Post: #19301

(03-08-2016 03:47 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

B21 naming contest is up. Any Air Force related members who could suggest "Trump"?
http://www.afgsc.af.mil/Library/NametheB...nForm.aspx

Bro, you have to call it the Ivanka. Delivering bombshells with every click of the button.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #19302

(03-08-2016 03:47 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

B21 naming contest is up. Any Air Force related members who could suggest "Trump"?
http://www.afgsc.af.mil/Library/NametheB...nForm.aspx

If Trump doesn't get elected, they should name it Cuck. A high-tech specialized weapons platform dedicated to spreading cuckness around the world. Designed to be used as a last resort only, if subversion by sponsoring 'independent opposition', gay parades and NGOs doesn't work.

The name would even fit the lineage somewhat:

B-1 Lancer
B-2 Spirit
B-21 Cuck

Post: #19303

Borders get opens by influential businesses and powerful interests. You can't say if they didn't open the Borders it wouldn't be so bad. Of course the business will do what they can to open them. Why wouldn't they? Of course the prisoners want the prison doors open and the guards gone. Why wouldn't they.

Am I missing something here? Because it seems like these conversations are very narrow in focus. You can't say well if we didn't just open the borders. Then life would be good. If only girls were not attention whores and ate too many carbs then everything would be good. Maybe I am just missing it and that is fine. My focus is to raise my FU money. The thing about these opinions is we have them and some that rail against certain things never go beyond the keyboard.

Post: #19304

(03-08-2016 04:59 AM)samsamsam Wrote:  Borders get opens by influential businesses and powerful interests. You can't say if they didn't open the Borders it wouldn't be so bad. Of course the business will do what they can to open them. Why wouldn't they? Of course the prisoners want the prison doors open and the guards gone. Why wouldn't they.

Sure, but this is the Trump thread. It's 700+ pages because we are operating under the assumption Trump is going to lock the inmates back in the asylum and bring the guards back. We are arguing the objective merits of different policy choices. Their objective merits are independent from the likelihood of them actually being implemented.

Post: #19305

Anyway, back on track with this thread. Trump has released a statement condemning the massive legal immigration problem. This is very reassuring and lessens some of my concerns that he would tackle illegal immigration only to open the spigots on the "legal" invasion even further.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...dle-class/

Quote:Pew polling shows 83 percent of all voters — Democrats, Republicans and Independents — think immigration should be frozen or reduced. The biggest beneficiaries of allowing fewer foreign workers into our country would be minority workers, including all immigrants now living here, who are competing for jobs, benefits and community resources against record waves of foreign workers. Limiting job competition would reopen pathways to middle-class stability and shrink welfare rolls. In addition, it would relieve overcrowding in our schools and hospitals that afflict our poorest communities.

Post: #19306

(03-08-2016 03:34 AM)Enigma Wrote:  Not to mention the through-the-roof unemployment. I'm sure there are plenty of people that would rather work on an assembly line than have no job at all.

The answer to that is remove the minimum wage and pages of regulations, not add a tariff. Adding a tariff is a roundabout form of welfare - your work is actually only worth $15/hr, but the rest of the country has to top it up to $20/hr by overpaying for stuff.

(03-08-2016 02:46 AM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  That's one way of imagining it, but the empirical evidence shows otherwise. Before we were blessed with the boundless benefits of cheap foreign made shit we had a robust industrial economy, with plentiful jobs which allowed men with nothing more than a high school diploma to afford a house, a car, and a stay at home wife raising 2-4 kids.
...
So please explain in which way the standard of living has increased since the day of the working husband with the white picket fence and two car garage?
...
So if you could have such a high standard of living back in 1960, before the advent of computers, industrial robots, productivity gains from automation, and Chinese made shit, I'm guessing you would have an even higher standard of living today when you add computers, industrial robots, and automation into the mix to raise worker productivity. Just think about it: how is it possible that 1 high school educated man in 1960 could provide a great standard of living to a family of 6 when today 2 working, college educated parents are barely able to survive with a single child? Why haven't standards of living risen despite the huge advances in productivity?

