US President Donald J. Trump Impeachment Megathread - Democrats commit mass political suicide

On September 24th, 2019, Nanci Pelosi did what everyone expected was some exceptional political posturing -- initiating a formal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.

The initial "charge," such as it was, was "betraying his oath of office and the nation's security by seeking to enlist a foreign power to tarnish a rival for his own political gain." This, amusingly, was after it was discovered and widely reported on that the DNC had contacted the very same foreign power to attempt to tarnish Trump.

Specifically, this was all based on a rumor that Trump had asked the Ukraine to investigate how a prosecutor investigating Joe Biden's son for corruption had gotten fired, and withheld foreign aid until they had agreed. (He did ask the leader of the Ukraine to investigate what happened with the prosecutor, but did not hold up any foreign aid nor threaten anything of the like.)

Around this time, Trump did something they could not, and still cannot, understand: He publicly turned over all the documents. The transcript of the phone call they claimed showed him committing the crime of blackmailing the Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden for him was released, showing that Trump did nothing wrong. The only reaction the radical left had was arguing over the definition of "transcript" and spouting off a conspiracy theory about official state documents being edited.

At the same time, old video evidence of Joe Biden publicly bragging about blackmailing the Ukraine into NOT investigating his son came to light. Yes, this is exactly what they're accusing Trump of doing. The left is nothing if not subtle. Right after this, evidence came to light that Pelosi, Kerry, and Romney's kids had similar fake jobs in the Ukraine, getting paid ungodly amounts of money and embezzling US foreign aid to the Ukraine -- all things that Trump's Attorney General has openly discussed investigating.

By releasing the transcripts, the DNC was tripped up. Instead of being able to leak information from their secret investigation until November 2020, they were forced to play their hand publicly.

And they had no hand to play. The impeachment accusations came from second and third hand sources -- watercooler talk from Unelected Deep State Analysts with Trump Derangement Syndrome, outraged that President Trump refused to obey them when they felt they had a better idea as to how to run Foreign Affairs. Other allegations included that supposedly, the telepathic DNC members working in the state department knew what Trump was thinking (despite him literally saying the exact opposite) or could tell that Trump would do something even worse -- maybe something actually illegal -- in the future, and boy howdy, the imaginary Trump in their minds was a right bastard.

(As an aside, the name of the whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, has been censored across pretty much all social media, a test run of whatever censorship they're going to enact in the next few months to try and swing the election.)

At the same time, the DNC performed significant amounts of partisan political fuckery to do this all publicly, but unofficially -- preventing the GOP from bringing forth witnesses or questioning the DNC's witnesses, or even reading the double plus secret evidence the DNC supposedly had. Those GOP that did get access to the evidence have confirmed it's a 3 pound 5 ounce nothingburger.

The charges have since mutated, with them initially being changed to "bribery" -- as "bribery" focus groups easier and is easier to spew out on Twitter.

On December 18th, 2019, along party lines and with bipartisan opposition, they finally drafted their articles of impeachment -- first for "Abuse of Power" and second for "Obstruction of Congress." Neither are actually crimes nor are they impeachable offenses, even if they were true -- which the DNC has provided no evidence of, explaining that it's the Senate's job to investigate and find the evidence.

Narrator: It is not the Senate's job to investigate and find the evidence.

The "Obstruction of Congress" charge is particularly egregious, as they are claiming that Trump, by reaching out to the courts to act as mediators in his dispute over the rules with Pelosi, was obstructing her. In other words, Pelosi's stance is that the President must obey her, even if she's being a batshit insane drunk. Many legal scholars, including Alan Dershowitz, have pointed out that this is absolute bullshit.

The latest development as of this writing on December 21th, 2019, is that Pelosi is demanding that the GOP recuse itself, allowing the DNC to reshape the Senate in order to make the process "fair" -- by creating a Kangaroo court. The GOP is refusing outright, as the Senate's role during this is very specifically to take the charges and all the evidence gathered from the house -- which is none -- and vote yes or no on impeachment. They need 2/3rd majority to vote yes, and the DNC does not have the votes.

