EmmetK
-
Posts
449 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by EmmetK
-
-
49 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said:
Yet again, we agree. In your mind, facts prove nothing.
Since you've stopped reading, I'll simply cite the facts that you don't want to know.
What we don't know for a fact is what is actually being negotiated in the US Senate right now. And how far Biden and Harris (she's the immigration czar) will go to make a deal with Republicans to get aid to Ukraine and Israel. As well as address the "broken border" problem that most Americans agree on.
If I believe what I read, groups like the ACLU and SPLC are concerned that Republicans will push for things like a return to Trump's child separation policies, which a vast majority of Democrats and Independents oppose. So we'll have to see whether any deal can be struck, and what it includes. My guess is that if Republicans really want a poison pill to kill compromise, throwing in a cruel provision that Trump came up with that they know only older Republicans support would be one way to do it.
You claimed that Trump threw kids in cages and provided ZERO evidence.
I claimed that Obama built cages and threw kids in them and provided evidence.
No surprise that you changed the subject to avoid acknowledging your "facts" were lies.
Keep following the polls, and keep calling Trump a Nazi and lie about him. Ya got nothing else.
And while you are thinking about that. Here's the new FOX News poll just out tonight. Biden approval rating at an all time low - 38%. That's lower than Trump's approval ever was.https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-approval-rating-sinks-all-time-low-new-national-poll
-
28 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said:
Again, we agree. Trump rarely tells the truth. He usually lies.
I never said that Trump said, factually, he will throw kids in cages. I said that he did throw kids in cages. Which, factually, most Americans do not support. Which, factually, contributed to him being a big sorry old fat loser in 2020. Which, factually, led his "hostages" to go beat the shit out of cops on Jan. 6th to show how much they love police, and democracy.
CBS News poll: Two-thirds of Americans say separating children, parents at border unacceptable
I'll always make sure to put the facts after the first paragraph so they never have to disturb you. Seems like these facts do actually disturb the majority of Americans, though.
And that picture of people behind a wire fence proves? It proves nothing.
We do know that the cages were built by Obama to put kids in according to WaPo:
The cages where OBAMA put kids in according to the ACLU? Thosse cages?
If you're gonna cite facts, at least cite them correctly. It was OBAMA that put kids in cages. Not Donald Trump.
-
2 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said:
We agree. So do I.
I'll repeat what I said above, citing Trump fan boy Ben Shapiro. Trump wins when the camera is on Biden and everyone is talking about the "I" words: inflation, immigration, impeachment, Israel, idiot.
Then Trump opens his mouth and says, "Hey. I got a great idea. Let's sound like Nazis, and throw kids in cages." true, the elite clutch their pearls. But maybe at best 1 in 3 Americans actually like the idea of sounding like Nazis and throwing kids in cages.
I never bother to read more than the first sentence of your long-winded gibberish. Miraculously, I made it thru 2 sentences.
Saying that ILLEGALs are poisoning the blood of America's youth doesn't make Trump sound like a Nazi to the majority of Americans (yourself, Mike and Joe Scarboro and their acolytes excluded). Illegals bring fentanyl and other drugs into the US. They bring crime to border communities. That is POISON. The left can keep using words like Nazi, Hitler, fascist, etc. It rings hollow. Nobody believes it and therefore nobody cares. And Trump never said he will throw kids in cages. Just more lies as the polls continue to show Trump's lead over Senile Joe increasing every day.
-
2 hours ago, unicorn said:
I didn't think I needed to qualify with "everyone except the most stupid idiots." Just like when Trump said "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by: " his implicit backing of white supremacy groups is well-understood by everyone (except the most stupid idiots).
YOUR problem is that the only ones who object to Trump's comment about ILLEGAL aliens are the MSNBC watching, NYTimes reading, Volvo driving, Chablis sipping, out-of-touch elitist class who clutch their pearls over comments like that which most Americans agree with. Polls show that even Black voters, whose support Trump now has at 17%; and Hispanics, whose approval of Trump is at 38%, are opposed to the waves and waves of illegals flooding the country. Illegal immigration is a BIG winning issue for Trump and the GOP. And the more President Trump can generate headlines by exposing Senile Joe Biden's open border policies, the bigger Trump's lead will continue to grow and guarantee himself a second term.
So frankly I hope Trump replays that New Hampshire speech at every campaign event. And I also hope that liars like @Bingo T Dog continue to mislead, misquote and lie about his comments. It exposes the weakness and lack of integrity and honesty of Trump's detractors.