Is the presence of cheap foreign made products the only thing that has changed? Correlation does not imply causation, there are hundreds of other factors that have also changed. Regulations, taxes & loopholes, bailouts, monetary policy, have these gotten more burdensome on the middle class or less? If making imports more expensive, and sending the proceeds of those tariffs into government coffers makes the middle class rich again, I'll eat my hat.

This guy has some good illustrations of the changes in public/private spending and regulatory compliance costs: http://grandfather-economic-report.com/regulation.htm .

Post: #19307

Excerpt from Pat Buchanan's blog:

Quote:Fully 116 members of the GOP’s national security community, many of them veterans of Bush administrations, have signed an open letter threatening that, if Trump is nominated, they will all desert, and some will defect – to Hillary Clinton!

“Hillary is the lesser evil, by a large margin,” says Eliot Cohen of the Bush II State Department. According to Politico’s Michael Crowley, Cohen helped line up neocons to sign the “Dump-Trump” manifesto.

Another signer, Robert Kagan, wailed in the Washington Post, “The only choice will be to vote for Hillary Clinton.”

Are they serious?

Victory for Clinton would mean her remaking the Supreme Court, killing all chances that Roe v. Wade could be overturned, or that we could get another justice like Antonin Scalia before 2021.

What are these renegades and turncoats so anguished about?

Trump calls the Iraq War many of them championed an historic blunder. Trump says that, while a supporter of Israel, he would be a “neutral” honest broker between Israel and the Palestinians in peace negotiations, as was Jimmy Carter at Camp David.

Trump says he would “get along very well” with Vladimir Putin, as Richard Nixon got along with Leonid Brezhnev and Mao Zedong.

Trump would launch no new crusades for democracy. He would not oppose Russia bombing ISIS. He would build that wall on the border. He would transfer from U.S. taxpayers to rich allies more of the cost of defending themselves.

Do not most Americans agree with much of this?

Yet this neocon ultimatum about deserting should the voters nominate Trump testifies eloquently to their loyalty.

With every ex-president and ex-nominee repudiating Trump, and foreign policy elites going rogue, the GOP hierarchy is saying: We will cut Trump dead, just as the Rockefeller-Romney crowd cut Barry Goldwater dead.

This is pure my-way-or-the-highway politics.

But it raises anew the question: Can the establishment stop Trump?

Answer: It is possible, and we shall know by midnight, March 15. If Trump loses Florida and Ohio, winner-take-all primaries, he would likely fall short of the 1,237 delegates needed for nomination on the first ballot.

How could the anti-Trump forces defeat him in Ohio, Florida and Illinois? With the same tactics used to shrink Trump’s victory margins in Virginia, Louisiana and Kentucky to well below what polls had predicted.

In every primary upcoming, Trump is under a ceaseless barrage of attack ads on radio, TV, cable and social media, paid for by super PACs with hoards of cash funneled in by oligarchs.

But Trump, who is self-funding his campaign, has spent next to nothing on ads answering these attacks, or promoting himself or his issues. He has relied almost exclusively on free media.

Yet no amount of free media can match the shellfire falling on him every hour of every day in every primary state.

Our Principles PAC, backed by Nebraska’s billionaire Ricketts family, has poured millions into trashing Trump. American Future Fund is dumping $1.75 million in Florida this week; Club for Growth $1.5 million.

Hedge-fund billionaire Paul Singer is backing the Conservative Solutions PAC, which has dumped millions into anti-Trump ads and plans to spend more than $7 million between March 1 and 15, with $4 million of that going into Florida. The super PAC pile-on is unprecedented.

How well Trump fares in Michigan and Mississippi, measured against how well he was doing in polls last week, will reveal just how successful super PAC savagery has been in changing hearts and minds.

Can millionaires and billionaires who back open borders, mass immigration, globalization and the disappearance of nation states into transnational collectives overwhelm with their millions spent in ads the patriotic movements that arose this year to the wonderment of America and the world?

