|
Webster10
Up like Trump



Registered: 12/03/13
Posts: 9,966
Loc: Strawberry Fields
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: PatrickKn]
#23915560 - 12/11/16 08:41 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
PatrickKn said: Not at all, I've gambled more on less and those bets were nearly two years old by the time election day rolled around.
Any saltiness is from some conservatively minded members not having genuine outrage at some things the new administration is doing or setting up for the sole purpose of siding with it as a movement, despite being against those things just a few months ago. But I guess it's better than the liburulz destroying everything even if Trump has changed track on most of the big things he campaigned on in the course of 1 month.
The dishonest media vehemently reported about how Hillary was going to win and that Trump had no chance. They were wrong then, so why are you believing them now? Trump isn't even in office yet, and so far he's actually held up several campaign promises. Have you considered that Trump WILL actually keep his promises, and that the dishonest media is still being dishonest, and will be WRONG again? Consider it.
--------------------
|
Webster10
Up like Trump



Registered: 12/03/13
Posts: 9,966
Loc: Strawberry Fields
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: PatrickKn]
#23915563 - 12/11/16 08:44 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: I'm pretty sure Trump thinks Ben Carson is qualified to be secretary of Housing and Urban Development because he's black.
Quote:
PatrickKn said: He wasn't pro-tobacco enough to get the Surgeon General spot.

--------------------
|
PatrickKn


Registered: 07/10/11
Posts: 20,564
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: Webster10] 3
#23915596 - 12/11/16 08:55 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Webster10 said:
Quote:
PatrickKn said: Not at all, I've gambled more on less and those bets were nearly two years old by the time election day rolled around.
Any saltiness is from some conservatively minded members not having genuine outrage at some things the new administration is doing or setting up for the sole purpose of siding with it as a movement, despite being against those things just a few months ago. But I guess it's better than the liburulz destroying everything even if Trump has changed track on most of the big things he campaigned on in the course of 1 month.
The dishonest media vehemently reported about how Hillary was going to win and that Trump had no chance. They were wrong then, so why are you believing them now? Trump isn't even in office yet, and so far he's actually held up several campaign promises. Have you considered that Trump WILL actually keep his promises, and that the dishonest media is still being dishonest, and will be WRONG again? Consider it.
I'm only going off his own words, and his own appointments. It's straight from the horses mouth so to speak.
Unless you'll have me believe the dishonest media is lying about everything including his appointments, his reversal on his stances regarding assigning a special prosecutor for Clinton, his admission that there will be some fence instead of all wall like he was touting before hand (like, no shit - but he waited till the election was done to change tack). I think the biggest laugh is the bank executives getting political appointments. Blatant.
For the record though, there are some things I've enjoyed that he's had reversals on. Breath of fresh air perhaps? Moments of clarity for the dude after campaigning for months on end? Who knows. I can't genuinely take much he says at face value though. He goes with the flow and mimics popular opinion (the popular opinion of his followers) more than he forms hard line stances. That can be a good thing, but not if every one of his supporters gives him a free check to do whatever. Criticism is the strongest deterrent for bad policy for a President Trump.
Everyone says, "Just give him a chance". I am. More of a chance than I was granting Clinton. I'm waiting for him to prove that he's not a corporate meat puppet like so many others, and he's not doing a very good job of proving that just yet.
|
Webster10
Up like Trump



