RugbyRebels

Repugnant orange cock cheese. Fuck.

Do you also believe in Santa?

What do you mean?

Trump is as real as Santa.

Righty-O man.

Trump has challenged Clinton to a drugs test before the next debate:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37667924

If Trump is Santa, then perhaps someone should drug test him. How he visits over 2 billion children in one night is beyond me!!!

Does he have asthma or allergies or something?

Quality...

And another:

Nice one Waspy.

Trump shall overcomb

I have very little interest in Trump, because I think he's an actor playing a role, and neither do I have any wish to defend him - partly for that reason. But I stumbled across this surprising titbit while idly surfing the net this evening:

Rowanne Brewer Lane claims the New York Times "spun" her story to make it appear more negative

After the release of a scathing news report about Donald Trump’s treatment of women, one of the businessman’s former girlfriends is speaking out and alleging the media got her story wrong.

“He never made me feel like I was being demeaned in any way,” Rowanne Brewer Lane said Monday on Fox & Friends. “He never offended me in any way. He was very gracious. I saw him around all types of people, all types of women. He was very kind, thoughtful, generous, you know. He was a gentleman.”

The New York Times interviewed dozens of women and combed through published personal accounts of Donald Trump's questionable relationships with women he's encountered throughout his life.
Share


http://time.com/4336792/rowanne-brewer- ... ald-trump/

Trump was alleged to have called Lil Jon an "Uncle Tom" while filming Celebrity Apprentice. It was explained to him by multiple people why calling a black man an "Uncle Tom" is a bit very out of order, and apparently Trump was having none of it.

Lil' Jon has confirmed that it happened on his Twitter, but has stated that when he explained to Trump why he was rather offended by it, Trump did cut it out.

Rowan, if there is some group clever and powerful enough to cause the GOP to select a candidate of their own choosing with the intent of making Clinton look electable, wouldn't they be clever and powerful enough not to pick someone who has such considerable and visible support?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The "group" is not exactly some shadowy, underground movement, Lizard. It is well-known that a deep state comprised of heads of major corporations and the Military Industrial Complex has been pulling the strings for some considerable time - perhaps going right back to WWII, in fact, about the time the creation of the CIA. Books have been written and documentaries made on the subject, and it si referred to directly by everyone from Chomsky to Pilger. A lot of Trump's support has been bailing out on him, btw, and that was always going to be part of the charade.

I did more reading up on the sex allegations last night, and apart from Brewer Lane's comments that nothing untoward happened with Trump and the NY Times had deliberately twisted her story, it seems that a number of other cases merely amount to 'she said, he said, she said' over inappropriate comments, touches or kisses from years and even decades ago. That wouldn't even see the light of day in a normal court room involving normal people. You might even say this is creating a slightly dangerous environment for men.

You might - except for one thing. None of it is real. It's a charade, Trump is acting, and the idea is to get a war criminal elected as the only viable candidate. It's not even a new tactic. That's how Johnson got in ahead of Goldwater in 64, and the result was another decade of war in Vietnam. & I suspect Clinton will bring us at least another decade of wars in the Middle East, with Syria the likely flashpoint. But don't misconstrue this. I despise Trump for whatever he is, sexual predator, charlatan or otherwise, and would never vote for him. I've already said a number of times I'd go with Jill Stein were I eligible.

& that's an interesting point. The rest of the world has no choice but sit back and watch this circus, knowing that the outcome is going to effect all of us. But we have no control over it whatsoever, other than to be able to voice our opinions on international forums via the internet. At least that's a step forward from 64.

rowan wrote:The "group" is not exactly some shadowy, underground movement, Lizard. It is well-known that a deep state comprised of heads of major corporations and the Military Industrial Complex has been pulling the strings for some considerable time - perhaps going right back to WWII, in fact, about the time the creation of the CIA. Books have been written and documentaries made on the subject, and it si referred to directly by everyone from Chomsky to Pilger. A lot of Trump's support has been bailing out on him, btw, and that was always going to be part of the charade.

I did more reading up on the sex allegations last night, and apart from Brewer Lane's comments that nothing untoward happened with Trump and the NY Times had deliberately twisted her story, it seems that a number of other cases merely amount to 'she said, he said, she said' over inappropriate comments, touches or kisses from years and even decades ago. That wouldn't even see the light of day in a normal court room involving normal people. You might even say this is creating a slightly dangerous environment for men.

You might - except for one thing. None of it is real. It's a charade, Trump is acting, and the idea is to get a war criminal elected as the only viable candidate. It's not even a new tactic. That's how Johnson got in ahead of Goldwater in 64, and the result was another decade of war in Vietnam. & I suspect Clinton will bring us at least another decade of wars in the Middle East, with Syria the likely flashpoint. But don't misconstrue this. I despise Trump for whatever he is, sexual predator, charlatan or otherwise, and would never vote for him. I've already said a number of times I'd go with Jill Stein were I eligible.

