*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[MadMojoMonkey]

So it's not just that the police are enforcing racist laws, now.
It's that the modern day police grew out of a history of slave catchers.



Then a bunch of laws written to oppress voters and black communities were passed.

Then those police were militarized.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Oh shit, wuf's gonna go balistic.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/05/enter...rnd/index.html

I'm gonna start to regret all those jokes I made about this.

[oskar]

I'd be surprised if he breaks 1%.
If he doesn't drop out the second the first polls come in, I think he's more likely to syphon votes from Trump than Biden. I wouldn't be too worried.

If there ever was a time for a 3rd party to break 5% it would be now, but Kanye is not the guy.

[Poopadoop]

Lol Kanye.

Then again I also said lol Trump.

So he'll probably win.

[CoccoBill]

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a9606081.html

[Poopadoop]

Not really MAGA news, but close enough.

https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/sta...33376397008896

[Poopadoop]

There've been at least three major Trump scandals in the last little while that should disqualify him from office: Commuting the sentence of Roger Stone, doing nothing about Putin's bounty on US soldiers, and not speaking to Fauci since early June.

And I'm probably forgetting a few in there somewhere.

And yet, nothing from Oskar about any of them.

I think this is empirical proof that we have all become desensitized.

[oskar]

I think this is empirical proof that we have all become desensitized.

Yup. I read the other day that his aides ordered big trucks to the White House lawn to cheer him up, and I just thought: of course that's true! I'm not even going to fact check that. That is so stupid, it has to be true.

I'm not too invested in Trumps trajectory right now because at this point a Biden victory seems unavoidable. I am surprised how much Biden leads. Maybe the "Biden is the most electable"-people saw something I didn't. Apparently when americans say: we want healthcare, affordable housing and a planet that's not on fire, and Biden's like: "no", they're like: "Fuck my shit up, daddy!"

I don't get it, but I don't have to. I'm not one to kink shame.

[Poopadoop]

Yup. I read the other day that his aides ordered big trucks to the White House lawn to cheer him up, and I just thought: of course that's true! I'm not even going to fact check that. That is so stupid, it has to be true.

I'm not too invested in Trumps trajectory right now because at this point a Biden victory seems unavoidable. I am surprised how much Biden leads. Maybe the "Biden is the most electable"-people saw something I didn't. Apparently when americans say: we want healthcare, affordable housing and a planet that's not on fire, and Biden's like: "no", they're like: "Fuck my shit up, daddy!"

I don't get it, but I don't have to. I'm not one to kink shame.

I think this is going to be another 2016 'lesser of two evils' election. Only this time, no-one can pretend that Trump will change (except maybe to become even worse) if he's elected. So, the only voters left are the MAGA-tards and racists for whom facts don't matter.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I shouldn't laugh, but this is the juiciest irony I've seen in days.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...19-coronavirus

[Poopadoop]

I shouldn't laugh, but this is the juiciest irony I've seen in days.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...19-coronavirus

Build that wall! Build that wall!

[oskar]

I can't believe I haven't seen a single reporter ask Trump questions in the way he answers them to expose his stupidity. Like "Do you think you'll do good in regards to trade? Maybe very good in the next very short time?" Or "China has done very badly, do you think they'll have to do better? Maybe much better even?"

[Poopadoop]

I can't believe I haven't seen a single reporter ask Trump questions in the way he answers them to expose his stupidity. Like "Do you think you'll do good in regards to trade? Maybe very good in the next very short time?" Or "China has done very badly, do you think they'll have to do better? Maybe much better even?"

I always find the reporters who ask the POTUS questions strangely deferential. It's not just that they rarely ask him a hard question, it's that whenever they do and he invariably answers with some word salad bullshit, they don't press him but just move on.

I mean, if it were a UK leader acting like him, an interviewer would be like "C'mon mate, wtf are you on about?" pretty much every time.

Or, they could just have him stand up in the House and answer questions like they do here.

[Poopadoop]

The Fauch isn't taking any shit from the WH.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...campaign=share

[OngBonga]

It's nearly impossible to read criticism of Trump without it being massively biased. It's very clear that article is written by someone who opposes Trump. Journalism is dead.

[Poopadoop]

It's nearly impossible to read criticism of Trump without it being massively biased. It's very clear that article is written by someone who opposes Trump. Journalism is dead.