Registered: 12/03/13
Posts: 9,966
Loc: Strawberry Fields
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: PatrickKn]
#23915689 - 12/11/16 09:24 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
PatrickKn said:
Quote:
Webster10 said:
Quote:
PatrickKn said: Not at all, I've gambled more on less and those bets were nearly two years old by the time election day rolled around.
Any saltiness is from some conservatively minded members not having genuine outrage at some things the new administration is doing or setting up for the sole purpose of siding with it as a movement, despite being against those things just a few months ago. But I guess it's better than the liburulz destroying everything even if Trump has changed track on most of the big things he campaigned on in the course of 1 month.
The dishonest media vehemently reported about how Hillary was going to win and that Trump had no chance. They were wrong then, so why are you believing them now? Trump isn't even in office yet, and so far he's actually held up several campaign promises. Have you considered that Trump WILL actually keep his promises, and that the dishonest media is still being dishonest, and will be WRONG again? Consider it.
I'm only going off his own words, and his own appointments. It's straight from the horses mouth so to speak.
Unless you'll have me believe the dishonest media is lying about everything including his appointments, his reversal on his stances regarding assigning a special prosecutor for Clinton, his admission that there will be some fence instead of all wall like he was touting before hand (like, no shit - but he waited till the election was done to change tack). I think the biggest laugh is the bank executives getting political appointments. Blatant.
For the record though, there are some things I've enjoyed that he's had reversals on. Breath of fresh air perhaps? Moments of clarity for the dude after campaigning for months on end? Who knows. I can't genuinely take much he says at face value though. He goes with the flow and mimics popular opinion (the popular opinion of his followers) more than he forms hard line stances. That can be a good thing, but not if every one of his supporters gives him a free check to do whatever. Criticism is the strongest deterrent for bad policy for a President Trump.
Everyone says, "Just give him a chance". I am. More of a chance than I was granting Clinton. I'm waiting for him to prove that he's not a corporate meat puppet like so many others, and he's not doing a very good job of proving that just yet.
Look, obviously you should believe the news about his appointments and such, but what you're blindly believing is the analysis about his picks that the dishonest media is spewing out. Yes Trump is appointing people who were in high ranking jobs in the private sector. He is also making them sign a non-lobbying pledge. So really, the fact is that just because Trump appointed some Exxon Mobile fat cat to be SoS doesn't mean that "corporate greed has taken over and the banks control the government." It means that Trump is picking people that are qualified, have experience in being an executive and is going to control them by being a strong leader. Like it or not, Trump's administration isn't going to be big on dissent. You can bet that anyone who Trump appoints is going to be loyal as hell to him and follow his orders. So just because these appointees have history is business doesn't mean that they're going to ransack the government and that Trump is a sellout. That's just a ridiculous assertion. It means that he's picking competent leaders that will be able to follow orders effectively.
Also, to actually be aware of the real state of affairs, you have to realize that Trump likes to play the media and have them make fools of themselves. If you didn't know anything about the way Trump operates, you might've actually thought that Romney was a potential pick for SoS. He never was. Trump brought that piece of shit in just so he could hear him beg, have the retarded MSM report on it, then kick Romney to the curb and make the MSM look stupid for even reporting on it. That's just one example.
Another example is the hillary special prosecutor bait. Yes, he conceded he won't appoint a SPECIAL prosecutor, but he appointed SESSIONS as his AG. You better believe that if any incriminating evidence is found(it will be), that Sessions is going to act on it. So what's the end result? The media reports that Trump WONT appoint a special prosecutor, but he appoints an AG that is likely to prosecute hillary anyways. How dumb would the media look if hillary was charged by the trump administration after mockingly reporting that trump flip flopped on the special prosecutor?
See a pattern? Same goes for the wall. Patrick, I like you, but get a clue.
--------------------
Edited by Webster10 (12/11/16 09:25 AM)
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: koods]
#23915730 - 12/11/16 09:38 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
philopian_tube said:
Quote:
koods said: I'm pretty sure Trump thinks Ben Carson is qualified to be secretary of Housing and Urban Development because he's black.
Only you would think that because you are racist.
Come on, the only African American in the cabinet is going to be HUD secretary, despite having absolutely no qualifications for the job besides growing up in a ghetto?

well, arent you the racist one. do you believe that blacks shouldnt have jobs now?
let me ask for a moment, what exactly are the qualifications for being the HUD secretary and why havent you been bashing the Obama picks since the current secretary is simply a career politician. does that make him qualified for the job?
|
Webster10
Up like Trump



Registered: 12/03/13
Posts: 9,966
Loc: Strawberry Fields
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: Prisoner#1]
#23915734 - 12/11/16 09:39 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Career politicians, usually, are inherently LESS qualified for any job whatsoever.
--------------------
|
SoloTrip
Help Ever, Hurt Never