Has that proud 18th century boast of Americans, “Here, sir, the people rule!” given way to the rule of the oligarchs?

http://buchanan.org/blog/oligarchs-super...egy-124921

Post: #19308

Lord Black of Crossharbour has made a prediction...

Conrad Black Wrote:Donald Trump will not simulate the languorous defeatism of the senior Bush or Mitt Romney, or the blunderbuss shortcomings of Bob Dole and John McCain. (Romney’s savage attack on Trump on Thursday served to remind Republicans of how he squandered a winnable election in 2012 and faced in all four directions on every major issue.)

Eight years ago, it was time to break the colour barrier at the White House. Now it is time to clean the Augean Stable. Donald Trump has his infelicities, though not those that malicious opponents or people like John Robson, who simply haven’t thought it through, allege. But he seems to have become the man whom the great office of president of the United States now seeks.

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/con...ar-BBqmFcQ

Methinks Lord Black just compared Trump to Hersules (the fifth lanour of Hercules was cleaning the Augean Stable). Trump smash. Konvict... Muzik...

Post: #19309

(03-08-2016 06:43 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

(03-08-2016 03:34 AM)Enigma Wrote:  Not to mention the through-the-roof unemployment. I'm sure there are plenty of people that would rather work on an assembly line than have no job at all.

The answer to that is remove the minimum wage and pages of regulations, not add a tariff. Adding a tariff is a roundabout form of welfare - your work is actually only worth $15/hr, but the rest of the country has to top it up to $20/hr by overpaying for stuff.

No it is not.

Phoenix, your flag has you in Japan but you could be anywhere in the world. Let me ask you this,

Do you like the following:

1. Paved and plowed roadways
2. Free schools
3. Hospitals
4. Strong military
5. Functioning government entities that do not require bribes to get things done
6. No child labor
7. Environmental limits on what you can and cannot dump into the water and air
8. Trash pick up
9. Support for the downtrodden (welfare,etc)

Granted a few of these can be reduced and the like (welfare and environmental regs), but I get the impression you really appreciate things like that.

If you want a first world country to compete with a third world country you need to eliminate the things that cost money and make that country first world to have it be able to effectively compete with the third world.

Forcing labor costs to rush towards zero doesn't improve your country nor strengthen the tax base. It just makes it shitty for everyone else except the goon living in his gated community.

Post: #19310

(03-08-2016 08:04 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  No it is not.

It certainly is. When Holden gets a tariff put on importing other cars, what does that mean? It means that a small select group of Holden executives, factory workers and union bosses, get protected from competing with other car manufacturers. And the rest of the country has to pay extra for their shitty uncompetitive cars, or pay a premium for foreign cars who can compete based on merit. It is a textbook example of forced wealth transfer from the many to the few, AKA a heist.

(03-08-2016 08:04 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  Do you like the following:

1. Paved and plowed roadways
2. Free schools
3. Hospitals
4. Strong military
5. Functioning government entities that do not require bribes to get things done
6. No child labor
7. Environmental limits on what you can and cannot dump into the water and air
8. Trash pick up
9. Support for the downtrodden (welfare,etc)

1. Yep.
2. No such thing as free, someone is paying, often for other peoples children. We're pretty against that here.
3. No different to any other business. It's always interesting that whatever is currently nationalized is somehow automatically justified in that. Medicine is no different to any other business, filling customers needs for a price, and the more competition the better.
4. Sure, if it's for defence and not what it's been used for recently.
5. Really? Lobbyists and donors are not an institutionalized form of bribery? Just because it's not tucking paper bills in pockets, doesn't mean it isn't there.
6. I have no problem with child labour.
7. Yep.
8. As per (3), no reason this has to be done by a government.
9. Trodden down by whom? By themselves: no they should have no support. By bad luck in spite of hard work: sure. By others: sounds like a government.

This discussion is probably better suited to the Libertarian Party thread though.

(03-08-2016 08:04 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  If you want a first world country to compete with a third world country you need to eliminate the things that cost money and make that country first world to have it be able to effectively compete with the third world.

Forcing labor costs to rush towards zero doesn't improve your country nor strengthen the tax base. It just makes it shitty for everyone else except the goon living in his gated community.

