Commandante Donald Trump : troll, puis candidat puis président puis putschiste puis re président

[Marlenus]

Bon alors la nouvelle porte parole de Trump:

 

Promotion canapé ou pas?

 

 

 

[Neomatix]

15% de rentabilité quasi certains en 6 mois, vous en pensez quoi?

https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2020/winner

[Bézoukhov]

il y a 1 minute, Neomatix a dit :

15% de rentabilité quasi certains en 6 mois, vous en pensez quoi?

 

Faut se hedger en forex en face.

[Bézoukhov]

Et à la reflexion, ça price assez bien ma théorie selon laquelle l'un des deux devrait schlaguer du coronavirus ?

[Tesla]

Dans le cas d'un Biden ⚰️, parier sur Michelle Obama.

[Hayek's plosive]

Le 01/05/2020 à 23:16, Tramp a dit :

Voilà.

 

C’est illégal à plusieurs point de vue.
Et ça ferait scandale.

Et qui achèterait la dette US ? Ils en émettent comme jamais. 

 

La Fed. 

[Brock]

6 hours ago, Tesla said:

Dans le cas d'un Biden ⚰️, parier sur Michelle Obama.

 

Oprah ! lol

[Brock]

ehehe 

 

https://thedonald.win

 

edit: https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/   a ete mis en quarantaine. concretement cela veut dire qu'il faut s'identifier d'une maniere ou d'une autre pour pouvoir poster.J'imagine que c'etait de toute facon insupportable pour Reddit qui est plutot un site de conformistes et de gauchistes.

 

[Bisounours]

En 2017 Trump a créé un département visant à interdire les vaccins obligatoires. C'est vrai, ça ?

 

https://moneyrang.org/trump-fait-interdire-les-vaccins-obligatoires?fbclid=IwAR35UV50nFpuBzwuVfAukp6BHphLZwVjEJjd3mh5n9wdOUp66s1gIFebeI8

[TODA]

 

VACCINATION
Zuckerberg auditionné pour la censure exercée par Facebook

En gros, le juge lui dit « vous avez créé votre réseau social Facebook afin de relier les gens entre eux et qu’ils échangent toute information utile ou pas entre eux ? »

Zuckerbergl boit un coup et dit « oui c’est vrai mais il y a des info dangereuses qui circulent et ... » Le juge le coupe et lui dit de s’en tenir juste à répondre aux questions demandées et qu’il n’a pas de temps à perdre ...

Ensuite il lui dit :

« si votre réseau avait ce but, pourquoi appliquez-vous une mesure de censure stricte sur leurs échanges, ça ne vous regarde point ce qu’ils échangent et se disent, c’est le droit que vous leur avez donné avec Facebook ? »

Zuckerberg boit et dit « non notre censure s’applique uniquement sur les discours décourageants à l’encontre des vaccins ou de leur dangerosité et il est important que les gens se vaccinent et acceptent de se faire vacciner ! »

Le juge « d’où tenez-vous ces informations que les vaccins ne sont pas dangereux ? Avez-vous une étude qui garantit à 100% la sûreté des vaccins que vous prônez ? »

Zuckerberg boit et dit « non je n’en ai pas, il n’y a rien de garanti à 100% mais il est nécessaire de le faire »

Le juge « donc vous n’avez aucune habilité pour conseiller sur les vaccins ni étude pour garantir la santé des gens et donc aucun droit d’appuyer les raisons de votre censure extrême sur le réseau que vous avez fournis à ces usagers ...
Je vous convoquerai prochainement ! »
Voilà en gros l’échange, l’essentiel est là.

/!\ https://www.facebook.com/groups/698141807656499/wp/178806850021193/ /!\

[TODA]

bon, faut suivre, un peu..

plus récement, 31 janvier 2020

Trump a crée

 

[Brock]

 

Quote

 

Gravvvyyy4 days ago

14 comments. The most relevant piece of information out there and it has less than 2k views. Oh America, look what we have all fallen prey to for so long. I apologize President Trump. I was a never trumper because of MSM. You have my respect.

 

 

 

ahaha personne ne va sur CNBC lol

580K subscribers mes couilles oui  

[cedric.org]

On 5/12/2020 at 7:37 PM, TODA said:

 

VACCINATION
Zuckerberg auditionné pour la censure exercée par Facebook

En gros, le juge lui dit « vous avez créé votre réseau social Facebook afin de relier les gens entre eux et qu’ils échangent toute information utile ou pas entre eux ? »

Zuckerbergl boit un coup et dit « oui c’est vrai mais il y a des info dangereuses qui circulent et ... » Le juge le coupe et lui dit de s’en tenir juste à répondre aux questions demandées et qu’il n’a pas de temps à perdre ...

