What's new

US Politics

Just fookin A+ perfect haha
Alex and Infowars going full legit, and gaining big league credibility is one of the best things to have come out of the election. :D

I've watched the guy for 5 or 6 years now, I always thought he was cool even if a bit ott at times.

watch infowars for spicy 'murrican right wing news, and TyT for goofy left wing news, and that bust up at the RNC was epic.
 
.
President Trump

55:17Video duration: 55:17 Aired: 01/03/17

FRONTLINE examines the key moments that shaped President-elect Donald Trump. Interviews drawn from The Choice 2016 with advisors, business associates and biographers reveal how Trump transformed himself from real estate developer to reality TV star to president.

http://www.pbs.org/video/2365924612/
 
.

good fear ****, yes ? @LA se Karachi :partay:

ominous score, slow down + crop people's faces, the narrator guy.. :disagree:

also extremely funny is how CNN and MSNBC are now doing interviews with neoconmen John McCain and Lindsey Graham to prove how the evil Russians helped steal it from crooked hillary.

the msm, as we've know them, are finished.

random interesting new media interview here:


Infowars are also cool, I'd kill for a Dave Rubin/Alex Jones interview.
 
.
85.jpg


DONALD TRUMP’S ALARMINGLY TRUMPIAN TRANSITION

By John Cassidy January 4, 2017

With the House Republicans reversing themselves (temporarily, perhaps) on gutting the Office of Congressional Ethics, and Megyn Kelly jumping from Fox News to NBC News, the 2017 political-news cycle began with a bang on Tuesday. But there was no getting away from the story that overwhelms all others: in sixteen days, Donald Trump will become the forty-fifth President of the United States. Outside the Trump family and the alt-right, is there anyone who didn’t shudder a little as the ball dropped in Times Square on Saturday night?

There have long been serious doubts, even among members of his own party, about Trump’s suitability for any public office, let alone the Presidency. His opponents in the Republican primary described him as a “con artist” (Marco Rubio), a “delusional narcissist” (Rand Paul), a purveyor of dangerous falsehoods (John Kasich), and a descendant of Joseph McCarthy (Lindsey Graham). When President Obama suggested, last August, that Trump “doesn’t have the judgment, the temperament, the understanding” to be President, many senior Republicans privately agreed with him.

If there were people expecting that Trump would use the lengthy interregnum between Election Day and Inauguration Day to offer reassurances about what lies ahead, he has gone out of his way to disabuse them. For the past two months, he has spent his time publicly congratulating himself on his victory (while greatly exaggerating its scale) and taunting those he defeated; putting together a Cabinet of conservative ideologues, billionaires, and generals; blithely dismissing calls for him to divest his business interests; and—this almost every day—running his mouth on Twitter. In short, it has been a distinctly Trumpian transition.

Perhaps, as the Times’ David Brooks has suggested, we should regard Trump’s online efflorescences as nothing more than perishable Snapchat messages or Baudrillardian simulacra. It is a challenge, though, to be cavalier about a President-elect one day issuing menacing statements about North Korea’s pursuit of nuclear weapons and the next day publicly trashing the intelligence services whose job it will be to inform him about nuclear proliferation and other global dangers. Evidently, Trump doesn’t think he needs much professional advice: he already regards himself as an expert on foreign-policy issues, including nuclear negotiations.

And he’s just days away from gaining access to codes that could be used to launch a nuclear attack within minutes—a prospect that has many Americans and citizens of other countries unnerved. The Ploughshares Fund, a venerable arms-control organization, has circulated a petition urging Obama to take U.S. nuclear missiles off high alert before he leaves office. “It’s too late to stop Donald Trump from becoming president,” Joe Cirincione, the president of the Fund, wrote recently. “But it is not too late to stop him from impulsively blowing up the planet.”

To be sure, other men who were ill-qualified, ethically challenged, or potentially unhinged have occupied the Oval Office during the Republic’s long history. John Tyler and Millard Fillmore, two mid-nineteenth-century Whigs, are sometimes cited in the first category. During the nineteen-twenties, Warren G. Harding brought the stench of corruption right into the West Wing, where he played poker with his cronies from Ohio, some of whom were busy enriching themselves at federal expense. And, when it comes to addled Presidents, we have the accounts that have been handed down of Richard Nixon as the Watergate scandal reached its climax—brooding, cursing, drinking heavily, driven to the edge of madness.