No that's not how the world works. The origin of the first and third worlds was the industrial revolution. High wages are a byproduct of capital and skills. They did not magically appear by themselves, nor has America always had them.

Raising walls to hide Americans from highly competitive foreign countries (which Americans actually used to be themselves) is the economic equivalent of the safe space. It will cause decay, not revival. The solution is gutting government regulation to improve business, and gutting government support of education so that people resume buying education based on usefulness.

Post: #19311

(03-08-2016 06:07 AM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  Anyway, back on track with this thread. Trump has released a statement condemning the massive legal immigration problem. This is very reassuring and lessens some of my concerns that he would tackle illegal immigration only to open the spigots on the "legal" invasion even further.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...dle-class/

Quote:Pew polling shows 83 percent of all voters — Democrats, Republicans and Independents — think immigration should be frozen or reduced. The biggest beneficiaries of allowing fewer foreign workers into our country would be minority workers, including all immigrants now living here, who are competing for jobs, benefits and community resources against record waves of foreign workers. Limiting job competition would reopen pathways to middle-class stability and shrink welfare rolls. In addition, it would relieve overcrowding in our schools and hospitals that afflict our poorest communities.

Quote:Pew polling shows 83 percent of all voters — Democrats, Republicans and Independents — think immigration should be frozen or reduced. The biggest beneficiaries of allowing fewer foreign workers into our country would be minority workers, including all immigrants now living here, who are competing for jobs, benefits and community resources against record waves of foreign workers. Limiting job competition would reopen pathways to middle-class stability and shrink welfare rolls. In addition, it would relieve overcrowding in our schools and hospitals that afflict our poorest communities.

Smart stuff. Emphasizes his crossover appeal and minority victims of high immigration to cut into the left.

Post: #19312

Let's say Chinese goods are replaced with American goods.
The price goes up in proportion to the new, higher cost of production.
People have to spend more on manufactured items and industrial supplies.
However, the increase in blue collar jobs allows many to go off welfare, dovetailing nicely with a Trump tax cut.

So we have blue collar workers with decent wages, which blue collar workers have never been shy about spending.
The people spending more on manufactures also have a tax cut.
Even if this comes out as economically equivalent to the previous situation, doesn't it give the new blue collars a sense of pride and independence?
Doesn't it give the USA more leverage over China, which can no longer hold trade over them?

Further, you have to consider that Made In the USA goods are worth more than their labour cost would suggest.
American products come with Western values of honesty, efficiency, and unwillingness to poison babies for money.
Wouldn't you pay more for that guarantee of honest workmanship?
The irony is that the Chinese would pay through the nose for made-in-America items, just for the prestige they have.
Europe would also be more comfortable with these items, though Japan and Korea would remain an equal competitors there.
People are thinking too domestically. The US could become an exporting power again, and charge a premium that China could never get away with.

Post: #19313

Can the weak economists (ElJefe and Phoenix) stop clogging up the Trump thread with your garbage analyses of trade?

I've already posted a long response why the current "Free trade" is bullshit, read it and refute if you think you know better:

/thread-54249.html

Take the trade arguments to that thread please. This thread is for election coverage.

Post: #19314

Old friend came out to support Trump, share this:



http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/man-l...hell-whoa/

Post: #19315

(03-08-2016 08:35 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

(03-08-2016 08:04 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  No it is not.

It certainly is. When Holden gets a tariff put on importing other cars, what does that mean? It means that a small select group of Holden executives, factory workers and union bosses, get protected from competing with other car manufacturers. And the rest of the country has to pay extra for their shitty uncompetitive cars, or pay a premium for foreign cars who can compete based on merit. It is a textbook example of forced wealth transfer from the many to the few, AKA a heist.