Ensuite il lui dit :

« si votre réseau avait ce but, pourquoi appliquez-vous une mesure de censure stricte sur leurs échanges, ça ne vous regarde point ce qu’ils échangent et se disent, c’est le droit que vous leur avez donné avec Facebook ? »

Zuckerberg boit et dit « non notre censure s’applique uniquement sur les discours décourageants à l’encontre des vaccins ou de leur dangerosité et il est important que les gens se vaccinent et acceptent de se faire vacciner ! »

Le juge « d’où tenez-vous ces informations que les vaccins ne sont pas dangereux ? Avez-vous une étude qui garantit à 100% la sûreté des vaccins que vous prônez ? »

Zuckerberg boit et dit « non je n’en ai pas, il n’y a rien de garanti à 100% mais il est nécessaire de le faire »

Le juge « donc vous n’avez aucune habilité pour conseiller sur les vaccins ni étude pour garantir la santé des gens et donc aucun droit d’appuyer les raisons de votre censure extrême sur le réseau que vous avez fournis à ces usagers ...
Je vous convoquerai prochainement ! »
Voilà en gros l’échange, l’essentiel est là.

/!\ https://www.facebook.com/groups/698141807656499/wp/178806850021193/ /!\

Le mec, l'État le menace pendant des lois pour lutter contre les fakenews et autres conneries, et maintenant qu'il le fait, l'État lui demande de quel droit il le fait. C'est magique.

 

Édit : la typo est assez magique également, je la garde.

[Adrian]

'Obamagate' backfires: Documents show Biden, Obama acted properly

 

oBamAgAtE

[Brock]

Non.

[Marlenus]

Tiens j'ai l'impression que depuis quelques temps Slate s'intéresse aux libertariens.

Au moins on commence à en parler...

 

http://www.slate.fr/podcast/190824/difficile-existence-mouvement-libertarien-ere-donald-trump-2020-39

[Brock]

Ils sont sympas mais ce que Trump a reussi a faire du Gop les botte manifestement en touche...

c'est quoi le positionnement politique de Slate? c'est pas clair

 

 

[Marlenus]

12 minutes ago, Brock said:

Ils sont sympas mais ce que Trump a reussi a faire du Gop les botte manifestement en touche...

c'est quoi le positionnement politique de Slate? c'est pas clair

 

 

Gauche SJW clairement.

Ils mettent en étendard l'écriture inclusive par exemple.

Ils ont quelques cocos et féministes bien gratinées (Titiou Lecoq par exemple)

 

Mais il leur arrive d'avoir des articles intéressants (enfin de mon point de vue) une fois que tu évites leurs marottes.

 

(Il est marrant d'ailleurs qu'ils ont été pris entre deux feux pendant l'affaire de la ligue du lol, vu que c'est sorti avec un de leurs auteurs récurrent et que l'un des membres actifs est leur rédac chef  )

[Brock]

damn!

[Rincevent]

J'apprends que Trump est un pervers narcissique, un prédateur sadique qui a délibérément décidé d'un démocide. Rien que ça.

 

https://www.salon.com/2020/04/25/psychologist-john-gartner-trump-is-a-sexual-sadist-who-is-actively-engaging-in-sabotage/

[Brock]

ca m'aurait etonne qu'il trouvent que c'est un homme d'une grande bonte sur qui on peut compter ahahah

[Sloonz]

31 minutes ago, Vilfredo Pareto said:

Donald Trump's handwriting reveals he's a lying, lazy, arrogant person, according to an expert.

[Johnnieboy]

il y a une heure, Brock a dit :

ca m'aurait etonne qu'il trouvent que c'est un homme d'une grande bonte sur qui on peut compter ahahah

 

De fait, rien ne laisse penser ça.

[Brock]

ah si SI moi je trouve que si

d'ailleurs si je ne m'abuse il me semble qu'il a recu differents awards dans les 80s et 90s, qui ont ete promptement oublies pour le faire passer pour un raciste...

[Adrian]

Trump: 'I tested very positively in another sense so — this morning. Yeah. I tested positively toward negative, right. So, I tested perfectly this morning — meaning I tested negative.'

 

[Johnnieboy]

Il y a 9 heures, Brock a dit :

ah si SI moi je trouve que si

d'ailleurs si je ne m'abuse il me semble qu'il a recu differents awards dans les 80s et 90s, qui ont ete promptement oublies pour le faire passer pour un raciste...

 

Arrête donc ton char de fanboy, ça devient vraiment gênant, en fait.

[Brock]

je suis un total fan! all hail the God Emperor! 

[Brock]

13 hours ago, Adrian said:

Trump: 'I tested very positively in another sense so — this morning. Yeah. I tested positively toward negative, right. So, I tested perfectly this morning — meaning I tested negative.'