But historical comparisons to Trump only go so far. Tyler and Fillmore, the tenth and thirteenth Presidents, were both experienced politicians who were serving as Vice-Presidents when their bosses died. (Tyler had been the governor of Virginia and also represented the state in the U.S. Senate. Fillmore was a former chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.) Although Harding’s name will forever be associated with the Teapot Dome scandal, which involved the secret leasing out of federal oil reserves, he wasn’t accused of lining his own pockets. Nixon, a Shakespearean figure racked by personal insecurities, was also an intelligent man blessed with great powers of concentration. According to Arthur Burns, the economist he appointed to head the Federal Reserve, Nixon could have “held down a chair in political science or law in any of our major universities.”

Trump, then, is sui generis. He has no experience in elected office—in these demented times, that was part of his popular appeal. His reputation as a hugely successful businessman has little basis in fact, as does his claim of being worth ten billion dollars. Until he launched his Presidential campaign, in which he showed some genuine skill as a rabble-rouser, his talents had lain in attracting other people’s money, promoting himself in the media, and playing a role on reality television—the role of Donald Trump, the great dealmaker.

If Trump has any ethics, they are self-serving ones. In his business dealings, he has a record of chiselling suppliers; bankrupting public companies; and operating a private outfit, Trump University, that recently settled charges that it was little more than a scam designed to part Americans of modest means from their savings. For many years, it seems, Trump exploited a loophole in the tax code to avoid paying any federal taxes. At times, he has associated with alleged mobsters and shadowy foreign businessmen, including rich Russians who have invested in some of his real-estate projects. (On this, a lengthy article in The American Interest gathers much of what can be gleaned from public filings and court records.) Although Trump poses as a champion of the common man, he is a prime exemplar and beneficiary of oligarchical capitalism.

He is also, as he displayed many times over the past year and a half, an inveterate bully who views the world almost exclusively in terms of winning and losing. Tony Schwartz, who ghostwrote Trump’s book “The Art of the Deal,” which helped define Trump’s public brand, has described him as a compulsive liar and a sociopath. Trump’s history of denigrating minorities, inciting racial fears, promoting birtherism, and boasting about sexually assaulting women surely doesn’t need recounting, but one lesser-known incident is perhaps worth recalling. In 2000, after some family members went to court and challenged his father’s will, Trump cut off health coverage to a nephew’s young son who was suffering from a chronic neurological disorder that caused violent seizures and brain damage. Asked by the Times why he took this action, he said, “I was angry because they sued.”

This is the man about to join the lineage of Washington, Lincoln, and Roosevelt. In the coming days and weeks, some cynical Republican leaders who have made their self-serving peace with Trump will put on a show of support for him and claim that all is proceeding normally. Obama himself, whether out of a desire to go by protocol or in the hope of exercising some restraining influence, has so far avoided making any public criticisms, even though Trump has shown little sign of heeding the advice Obama offered a few days after the election, when he said, “There are going to be certain elements of his temperament that will not serve him well, unless he recognizes them and corrects them. Because when you’re a candidate and you say something that is inaccurate or controversial, it has less impact than it does when you’re President of the United States.”

Come two weeks from Friday, Trump will be in that position. It is to be fervently hoped that, as Obama predicted in November, entering the Oval Office will awaken Trump to the reality and enormousness of the responsibilities he faces and change the way he behaves. Such a possibility can’t be entirely discounted, I suppose. But, at this stage, does anybody really believe it will happen?
 
.
good fear ****, yes ? @LA se Karachi :partay:

ominous score, slow down + crop people's faces, the narrator guy.. :disagree:

also extremely funny is how CNN and MSNBC are now doing interviews with neoconmen John McCain and Lindsey Graham to prove how the evil Russians helped steal it from crooked hillary.

the msm, as we've know them, are finished.

random interesting new media interview here:


Infowars are also cool, I'd kill for a Dave Rubin/Alex Jones interview.


Well, that's Frontline's style---ominous and dramatic. I enjoy it personally. I think that they make some of the best documentaries out there.
But Trump is such a goofy/brash character that the style clashes.

The mainstream media isn't going anywhere though. There is new media, but that is being primarily driven by young people. As a result, most of it is left-leaning.
 