-
LIE #1: "Trump says All Immigrants are "Poisoning the Blood" of the US"
LIE #2: "This includes illegal immigrants according to Trump"
LIE #3: "I do not lie"
LIE #4: "..when Trump talks about "blood," everyone knows what he means.."
You not only lie, but you are pathological.
The more you write, the more you lie.
Keep going, please.
-
9 minutes ago, Bingo T Dog said:
I do not lie.
LIE #!: "Trump says All Immigrants are "Poisoning the Blood" of the US"
LIE #2: "This includes illegal immigrants according to Trump"
LIE #3: "I do not lie"
You not only lie, but you are pathological.
The more you write, the more you lie.
Keep going, please.
-
35 minutes ago, Bingo T Dog said:
We have learned to know his TRUE intent behind his words.
Thank you for at least admitting that you knowingly lied.
And how you choose to interpret Trump's words is not the title of this thread.
The title of this thread is: 'Trump says all Immigrants are "Poisoning The Blood" of the US'.(my bold highlights).
If what you say is true, why didn't you title it, "Even though Trump clearly said Illegal Immigrants are...... But I think what he meant was......"
Instead, you chose to lie. Not just an ordinary lie, but a whopper of a Lie.
Your post also says, "This includes legal immigrants according to Trump." Another lie, especially since you admit that you know Trump was only referring to ILLEGAL immigrants.
I repeat my question, Why do you lie? And why do you lie so often?
- Marc in Calif, Mavica and alvnv
-
1
-
2
-
3 minutes ago, Bingo T Dog said:
He should have built a wall!!! Maybe Mexico would help pay??? Maybe Steve Bannon could help???
Trump Says All Immigrants Are "Poisoning The Blood" of the US.
Why do you lie?
-
22 minutes ago, Bingo T Dog said:
RESTRICT LEGAL IMMIGRATION ALSO. LISTEN TO HIS WORDS. I WONDER IF HE THINKS ALL THOSE MAGA RALLY PEOPLE ARE DESCENDENTS OF THE MAYFLOWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Restricting Legal immigration is VERY different than your title of this thread. Why didn't you title this thread: Trump seeks to limit legal immigration? Instead, you chose to mislead and distract with a lie. Not just a white lie, but a whopper of a lie. Fact: Trump never said what you claim he did.
I don't see a lot of large-breasted Swedes in migrant caravans. I don't see a lot of large breasted Swedes standing on the border, waiting to cross ILLEGALLY.
Trump, like most Americans, want law abiding citizens to enter the US. Not drug dealers and criminals. And this isn't being accomplished with Biden's open border, come one - come all policy.
-
14 hours ago, Bingo T Dog said:
https://www.aol.com/news/trump-repeats-poisoning-blood-anti-221431017.html I guess we've been "poisoning the blood" for the last 200 years (maybe longer). This includes legal immigrants according to Trump. I wonder if he considers his own family "poisoned" by Jared Kushner marrying Ivanka and having children. Melania immigrated here. Is Barron "poisoned"?
LOL.
WOW. What a STUPID and MISLEADING title.
Trump didn't say ALL immigrants. He was referring to ILLEGAL immigrants.
Do you understand the definition of the word "illegal" ? They are breaking US law! Here is a fact, criminals do poison the blood of America when they commit crimes.Even if you didn't watch Trump's speech, did you even bother reading the link to the article you posted? I'll make it easy for you. Here is the first line (I even underlined and emboldened the words in question to make it as easy as possible for you to understand:
DURHAM, New Hampshire (Reuters) -Donald Trump, the Republican presidential frontrunner, said on Saturday that undocumented immigrants were "poisoning the blood of our country," repeating language that has previously drawn criticism as xenophobic and echoing of Nazi rhetoric.
Dems like you see the polls. Biden is losing in every poll, and losing badly. So you have to resort to fake news and lies. It won't help. Senile Joe Dementia will be out of a job in a year. He will need all of his wits as he will be a material witness in Hunter's trial on felony charges.
Americans are sick of Biden and Biden's policies. They are sick of high crime, open borders; billions going to house illegals; feed them, provide medical care, etc., while millions of Americans are homeless; boys competing in girls' sports, the fentanyl crisis brough on by open borders. That's what Americans care about, NOT Trump's criticism of illegals.
Trump promised to return us to the policies of his first Presidency, namely low inflation, low food and gas prices, protecting our borders, low unemployment and no wars! Oh, the horror! Everybody run for the hills! lol.
-
Neither one will ever see a nickel....
This case will be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. It will take years.