Pelosi is refusing to send over the articles of impeachment until the GOP allows her to stack the Senate against Trump, an act that Dershowitz as well as Noah Feldman, the DNC's own star legal expert witness, has said is unconstitutional and "a problem," as Trump isn't impeached until the articles have been filed. Meanwhile, the DNC has put the House on vacation until the new year, while the Senate is exploring options including forcing the articles over without Pelosi's ok. Trump and the Senate have both went to the SCOTUS to ask them if any of this is constitutional.

tl;dr: Trump may have found where the Swamp was embezzling US Foreign Aid. Many politician's children working fake jobs for huge amounts of money in the Ukraine, blatantly selling influence. This caused the DNC to freak out and try and headshot Trump. They missed. The Democrats appear to have committed political suicide, making Trump a Martyr and only realizing in the aftermath that they didn't actually get rid of him or even weaken him in any way. They also appear to realize they fucked up and are trying to slow walk it back, keeping the "he's impeached!" victory while not actually having to let anyone read the evidence or have a trial on it.


@Yotsubaaa did a great writeup here with links to various winner posts: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/nancy...kraine-phone-call.61583/page-135#post-5606264

And @Yotsubaaa did a new version very late on the 21st of December: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/presi...chment-megathread.61583/page-260#post-5754920

Which are too big to quote here.



https://archive.fo/oVGIv

WASHINGTON — Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on Tuesday that the House would initiate a formal impeachment inquiry against President Trump, charging him with betraying his oath of office and the nation’s security by seeking to enlist a foreign power to tarnish a rival for his own political gain.

Ms. Pelosi’s declaration, after months of reticence by Democrats who had feared the political consequences of impeaching a president many of them long ago concluded was unfit for office, was a stunning turn that set the stage for a history-making and exceedingly bitter confrontation between the Democrat-led House and a defiant president who has thumbed his nose at institutional norms.

“The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the Constitution,” Ms. Pelosi said in a brief speech invoking the nation’s founding principles. Mr. Trump, she added, “must be held accountable — no one is above the law.”

She said the president’s conduct revealed his “betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security and betrayal of the integrity of our elections.”

Ms. Pelosi’s decision to push forward with the most severe action that Congress can take against a sitting president could usher in a remarkable new chapter in American life, touching off a constitutional and political showdown with the potential to cleave an already divided nation, reshape Mr. Trump’s presidency and the country’s politics, and carry heavy risks both for him and for the Democrats who have decided to weigh his removal.

Though the outcome is uncertain, it also raised the possibility that Mr. Trump could become only the fourth president in American history to face impeachment. Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were both impeached but later acquitted by the Senate. President Richard M. Nixon resigned in the face of a looming House impeachment vote.

It was the first salvo in an escalating, high-stakes standoff between Ms. Pelosi, now fully engaged in an effort to build the most damning possible case against the president, and Mr. Trump, who angrily denounced Democrats’ impeachment inquiry even as he worked feverishly in private to head off the risk to his presidency.

Mr. Trump, who for months has dared Democrats to impeach him, issued a defiant response on Twitter while in New York for several days of international diplomacy at the United Nations, with a series of fuming posts that culminated with a simple phrase: “PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT!” Meanwhile, his re-election campaign and House Republican leaders launched a vociferous defense, accusing Democrats of a partisan rush to judgment.

“Such an important day at the United Nations, so much work and so much success, and the Democrats purposely had to ruin and demean it with more breaking news Witch Hunt garbage,” Mr. Trump wrote. “So bad for our Country! For the past two years, talk of impeachment had centered around the findings of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, who investigated Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections and Mr. Trump’s attempts to derail that inquiry. On Tuesday, Ms. Pelosi, Democrat of California, told her caucus and then the country that new revelations about Mr. Trump’s dealings with Ukraine, and his administration’s stonewalling of Congress about them, had finally left the House no choice but to proceed toward a rarely used remedy.

“Right now, we have to strike while the iron is hot,” she told House Democrats in a closed-door meeting in the basement of the Capitol. Emerging moments later to address a phalanx of news cameras, Ms. Pelosi, speaking sometimes haltingly as she delivered a speech from a teleprompter, invoked the Constitution and the nation’s founders as she declared, “The times have found us” and outlined a new stage of investigating Mr. Trump.

At issue are allegations that Mr. Trump pressured the president of Ukraine to open a corruption investigation of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., a leading contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, and his son. The conversation is said to be part of a whistle-blower complaint that the Trump administration has withheld from Congress. And it occurred just a few days after Mr. Trump had ordered his staff to freeze more than $391 million in aid to Ukraine.

Mr. Trump has confirmed aspects of his conversation with the Ukrainian leader in recent days, but he continues to insist he acted appropriately.

