Trump's a traitor: The bounty should be on his head (metaphorically speaking)
Trump's a traitor: The bounty should be on his head (metaphorically speaking)
Is the Russian bounty scandal the final nail in Donald Trump's (political) coffin? It certainly should be
LUCIAN K. TRUSCOTT IV, JULY 4, 2020
The first story of the rest of Donald Trump's life was published last Friday in the New York Times, revealing that the Russian intelligence agency known as the GRU has been paying bonuses to Taliban fighters to kill Americans, and that this intelligence had been reported to Trump and had been known at least since March. The story was subsequently confirmed by the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and the AP.
But at least as interesting as the facts in the story was this gem a few paragraphs down: "Spokespeople at the National Security Council, the Pentagon, the State Department and the C.I.A. declined to comment," the Times reported, pretty much giving us a list of who in government wants Donald Trump out of office. Remember that old saying, "When they tell you it's not about sex, it's about sex." Well, when newspapers tell you who refuses to comment on a story, they're telling you who leaked the story to them in the first place and hinting strongly at their motive.
The White House took more than 24 hours to respond on Saturday evening. Saying she wasn't commenting on the "merit of the alleged intelligence," White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany assured us that "Neither the President nor the Vice President were briefed on the alleged Russian bounty intelligence." Thus began what would become an odd, drawn-out series of denials, non-denials, denials of denials, and explanations and revisions of previously denied denials. Trump's defense of his ignorance about the bounties was immediately clocked as the "Sergeant Schultz" defense: "I know nothing. I know nothing!"
On Sunday, the New York Times reported that "United States intelligence officers and Special Operations forces in Afghanistan alerted their superiors as early as January to a suspected Russian plot to pay bounties to the Taliban to kill American troops in Afghanistan."
Trump knew in early January. Boom!
(Cont'd at link)
Link: Trump's a traitor: The bounty should be on his head (metaphorically speaking)
Replies to: Trump's a traitor: The bounty should be on his head (metaphorically speaking)
Kyle, Frank - What the fuck?? Why is this still up???
Why is Corky the Retard still a poster on this board? This is a fucking terroristic propaganda threat against the president!!!
Actually it's the title of the linked article.
(no message)
No kidding. And it doesn't belong here.
(no message)
So? (Metaphorically speaking).
(no message)
Clickbait title, questions whether Bounty matter will be the last nail in Don's POLITICAL coffin.
(no message)
.
(no message)
Why is your stuff still up? Pot meet kettle.
(no message)
because he makes sense.
unlike the lib fruitcakes who are trying to destroy the country.
how's that 'summer of love' going for you?
you get any good loot during the riots?
any new statues for your foyer?
He makes as much sense as you........zero.
(no message)
Corky brainwashed by the MSM, Russia Hoax,HRC lost,act like a man🤡
(no message)
Congrats for at least getting the correct board. Are you related to imbecile?
(no message)
Re: Trump's a traitor: The bounty should be on his head (metaphorically speaking)
(no message)
Can you roll over too - someone toss Dorothy a bone.
(no message)
Mark, this guy has crossed the line again, and this crap should be removed.
I’m sorry to bother you, but this is getting crazy.
The only reason it's still up is because it's the title of the article he linked
Otherwise it would be gone.
Although that raises another concern
I'm certain there are all kinds of articles/posts out there on the internet with terrible titles, so let me think about this.
If this thread disappears it's because of this concern.
Thanks for the consideration. I understand the free speech concerns, but I think that a line can be
Reasonably drawn at the threat (direct or implied) of physical violence to a person. That's my 2 cents anyways.
P.S. Seriously:Would a similar Brietbart article title posted here about Obama have been tolerated?
Or would it have been considered dangerous and racist?
Do you really want to open the door to threatening posts being legitimized here merely because they are titled elsewhere first and then copy/pasted?
I think that it's wrong in either example, and I think that you do too.
And that brings in another concern where articles and ads include targets on political figures
Should those be eliminated too?
The idea of expression and information is the big concern.
Allowance to offer information that might be objectional to some, may be just information to others.
Why should this board be any different - kneel to the mob.
(no message)
Look up the term "metaphorically speaking".
(no message)
He clearly said, Lock Him Up - Lock Him Up - Lock Him Up! ... Repeat after him -
Crooks and conmen deserve their years in prison and Trump should be no different.
He said “there should be a bounty on POTUS head”. That is a threat to life, not prison....
......the deeper some of you sink into your psychosis, the more titillation you get by pushing the limit and imagining your hate fantasies. You seem to think that you can skirt the rules by sticking in a legal hedge phrase.
I’m hoping I’m not the only one who doesn’t want to see things go this way on this forum.
yeah and that is to Lock Him Up - repeat after me...
PS: and please, save us from your Holier Than Thou bull.
What is a “metaphorical bounty”, Corky? You understand that threatening the life of the POTUS is a
federal crime, don’t you? And you think you can do it by being clever?
This is a despicable copy paste hate post.
Just another hateful idiot from the tolerant Left.
As much as I despised BHO, no one should have ever talked about taking his life. Amazing how hate filled these Dems have become. Definitely not the Dem party of my parents.
Dem party of your parents? They would feel right at home because the Dems did more in those days.
just not reported on
Oh good, you too
Loser.
(no message)