Registered: 12/30/14
Posts: 1,059
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: PatrickKn]
#23915741 - 12/11/16 09:41 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Just going on a little rant here,, I'd like to imagine myself some sort of prophet but the truth is that us Bernie Sanders people were all basically saying the same thing and all of our predictions have come true, including that Hillary could get snagged up by legal issues (YES some of us could foresee Comey's letter, or something like it), and that we would receive the blame for Trump's victory and not the people who didn't vote or those that voted for Trump thereby admitting to doing nothing wrong, and learning nothing! The lesson to be learned of course, is that YOU CANNOT WIN WITHOUT US Progressives and Millenials.
I feel if Hillary Clinton had chosen Bernie Sanders as her running mate, then she would be the President elect right now but instead she expressed her contempt for us who opposed her by selecting Tim Kaine as her running mate and her decision to rehire DW Shultz who recall was replaced by the equally corrupt and shameless Donna Brazile.
Instead of attempting to unify the party, Hillary thought she could win without us, by courting conservatives who ultimately came home for Trump. I'm not as heartbroken about it as you might imagine. See we Berners have one more prediction that has yet to come true! We said the next President would be so bad that they would likely be a four year President followed by eight years of the other party.
--------------------
Edited by SoloTrip (12/11/16 09:42 AM)
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: Webster10]
#23915754 - 12/11/16 09:43 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Webster10 said: Career politicians, usually, are inherently LESS qualified for any job whatsoever.
but what exactly are the qualifications for being the HUD secretary, I mean koods keeps telling us that carson is unqualified, what exactly are the qualifications?
|
Webster10
Up like Trump



Registered: 12/03/13
Posts: 9,966
Loc: Strawberry Fields
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: SoloTrip]
#23915759 - 12/11/16 09:44 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
feel if Hillary Clinton had chosen Bernie Sanders as her running mate, then she would be the President elect right now but instead she expressed her contempt for us who opposed her by selecting Tim Kaine as her running mate and her decision to rehire DW Shultz who recall was replaced by the equally corrupt and shameless Donna Brazile.
Yes, the DNC is shamelessly corrupt. And you're right about how the democrats screwed over progressives and by extension ended up screwing themselves.
Just saying though, Hillary HAD to pick Tim Kaine. He was the DNC chair before he stepped down and recommended Hillary's inside horse, DWS for the job. He even was bragging about being the VP select as early as 2015. That's what happens when you make corrupt back door deals
--------------------
|
twighead
mͯó



Registered: 08/27/08
Posts: 29,560
Loc: Glenn Gould's Fuck Windmill
Last seen: 3 hours, 41 minutes
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: Webster10]
#23915766 - 12/11/16 09:46 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Sugar cane Tim they call him "Tim on a whim" or "The back door blood-body"
|
Webster10
Up like Trump



Registered: 12/03/13
Posts: 9,966
Loc: Strawberry Fields
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: Prisoner#1]
#23915772 - 12/11/16 09:47 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Webster10 said: Career politicians, usually, are inherently LESS qualified for any job whatsoever.
but what exactly are the qualifications for being the HUD secretary, I mean koods keeps telling us that carson is unqualified, what exactly are the qualifications?
I believe that Koods is saying that Carson is unqualified because he lacks what I'm going to start calling, "The Hillary Factor."
The Hillary Factor can be summed as being completely an utterly incompetent, a career politician and a democratic stooge. Koods thinks that this credential is required for every government official.
--------------------
|
imachavel
I loved and lost but I loved-ftw



