Just had a look at that fellas YT channel. Wow...what an utter cunt.
He may be that, but he makes some very good points.
Indeed.
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Trump
Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:38 pm
by Donny osmond
Digby wrote:
WaspInWales wrote:
morepork wrote:What sort of counseling does his wife receive for letting that repugnant mollusk empty into her?
If his hands are an indicator of his cock size, she might not even notice.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
She'd have likely noted carrying children to term, just as she likely noticed when he disturbingly letched over their daughter
Following Graham Linehan on twitter who has often tweeted that Trump raped his wife? No idea where he got that from, but he's not shy about broadcasting it.
Re: Trump
Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:40 pm
by WaspInWales
rowan wrote:
Vengeful Glutton wrote:
WaspInWales wrote:
Just had a look at that fellas YT channel. Wow...what an utter cunt.
He may be that, but he makes some very good points.
Indeed.
You should subscribe to him rowan. A lot of his videos are titled 'The truth about...'.
Seems legit.
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Trump
Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:54 pm
by Digby
Donny osmond wrote:
Digby wrote:
WaspInWales wrote:
If his hands are an indicator of his cock size, she might not even notice.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
She'd have likely noted carrying children to term, just as she likely noticed when he disturbingly letched over their daughter
Following Graham Linehan on twitter who has often tweeted that Trump raped his wife? No idea where he got that from, but he's not shy about broadcasting it.
The race might be on between Trump and Putin to make rape in marriage something one can't be prosecuted for again. 'tis a hell of a claim to be making mind, on the face of it I can't see why either party would've talked to Graham, still, it's his money (for now)
Re: Trump
Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:10 pm
by rowan
WaspInWales wrote:
rowan wrote:
Vengeful Glutton wrote:
He may be that, but he makes some very good points.
Indeed.
You should subscribe to him rowan. A lot of his videos are titled 'The truth about...'.
Seems legit.
I prefer this guy. He's not as funny, and I don't agree with many of his views, but he gets his facts right:
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Trump
Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:18 pm
by kk67
Donny osmond wrote:
Digby wrote:
WaspInWales wrote:
If his hands are an indicator of his cock size, she might not even notice.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
She'd have likely noted carrying children to term, just as she likely noticed when he disturbingly letched over their daughter
Following Graham Linehan on twitter who has often tweeted that Trump raped his wife? No idea where he got that from, but he's not shy about broadcasting it.
Graham Linehan is a top bloke. In fact, he's the toppest of the top blokes.
Everytime the audience balks.....that's Graham.
Re: Trump
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:17 am
by WaspInWales
Trump has picked Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court...
Pro-Christian, anti-ACA, pro-death penalty, pro-founding fathers, pro-life, anti-youth in asia.
Have I missed anything?
Re: Trump
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:29 am
by morepork
rowan wrote:
WaspInWales wrote:
rowan wrote:
Indeed.
You should subscribe to him rowan. A lot of his videos are titled 'The truth about...'.
Seems legit.
I prefer this guy. He's not as funny, and I don't agree with many of his views, but he gets his facts right:
His accent seems an unholy amalgam of American and Irish. Is he an "economic migrant"? Can you provide a dialogue from African American civil rights luminaries that promoted a dialogue criticising American imperialism and racism via the conduit of Islam? How is the current bogeyman not a civil rights issue? Don't fire back about Clinton and Obama without a considered response that accounts for the history of the right of non-white people to be treated as equals.
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Trump
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:55 am
by Mikey Brown
Donny osmond wrote:
Digby wrote:
WaspInWales wrote:
If his hands are an indicator of his cock size, she might not even notice.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
She'd have likely noted carrying children to term, just as she likely noticed when he disturbingly letched over their daughter
Following Graham Linehan on twitter who has often tweeted that Trump raped his wife? No idea where he got that from, but he's not shy about broadcasting it.
Doesnt make for fantastic reading, but there you go.
Just had a look at that fellas YT channel. Wow...what an utter cunt.
He makes valid points its true. Couple of things for me though after 1 viewing.
He states Muslims throw gays off building and mutilate womens genitals ect as if to take the moral high ground. Somalia mutilate womens genitals, as does their Christian neighbour Ethiopia. Its a regional issue not a religious one. Saudi Arabia don't let women do fuck all, Malaysia have had female heads of state. Somalia is different to Turkey which is different to Indonisia. All Muslim all do different shit but are all the same according to this nugget.
More people are killed by guns in the states than ny muslim terrorist attacks. Don't see this cunt making a video about that though do we?
Just had a look at that fellas YT channel. Wow...what an utter cunt.
He makes valid points its true. Couple of things for me though after 1 viewing.
He states Muslims throw gays off building and mutilate womens genitals ect as if to take the moral high ground. Somalia mutilate womens genitals, as does their Christian neighbour Ethiopia. Its a regional issue not a religious one. Saudi Arabia don't let women do fuck all, Malaysia have had female heads of state. Somalia is different to Turkey which is different to Indonisia. All Muslim all do different shit but are all the same according to this nugget.