 

 

j'adore son style de Champion Of Trollery

[Brock]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/waynecrews/2020/05/20/new-trump-executive-order-on-deregulation-to-kickstart-job-creation-and-economic-growth/#6bb4213c38dc

 

quel salaud populiste!

[Freezbee]

Citation

James Mattis Denounces President Trump, Describes Him as a Threat to the Constitution

 

In an extraordinary condemnation, the former defense secretary backs protesters and says the president is trying to turn Americans against one another.

 

 

James Mattis, the esteemed Marine general who resigned as secretary of defense in December 2018 to protest Donald Trump’s Syria policy, has, ever since, kept studiously silent about Trump’s performance as president. But he has now broken his silence, writing an extraordinary broadside in which he denounces the president for dividing the nation, and accuses him of ordering the U.S. military to violate the constitutional rights of American citizens.

 

 

“I have watched this week’s unfolding events, angry and appalled,” Mattis writes. “The words ‘Equal Justice Under Law’ are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court. This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding. It is a wholesome and unifying demand—one that all of us should be able to get behind. We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values—our values as people and our values as a nation.” He goes on, “We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.”

 

In his j’accuse, Mattis excoriates the president for setting Americans against one another.

 

“Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us,” Mattis writes. “We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.”

 

He goes on to contrast the American ethos of unity with Nazi ideology. “Instructions given by the military departments to our troops before the Normandy invasion reminded soldiers that ‘The Nazi slogan for destroying us … was “Divide and Conquer.” Our American answer is “In Union there is Strength.”’ We must summon that unity to surmount this crisis—confident that we are better than our politics.”

 

Mattis’s dissatisfaction with Trump was no secret inside the Pentagon. But after his resignation, he argued publicly—and to great criticism—that it would be inappropriate and counterproductive for a former general, and a former Cabinet official, to criticize a sitting president. Doing so, he said, would threaten the apolitical nature of the military. When I interviewed him last year on this subject, he said, “When you leave an administration over clear policy differences, you need to give the people who are still there as much opportunity as possible to defend the country. They still have the responsibility of protecting this great big experiment of ours.” He did add, however: “There is a period in which I owe my silence. It’s not eternal. It’s not going to be forever.”

 

That period is now definitively over. Mattis reached the conclusion this past weekend that the American experiment is directly threatened by the actions of the president he once served. In his statement, Mattis makes it clear that the president’s response to the police killing of George Floyd, and the ensuing protests, triggered this public condemnation.

 

“When I joined the military, some 50 years ago,” he writes, “I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside.”

 

He goes on to implicitly criticize the current secretary of defense, Mark Esper, and other senior officials as well. “We must reject any thinking of our cities as a ‘battlespace’ that our uniformed military is called upon to ‘dominate.’ At home, we should use our military only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors. Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict—a false conflict—between the military and civilian society. It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part. Keeping public order rests with civilian state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them.

 

Here is the text of the complete statement.

 

Citation

In Union There Is Strength

I have watched this week’s unfolding events, angry and appalled. The words “Equal Justice Under Law” are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court. This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding. It is a wholesome and unifying demand—one that all of us should be able to get behind. We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values—our values as people and our values as a nation.

 

When I joined the military, some 50 years ago, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside.

 

We must reject any thinking of our cities as a “battlespace” that our uniformed military is called upon to “dominate.” At home, we should use our military only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors. Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict—a false conflict—between the military and civilian society. It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part. Keeping public order rests with civilian state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them.

 

James Madison wrote in Federalist 14 that “America united with a handful of troops, or without a single soldier, exhibits a more forbidding posture to foreign ambition than America disunited, with a hundred thousand veterans ready for combat.” We do not need to militarize our response to protests. We need to unite around a common purpose. And it starts by guaranteeing that all of us are equal before the law.

 

Instructions given by the military departments to our troops before the Normandy invasion reminded soldiers that “The Nazi slogan for destroying us…was ‘Divide and Conquer.’ Our American answer is ‘In Union there is Strength.’” We must summon that unity to surmount this crisis—confident that we are better than our politics.

 

Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.

 

We can come through this trying time stronger, and with a renewed sense of purpose and respect for one another. The pandemic has shown us that it is not only our troops who are willing to offer the ultimate sacrifice for the safety of the community. Americans in hospitals, grocery stores, post offices, and elsewhere have put their lives on the line in order to serve their fellow citizens and their country. We know that we are better than the abuse of executive authority that we witnessed in Lafayette Square. We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution. At the same time, we must remember Lincoln’s “better angels,” and listen to them, as we work to unite.

 

Only by adopting a new path—which means, in truth, returning to the original path of our founding ideals—will we again be a country admired and respected at home and abroad.