The president said on Tuesday that he would authorize the release of a transcript of the conversation, part of an effort to pre-empt Democrats’ impeachment push. But Democrats, after months of holding back, were unbowed, demanding the full whistle-blower complaint and other documentation about White House dealings with Ukraine, even as they pushed toward an expansive impeachment inquiry that could encompass unrelated charges.

President Trump’s personal lawyer. The prosecutor general of Ukraine. Joe Biden’s son. These are just some of the names mentioned in the whistle-blower’s complaint. What were their roles? We break it down.

Ms. Pelosi told fellow Democrats that Mr. Trump told her in a private call on Tuesday morning that he was not responsible for withholding the whistle-blower complaint from Congress. But late Tuesday, the White House and intelligence officials were working on a deal to allow the whistle-blower to speak to Congress and potentially even share a redacted version of the complaint in the coming days, after the whistle-blower expressed interest in talking to lawmakers.

Although Ms. Pelosi’s announcement was a crucial turning point, it left many unanswered questions about exactly when and how Democrats planned to push forward on impeachment.
 
Última edición:
What bothers me about this episode is people saying acting like this is a "both sides" thing. It's not. Trump didn't get help from Russia, that was a lie. The Democrats trying to impeach over and over is strictly their fault. Biden publicly bragging about his corruption means there was no dirt to dig up, he supplied it free of charge.

In the past the republicans have been idiots, but the current mess is 100% democrats fault. It's not the Senate or the house, it's the DNC attempting a coup.

I believe the mainstream media is trying to muddy the waters and it's working better than it should.


I don't see a real smoking gun on Biden's part, as in jr. actually did something corrupt. There is so much corruption in Ukraine that prosecutor could be fired for any number of reasons, no necessarily whatever Jr.'s company did. Also, he came on board to that company after it was well in existence and doing business. So again, I don't see what exactly and specifically he did in regard to corruption.

Doing business in Russia, Ukraine (pretty much any former republic, even Baltic) or China will involve some form of corruption, hard, soft. If you look hard enough, you can find something.

R's allege the chain of Biden pressuring firing of the prosecutor based on what his son did. Former is a known fact, but latter isn't exactly proven, as is what exactly Biden's son did. I have not seen specific charges. So in that regard, Rs are doing exactly what Ds have been doing, come up with some plausible accusation and pushing the crap out of it to its drone army.
 
The usual suspects wanting to attempt a coup, and Pelosi offering them enough rope to hang themselves.

I have long doubted Pelosi's worth as any kind of leader, but she has certainly shown she knows how to play the game. Only real question this time is will there be enough time after the whole thing falls apart to pull back out of the crazy nosedive. Any establishment Ds are most likely going to commit as little as possible to the affair, just enough to look like they're invested in seeing Trump get brought down, but they won't stake anything on it that will lead to them not having a chance at another term. Pretty much like the New Green Deal went down.

Again, I don't trust Pelosi one bit, I think she's an awful human being, but I also don't think she's a true believer in this impeachment attempt or likely to follow the rabid progressives any more than she needs to in order to see them step directly onto a political landmine and get blown skyhigh. Then she'll scurry back to the center to rally the party and move them back from the ledge everybody has just been sprinting towards. If there's one thing I can trust her to do, it's to be as pragmatic as she can afford.

Worth noting that the mainstream Dems are in a bit of a panic right now. Biden is finished. No question. No matter how much the Dems and media shills try and paper over it, it is blaringly obvious now that he was bought and paid for by a foreign power as Veep. That's not going away, even if he never faces any charges. That strips away his "everyman" charm and reveals him to be a blue blooded lord of privilege doing shady shit with his unaccountable son. That leaves Warren in the #1 spot right now. But Wallstreet just loudly told the Dems in no uncertain circumstances that Warren is NOT an acceptable nominee for the people that give the Dems all the money. And the money will therefore stop until or unless something happens to dislodge warren. The only other establishment Dem in the pack is Harris. Who everybody hates. She is polling lower than "Margin of Error". She is a nasty unpleasant bitch, who spent her career throwing black men in prison. Often fraudulently.

So Dem's are seeing their election hopes implode. They need the money! Really need it as the DNC is effectively bankrupt. The only candidate doing well in fundraising is Bernie.
 