If you're Fauci and the WH is pissing on your reputation, do you talk to a sympathetic media outlet like the Atlantic, or to Fox News who will just spin your defense against you?

I agree all media is biased. Still seems possible to just look at the article and pick out what Fauci says and ignore the spin if you want.

[OngBonga]

"All media is biased".

Indeed, which is why journalism is dead. A talented journalist is capable of finding non-biased language to report on an event. Maybe 20 years ago, such journalists worked for leading agencies. Now, talented journalists are pushed to the "fringe" and have to publish their own blogs.

[Poopadoop]

Now, talented journalists are pushed to the "fringe" and have to publish their own blogs.

...because if you have talent you therefore are unbiased.

Face it, everyone is biased. It's unavoidable.

Also I think Coco makes a good point that AP and Reuters are pretty neutral. There's bias and then there's BIAS.

[OngBonga]

...because if you have talent you therefore are unbiased.

Face it, everyone is biased. It's unavoidable.

Also I think Coco makes a good point that AP and Reuters are pretty neutral. There's bias and then there's BIAS.

Of course everyone has bias. The point about "talented journalists" is that such journalists can put aside their natural bias and report on the facts.

Reuters is probably the least biased agency out there, yet they are still biased in the editing, if not the journalist's language.

[CoccoBill]

What are some biased news articles from AP or Reuters?

[OngBonga]

Reuters is flagging up as "least biased" according to mediabiasfactcheck.com, while AP gets good reviews too. With that said, I just checked out the Reuters home page and the leading story is "Russia trying to steal COVID-19 vaccine data, say UK, U.S. and Canada", and goes on to publish British propaganda like the following quote... “While others pursue their selfish interests with reckless behaviour, the UK and its allies are getting on with the hard work of finding a vaccine and protecting global health”.

There is no balance here, there's no suggestion that the UK, USA and Canada are trying to keep their research from nations like Russia in order to protect profit from such vaccines. The fact Russia are claimed to be trying to "steal" such information shows we're not working with them on a vaccine. This is contrary to earlier statements from the UK which imply the world should work together to defeat covid19.

It's garbage propaganda. However, they are noteworthy because they are very careful with their language, their bias is much more subtle.

[Poopadoop]

Reuters is flagging up as "least biased" according to mediabiasfactcheck.com, while AP gets good reviews too. With that said, I just checked out the Reuters home page and the leading story is "Russia trying to steal COVID-19 vaccine data, say UK, U.S. and Canada", and goes on to publish British propaganda like the following quote... “While others pursue their selfish interests with reckless behaviour, the UK and its allies are getting on with the hard work of finding a vaccine and protecting global health”.

There is no balance here, there's no suggestion that the UK, USA and Canada are trying to keep their research from nations like Russia in order to protect profit from such vaccines. The fact Russia are claimed to be trying to "steal" such information shows we're not working with them on a vaccine. This is contrary to earlier statements from the UK which imply the world should work together to defeat covid19.

It's garbage propaganda. However, they are noteworthy because they are very careful with their language, their bias is much more subtle.

I don't see a problem with this reporting as you describe it. The critical thinker sees this as "Russia trying to steal data, say x, y, z." Then they quote what you describe as propaganda from the UK gov't, which may or may not be propaganda. It's not their job to identify propaganda, it's their job to report what people say. And unless they have evidence that what they say is demonstrably untrue, they're doing their job in reporting it.

Quick Q: Do they also describe Russia's denial of the allegations? And if so, why do you assume it's a biased report?

Edit: Yeah, there you go.

Russian news agency RIA cited spokesman Dmitry Peskov as saying the Kremlin rejected London’s allegations, which he said were not backed by proper evidence.

So, their story is basically 'these countries accused another country of X, and the accused country denied it.' That's about as objective a reporting of facts as you can get.

Now compare that to the DM, Fox, or MSNBC.

[OngBonga]

I certainly agree Reuters is significantly less biased than Fox or CNN, and have already said I believe they're likely the least biased agency out there. But you know what I think when I see "omg Russia" in the media. They're the bogey man that the UK govt always refer to when they need a distraction. There are no MSM agencies based in the UK or USA that apply critical thinking when it comes to Russia, and when a supposed unbiased agency prints this stuff, it gives it more credit than when the Daily Mail do so. So yes, I do believe it is their job to identify propaganda, at least if they wish to remain unbiased.