.
Well, that's Frontline's style---ominous and dramatic. I enjoy it personally. I think that they make some of the best documentaries out there.
But Trump is such a goofy/brash character that the style clashes.
I've seen a few frontline shows, those were generally dealing with heavy stuff like wars etc, imo it's a bit of a shame they put Trump's win in there.

eh, the style clashes ?


yes he's goofy and brash and a potty-mouth and has been caught being crass at times, but Adolf Hitler he's not. This was the sort of documentary you'd expect an enemy state to make about the US President. This was also apparently just clips from an episode called the choice, which aired back in September or something, part 2 airs post inauguration on the 24th, looking fwd to it.

The mainstream media isn't going anywhere though. There is new media, but that is being primarily driven by young people. As a result, most of it is left-leaning.
There's a few good right leaning ones too, not talking about the spicy right like infowars, regular right of centre, people who make good points and talk sense, Cenk and Jones are the 2 extremes.

the msm are on their way out, and not specifically to do with the horrible coverage of Trump, people in general have been moving away from cable, the big talking heads on 9 pm shows don't wield the same power they used to, and many feel online is where they get the real news.

Imagine if Trump gives his first big interview post assuming office to infowars, it could happen.
 
. .
posted this in the Syrian War thread, worth sharing here too

 
.
I've seen a few frontline shows, those were generally dealing with heavy stuff like wars etc, imo it's a bit of a shame they put Trump's win in there.


Well it is a serious topic, whether one supported him or not. Also, his campaign and election to the Presidency is a bit of a "heavy" topic to some of us. :D

This was the sort of documentary you'd expect an enemy state to make about the US President.


Lol, that's a bit of an exaggeration. Frontline did take a critical approach towards Trump and his campaign. But there is a lot to question, whatever your politics.

the msm are on their way out, and not specifically to do with the horrible coverage of Trump, people in general have been moving away from cable, the big talking heads on 9 pm shows don't wield the same power they used to, and many feel online is where they get the real news.


True, but they'll still be here. They're just shifting from print and television to online. The MSM still do the most of the actual reporting in the country. Other sources feed of their news reports and write their own articles or commentary.
 
.
Well it is a serious topic, whether one supported him or not. Also, his campaign and election to the Presidency is a bit of a "heavy" topic to some of us. :D
ok, fair enuff

but this is the president of the US, the bad vibes they're all casting around it is surreal.

Lol, that's a bit of an exaggeration. Frontline did take a critical approach towards Trump and his campaign. But there is a lot to question, whatever your politics.
no it's not, it was very dark and scarily themed, unnecessarily so.

and sure, he should be held up for scrutiny but to the same standard as 44 and 43 etc were, "hitler" is way over the top, and we've seen plenty of that from everything from the NyT, WaPo, and other "reputable" print media as well as on CNN, MSNBC, FOX (when the right wingers had rabid guests on for sake of ratings etc).. they did everything they could to get crooked hillary elected and still lost.

this one is going down in lore, they'll be writing songs about it a hundred years from now. :P

True, but they'll still be here. They're just shifting from print and television to online. The MSM still do the most of the actual reporting in the country. Other sources feed of their news reports and write their own articles or commentary.
they're finished and on a slow decline to zero, just like print media. Their whole format is outdated, other people, and with a lot fewer resources are doing a whole lot better reporting as well as with their commentary on msm reported stories, and people are smart, they'll sift through the piles and find the good stuff.

Dave Rubin is probably going to be very big in the future, one to watch out for, for sure.

also, you seem to be a very reasonable guy, I want to ask you a question, so give me an 'official' statement on your position, like frame it in a few sentences and give me the meat/crux/essence etc.

as a muslim? (I'm guessing) immigrant from Pakistan, what is your worst case scenario ? and does being a "minority" even figure in your analysis of Trump ? basically, do you just dislike the guy for saying some of the things he's said or maybe you always thought he was an asshole or are there specific policy positions you have a problem with ?

as a not US citizen watching this from a fair distance, I don't care about any of his domestic policies (the wall, taxes, guns, gays, abortion or whathaveyou)

so for me, and just purely from a US foreign policy pov, I see a lot of good and common sense in what he's said so far, and based on that, I'm really positive on the whole thing and a big fan of the guy, but I'll switch sides in a hurry if he continues to arm and fund the so called rebels in Syria and starts new wars and so on.

and did you watch that last secular talk vid I posted ? big league Syrian war truth bombs.
its-ok-fingers-sign.png
 
.
It is crystal-clear that the Russians tried to undermine our democracy, and now even Trumpanov accepts that they were involved in the hacking, though he is still denying that they intervened in the election to help him win, SAD.