(03-08-2016 08:04 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  Do you like the following:

1. Paved and plowed roadways
2. Free schools
3. Hospitals
4. Strong military
5. Functioning government entities that do not require bribes to get things done
6. No child labor
7. Environmental limits on what you can and cannot dump into the water and air
8. Trash pick up
9. Support for the downtrodden (welfare,etc)

1. Yep.
2. No such thing as free, someone is paying, often for other peoples children. We're pretty against that here.
3. No different to any other business. It's always interesting that whatever is currently nationalized is somehow automatically justified in that. Medicine is no different to any other business, filling customers needs for a price, and the more competition the better.
4. Sure, if it's for defence and not what it's been used for recently.
5. Really? Lobbyists and donors are not an institutionalized form of bribery? Just because it's not tucking paper bills in pockets, doesn't mean it isn't there.
6. I have no problem with child labour.
7. Yep.
8. As per (3), no reason this has to be done by a government.
9. Trodden down by whom? By themselves: no they should have no support. By bad luck in spite of hard work: sure. By others: sounds like a government.

This discussion is probably better suited to the Libertarian Party thread though.

(03-08-2016 08:04 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  If you want a first world country to compete with a third world country you need to eliminate the things that cost money and make that country first world to have it be able to effectively compete with the third world.

Forcing labor costs to rush towards zero doesn't improve your country nor strengthen the tax base. It just makes it shitty for everyone else except the goon living in his gated community.

No that's not how the world works. The origin of the first and third worlds was the industrial revolution. High wages are a byproduct of capital and skills. They did not magically appear by themselves, nor has America always had them.

Raising walls to hide Americans from highly competitive foreign countries (which Americans actually used to be themselves) is the economic equivalent of the safe space. It will cause decay, not revival. The solution is gutting government regulation to improve business, and gutting government support of education so that people resume buying education based on usefulness.

I just had this argument with another so called libertarian who really doesn't get it and i'm disappointed to see the same here.

It is not a heist and tariffs encourage businesses to invest in the local market as a way to get around them. This happens in the US and as well as the UK. Here are two examples:

The US has tariffs on importing vehicles into the US. Toyota skirts these rules by taking unassembled parts made in different countries and assembling them in the US at a Toyota owned plant hiring US based workers. It's not perfect, but does the job.

In the UK, Walmart wanted to enter the market here. Walmart has enough money to just buy land, open up new stores, and just smash up. The UK government said no, so you know what they did? The went and bought out another store and now operate through that to capture profit in the UK market. Tariffs protect a market from undue outside influences, they also protect a country's sovereignty.

When you export your ability to manufacture goods you make yourself beholden to the needs of your "trading" partner. Don't get mad when said training partner begins to flex its geopolitical muscle and wants you to back down in cases that affect you.

America was once a third world like country that used tariffs to build up its industrial base. If you search for tariff rates in the 19th and 20th century you'll see that they were very high. England at the time had superior products since they were first to mechanize. Did you get cheap knock offs at the time? Yes, but that is how you build up your industry to get to the point where people prefer the domestic goods to the international one. The federal government also used these tariffs as the sole source of their income.

Try and ship your own American made product over into China and see how many tariffs you have to pay to offer such goods there. You'll be priced way out of the market.

Sheltered domestic industries still have to deal with competition from other domestic producers. Your argument falls flat when you have domestic competition. Until robots and automation improve you cannot compete with peasants willing to work 80 hours a week for 2/3 dollars a day.

This whole argument leaves out the fact that the 3rd world conveniently have their currencies pegged way below the value of the US dollar. You tell me how eliminating minimal wage and other regulations will help when the value of 1 unit of money is almost worth 1/64th of that.

I'm all for reducing the cost of business. Unfunded liabilities are off the charts. But there needs to be a mix and match of both libertarian ideals and modest regulation to protect domestic industries from peasant slave labor.

You will not find anyone in this country that supports paying people a pittance wage an hour while employing young children who should be going to school.

Edit, bringing the thread back on topic. Bikini Ivanka:

Post: #19316

These 5 Acts of Kindness Reveal There’s More to Donald Trump Than Just His Celebrity Persona
http://www.ijreview.com/2015/11/461306-t...y-persona/

Post: #19317

Keeping a list of the cucks so Trump can punish them after he wins...