And yes, they print Russia's denial, with a quick one liner at the end.

[CoccoBill]

Ong you seem to be thinking any news media accusing Russia of anything is biased. Do you personally know many Russians or have you ever been there? Do you know how they see themselves and the rest of the world, what Russian media is like and how things operate there? Do you know Putin's history? Do you know who/what APT29 is, who finances them and what they have been caught doing in the past?

While I'm sure some accusations against Russia in the media are false or exaggerated, I don't think you're fully aware of what's going on there.

[OngBonga]

Ong you seem to be thinking any news media accusing Russia of anything is biased. Do you personally know many Russians or have you ever been there? Do you know how they see themselves and the rest of the world, what Russian media is like and how things operate there? Do you know Putin's history? Do you know who/what APT29 is, who finances them and what they have been caught doing in the past?

While I'm sure some accusations against Russia in the media are false or exaggerated, I don't think you're fully aware of what's going on there.

I think all geopolitical news is biased, not just when it comes to Russia.

This is all kind of irrelevant. I'm not pretending Russia are good guys. I just see through the bullshit. Russia is the go-to bogey man when the UK govt want to drum up jingoistic support. And it suits Russia just fine, because it helps them to drum up jingoistic support too. In turn, this means public support for foreign policy and military strategy & budgets. If the UK didn't have such a powerful "enemy", we wouldn't need to spend trillions on nuclear weapons. It's all business to the military industry.

Of course I'm not fully aware of what's going on there, and I'm the first to admit I might be wrong. I'm just highly skeptical when I read geopolitical propaganda.

[oskar]

MSM is massively understating how problematic this is. You cannot let this happen. These are private security forces with no oversight, whose authority is being respected. This cannot be tolerated. If you live in the US and you like having human rights you should be out on the street until this is fixed.
Right now they are testing the waters with catch and release, but you don't want these guys on the ground in November when the only one they're accountable to is Donald Trump.

[OngBonga]

MSM is massively understating how problematic this is. You cannot let this happen. These are private security forces with no oversight, whose authority is being respected. This cannot be tolerated. If you live in the US and you like having human rights you should be out on the street until this is fixed.
Right now they are testing the waters with catch and release, but you don't want these guys on the ground in November when the only one they're accountable to is Donald Trump.

Private? I heard "federal troops".

Don't get me wrong, anonymous troops on the street is definitely not something we should be cheerleading, but from what I can gather from that report, they are employed by the government, which makes them the opposite of "private security forces".

[OngBonga]

I guess you mean "Trump's private security" rather than "private sector security".

When I read "Private security" I think of companies like G4S, private companies operating for profit. We definitely do not want to see these guys on the streets, dealing with civil unrest, because they have a vested interest in disorder continuing. But we also don't want to see troops on the street that only answer to the President, especially badgeless. Any security actively employed by the government or anyone else for that matter need to be indentifiable and subject to law.

[oskar]

It is being reported that they are federal officers but handling protests should not be in federal jurisdiction. They are not identifying themselves, aren't wearing any labels and drive in unmarked civilian SUV's. They are arresting people without a statement, and driving them away in rental vans. What they are doing could be done by just about anyone who owns a weapon and camouflage pants.

At the very least tolerating this sets the precedent that:
Anyone can be arrested for any reason.
The command of anyone dressed up like military has to be followed.

I think most people will agree that this is problematic. I think it's a lot more than that. This is the time you should start to panic if you live in the US. I think it's something that needs to be fought back immediately. You cannot allow fellow citizens to be arrested by unidentifiable and therefore unaccountable forces.

[OngBonga]

https://twitter.com/andreinawie/stat...18869902413824

This is London, last night, because some criminal got killed by a cop a couple of months ago in USA. This is the consequences of identity politics.

[Poopadoop]

https://twitter.com/andreinawie/stat...18869902413824

This is London, last night, because some criminal got killed by a cop a couple of months ago in USA. This is the consequences of identity politics.

Do you think black people might have a gripe with how the police operate here as well?

[oskar]

Do you think black people might have a gripe with how the police operate here as well?

No, couldn't be.

[Poopadoop]

No, couldn't be.

Well, speak of the Devil.