It is likely that the judgment will either be tossed out or the judgment lowered significantly at one of the layers of appeal..Mayor Giuliani is 79, and not in the best of health. He will likely be flying with the angels in heaven before this case is finalized.
He is not stupid. I am sure he is already beginning the process of liquidating his assets so there will be nothing left for these two to claim from his estate.- Mavica and Marc in Calif
-
2
-
4 hours ago, Department_Of_Agriculture said:
They ignored the evidence because they wanted the massacre to happen. They wanted the massacre to happen because that piece of shit Binyamin Netanyahu is facing criminal charges for bribery and fraud in three separate criminal cases in Israel and was facing the risk of his government collapsing. A nice little slaughter and war was precisely what he thought would turn him from criminal to hero with his "heroic" response. After all, what are a few thousand dead Jewish and Palestinian kids compared to the greater good eh?
Of course it goes deeper than that. This piece of shit, who calls himself by the false name "Netanyahu" to pretend that he has some ancestral connection to the region, has long sought the elimination of the Palestinians and to completely destroy any possibility of a real Palestinian state. This nice little massacre that he knowingly permitted provided precisely the excuse that he needed to put his bloody plans into action. Palestinians weren't told to move from North Gaza to southern Gaza for their own protection; they were ordered to move so that North Gaza could be annexed by the Zionists. If protecting civilians had been the goal, they would not have been dropping bombs on kids as they evacuated and they would not have been dropping bombs on kids in southern Gaza.
Alongside that, this piece of shit has specifically attempted to wipe-out the Palestinian Christian community- the oldest Christian community in the world - in targeted attacks. Witness the targeted attack on the ancient Saint Porphyrius Church in Gaza City where the Christians were sheltering. What had they to do with Hamas? Saint Porphyrius Church is the third-oldest functioning church in the world and the existence of this ancient Palestinian community is an affront to those who make false claims of ownership on that land. By contrast, this Binyamim, whose real surname is Mileikowsky, is of Russian and Polish ghetto heritage with no historic connection to the land of Palestine.
The redeeming feature of this tragic episode, though, is how it has woken so many up around the world though. In America, the youth who have long been lied to about what is going-on in Palestine have been woken-up by images of screaming kids their own age being blown apart by bombs and are speaking out and taking direct action. Change is coming. That piece of shit who calls himself Netanyahu allowed the massacre to happen because he thought it beneficial to himself and that it would enable the final obliteration of Palestine. As the truth comes out though, it may prove to be his final doing. I look forward to seeing this rat in The Hague.
In the meantime, the blood of the dead children, Jews and Palestinians alike, is on his hands and on the hands of those who back him.
Perhaps the most vile, hateful, and ignorant post ever made on this forum.
- Ruthrieston, Olddaddy, Phoenixblue and 5 others
-
3
-
1
-
4
-
1 hour ago, forky123 said:
So, you read many sites from all parts of the spectrum but have no interest in this one because it's a total nobody on a site no one has heard of
Exactly!
- forky123, Marc in Calif and alvnv
-
1
-
2
-
3 hours ago, forky123 said:
1) I have never quoted him.
2) I have never used red highlights.
3) The fact you never read from, quote or listen to anyone from "the lunatics" is hardly a surprise. Your choice of news though is such that one might place you in the band of "lunatics" on the right. If the two extremes keep going the way they are in the US there is going to be bloodshed.
Actually I read many sites from all parts of the political spectrum. I read with great interest the left-wing sites as I want to keep up-to-date on what America's enemies are up to. However, why would I, or anyone, have any interest in an opinion piece from responsiblestatecraft.org written by a self-identified DSA member. A total nobody opining on a site no one ever heard of. If that's the best you can do to prove your point, you lose the argument on a TKO.
-
1 hour ago, forky123 said:
You still haven't read any of the sources have you? They provided their sources in the article but you simply couldn't be bothered to check any of them out. If it doesn't say Fox, Breitbart, OAN or Newsmax it's left wing to you and therefore "biased"
I read the post.
I also point out the writer is a left-wing, unapologetic member of the DSA. Same as AOC, Tlaib, Bernie, and the rest of the lunatics.
Michael Galant (he/him) is the Senior Communications Associate at Win Without War, a diverse network of activists and organizations working for a more peaceful, progressive U.S. foreign policy. Michael is interested in building global solidarity for Left alternatives to neoliberal models of globalization and development. He is a coordinator of the Progressive International — a new initiative to unite, organize, and mobilize global progressive forces behind a shared vision of a world transformed — an active member of the Democratic Socialists of America, and has organized in the global justice, labor, and Palestine solidarity movements. Michael has written for publications including Jacobin, In These Times, and Truthout on such topics as trade, tax avoidance, international financial institutions, corporate accountability, labor internationalism, and more.