More people are killed by guns in the states than ny muslim terrorist attacks. Don't see this cunt making a video about that though do we?
Yep, I agree with all that. This one wasn't nearly as funny as his other ones either. He (or his script-writers) should work more on the humor and less on the politics - which they're really not so good at. At the same time, like the Irish-Canadian radio show host Stefan Molyneux (whose video I posted earlier), he does bring to light some very relevant points that are being totally ignored by the mainstream media - such as the fact Obama not only bombed most of the countries on the list everyone's ranting about; his government actually drew up the list in the first place. While the Facebook warriors are sharing graph after graph telling us how the main instigators of terrorism are not on the list, and Trump is doing business with all of them, the same was also true of Obama, while their cherished Democratic candidate Clinton was sponsored by the Saudis. None of which justifies this reprehensible visa suspension, however.
Re: Trump
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2017 9:07 am
by WaspInWales
morepork wrote:
WaspInWales wrote:Fucking hell.
The murky world of politics/celebrity knows no bounds.
Not sure what/who I believe, but $14m is tidy!
Look up "central park five" and "Trump"...
Can remember reading about that during the primaries.
He really is a vile man.
Re: Trump
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 2:21 am
by WaspInWales
Aunty, and others are reporting that Senate Republicans changed the rules in order for Trump nominations to be passed.
I appreciate that this could work the other way, if the Democrats were in control of the Senate, but what is the fucking point of having the vote if the majority party can just do that?
Just out of interest, has this kinda thing happened before?
Could it happen to confirm Gorsuch to the SC?
The SOS for the US is handed to someone from the oil industry with ties to Russia, I'm just struggling to understand the process. I know on the other hand, the opposition can just filibuster the nomination and then follows countless back and forth based on party lines. It works both ways but it seems a little pointless if one side can just say "fuck you, we're going to do it anyway".
Is that about right?
Re: Trump
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 10:58 am
by morepork
WaspInWales wrote:Aunty, and others are reporting that Senate Republicans changed the rules in order for Trump nominations to be passed.
I appreciate that this could work the other way, if the Democrats were in control of the Senate, but what is the fucking point of having the vote if the majority party can just do that?
Just out of interest, has this kinda thing happened before?
Could it happen to confirm Gorsuch to the SC?
The SOS for the US is handed to someone from the oil industry with ties to Russia, I'm just struggling to understand the process. I know on the other hand, the opposition can just filibuster the nomination and then follows countless back and forth based on party lines. It works both ways but it seems a little pointless if one side can just say "fuck you, we're going to do it anyway".
Is that about right?
Look at what has happened at any attempt at gun control in recent history.
Probably most worrying is the intent to bring in big Tech to run social media and internet traffic data. That is far too much power in the hands of too few. Madness. One also wonders that if there is an "Islamic" task force, why not a Catholic Pedophilia Action Team, or an Anti White Supremeist Militia Protection Group?
They are fucking reeling you in you Orange donkey.
Probably most worrying is the intent to bring in big Tech to run social media and internet traffic data. That is far too much power in the hands of too few. Madness. One also wonders that if there is an "Islamic" task force, why not a Catholic Pedophilia Action Team, or an Anti White Supremeist Militia Protection Group?
They are fucking reeling you in you Orange donkey.
Do you believe that he actually listens to anyone?
Re: Trump
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:13 pm
by Sandydragon
And if you were wondering how Trump would deal with America's closest allies, here it is. Somebody seriously needs to change his Twitter password and lock him out. As it stands there is no point in hacking his account, nothing you could write on there would match his own efforts. Meanwhile, Trump decides to discuss the use of US military in Mexico and suggests that the Mexican authorities aren't up to the job (probably not entirely without basis in fact) in a call to the Mexican president. Compared to the Oompa Loompa, Boris looks positively statesmanlike.
Trump berates Australian PM over ‘dumb’ refugee deal
Malcolm Turnbull’s call with President Trump is understood to have ended abruptly and was followed up by an angry late-night tweet from the US president
Australia’s relationship with the United States, its closest ally, has been rocked by the leaking of a searing confrontation between President Trump and Malcolm Turnbull followed by a scornful late-night tweet from the US president.
An account of a telephone conversation the leaders had at the weekend revealed that an enraged Mr Trump had told Mr Turnbull that he had spoken with four other world leaders on Saturday, including President Putin of Russia, but that “this was the worst call by far”.
Mr Trump abruptly ended what was supposed to be an hour-long conversation with the Australian prime minister after only 25 minutes, angered that Australia expected him to honour a deal struck with President Obama to take up to 1,500 refugees Australia has confined to remote Pacific islands.
It is believed that during the exchange Mr Trump fumed that “this is the worst deal ever” and accused Mr Turnbull of trying to export the “next Boston bombers” to the US.
Mr Turnbull initially attempted to play down the fracture with Mr Trump after The Washington Post published details of the conversation but later – at 11pm Washington time — Mr Trump fired off an angry tweet in which he called the deal “dumb”.
“Do you believe it?” the tweet said. “The Obama administration agreed to take thousands of illegal migrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb deal!”