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/sta...54459203960837

[OngBonga]

I pretty much agree with you. It's very much problematic. But is anarchy any better than fascism? Are you ready for anarchy? I sure as hell am not.

Here's the thing. He's not even subtle. Anonymous troops on the street is so blatantly against the very principles of our democratic freedoms that you can't call it anything other than fascist. If he actually gets voted in, in a fair election, this year, USA are basically voting for fascism and we have to respect that. I guess if that happens the USA have decided it was a choice between right wing fascists, or left wing neofascists. Overt vs covert.

The problem is, protest doesn't make a blind bit of difference, and civil war is either defeat or anarchy. Those are the two options when we talk about "fighting back". I wish I could say anarchy is a better choice than fascism, but I don't have enough faith in humans. If the system collapses, we enter an era of lawlessness, a world that will be orders of magnitude more racist than this world. I think when it comes to the collapse of the system, you have to be careful what you wish for.

Fascism has been with us for decades. They're just getting less subtle about it. They've conditioned us to accept it, and they've done that by keeping us divided and making sure we're cunts to each other. They ensured anarchy is a terrible alternative to their breed of fascism.

[oskar]

Here's the thing. He's not even subtle. Anonymous troops on the street is so blatantly against the very principles of our democratic freedoms that you can't call it anything other than fascist.

I still remember when you defended exactly this when ICE did it to immigrants.

[OngBonga]

Of course, the problem is racism, not that there are black drug dealers from out of town, which incidentally is a problem in my town too. County lines, they call it, when city dealers come to rural towns to sell drugs. They don't tend to be white guys, and they don't tend to be reggae loving Rastas selling weed. They're gnarly bastards selling coke, crack and smack.

This copper is a nob, but he hasn't shown he's racist here. He's shown that he was assigned at that time to look for country lines dealers, and so it stands to reason he's going to pull over a car he's not seen before driven by a black driver. He was so afraid of being accused of racism that he did a fucking great job of looking like a racist twat. But the person he pulled over is going to vaguely match the description of suspects he's assigned to be on the lookout for. Racial profiling is inevitable. The colour of someone's skin forms an important part of that person's description.

Here's a fun exercise... find a case of a Chinese person being racially profiled by the police in the UK. Not so easy to find examples. Then ask why that might be, and consider if the system is racist, or if the problem is cultural.

[oskar]

Nobody's growing coca leaves in your climate, so ldo they come from out of town. Why is that a problem now?

[oskar]

Here's a fun exercise... find a case of a Chinese person being racially profiled by the police in the UK. Not so easy to find examples. Then ask why that might be, and consider if the system is racist, or if the problem is cultural.

There are much better indicators for crime than race. Poverty for one thing. If it's good to profile and harass blacks, then wouldn't it be better to profile and harass people based on income? The police could very easily get that data and they could be at your door by monday. Would that be acceptable?
You are after all a real criminal who does bad scary crime like drugs, aren't you?

[Poopadoop]

Here's a fun exercise... find a case of a Chinese person being racially profiled by the police in the UK. Not so easy to find examples. Then ask why that might be, and consider if the system is racist, or if the problem is cultural.

Cart meets horse.

Perhaps racist attitudes restricting their opportunities in other areas result in more Black British resorting to a life of crime than those of another race.

More generally, when you forcibly import a minority group into your country and treat them like shit for a few centuries, you might have to take some responsibility for how their "culture" goes on to develop within your country.

[Jack Sawyer]

Of course, the problem is racism, not that there are black drug dealers from out of town, which incidentally is a problem in my town too. County lines, they call it, when city dealers come to rural towns to sell drugs. They don't tend to be white guys, and they don't tend to be reggae loving Rastas selling weed. They're gnarly bastards selling coke, crack and smack.

This copper is a nob, but he hasn't shown he's racist here. He's shown that he was assigned at that time to look for country lines dealers, and so it stands to reason he's going to pull over a car he's not seen before driven by a black driver. He was so afraid of being accused of racism that he did a fucking great job of looking like a racist twat. But the person he pulled over is going to vaguely match the description of suspects he's assigned to be on the lookout for. Racial profiling is inevitable. The colour of someone's skin forms an important part of that person's description.

Here's a fun exercise... find a case of a Chinese person being racially profiled by the police in the UK. Not so easy to find examples. Then ask why that might be, and consider if the system is racist, or if the problem is cultural.