Quote:“It’s one thing if [Trump] goes to the convention and he’s got 48 percent, 49 percent of the delegates,” Tennessee’s Republican Governor Bill Haslam said. “Then it’s a hard thing to see if there’s a convention floor battle. But if he goes to the convention and he’s got 35 or 40 percent, that’s a whole different thing.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...onvention/

Bill Haslam... you ignorant cuck... drop dead.

Quote:The meeting on Georgia’s Sea Island was reportedly attended by Apple’s Tim Cook, Tesla Motor’s Elon Musk, Facebook investor Larry Page, Senate Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, and House Speaker Rep. Paul Ryan, along with several other GOP leaders. The meeting was sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute.

Christ look at all the cucks. They should rename Georgia's Sea Island to Isle of Cuck.

Quote:While the event was supposed to be off-the-record, Weekly Standard chief William Kristol tweeted that the meeting was haunted by the “specter of Donald Trump.”

“The key task now, to once again paraphrase Karl Marx, is less to understand Trump than to stop him,” Kristol reportedly wrote. “In general, there’s a little too much hand-wringing, brow-furrowing, and fatalism out there and not quite enough resolving to save the party from nominating or the country electing someone who simply shouldn’t be president.”

So, as if quoting Marx was not sufficiently evil, this motherfucking piece of shit Kristol is using classic hypnosis techniques... it's not important to UNDERSTAND... you're getting sleepy... you're doing too much "brow-furrowing"... too much THINKING... you just need to stop thinking and do what Kristol tells you, and Kristol is telling you to stop Trump... because Kristol says so... pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

What a colossal fucking asshole. And writes this shit in plain daylight. Yuri Bezmenov was right. These fucking commie academics conduct their bullshit in plain light of the sun. And they will be the first ones lined up and shot after the Bolshevik revolution. Almost makes one want to see it happen.

Post: #19318

(03-08-2016 09:48 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  Keeping a list of the cucks so Trump can punish them after he wins...

Quote:“It’s one thing if [Trump] goes to the convention and he’s got 48 percent, 49 percent of the delegates,” Tennessee’s Republican Governor Bill Haslam said. “Then it’s a hard thing to see if there’s a convention floor battle. But if he goes to the convention and he’s got 35 or 40 percent, that’s a whole different thing.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...onvention/

Bill Haslam... you ignorant cuck... drop dead.

Quote:The meeting on Georgia’s Sea Island was reportedly attended by Apple’s Tim Cook, Tesla Motor’s Elon Musk, Facebook investor Larry Page, Senate Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, and House Speaker Rep. Paul Ryan, along with several other GOP leaders. The meeting was sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute.

Christ look at all the cucks. They should rename Georgia's Sea Island to Isle of Cuck.

The Federal Reserve was created during a secret meeting by the Secretary of the Treasury and JP Morgan's 5 top financiers at the same location. It ain't a coincidence, folks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jekyll_Isl...rve_System

Post: #19319

(03-08-2016 09:17 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  I just had this argument with another so called libertarian who really doesn't get it and i'm disappointed to see the same here.

Are you sure you're not concerned to see the same here?
If you're interested in continuing this discussion in spite of me 'not getting it' (disagreeing with you), post it in the libertarian thread.

Post: #19320

(03-08-2016 09:57 AM)Space Cowboy Wrote:  The Federal Reserve was created during a secret meeting by the Secretary of the Treasury and JP Morgan's 5 top financiers at the same location. It ain't a coincidence, folks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jekyll_Isl...rve_System

OK... now I'm disturbed. Wikipedia says Jekyll Island is "one of" Georgia's Sea Islands. So Breitbart isn't even sure of the exact location (i.e., which Sea Island) this meeting took place on, probably for security reasons (i.e., the cucks ain't talking), and I am assuming you are right Space Cowboy, Jekyll Island sounds like a prime suspect for the precise locale. This is truly fucking disturbing. Somebody call Alex Jones.

Post: #19321

Who you guys think is gonna get Ohio, Trump or Kasich?

Betfair is having 3.5 odds on Trump, so im very tempted to take it.