Doing business in Russia, Ukraine (pretty much any former republic, even Baltic) or China will involve some form of corruption, hard, soft. If you look hard enough, you can find something.
yes, but we dont talk about normal corruption. Biden didnt take money, he threatened Ukraine to end militairy aid if they dont pay him.
and all of that while pro russian ukrainians were marching on kiev---
 
Well it's going to be Warren. I hate to break it to wall street but Lizzie is going to be running against Trump. She's probably not going to win either. Those stock nigglets are just going to have to sit down and be quiet.

Lizzie will follow McGovern and Mondale into history.

yes, but we dont talk about normal corruption. Biden didnt take money, he threatened Ukraine to end militairy aid if they dont pay him.
and all of that while pro russian ukrainians were marching on kiev---
Why was a Ukranian Oligarch paying his useless incompetant son Millions of dollars? Why was China paying hin $1.5 Billion? Yeah they WERE paying Biden.
 
The usual suspects wanting to attempt a coup, and Pelosi offering them enough rope to hang themselves.

I have long doubted Pelosi's worth as any kind of leader, but she has certainly shown she knows how to play the game. Only real question this time is will there be enough time after the whole thing falls apart to pull back out of the crazy nosedive. Any establishment Ds are most likely going to commit as little as possible to the affair, just enough to look like they're invested in seeing Trump get brought down, but they won't stake anything on it that will lead to them not having a chance at another term. Pretty much like the New Green Deal went down.

Again, I don't trust Pelosi one bit, I think she's an awful human being, but I also don't think she's a true believer in this impeachment attempt or likely to follow the rabid progressives any more than she needs to in order to see them step directly onto a political landmine and get blown skyhigh. Then she'll scurry back to the center to rally the party and move them back from the ledge everybody has just been sprinting towards. If there's one thing I can trust her to do, it's to be as pragmatic as she can afford.
If "the usual suspects" means "well-connected Hillary Clinton loyalists," I'm right there with you.

Impeachment would be a perfect re-entry for her into American politics. She can claim more people voted for her the last time around, her opponent is a disgrace, her primary challengers are too far to the left for the average American, and she's a woman who will do something about toxic masculinity.

Everything about this feels like a coup. I'm just not convinced the real target is President Trump.
 
If "the usual suspects" means "well-connected Hillary Clinton loyalists," I'm right there with you.

Impeachment would be a perfect re-entry for her into American politics. She can claim more people voted for her the last time around, her opponent is a disgrace, her primary challengers are too far to the left for the average American, and she's a woman who will do something about toxic masculinity.

Everything about this feels like a coup. I'm just not convinced the real target is President Trump.
Hillary, in her post-menopausal madness, is desperately trying to position herself for a comeback, teaming up with Chelsea to make various media appearances. Noticeably absent is Bill Clinton who I suspect wants no part of this craziness, knowing full well Hillary has all the charisma of a dead fish left in the sun too long. Say what you will about Bill (and most of it is true) but that's a man who has charm, cunning and political smarts, all of which Hillary lacks. He knows Hillary will never be President of even the local Chamber of Commerce much less the USA. The people she needs to win over are not pussy hat wearing white women who went to Brown on Daddy's money or troons whooping it up at the Folsom Street Fair, its the plebes who don't give a shit about toxic masculinity.

It's an attempted coup all right and to make it work you have to take out Trump who is far more popular than the DNC will ever admit. Part of me wants them to go all out just so they can go down in flames but like someone else said-Pelosi, while being a scumbag, isn't stupid enough to let that happen.
 
I don't think burnout is as likely as a lot of people do.
"Shell shock" is a real thing. It's not that people want to burn out. It's that you can only handle so much, and eventually the continuous stress (whether it's being shot at or being constantly wound up by every fucking thing the media tells you to be angry about) actually breaks something inside. Your ability to cope with the stress fails, and you go to pieces. The end results vary from total withdrawal to violent outbursts, but they're rarely pleasant.

People will cause themselves real damage with this steady supply of outrage. You simply can't endure heavy stress for years without seriously harming yourself. And these are mostly snowflakes we're talking about here, not trained soldiers.

Burnout is definitely likely in a lot of people as an alternative to shell shock. You can often feel it coming, i.e. when someone says "I can't take much more of this" and genuinely means it (not in a twitter-tantrum sort of way), they're being receptive enough to pick up on the signals from their mind -- "shit's about to go sideways if we don't cool it, boss." One way of coping is to just straight up stop giving a shit (e.g. burnout). Just throw up their hands and say "fuck it." And they mean it, because given the choice (conscious or otherwise) between that and shell shock, burnout wins.
 