His politics are of a fringe movement. It is ridiculous to quote him from an unknown site to prove a point. And then use red highlights, as if you were quoting the Gettysburg Address.
Period.
Case closed.- forky123, alvnv and Marc in Calif
-
1
-
2
-
8 hours ago, Marc in Calif said:
Thanks for finally admitting that you simply do not understand what source citations are. The article has MANY verified statistics from a wide variety of sources. You're just too stubborn to click the links and read those sources.
Tell me: Did you click any of the links in that article?
If you were afraid to click them, I understand. Your fragile ego wouldn't have liked reading them because they prove that your claims are completely false.
I'll just continue poking you with those links -- whether you want to click them or not! 🤡🤣🤡
Thanks for again acknowledging your limited comprehension. Although that was made clear when you admitted that you were unfamiliar with the Rafah Crossing.
Now that you have displayed that you rely on unsourced statistics from responsiblestatecraft.org, an unknown and little read website, one can only imagine what source you will be using next to prop up your losing argument. The Onion? Mad Magazine? lol
Oh, and here's a free helpful hint... Red highlights don't make your point any stronger. It merely emphasizes your total failure to prove whatever point you are trying to make.
- forky123, Marc in Calif and alvnv
-
1
-
2
-
15 hours ago, Marc in Calif said:
HINT: In online text, underlining (underscoring) indicates a reference link to the specific evidence.
I'm embarrassed for you. You don't even know this most significant feature of the internet. 🤣
Clearly you are unable to grasp my point. So I'll try one more time. But I am not hopeful given the fact that I am dealing with someone who posts ad nauseum on the Gaza situation yet never heard of the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt.
Citing unsourced and unverified statistics from a long-winded article contained in an unknown, little-read website, and then doing a copy and paste with red highlights proves NOTHING other than your lack of ability to engage in any form of intelligent dialog.
Your continual referencing of responsiblestatecraft.org as if it were the NYTimes or any other legitimate source on the right or left is truly stunning.
-
3 minutes ago, Marc in Calif said:
Please prove that any one of the factual statements is false. Did you not go to the linked evidence, which is VERY specific?
Just as an example, can you prove that the following facts are false?
The US dropped more bombs on Afghanistan in 2019 than any other year since the Pentagon began keeping a tally in 2006, reflecting an apparent effort to force concessions from the Taliban at the negotiating table.According to new figures released by US central command, US warplanes dropped 7,423 bombs and other munitions on Afghanistan, a nearly eightfold increase from 2015.
I wasn't the author of the article, so I don't have to prove anything.
There are ZERO specifics. Not one country is named. Not even an area. The article is a joke. Not surprising that you would resort to citing an opinion piece from a website that nobody reads and most people never heard of. Actually it's more pathetic than laughable.
-
2 hours ago, Marc in Calif said:
Why would I deny facts? I never did deny that.
But Drumpf was a warmonger. He escalated existing wars and military actions. He brought the US perilously close to new wars. And he didn't try to end some of the "endless" wars.
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2021/01/20/trump-the-anti-war-president-was-always-a-myth/
... Trump did escalate conflict in theatres of war he inherited, repeatedly brought the country to the brink of new wars, and recklessly threw around U.S. power with no regard for the many lives it would cost. The “anti-war” candidate, like those before him, was a pro-war president.
Escalating Inherited Wars — Despite repeated PR stunts, Trump did not “bring the troops home” or “end endless wars.” In fact, Trump consistently added fuel to the fire, increasing troop levels, deepening reliance on private contractors, and dramatically scaling up aerial warfare. Where an end to endless war requires repealing the 2001 and 2002 Authorizations for Use of Military Force, Trump expanded conflicts under both. His term saw four consecutive years of growth of an already out-of-control Pentagon budget. And loosening even the minimal restrictions that were already in place, he expanded the United States’ deadly and unaccountable drone wars.
Not only did Trump not end the wars he promised to, he worsened them, dropping more bombs, stoking further conflict, undermining the prospects of peace, and massively increasing the rate of civilian deaths.All in on Yemen — U.S. support for the Saudi- and UAE-led intervention in the war in Yemen is one of the most egregious examples of destructive militarist foreign policymaking in years. Not only did Trump do nothing to end U.S. complicity himself, he repeatedly used his veto power to override bipartisan majorities in Congress that tried to stop U.S. military involvement and block the flow of arms to the conflict....