So we detain every never-seen-before black driver we see. Totally not racist.

[OngBonga]

I mean, in Jack's world, when a cop is looking for drug dealers who are described as "black", the cops need to pull over white guys to not be racist.

[Poopadoop]

I mean, in Jack's world, when a cop is looking for drug dealers who are described as "black", the cops need to pull over white guys to not be racist.

Being the same race as a criminal is not probably cause to detain someone, sorry.

If the cops pulled you over saying 'we're looking for a white guy, and you're white', I suspect you wouldn't be so blase about it. If it happened once, you might shrug it off, but if it kept happening over and over, you'd get sick of it pretty quickly.

If the cops handcuffed you and put their knee on your neck because some white criminal was in the neighborhood, you'd be fucking livid.

[oskar]

Well hold on, we don't know the full story. What if he sold drugs to Ong?

[OngBonga]

Somewhere, a white guy committed a crime, and the cops will be pulling white people over because they vaguely match the description of the suspect. That's precisely as racist.

[OngBonga]

Being the same race as a criminal is not probably cause to detain someone, sorry.

No, but being the same race, while driving a car a local cop is unfamiliar with, while they are looking for someone described as black and from out of town, that is. And to be clear, we're using the word "detain" loosely here, as in detained at the road side for five minutes. Cop can do that for pretty much any reason, such as checking the tread on your tires. Of course the cop needs more to make an arrest, but getting pulled over is part and parcel of driving a car, just like stopping at traffic lights. It happens to most people, and it's nearly always for a reason. Does it happen to more people than others? Sure. I'm betting black Mercedes get pulled over more often than Nissan Micras. I'm guessing fast cars get pulled over more than slow ones. I'm guessing people of all races get pulled over more often in crime hotspots than in low crime areas. Cops have got a job to do, and racial profiling is inevitably part of that job, because skin colour is an important aspect of a person's description. Is offending racially sensitive people worse than crime?

[Poopadoop]

No, but being the same race, while driving a car a local cop is unfamiliar with, while they are looking for someone described as black and from out of town, that is.

No actually it's not.

And since when does a cop know all the cars in the town he lives in? Fuck off.

And who has ever been described as 'black and from out of town'? Unless this town is made up of less than 100 people, then fuck off again.

And to be clear, we're using the word "detain" loosely here, as in detained at the road side for five minutes. Cop can do that for pretty much any reason, such as checking the tread on your tires.

No actually he has to have a reason. Unless he can see the tread on your tires is low while they're spinning (in which case he isn't really a cop, but Superman), he can't just pull you over to randomly check your vehicle for faults.

The cops in my hometown more than once used this 'random check' bullshit on me, when their real reason was that I was over the legal limit of Native American blood. If I was older and wiser I would have busted their asses for it. And they would have gotten sanctioned. And rightly so.

Of course the cop needs more to make an arrest, but getting pulled over is part and parcel of driving a car, just like stopping at traffic lights. It happens to most people, and it's nearly always for a reason. Does it happen to more people than others? Sure. I'm betting black Mercedes get pulled over more often than Nissan Micras. I'm guessing fast cars get pulled over more than slow ones. I'm guessing people of all races get pulled over more often in crime hotspots than in low crime areas. Cops have got a job to do, and racial profiling is inevitably part of that job, because skin colour is an important aspect of a person's description. Is offending racially sensitive people worse than crime?

All kinds of excuses can be used, but you're infringing on someone's rights if you pull them over based on their skin colour, i.e., without a good reason. A person has a right to go about their business without being repeatedly stopped by police for having a certain shade of skin.

[Jack Sawyer]

No, but being the same race, while driving a car a local cop is unfamiliar with, while they are looking for someone described as black and from out of town, that is. And to be clear, we're using the word "detain" loosely here, as in detained at the road side for five minutes. Cop can do that for pretty much any reason, such as checking the tread on your tires. Of course the cop needs more to make an arrest, but getting pulled over is part and parcel of driving a car, just like stopping at traffic lights. It happens to most people, and it's nearly always for a reason. Does it happen to more people than others? Sure. I'm betting black Mercedes get pulled over more often than Nissan Micras. I'm guessing fast cars get pulled over more than slow ones. I'm guessing people of all races get pulled over more often in crime hotspots than in low crime areas. Cops have got a job to do, and racial profiling is inevitably part of that job, because skin colour is an important aspect of a person's description. Is offending racially sensitive people worse than crime?