Registered: 06/06/07
Posts: 31,375
Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 7 hours, 30 minutes
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: Webster10]
#23915837 - 12/11/16 10:05 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Webster10 said:
Quote:
PatrickKn said:
Quote:
Webster10 said:
Quote:
PatrickKn said: Not at all, I've gambled more on less and those bets were nearly two years old by the time election day rolled around.
Any saltiness is from some conservatively minded members not having genuine outrage at some things the new administration is doing or setting up for the sole purpose of siding with it as a movement, despite being against those things just a few months ago. But I guess it's better than the liburulz destroying everything even if Trump has changed track on most of the big things he campaigned on in the course of 1 month.
The dishonest media vehemently reported about how Hillary was going to win and that Trump had no chance. They were wrong then, so why are you believing them now? Trump isn't even in office yet, and so far he's actually held up several campaign promises. Have you considered that Trump WILL actually keep his promises, and that the dishonest media is still being dishonest, and will be WRONG again? Consider it.
I'm only going off his own words, and his own appointments. It's straight from the horses mouth so to speak.
Unless you'll have me believe the dishonest media is lying about everything including his appointments, his reversal on his stances regarding assigning a special prosecutor for Clinton, his admission that there will be some fence instead of all wall like he was touting before hand (like, no shit - but he waited till the election was done to change tack). I think the biggest laugh is the bank executives getting political appointments. Blatant.
For the record though, there are some things I've enjoyed that he's had reversals on. Breath of fresh air perhaps? Moments of clarity for the dude after campaigning for months on end? Who knows. I can't genuinely take much he says at face value though. He goes with the flow and mimics popular opinion (the popular opinion of his followers) more than he forms hard line stances. That can be a good thing, but not if every one of his supporters gives him a free check to do whatever. Criticism is the strongest deterrent for bad policy for a President Trump.
Everyone says, "Just give him a chance". I am. More of a chance than I was granting Clinton. I'm waiting for him to prove that he's not a corporate meat puppet like so many others, and he's not doing a very good job of proving that just yet.
Look, obviously you should believe the news about his appointments and such, but what you're blindly believing is the analysis about his picks that the dishonest media is spewing out. Yes Trump is appointing people who were in high ranking jobs in the private sector. He is also making them sign a non-lobbying pledge. So really, the fact is that just because Trump appointed some Exxon Mobile fat cat to be SoS doesn't mean that "corporate greed has taken over and the banks control the government." It means that Trump is picking people that are qualified, have experience in being an executive and is going to control them by being a strong leader. Like it or not, Trump's administration isn't going to be big on dissent. You can bet that anyone who Trump appoints is going to be loyal as hell to him and follow his orders. So just because these appointees have history is business doesn't mean that they're going to ransack the government and that Trump is a sellout. That's just a ridiculous assertion. It means that he's picking competent leaders that will be able to follow orders effectively.
Also, to actually be aware of the real state of affairs, you have to realize that Trump likes to play the media and have them make fools of themselves. If you didn't know anything about the way Trump operates, you might've actually thought that Romney was a potential pick for SoS. He never was. Trump brought that piece of shit in just so he could hear him beg, have the retarded MSM report on it, then kick Romney to the curb and make the MSM look stupid for even reporting on it. That's just one example.
Another example is the hillary special prosecutor bait. Yes, he conceded he won't appoint a SPECIAL prosecutor, but he appointed SESSIONS as his AG. You better believe that if any incriminating evidence is found(it will be), that Sessions is going to act on it. So what's the end result? The media reports that Trump WONT appoint a special prosecutor, but he appoints an AG that is likely to prosecute hillary anyways. How dumb would the media look if hillary was charged by the trump administration after mockingly reporting that trump flip flopped on the special prosecutor?
See a pattern? Same goes for the wall. Patrick, I like you, but get a clue.
The guy is scary as shit. They all are that's true but this guy especially chills me with images of war and tank shells screaming across the empty air and blowing to pieces the ground beneath me while my lungs rupture from the pressure of the blast if nothing else. I am just seeing a war planet when I close my eyes.
He just fucks with me a little more then any level I've experienced recently from any other person who's been president in my life. I hope I'm wrong about him but I just feel like he's another George Bush all over again but with fancier words. I guess they are all the same though. They are all puppets for a military state. He is just the next fill in.
I don't see the level of peace going up and the level of war going down any time soon though. Plus our own country is still fucked to hell with shit wages, but the economy is still pretty stable though. We aren't having a job problem like we had in 2008 but man wages still suck. Obama didn't help with that too much either. He said congress kept blocking him to raise it but you think he pushed really hard for it? I don't feel the effort was really there. He was putting too much effort on war.
--------------------
I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
|
Webster10
Up like Trump



Registered: 12/03/13
Posts: 9,966
Loc: Strawberry Fields
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: imachavel]
#23915860 - 12/11/16 10:14 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
We avoided Hillary who literally would have been the biggest proponent of the military state to date. We dodged a bullet, don't believe what the MSM is feeding you.
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,066
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 3 hours, 56 minutes
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: Webster10]
#23915874 - 12/11/16 10:20 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Webster is hella triggered this morning
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Webster10
Up like Trump



Registered: 12/03/13
Posts: 9,966
Loc: Strawberry Fields
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: koods]
#23915897 - 12/11/16 10:28 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Hi, Koods. Are you ready for another day of lying, crying, screaming, sulking and denial?
--------------------
|
Webster10
Up like Trump



