Another day... another school shooting in America
#61
(02-19-2018, 11:48 PM)Valuesize Wrote: I know how I felt when I first heard about the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. I grew up not too far from there. Old friends of mine still live in that area, and some of them have kids who go to that school. So my first thought was, “Are my friends’ kids dead?” Now we’re learning that when the pieces of filth running Donald Trump’s White House first heard about the shooting, what they felt was relief. No, really.


One of Trump’s White House Officials, who refused to attach their own name to these words for rather obvious reasons, summed up the shooting this way to the Washington Post: “For everyone, it was a distraction or a reprieve. A lot of people here felt like it was a reprieve from seven or eight days of just getting pummeled.” (link). Are you kidding me? I mean seriously, someone please tell me this isn’t a real quote, because I don’t even know what to say about it. Sadly, this indeed a real quote from a real Trump White House adviser.

Not only do Trump and his goons view themselves as the victims because they’re finally having to face questions about their own criminal antics, they felt relieved when a bunch of innocent American children were murdered, because it meant a day off from having to face questions about their criminal antics. I get that these people are feeling the heat, but you know what? So what.

The truly revealing part about this quote is that it isn’t merely one Trump White House adviser being dumb enough to admit to having felt relieved about she school shooting. This is one Trump adviser saying that they pretty much all felt that way. This is the kind of culture that career criminal and worthless subhuman Donald Trump has installed in the White House. For this alone he should be impeached.
  Right so I'm just supposed to believe that not only ONE person felt his way that's not good enough it goes on to claim EVERYONE at the white house feels this way.

You are off the rails VS as it's obvious you will post anything and everything you can find that's anti Trump.
And you apparently don't care if it's true or not.
The guy who wrote this is Bill Palmer a blogger. He makes money putting out SHIT like this.

 . Snopes.com editor Brooke Binkowski as “basically a pro-Hillary Clinton 'news site.' It was out there to counter misinformation.”[2] The site has been criticized for building a large following based on "wildly speculative theories about Donald Trump.
Reply
#62
(02-20-2018, 11:35 AM)tvguy Wrote:   Right so I'm just supposed to believe that not only ONE person felt his way that's not good enough it goes on to claim EVERYONE at the white house feels this way.

You are off the rails VS as it's obvious you will post anything and everything you can find that's anti Trump.
And you apparently don't care if it's true or not.
The guy who wrote this is Bill Palmer a blogger. He makes money putting out SHIT like this.

 . Snopes.com editor Brooke Binkowski as “basically a pro-Hillary Clinton 'news site.' It was out there to counter misinformation.”[2] The site has been criticized for building a large following based on "wildly speculative theories about Donald Trump.

Laughing Laughing Laughing  Yes and it's intentional. DUH! There has been ZERO response to "normal" posts so I'm TRYING  to get someone (besides you) to call me on it. Nobody wants to play anymore.  Laughing  

I'm the anti-Hannity of the RVF.  Laughing

If I didn't include a link to the sourse, it was baiting. Pure and simple.  Big Grin
Reply
#63
(02-20-2018, 12:30 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 11:35 AM)tvguy Wrote:   Right so I'm just supposed to believe that not only ONE person felt his way that's not good enough it goes on to claim EVERYONE at the white house feels this way.

You are off the rails VS as it's obvious you will post anything and everything you can find that's anti Trump.
And you apparently don't care if it's true or not.
The guy who wrote this is Bill Palmer a blogger. He makes money putting out SHIT like this.

 . Snopes.com editor Brooke Binkowski as “basically a pro-Hillary Clinton 'news site.' It was out there to counter misinformation.”[2] The site has been criticized for building a large following based on "wildly speculative theories about Donald Trump.

Laughing Laughing Laughing  Yes and it's intentional. DUH! There has been ZERO response to "normal" posts so I'm TRYING  to get someone (besides you) to call me on it. Nobody wants to play anymore.  Laughing  

I'm the anti-Hannity of the RVF.  Laughing

If I didn't include a link to the sourse, it was baiting. Pure and simple.  Big Grin

LOL aight den
Reply
#64
(02-20-2018, 12:30 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 11:35 AM)tvguy Wrote:   Right so I'm just supposed to believe that not only ONE person felt his way that's not good enough it goes on to claim EVERYONE at the white house feels this way.

You are off the rails VS as it's obvious you will post anything and everything you can find that's anti Trump.
And you apparently don't care if it's true or not.
The guy who wrote this is Bill Palmer a blogger. He makes money putting out SHIT like this.

 . Snopes.com editor Brooke Binkowski as “basically a pro-Hillary Clinton 'news site.' It was out there to counter misinformation.”[2] The site has been criticized for building a large following based on "wildly speculative theories about Donald Trump.