Oh lord you are so very wrong ong

With so many excuses I'm starting to think you are getting ready to jump out of the closet

Having to see someone as suspect because "they are black" and "drive a car" is exactly the kind of broad generalization that people are so against ong

[Jack Sawyer]

No, but being the same race, while driving a car a local cop is unfamiliar with, while they are looking for someone described as black and from out of town, that is. And to be clear, we're using the word "detain" loosely here, as in detained at the road side for five minutes. Cop can do that for pretty much any reason, such as checking the tread on your tires. Of course the cop needs more to make an arrest, but getting pulled over is part and parcel of driving a car, just like stopping at traffic lights. It happens to most people, and it's nearly always for a reason. Does it happen to more people than others? Sure. I'm betting black Mercedes get pulled over more often than Nissan Micras. I'm guessing fast cars get pulled over more than slow ones. I'm guessing people of all races get pulled over more often in crime hotspots than in low crime areas. Cops have got a job to do, and racial profiling is inevitably part of that job, because skin colour is an important aspect of a person's description. Is offending racially sensitive people worse than crime?

Racial or ethnic profiling is the act of suspecting or targeting a person on the basis of assumed characteristics or behavior of a racial or ethnic group, rather than on individual suspicion.[1][2] Racial profiling, however, is not limited only to an individual's ethnicity or race, but can also be based on the individual's religion, or national origin.[

Are you sure that racial profiling is inevitably part of the job that cops have to do?

[OngBonga]

How long before someone is kicking up a stink because a cop misgendered it?

"Hello sir, I pulled you over as we're looking for a man who matches your description."
"How dare you, I am a woman."
"I'm sorry Madam, it's just the man we're looking for also has a beard."

I mean, what's actually the difference between the cops pulling over a man because the suspect is male, or the cops pulling over a black person because the suspect is black?

[Poopadoop]

Let's ignore the 'out of town' bit because obviously that's bullshit.

Is the cop allowed to pull over every black person he sees to find the guilty party? For how many weeks?

Is he thinking he's going to identify the guilty party by looking deeply into his eyes? Is the idea that simply being pulled over will make the criminal confess? Other than harassing black people, what does pulling them all over accomplish?

You have to have more than a vague description and a coincidence in time and place to start accosting people and interrupting their day. Like a license plate number, or some identifying feature like a scar. What if the criminal was white? Would the cop then be allowed to hold up traffic to stop all the white people he sees driving around? I guarantee you if they did that there'd be a huge stink about it.

[oskar]

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1...395816960?s=20
2nd video in the thread.

Chris Wallace: "I took the [cognitive] test too, when I heard you passed it. It's not the hardest test. It shows a picture and it says, 'what's that,' and it's an elephant."


This is the test he's bragging about:



I'm dead.

[Poopadoop]

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1...395816960?s=20


This is the test he's bragging about:

I'd laugh if it turned out he paid someone else to take it, like with his SATs.

[Poopadoop]

Oh yeah, this is going to be a great campaign.

[Poopadoop]

Meanwhile in Trump's province of cuckoo land:

https://twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1284860680773017600

Trump to Wallace: "The last five questions were very hard. I'll bet you couldn't even answer the last five questions."

The last five questions were to name the current:
1. Date.
2. Month.
3. Year.
4. Place.
5. City.

I'll bet he could.

[oskar]

Oh yeah, this is going to be a great campaign.

Nobody saw it coming

[Poopadoop]

Amazing how well the laugh track suits this.

[Poopadoop]

If this kind of interview keeps going out on Fox News, he's fucked. Wallace just nails him again and again.

[oskar]

The whole thing is already up on FOX's YT channel. It's magic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6XdpDOH1JA
The slow roll on the retard proof test in split screen while Trump is bragging about how tough it is... they couldn't have made him look more stupid.

Chris Wallace was tougher on Trump than CNN or MSNBC ever were with a democratic candidate... or anyone has ever been on Trump for that matter. The CBS interview last week was an embarrassment.
This interview killed him. This is a 40 min. attack ad scripted by Trump against himself. It's beautiful.