Unfortunately, the fact is, the enemies would not have succeeded if we had an intelligent and informed voters.


BBxWGe6.jpg



The key findings from the US intelligence report on the Russia hack, decoded

Updated by Zack Beauchamp

Late Friday afternoon, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) released a declassified version of its report on Russia’s interference in the US presidential election. The report, which draws on intelligence gathered by the FBI, CIA, and NSA, concludes with “high confidence” that “Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election” that included hacking the personal email accounts of Democratic Party officials and political figures.

According to the report, Putin’s aim was to impugn Hillary Clinton’s credibility and boost Donald Trump’s chances of winning the election, and more broadly to make the US electoral system look shady and untrustworthy.

Much of this has already been reported publicly. But there are some key findings in this report, such as the precise nature of the link between WikiLeaks and the Russian hackers, that hadn’t been disclosed before.

Here’s a guide to the report — its most important findings and, in particular, the new and important disclosures it contains.

All three intel agencies agree that Putin personally ordered the hack, and that the goal was to help Trump


The ODNI report states conclusively that Putin personally ordered the email hacks of Democratic Party officials as part of a broader campaign to influence the US election in Trump’s favor. This seems to have sprung, in part, from Putin’s paranoia concerning perceived US attempts to undermine his government.

The report explains that Putin was incensed about a series of scandals that embarrassed his government, such as the Panama Papers leak, which revealed (among other things) a secret $2 billion account held by Putin personally. The Russian hacking campaign was designed in part to throw a similar kind of dirt on the United States, which he held responsible for his embarrassment.

“Putin publicly pointed to the Panama Papers disclosure and the Olympic doping scandal as US-directed efforts to defame Russia, suggesting he sought to use disclosures to discredit the image of the United States and cast it as hypocritical,” the ODNI report states.

The campaign was designed to disproportionately target Clinton, whom Putin saw as a threat — he blamed her, in particular, for the 2011 anti-government protests in Russia. So the “consistent goals” of the influence campaign, the report says, were “to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency.”

As time went on, however, the Russian campaign shifted — evolving into an attempt not just to hurt Clinton but to outright elect Trump. The Kremlin, according to the report, saw Trump as potential ally — someone with the right policy views and the right dealmaking disposition.

“Putin has had many positive experiences working with Western political leaders whose business interests made them more disposed to deal with Russia, such as former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder,” the report’s authors explain.


There’s an interesting diversion at this point in the report. The CIA and FBI conclude that the hack was designed to help Trump “with high confidence,” whereas the NSA does so only with “moderate confidence.” This is a little hint as to the sources for this report’s conclusions.

The CIA and the FBI rely more on “human intelligence” — that is, spies talking to sources. The NSA is responsible for what’s called “signals intelligence”: electronic intercepts, email surveillance, and so forth. This suggests that one of the report’s main conclusions — that the goal was to elect Trump — is based less on technical analysis and more on information American spies gleaned from their sources.

Then, as the election got closer and closer and a Trump victory looked less and less likely, Russian aims shifted again — becoming a campaign aimed at weakening a future Clinton administration.

It seems the Kremlin was just as surprised as the rest of the world when Trump won — and, indeed, thrilled. CNN and the Washington Post reported that the classified version of the report includes quotes from leading Russian officials celebrating on the night of Trump’s victory. They were, in the Post’s telling, “congratulating themselves.”

Russia gave the information to WikiLeaks

The ODNI report clears up one key source of confusion about Russia’s efforts: how WikiLeaks got involved.

We knew before this report that Russia was behind the hack of thousands of private emails from Clinton allies. We also knew that WikiLeaks published a huge number of those same emails. What we didn’t know is how the stolen emails got from the Russian hackers to WikiLeaks.

The report sheds some light on that question. It suggests that agents of Russia’s military intelligence service, the GRU, specifically chose WikiLeaks to be the outlet for much of its disclosures — and handed off the information to the organization.