Registered: 12/03/13
Posts: 9,966
Loc: Strawberry Fields
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: koods] 1
#23915913 - 12/11/16 10:34 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By 202,340 Votes [Re: Webster10] 2
#23916108 - 12/11/16 11:56 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By Over 2.5 Million Votes [Re: Prisoner#1]
#23916219 - 12/11/16 12:45 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
koods said: Why Putin hates Hillary Behind the allegations of a Russian hack of the DNC is the Kremlin leader's fury at Clinton for challenging the fairness of Russian elections.
politico. that's like brietbart for 'progressive' retards
You're a bubblehead
lol. I didnt post a politico article
To be fair, politico or no it provides an interesting insight. Now under the impression that the Clinton campaign are trying to blame Russia because they can't get over Hillary being blamed by Putin. It's not about whether Russia did anything or not, but pettiness at the international political level.
Quote:
And while Clintonites realize that few Americans typically pay close attention to the state of U.S.-Russia relations, there are two important caveats. One is the presence of large Polish, Ukrainian and other eastern European populations in Rust Belt states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wisconsin, where the Clinton campaign plans to flag stories about Trump and Putin for ethnic media outlets. The other is that voters of all stripes will surely pay attention to serious talk of foreign influence in the election.
Clinton campaign saw an opportunity to try and shift attention away from issues with Hillary that had come up during the primaries, and went for it. It didn't work as they planned, but they are convinced it was such a shoe-in that now they blame Russia for sabotaging it.
This sort of thing is what makes looking back over stories that came up during the election so interesting -- many were written with the sentiment that Hillary would win. My favourite was by Vox, released on the morning of the election day:
Starting at 0:53 "This election is close, it is close enough that something small could have completely thrown it. If Trump were just a bit more self-disciplined; if he hadn't bragged about sexual assault, while wearing a microphone; if Clinton's pneumonia had lingered a little bit longer: America would be ruled by a cruel narcissist with authoritarian ambitions."
Know he is supposed to be talking about Trump, but probably should have waited for Clinton to win before making a claim about the potential ruler that applies just as well to her. 
His closing statement about the true threat to Republics was interesting though.
|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By Over 2.5 Million Votes [Re: Shroomism] 1
#23916235 - 12/11/16 12:52 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shroomism said: There must be yang with yin, it's a law of the universe
This was my view making peace with the Trump presidency. As a Canadian, view Trump as a counter-balance to Trudeau -- where Trudeau and Clinton got along fine, he is likely to feel threatened by the Trump presidency. It will keep our government on it's toes, or we'll swing back to a Conservative majority in a few years once the party has finished it's new leadership decision.
Clinton was likely better for our economy in terms of trade, but Trump will potentially keep our ruling party from becoming complacent.
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: Hillary Clinton Won The Popular Vote By Over 2.5 Million Votes [Re: Tantrika]
#23916248 - 12/11/16 01:00 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
politico. that's like brietbart for 'progressive' retards
so where can we find your owned and operated news network...so we can, you know, get the right news?
Quote:
SweetLeafSamadhi said:
Quote:
Shroomism said: There must be yang with yin, it's a law of the universe
This was my view making peace with the Trump presidency. As a Canadian, view Trump as a counter-balance to Trudeau -- where Trudeau and Clinton got along fine, he is likely to feel threatened by the Trump presidency. It will keep our government on it's toes, or we'll swing back to a Conservative majority in a few years once the party has finished it's new leadership decision.
Clinton was likely better for our economy in terms of trade, but Trump will potentially keep our ruling party from becoming complacent.
indeed.
Quote:
Webster10 said: We avoided Hillary who literally would have been the biggest proponent of the military state to date. We dodged a bullet, don't believe what the MSM is feeding you.
true.
i'd say, question everything, especially if you're a believer in the installation of tyrants in by the Illuminati, or 'powers foreign and domestic', and the like, to "control the masses" a la 1984 style.
Quote:
Webster10 said: Career politicians, usually, are inherently LESS qualified for any job whatsoever.
*throws up hands*
but you're giving them all a pass, because they signed a non-lobbying agreement. Trump couldn't POSSIBLY be playing people like YOURSELF, with his methods? nah. it can't possibly be...you're his fan.
PS: how are those agreements stipulated?
does this end lobbying in Washington, overall, in general? or just the lobbying of people in his cabinet, until....? when?
Edited by akira_akuma (12/11/16 01:12 PM)
|
|