[Poopadoop]

Lol, and sweating like a pig too.

[oskar]

...and it's barely edited.

Michael Brooks passed away unexpectedly at 37. I highly recommend anything he's ever done on Brazil. He also does a great Dave Rubin impression.
Here's a fun clip with him and Matt Christman:
https://twitter.com/AnHourPastPaid/s...404902401?s=20

[oskar]

person
woman
man
camera
tv

https://youtu.be/fBEiCfLoW90?t=133

[Poopadoop]

person
woman
man
camera
tv

https://youtu.be/fBEiCfLoW90?t=133

To be fair, Biden probably would fail that test.

[Poopadoop]

Rebuild that Wall!

https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/s...51226049990656

[oskar]

To be fair, Biden probably would fail that test.

According to Trump, doctors told him that nobody had ever done what he had done with that brain damage test. That may or may not be a passing grade.

Rebuild that Wall!

https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/s...51226049990656

I can't see the link but I assume it's this: https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/co...ollapsing_due/

[Poopadoop]

According to Trump, doctors told him that nobody had ever done what he had done with that brain damage test. That may or may not be a passing grade.

The imagination runs wild...

I can't see the link but I assume it's this: https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/co...ollapsing_due/

Apparently that wasn't the first time part of it fell over, either. Here's a news bit from back in Feb.



"We're going to build a Wall, and Mexico is going to clean it up!"

[Jack Sawyer]

RIP Herman Cain

He fell to covid

[oskar]

And he probably got it at Trump's undersold super-spreader Tulsa rally. What a legacy!


Also new Trump interview and it's almost as good as the last one:
https://youtu.be/zaaTZkqsaxY?t=780

[Poopadoop]

Also new Trump interview and it's almost as good as the last one:
https://youtu.be/zaaTZkqsaxY?t=780

His comedy timing is impeccable!

[oskar]

Just a reminder that DJT doesn't have the exclusive rights to being a fucking retard.

[Poopadoop]

Just a reminder that DJT doesn't have the exclusive rights to being a fucking retard.

No, but he's still the World's Champ!





He really needs to take a page out of Biden's book and try to avoid talking as much as possible.

[oskar]

https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/st...496263687?s=20









-->https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_V...rising_attempt

On August 5 2020, Chris Murphy, an American Senator on the United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs confirmed via twitter that the United States Government had organised the coup attempt in order to install Guaido to run a puppet government on behalf of the United States.[20]

lol

[oskar]

I can't get through that one. If he's left to ramble unchecked, he's absolutely insufferable.

But he's up to his old tricks today in Ohio: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1...671397890?s=20

[OngBonga]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53713312

Labour MP complains about racial profiling after getting pulled over. The police claim they incorrectly entered the wrong reg and the same car, model and colour was shown, except registered to an address in Yorkshire, not London. In the BBC article linked above, Butler claims the driver is black.

Here's the youtube footage posted on youtube by the Guardian...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...ature=emb_logo

Notice how it's mirrored to give the impression she's the driver.

Here's footage that shows the driver is white...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78CWztXEA7A

Fucking state of the world. MPs lying about racial profiling while giving cops a hard time for doing their job.

[Poopadoop]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53713312

Labour MP complains about racial profiling after getting pulled over. The police claim they incorrectly entered the wrong reg and the same car, model and colour was shown, except registered to an address in Yorkshire, not London. In the BBC article linked above, Butler claims the driver is black.

Here's the youtube footage posted on youtube by the Guardian...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...ature=emb_logo

Notice how it's mirrored to give the impression she's the driver.

Here's footage that shows the driver is white...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78CWztXEA7A

Fucking state of the world. MPs lying about racial profiling while giving cops a hard time for doing their job.

I don't see how you can tell which video is the mirrored one. It could be either.

The cops' story about entering the wrong reg sounds a bit fishy too. And since when does being from Yorkshire make you a suspect in a crime?

Here we go again. The cops can't pull someone over just for being from out of town, regardless of their skin colour. Fuck off.

[Poopadoop]

Here's the youtube footage posted on youtube by the Guardian...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...ature=emb_logo



Here's footage that shows the driver is white...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78CWztXEA7A

Funny how the "mirrored" video (according to you) is the crystal clear one and the "real" video is low res. I didn't know you could make a high res video out of a low res one like that. Fucking genius.