The president’s use of social media to scorn the leader of a staunch military partner stunned Australian officials and prompted Mr Turnbull to confirm publicly that Mr Trump had ended their conversation early and to express his disappointment that the details of the confrontation had been leaked.
It also prompted some US Senate Democrats to express alarm at Mr Trump’s behaviour toward Australia, which has troops and aircraft alongside US forces in the Middle East and which backed up US forces in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Australia’s former Labor foreign minister, Bob Carr, said that Mr Trump’s behaviour would lead to a full review of Australia’s ties to the US, which include the pivotal ANZUS defence pact, which provides for the nations to come to each other’s aid in the event of an attack.
Under the deal agreed with President Obama, the US was to take refugees – many from Iran – who have been confined by Australia in harsh conditions on Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island and the tiny Pacific atoll state of Nauru.
They number about 1,500 but it is unclear how many were to go to the US. In return Australia was to accept refugees from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador currently living in camps in Costa Rica.
Mr Turnbull had insisted all day that Mr Trump had agreed to honour the deal, and the US embassy in Australia concurred, but as night fell it remained unclear whether he would.
Reports have also emerged of a call in which Mr Trump told the Mexican president that he might send troops across the border unless more was done to stop “bad hombres down there”. It was unclear whether the remark, leaked from the official transcript, was an offer or a threat. President Peña Nieto said that the conversation was “constructive”.
Mexican officials categorically denied that Mr Trump had threatened to send troops over the border.
In an excerpt of the transcript leaked to the Associated Press, Mr Trump said: “You have a bunch of bad hombres down there. You aren’t doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn’t, so I just might send them down to take care of it.”
Re: Trump
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:31 pm
by WaspInWales
This is the kinda thing I was looking forward to tbh. Thank you Trumpie.
I didn't think it would take long for the twat to show that he isn't very good at dealing with people who are more intelligent than he is. He's so used to having a tantrum and getting his own way thanks to his wealth, but that won't cut it at this level.
On the flip side, the suffering of many is likely to continue thanks to the cunt's bigoted ideas and inner circle of jizztards. Won't be long before he pulls out of the Paris agreement and revs up coal production. His supporters will cheer with delight at the jobs created, although that cheer will develop into a wheeze thanks to the increase pollutants in the air. Still, at least when they're drawing their final breaths through their disease riddled lungs, they can be sure they made the right vote.
Probably most worrying is the intent to bring in big Tech to run social media and internet traffic data. That is far too much power in the hands of too few. Madness. One also wonders that if there is an "Islamic" task force, why not a Catholic Pedophilia Action Team, or an Anti White Supremeist Militia Protection Group?
They are fucking reeling you in you Orange donkey.
Do you believe that he actually listens to anyone?
Yes. He has surrounded himself with some absolute cunts, some of whom have more extreme views than himself. I'm absolutely certain he takes counsel from them and it influences and feeds his own hatred.
I honestly think he's thick as mince too. It would be rather easy for smart people around him to influence him whilst giving him the impression that he is calling the shots.
Probably most worrying is the intent to bring in big Tech to run social media and internet traffic data. That is far too much power in the hands of too few. Madness. One also wonders that if there is an "Islamic" task force, why not a Catholic Pedophilia Action Team, or an Anti White Supremeist Militia Protection Group?
They are fucking reeling you in you Orange donkey.
Do you believe that he actually listens to anyone?
Yes. He has surrounded himself with some absolute cunts, some of whom have more extreme views than himself. I'm absolutely certain he takes counsel from them and it influences and feeds his own hatred.
I may have phrased that question poorly. What Im getting at is why do people think Trump is being led astray or controlled by background forces when most likely he is just doing what he believed to be the right things anyway. His appointees are largely (as you say) there to echo his own views (interesting to see how Mathis gets on), I don't think this president will be led as such; just more likely to be prodded in the direction he wants to travel anyway.
Re: Trump
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:43 pm
by WaspInWales
Sandydragon wrote:
WaspInWales wrote:
Sandydragon wrote:
Do you believe that he actually listens to anyone?
Yes. He has surrounded himself with some absolute cunts, some of whom have more extreme views than himself. I'm absolutely certain he takes counsel from them and it influences and feeds his own hatred.
I may have phrased that question poorly. What Im getting at is why do people think Trump is being led astray or controlled by background forces when most likely he is just doing what he believed to be the right things anyway. His appointees are largely (as you say) there to echo his own views (interesting to see how Mathis gets on), I don't think this president will be led as such; just more likely to be prodded in the direction he wants to travel anyway.
I've edited my post to take account of Trump's intelligence which is also key in how he can be influenced. He probably creams himself everytime he hears one of his consorts telling him what a great, powerful president he is just after advising him on foreign/domestic/security policy.
Re: Trump
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:51 pm
by Mellsblue
The leader of the western world (until Boris becomes PM) is a five year old with a Twatter account.
Social media has a lot to answer for. I liked the good old days when to get your point of view across to large sections of the population you had to have previously proven your intelligence and that you knew what you were talking about.