“We assess with high confidence that the GRU relayed material it acquired from the DNC and senior Democratic officials to WikiLeaks,” the ODNI writes. “Moscow most likely chose WikiLeaks because of its self proclaimed reputation for authenticity.”

This fits with what we knew publicly but directly contradicts WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange’s recent assertion that “our source is not the Russian government.” Which makes it seem like either the intelligence community’s assessment as well as the publicly available evidence are both way off base or Assange is lying.

There’s a third option, though: that the Russian agents hid their identity from Assange, using a fake persona — Guccifer 2.0, an allegedly Romanian hacker who is, in all likelihood, a front for Russian intelligence — as a cutout. The ODNI report, in one sentence, kind of suggests that’s what happened (though the sentence is hard to parse):

“We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence (General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0 persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks,” the report says.

Whether or not that interpretation is right, it’s quite clear from the report that US intelligence believes the Russian military intelligence service is WikiLeaks’ source. This was always the most likely scenario, and now we’ve got the ODNI report to back it up.

Russian trolls were ready to delegitimize Clinton if she won
The email hacks, according to ODNI, were only one part of a broader disinformation campaign targeting the US election.

“Moscow’s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that blends covert intelligence operations — such as cyber activity — with overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ‘trolls,’” the report explains, in what might be the first ever use of the word “trolls” in an official ODNI report.

One of the most interesting little tidbits about these Russian social media trolls is what they were planning to do in the event of a Clinton victory. According to ODNI, Russia’s social media operatives were primed to launch a massive propaganda campaign aimed at undermining the legitimacy of the election — playing into Trump’s theme that the election was “rigged.”

“Before the election, Russian diplomats had publicly denounced the US electoral process and were prepared to publicly call into question the validity of the results,” the report explains. “ProKremlin bloggers had prepared a Twitter campaign, #DemocracyRIP, on election night in anticipation of Secretary Clinton’s victory, judging from their social media activity.”

Trump won, of course, so this plan never came to fruition. Official Moscow shut up after Trump’s victory, wanting to maximize its influence with its preferred president.

“Putin, Russian officials, and other pro-Kremlin pundits stopped publicly criticizing the US election process as unfair almost immediately after the election because Moscow probably assessed it would be counterproductive to building positive relations,” ODNI writes.

RT is way more important than we think

The ODNI report focuses, to an almost surprising degree, on RT — the Kremlin’s international, English-language propaganda media outlet. The report contains several striking observations about RT’s reach, message, and proximity to the Russian government.

For instance, RT videos get more YouTube views than many other prominent, mainstream media outlets (though it’s possible these numbers are goosed):

Screen_Shot_2017_01_06_at_5.04.03_PM.png


The report also reveals that top staff at RT’s bureaus are very, very close to the Kremlin: The head of RT's Arabic-language service, Aydar Aganin, was transferred from Russia’s diplomatic service to manage RT's Arabic-language expansion, suggesting a close relationship between RT and Russia's foreign-policy apparatus.

In addition, the report states that RT's London Bureau is managed by Darya Pushkova — the daughter of Aleksey Pushkov, the current chair of the Russian State Duma’s foreign affairs committee and a former speechwriter for former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.

According to the report, RT — as well as Sputnik, another Russian government–funded English-language propaganda outlet — began aggressively producing pro-Trump and anti-Clinton content starting in March 2016. That just so happens to be the exact same time the Russian hacking campaign targeting Democrats began.

During the 2016 campaign, RT aired a number of weird, conspiratorial segments — some starring WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange — that cast Clinton as corrupt and funded by ISIS and portrayed the US electoral system as rigged.

Interestingly, the ODNI report also describes RT programming that promoted stories intended to benefit Russian economic interests — including what the report terms “anti-fracking programming.”

“This is likely reflective of the Russian Government's concern about the impact of fracking and US natural gas production on the global energy market and the potential challenges to Gazprom's profitability,” the report states. Gazprom is a huge Russian government-owned oil and gas company.

All of this makes it crystal clear that Russian information ops go way beyond just hacking — and that media outlets like RT and Sputnik are major elements of their US-focused propaganda campaign.

This is the beginning, not the end

The report concludes on an ominous note.

Given the success of Russia’s hacking and information campaign in the 2016 election, the ODNI expects that Putin will try to run a similar playbook in future democratic elections — in both the United States and worldwide.