There is nothing original in this post. It is simply a copy and paste from responsiblestatecraft.org. lol. Circulation of about 12?
I guess you think red highlighting to excerpts from an unknown, little read website makes your point any stronger. Au contraire.
Not one specific. Merely platitudes and generalizations.The fact is that when Trump was President, Russian troops stayed within their borders, there were no Hamas massacres and terrorism in the middle east, the southern border was not out of control, Also Trump was the midwife to the Abraham Accords.
The world is unquestionably far more dangerous under Dementia Joe Biden, who is an absolute disaster. -
3 hours ago, floridarob said:
And Trump from Mar a Lago with an ankle bracelet.....
You seem to think this guy is coherent and not a step away from a nursing home as well......TONS and TONS of examples how this guy has lost his marbles, including just about everyone that has worked for him saying he shouldn't be president..... but he's your guy
Donald Trump displays more energy in a day than Dementia Joe Biden does in a month.
As for mental awareness, Dementia Joe Biden barely has the alacrity to summon his aides when it is time to change his diaper.
- forky123, Marc in Calif, Bingo T Dog and 1 other
-
1
-
3
-
17 hours ago, Marc in Calif said:
It's so funny that you get excited -- and even orgasmic -- by reading polls a year before the 2024 election. 🤡
Keep going, if it makes you so enthusiastic. You'll be wiping all the egg of your face AFTER the election. 😁
I'd still rather be ahead by 6 than trailing by 6.
Biden's dementia and other infirmities will continue to worsen in 2024. Will he be campaigning from a Delaware nursing home in 2024? Also, Jill Stein's and Cornell West's campaigns will be getting off the ground next year as the hard left seeks alternatives to Dementia Joe.
Trump's lead will increase exponentially.- Marc in Calif, Bingo T Dog and forky123
-
1
-
2
-
3 minutes ago, EmmetK said:
So if there were no declared Republican candidates at the time, you are comparing apples to oranges.
One poll merely registers enthusiasm for a candidate and the other poll is an actual snapshot of an election comparing the 2 front-runners. This concept is clearly difficult for you to comprehend.And while you're chewing on that, here's another poll that just came out yesterday.... Trump by 4 in a two-way race. Trump by 6 in a four-way race.
And this poll is from Emerson, another firm, like the NY Times, not friendly to Trump.
Happy Thanksgiving.
Next year at this time, we will be referring to Donald John Trump as President-Elect.Enjoy your turkey while digesting that.
Touche!
-
7 hours ago, Marc in Calif said:
There were no Republican candidates in the poll at that time. So the people who the New York Times polled at the time changed their minds -- perhaps many times before the 2012 election
That's what polls do: they track opinion at only the time when they are adminstered.
Your exquisite trust in any current poll is amusing. And it leads you to make foolish statements.
But I hope you keep believing in Drumpf and his chances to win another election. The grief you experience will be all the more devastating when it comes! And it will... because voters' opinions change. ⌛
So if there were no declared Republican candidates at the time, you are comparing apples to oranges.
One poll merely registers enthusiasm for a candidate and the other poll is an actual snapshot of an election comparing the 2 front-runners. This concept is clearly difficult for you to comprehend.And while you're chewing on that, here's another poll that just came out yesterday.... Trump by 4 in a two-way race. Trump by 6 in a four-way race.
And this poll is from Emerson, another firm, like the NY Times, not friendly to Trump.
Touche!
-
38 minutes ago, Marc in Calif said:
Yes, the left-wing New York Times poll from September 2011 predicted that left-wing President Barack Obama's chances for re-election had dropped significantly:
President Obama’s support is eroding among elements of his base, and a yearlong effort to recapture the political center has failed to attract independent voters, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, leaving him vulnerable at a moment when pessimism over the country’s direction is greater than at any other time since he took office.You're very smart to trust New York Times polls. They are ALWAYS predictive of election results in the year preceding a presidential election. 🤡🤡🤡
The link you provided has a firewall so it cannot be seen. However, based on the headline, it did not say that Obama was trailing, and trailing outside of the polls margin of error like the current NYTimes/Siena poll states. It merely says his support is eroding. HUGE difference between the two.
Trump Says All Immigrants Are "Poisoning The Blood" of the US.
in Politics
Posted
Your own link provided shows that Trump was talking about illegals. You either didn't bother reading your own link, or as we now know, YOU LIED.
Don't try to dig out of the hole you dug for yourself. It's too deep.... especially with Alternet.com, whose readership is in double digits.
You lied, lied again, and then lied a third time. You have ZERO crdibility.