What bothers me about this episode is people saying acting like this is a "both sides" thing. It's not. Trump didn't get help from Russia, that was a lie. The Democrats trying to impeach over and over is strictly their fault. Biden publicly bragging about his corruption means there was no dirt to dig up, he supplied it free of charge.

In the past the republicans have been idiots, but the current mess is 100% democrats fault. It's not the Senate or the house, it's the DNC attempting a coup.

I believe the mainstream media is trying to muddy the waters and it's working better than it should.
He involves his family and in-laws in lots of stuff he really shouldn't. Maybe it's just nepotism, maybe he just doesn't trust anyone else (for understandable reasons). But it does make it easier to frame him as corrupt.

I don't see a real smoking gun on Biden's part, as in jr. actually did something corrupt. There is so much corruption in Ukraine that prosecutor could be fired for any number of reasons, no necessarily whatever Jr.'s company did. Also, he came on board to that company after it was well in existence and doing business. So again, I don't see what exactly and specifically he did in regard to corruption.

Doing business in Russia, Ukraine (pretty much any former republic, even Baltic) or China will involve some form of corruption, hard, soft. If you look hard enough, you can find something.

R's allege the chain of Biden pressuring firing of the prosecutor based on what his son did. Former is a known fact, but latter isn't exactly proven, as is what exactly Biden's son did. I have not seen specific charges. So in that regard, Rs are doing exactly what Ds have been doing, come up with some plausible accusation and pushing the crap out of it to its drone army.
At the end of the day though, either both Trump and Biden are in the wrong, or neither are. Because they're accused of basically doing the same thing. Their motives for doing said thing can't be known. They can be conjectured. Very plausibly perhaps. And if you accept the worst interpretation of one and the best interpretation of the other's motives, you may even by right. But there's no way to prove any of it. It just comes down to gut feelings.
 
Hillary, in her post-menopausal madness, is desperately trying to position herself for a comeback, teaming up with Chelsea to make various media appearances. Noticeably absent is Bill Clinton who I suspect wants no part of this craziness, knowing full well Hillary has all the charisma of a dead fish left in the sun too long. Say what you will about Bill (and most of it is true) but that's a man who has charm, cunning and political smarts, all of which Hillary lacks. He knows Hillary will never be President of even the local Chamber of Commerce much less the USA. The people she needs to win over are not pussy hat wearing white women who went to Brown on Daddy's money or troons whooping it up at the Folsom Street Fair, its the plebes who don't give a shit about toxic masculinity.

It's an attempted coup all right and to make it work you have to take out Trump who is far more popular than the DNC will ever admit. Part of me wants them to go all out just so they can go down in flames but like someone else said-Pelosi, while being a scumbag, isn't stupid enough to let that happen.
This would not be the first time she tried this.

She was involved in a coup in Honduras. Overthrew a socialist government.

#metoo started immediately after Trump took office. Someone was being accused an average of every 20 hours, including Trump. Most of the accusers already had lawyers. Did that happen because Trump was elected, or did that happen because HRC thought she was going to win and planned a stunt to usher in legislation criminalizing toxic masculinity?

Why would she not be scheming to take Trump down?
 
He involves his family and in-laws in lots of stuff he really shouldn't. Maybe it's just nepotism, maybe he just doesn't trust anyone else (for understandable reasons). But it does make it easier to frame him as corrupt.

I mean, it depends.

Trump is in a family where they pass down the family business to maintain their grasp of various forms of real estate every year or so. I assume that's why there's nepotism. Maybe one day, he wants his sons and daughters to command through a political dynasty, though I'm not sure how that would work considering the fact that I'm pretty sure it came to a shock that he's going into politics rather than continuing the business until he dies of old age, but whatever.
 
He involves his family and in-laws in lots of stuff he really shouldn't. Maybe it's just nepotism, maybe he just doesn't trust anyone else (for understandable reasons). But it does make it easier to frame him as corrupt.


At the end of the day though, either both Trump and Biden are in the wrong, or neither are. Because they're accused of basically doing the same thing. Their motives for doing said thing can't be known.
I get the feeling Trump's very close to Ivanka, who seems to have been a Daddy's girl (I was too) and is proud of her business skills and made sure she married a guy that treated her well and care for their family so I'm not as bothered by her role (but I don't like her typical rich white girl liberal politics). Ivanka & Jared haven't been enriching themselves at the public trough as far as I can tell which puts them in a different category than Hunter Biden and the like.
 