Post: #19322

More cucks for the list...

Quote:Apple CEO Tim Cook, Google co-founder Larry Page, Napster creator and Facebook investor Sean Parker, and Tesla Motors and SpaceX honcho Elon Musk all attended. So did Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), political guru Karl Rove, House Speaker Paul Ryan, GOP Sens. Tom Cotton (Ark.), Cory Gardner (Colo.), Tim Scott (S.C.), Rob Portman (Ohio) and Ben Sasse (Neb.), who recently made news bysaying he “cannot support Donald Trump.”

Along with Ryan, the House was represented by Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Fred Upton (Mich.), Rep. Kevin Brady (Texas) and almost-Speaker Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), sources said, along with leadership figure Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.), Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.), Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (Texas) and Diane Black (Tenn.).

http://www.infowars.com/at-secretive-mee...top-trump/

Quote:Philip Anschutz, the billionaire GOP donor whose company owns a stake in Sea Island, was also there, along with Democratic Rep. John Delaney, who represents Maryland. Arthur Sulzberger, the publisher of The New York Times, was there, too, a Times spokeswoman confirmed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/aei-...e6f8ea125d

Cucks... fucking cucks everywhere...

Post: #19323

(03-08-2016 10:30 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  More cucks for the list...

Quote:Apple CEO Tim Cook, Google co-founder Larry Page, Napster creator and Facebook investor Sean Parker, and Tesla Motors and SpaceX honcho Elon Musk all attended. So did Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), political guru Karl Rove, House Speaker Paul Ryan, GOP Sens. Tom Cotton (Ark.), Cory Gardner (Colo.), Tim Scott (S.C.), Rob Portman (Ohio) and Ben Sasse (Neb.), who recently made news bysaying he “cannot support Donald Trump.”

Along with Ryan, the House was represented by Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Fred Upton (Mich.), Rep. Kevin Brady (Texas) and almost-Speaker Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), sources said, along with leadership figure Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.), Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.), Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (Texas) and Diane Black (Tenn.).

http://www.infowars.com/at-secretive-mee...top-trump/

Quote:Philip Anschutz, the billionaire GOP donor whose company owns a stake in Sea Island, was also there, along with Democratic Rep. John Delaney, who represents Maryland. Arthur Sulzberger, the publisher of The New York Times, was there, too, a Times spokeswoman confirmed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/aei-...e6f8ea125d

Cucks... fucking cucks everywhere...

This is the first time in 30 years a single candidate has gotten so much hate from US corporations. You'd think Occupy Wall St. folks and Bernie Sanders supporters would be supporting him rabidly. Yet they are nowhere to be found.

Post: #19324

Interesting development regarding Hitlery:

http://www.investors.com/politics/editor...t-blew-up/

Looks like the ammunition bunker is filling up for Trump's eventually assault on this lying, criminal, malignant Witch:

"The State Department started releasing what would end up being 2,093 of Clinton’s emails that it said contained classified material.

Once those emails started emerging, Clinton changed her story to say that she never “knowingly” sent or received classified information, because none of the messages were so marked. That excuse fell by the wayside when emails turned up containing information deemed “classified at birth.” Then several showed up that couldn’t be released at all because their classification rating was so high.

The Post’s latest revelations, however, are particularly damning. It found that three-quarters of the classified emails she sent were written by Clinton herself.

Saying she didn’t know the information was classified because it wasn’t marked makes no sense, since she was the one who would have been responsible for marking it in the first place.

And, since she claims that she was “well aware of the classification requirements,” she can’t now claim that she was ignorant of the nature of the information she was sending.

As this story has unfolded over the past year, Clinton has tried to brush it aside as a partisan witch hunt. When that didn’t wash, she tried to blame the State Department for “over classifying” information, or charged that it was just the result of interagency squabbles.

Clinton also tried to smear the inspectors general for State and the intelligence community, both of whom were appointed by President Obama."

Now that the Washington Post is seeing the light of day around this dark-hearted Witch, I fail to see how Trump does not capitalize on her criminal conspiracies in the court of public opinion.

Post: #19325

Hillary is doomed.