& that's an interesting point. The rest of the world has no choice but sit back and watch this circus, knowing that the outcome is going to effect all of us. But we have no control over it whatsoever, other than to be able to voice our opinions on international forums via the internet. At least that's a step forward from 64.

And here we go again.

It's already self-evident (the part you highlighted), with the courageous Julian Assange one notable example

cashead wrote:Trump was alleged to have called Lil Jon an "Uncle Tom" while filming Celebrity Apprentice. It was explained to him by multiple people why calling a black man an "Uncle Tom" is a bit very out of order, and apparently Trump was having none of it.

Lil' Jon has confirmed that it happened on his Twitter, but has stated that when he explained to Trump why he was rather offended by it, Trump did cut it out.

That illustrates just how thick and pig-ignorant the guy is. Couple that with a spoilt rotten life and you have the makings of a well-rounded fuckwit. If you ever need to refute claims that wealthy people are naturally "fitter" and more intelligent than average (yes, Eugenics does rear up now and then in this daya and age), just wheel out Trump.

Digby wrote:

jared_7 wrote:F*cking hell, what a disgrace. I still can't believe this is the election to basically decide the fate of the world.

That seems a little too much, and at least unlike in China and Russia there is an election of sorts.

There's more to Democracy than scratching a cross on a piece of paper once every 5 years.
There was an episode of 'Yes, Prime Minister' I saw a few weeks ago. In an attempt to bypass the corruption of local government Jim is presented with an idea for locally elected councils who would make the local MP directly accountable for their councils behaviour.
It's a wonderful model for democracy that instantly had to be shelved by all political sides of the Westminster elite because they'd be accountable.

kk67 wrote:

Digby wrote:

jared_7 wrote:F*cking hell, what a disgrace. I still can't believe this is the election to basically decide the fate of the world.

That seems a little too much, and at least unlike in China and Russia there is an election of sorts.

There's more to Democracy than scratching a cross on a piece of paper once every 5 years.
There was an episode of 'Yes, Prime Minister' I saw a few weeks ago. In an attempt to bypass the corruption of local government Jim is presented with an idea for locally elected councils who would make the local MP directly accountable for their councils behaviour.
It's a wonderful model for democracy that instantly had to be shelved by all political sides of the Westminster elite because they'd be accountable.

... for things over which they had no control. You do understand that councils are elected as well don't you?

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

kk67 wrote:

Digby wrote:
That seems a little too much, and at least unlike in China and Russia there is an election of sorts.

There's more to Democracy than scratching a cross on a piece of paper once every 5 years.
There was an episode of 'Yes, Prime Minister' I saw a few weeks ago. In an attempt to bypass the corruption of local government Jim is presented with an idea for locally elected councils who would make the local MP directly accountable for their councils behaviour.
It's a wonderful model for democracy that instantly had to be shelved by all political sides of the Westminster elite because they'd be accountable.

... for things over which they had no control. You do understand that councils are elected as well don't you?

It was the council that would elect the MP.

Stupidity appears endemic to these types. Meet Dr. Ben Carson, Ex-Republican presidential contender and the thickest mother fucker to be awarded an MD. Sweet baby jesus...

kk67 wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

kk67 wrote:
There's more to Democracy than scratching a cross on a piece of paper once every 5 years.
There was an episode of 'Yes, Prime Minister' I saw a few weeks ago. In an attempt to bypass the corruption of local government Jim is presented with an idea for locally elected councils who would make the local MP directly accountable for their councils behaviour.
It's a wonderful model for democracy that instantly had to be shelved by all political sides of the Westminster elite because they'd be accountable.

... for things over which they had no control. You do understand that councils are elected as well don't you?

It was the council that would elect the MP.

So the MP wouldn't be accountable to, or removable by, the public at all. Yeah, sounds just like the sort of thing that they'd be terrified of...

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:
So the MP wouldn't be accountable to, or removable by, the public at all. Yeah, sounds just like the sort of thing that they'd be terrified of...

Though perhaps in an age of governance by Royal Prerogative they've nothing to be accountable for anyway.

(I would add I currently think using the Royal Prerogative is technically correct to invoke article 50, I'd just much rather they go via Parliament, and Parliament will someone have to suck up that the Brexit vote went as it did)

morepork wrote:Stupidity appears endemic to these types. Meet Dr. Ben Carson, Ex-Republican presidential contender and the thickest mother fucker to be awarded an MD. Sweet baby jesus...

Think I've got a good chance of becoming a neurosurgeon in the US!