“We assess the Russian intelligence services would have seen their election influence campaign as at least a qualified success because of their perceived ability to impact public discussion,” ODNI writes.

In fact, as the report explains, a new round of hacking began the day after the election:

Immediately after Election Day, we assess Russian intelligence began a spearphishing campaign targeting US Government employees and individuals associated with US think tanks and NGOs in national security, defense, and foreign policy fields. This campaign could provide material for future influence efforts as well as foreign intelligence collection on the incoming administration’s goals and plans.

In conclusion, Russia really did try to influence the 2016 US election — and there’s every reason to expect it will try again when the 2020 campaign kicks off.







Just shows what a cheap and vindictive nasty man he is, as many of us have been saying that he is not a presidential material, his petty tweets prove our point, of course, for foreigners it may be, “lol” but many Americans are disturbed with his childish behavior.

Does this man even realize that he has been elected President of the United States, only 13 days have left before he is sworn in as the 45th President of United States, instead of focusing his energies on important domestic and international issues he’s wasting his time on petty tweets.

One good example, how about, he stopped skipping important intelligence briefing!? Link
 
Last edited:
.
It is crystal-clear that the Russians tried to undermine our democracy, and now even Trumpanov accepts that they were involved in the hacking, though he is still denying that they intervened in the election to help him win, SAD.

Unfortunately, the fact is, the enemies would not have succeeded if we had an intelligent and informed voters.

We should be thankful that US is a republic and not a democracy. Democracy to me means mob rule. I can only imagine what damage Trump would cause in a parliamentary system.

Just shows what a cheap and vindictive nasty man he is, as many of us have been saying that he is not a presidential material, his petty tweets prove our point, of course, for foreigners it may be, “lol” but many Americans are disturbed with his childish behavior.

Does this man even realize that he has been elected President of the United States, only 13 days have left before he is sworn in as the 45th President of United States, instead of focusing his energies on important domestic and international issues he’s wasting his time on petty tweets.

One good example, how about, he stopped skipping important intelligence briefing!?

If Trump continues on this path, he won't last long. For now, he's a novelty, but in time he'll be pilloried for wasting everyone's time with such nonsense. The mid-term election will be a good indicator of his progress.
 
.
Just shows what a cheap and vindictive nasty man he is, as many of us have been saying that he is not a presidential material, his petty tweets prove our point, of course, for foreigners it may be, “lol” but many Americans are disturbed with his childish behavior.

Does this man even realize that he has been elected President of the United States, only 13 days have left before he is sworn in as the 45th President of United States, instead of focusing his energies on important domestic and international issues he’s wasting his time on petty tweets.

One good example, how about, he stopped skipping important intelligence briefing!? Link
He's just trolling the media, toying with them.

skipping briefings is no biggie when he's surrounded by people who are getting briefed daily, not like he can do anything till he takes office anyway, so for now he's busy building a cabinet.

It is crystal-clear that the Russians tried to undermine our democracy, and now even Trumpanov accepts that they were involved in the hacking, though he is still denying that they intervened in the election to help him win, SAD.

Unfortunately, the fact is, the enemies would not have succeeded if we had an intelligent and informed voters.

reducing tensions between the worlds two foremost military and nuclear superpowers, seems to me he has a pretty good grasp of important international issues.

amazing how the democrats have now become the party of war and keep pushing a false terrorist narrative on Syria while Trump makes peace.
 
.
The intelligence bringing us the Russian hacking evidence ...which btw, they say from the other side of their mouth, that they cannot reveal that evidence... is the same intelligence that brought us the 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' evidence.

"Just trust us, we're the government."

67f4163d9c861fef9e9c1e60aed1f243db96b276.png
 
.
He's just trolling the media, toying with them.

skipping briefings is no biggie when he's surrounded by people who are getting briefed daily, not like he can do anything till he takes office anyway, so for now he's busy building a cabinet.



reducing tensions between the worlds two foremost military and nuclear superpowers, seems to me he has a pretty good grasp of important international issues.

amazing how the democrats have now become the party of war and keep pushing a false terrorist narrative on Syria while Trump makes peace.
Don't you get it by now?? Who cares about a nuclear holocaust!! We just can't allow a "racist", "sexist", "misogynist" into office!!!

 
.
Back
Top Bottom