Well it's going to be Warren. I hate to break it to wall street but Lizzie is going to be running against Trump. She's probably not going to win either. Those stock nigglets are just going to have to sit down and be quiet.
I'm tired of people talking about wall street like they're the single most important thing in the economy anyway. They're professional gamblers. They're a side effect of the free market, not its drivers.

Lizzie will follow McGovern and Mondale into history.
I'm pretty sure we're not going to see another landslide presidential election for a long, long time. Shit's just too polar right now. She'll lose, but it'll be close.
 
You're not wrong in that the burnout can happen. I just don't think it will for two reasons. First is that people are more resilient than they know. The military and adventure sports showed me how to go beyond what I perceived as my limits numerous times. It's like running and hitting the wall. Anyone who's run or jogged to get in shape has hit it. Getting past it is just as simple as running through the wall. Just fucking do it you baby. Guess what? Keep going hard enough and you'll hit a second wall, and a third, and so on. How many you can get through depends on a lot of factors, but anyone who can't get through at least one is a baby back bitch.

Second, as someone who as been shot at more than most and has watched mortar fire get walked towards his position more than once, getting mad about politics isn't even close. People are frothing at the mouth mad about politics their whole lives. I have no doubt these people have been living stressed the fuck out for the last 4 years. I have no doubt a lot of people are feeling burned out, but I don't think they actually are. I think they can keep going, however; many may choose to quit when they could otherwise continue. I guess the question in my mind is not whether people will burnout, but more can the MSM keep people going when they feel burned out? That is much more complicated. As you pointed out, a lot of these people are bitchmade, but they've been molded to thrive off of outrage.

I made my statement that burnout wouldn't being a thing because I was assuming that they would be operating at their peak and they would push themselves to keep REEEing. That indeed may not be the case. The MSM and tech companies have however created a machine to pump out endless outrage porn. I'm not going to count on it failing and I don't think anyone else should either. There is no good reason to.
 
Hillary, in her post-menopausal madness, is desperately trying to position herself for a comeback, teaming up with Chelsea to make various media appearances. Noticeably absent is Bill Clinton who I suspect wants no part of this craziness, knowing full well Hillary has all the charisma of a dead fish left in the sun too long. Say what you will about Bill (and most of it is true) but that's a man who has charm, cunning and political smarts, all of which Hillary lacks. He knows Hillary will never be President of even the local Chamber of Commerce much less the USA. The people she needs to win over are not pussy hat wearing white women who went to Brown on Daddy's money or troons whooping it up at the Folsom Street Fair, its the plebes who don't give a shit about toxic masculinity.

It's an attempted coup all right and to make it work you have to take out Trump who is far more popular than the DNC will ever admit. Part of me wants them to go all out just so they can go down in flames but like someone else said-Pelosi, while being a scumbag, isn't stupid enough to let that happen.

That's a good point. Bill Clinton has not been seen or heard from in ages. Has anybody checked on him? Maybe to make sure he hasn't committed "Suicide"? Along with his Secret Service detail, mistress and dog?
 
"Shell shock" is a real thing. It's not that people want to burn out. It's that you can only handle so much, and eventually the continuous stress (whether it's being shot at or being constantly wound up by every fucking thing the media tells you to be angry about) actually breaks something inside. Your ability to cope with the stress fails, and you go to pieces. The end results vary from total withdrawal to violent outbursts, but they're rarely pleasant.

Agreed. I had to refrain from throwing my tablet across the room reading this vapid black cunt today in the news today.


Such a class act negress.
 
Well it's going to be Warren. I hate to break it to wall street but Lizzie is going to be running against Trump. She's probably not going to win either. Those stock nigglets are just going to have to sit down and be quiet.
Get woke, go broke.
I don't think the progressives care. They live in an such a strong echo chamber that they think 100% of the county hates Trump. Money just wont be needed.

A fun thing to think about is what will Silicon Valley do for Warren V Trump? During the '08 and '12 they bragged about how they used their data to help Obama. In '16 they did the same but on the down-low for HRC.
Will they try and help Warren? Or work against her?
Trump is orangemanbad but is driving traffic and money for them bigly. Warren is threatening to bust their shit up and end the gravy train.

 
Atrás
Top Abajo