people we have now. And, people will become much more open to criminals in office since it will be presumed that criminals are standard issue politicians. If you clapped your hands in glee every time you heard a prosecutor vow to put Trump away, you are the one to break the seal. Typically you find a crime and that leads you to the criminal. Deciding that you want to prosecute someone and then figuring out a charge is a hallmark of corruption. So we already have corruption, and it will be applied equally and more liberally from now until we get this back in a box.

+1 scary