Laughing Laughing Laughing  Yes and it's intentional. DUH! There has been ZERO response to "normal" posts so I'm TRYING  to get someone (besides you) to call me on it. Nobody wants to play anymore.  Laughing  

I'm the anti-Hannity of the RVF.  Laughing

If I didn't include a link to the sourse, it was baiting. Pure and simple.  Big Grin

It appears that you are a one man circle jerk.
Reply
#65
(02-20-2018, 07:52 PM)Someones Dad Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 12:30 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 11:35 AM)tvguy Wrote:   Right so I'm just supposed to believe that not only ONE person felt his way that's not good enough it goes on to claim EVERYONE at the white house feels this way.

You are off the rails VS as it's obvious you will post anything and everything you can find that's anti Trump.
And you apparently don't care if it's true or not.
The guy who wrote this is Bill Palmer a blogger. He makes money putting out SHIT like this.

 . Snopes.com editor Brooke Binkowski as “basically a pro-Hillary Clinton 'news site.' It was out there to counter misinformation.”[2] The site has been criticized for building a large following based on "wildly speculative theories about Donald Trump.

Laughing Laughing Laughing  Yes and it's intentional. DUH! There has been ZERO response to "normal" posts so I'm TRYING  to get someone (besides you) to call me on it. Nobody wants to play anymore.  Laughing  

I'm the anti-Hannity of the RVF.  Laughing

If I didn't include a link to the sourse, it was baiting. Pure and simple.  Big Grin

It appears that you are a one man circle jerk.

I suppose so.  Rolling Eyes

Why do you bother to come here and ask about ads you think are being intentionally kept from you, then not respond when it's not the answer you were looking for? I truly thought you were looking for truth and knowledge, but it seems you don't even want to take the time to read the indictment. Which by the way was INTENTIONALLY simply written for us layman to understand (Trumpsters more than the rest of us)  Laughing Even DAG Rosenstein came out to attempt to help you understand, which they normally wouldn't  do. 

Sorry your conspiracy theory didn't work out for you...
Reply
#66
(02-20-2018, 08:25 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 07:52 PM)Someones Dad Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 12:30 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 11:35 AM)tvguy Wrote:   Right so I'm just supposed to believe that not only ONE person felt his way that's not good enough it goes on to claim EVERYONE at the white house feels this way.

You are off the rails VS as it's obvious you will post anything and everything you can find that's anti Trump.
And you apparently don't care if it's true or not.
The guy who wrote this is Bill Palmer a blogger. He makes money putting out SHIT like this.

 . Snopes.com editor Brooke Binkowski as “basically a pro-Hillary Clinton 'news site.' It was out there to counter misinformation.”[2] The site has been criticized for building a large following based on "wildly speculative theories about Donald Trump.

Laughing Laughing Laughing  Yes and it's intentional. DUH! There has been ZERO response to "normal" posts so I'm TRYING  to get someone (besides you) to call me on it. Nobody wants to play anymore.  Laughing  

I'm the anti-Hannity of the RVF.  Laughing

If I didn't include a link to the sourse, it was baiting. Pure and simple.  Big Grin

It appears that you are a one man circle jerk.

I suppose so.  Rolling Eyes

Why do you bother to come here and ask about ads you think are being intentionally kept from you, then not respond when it's not the answer you were looking for? I truly thought you were looking for truth and knowledge, but it seems you don't even want to take the time to read the indictment. Which by the way was INTENTIONALLY simply written for us layman to understand (Trumpsters more than the rest of us)  Laughing Even DAG Rosenstein came out to attempt to help you understand, which they normally wouldn't  do. 

Sorry your conspiracy theory didn't work out for you...

What?  Of course I read it.  I still don't know that I personally ever saw a single "Russian" ad on facebook.  Yes I am on there.  I just want to know what ads the Russians pushed down our throats to make us vote different than we would have.

Saw today that CNN and MSNBC heavily pushed for one anti-trump rally, attended by Michael Moore, that was 100% directed by the Russian mobsters indicted.  So even though I never saw one of the propaganda ads, you are correct that they had influence.
Reply
#67
(02-20-2018, 08:38 PM)Someones Dad Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 08:25 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 07:52 PM)Someones Dad Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 12:30 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 11:35 AM)tvguy Wrote:   Right so I'm just supposed to believe that not only ONE person felt his way that's not good enough it goes on to claim EVERYONE at the white house feels this way.

You are off the rails VS as it's obvious you will post anything and everything you can find that's anti Trump.
And you apparently don't care if it's true or not.
The guy who wrote this is Bill Palmer a blogger. He makes money putting out SHIT like this.

 . Snopes.com editor Brooke Binkowski as “basically a pro-Hillary Clinton 'news site.' It was out there to counter misinformation.”[2] The site has been criticized for building a large following based on "wildly speculative theories about Donald Trump.

Laughing Laughing Laughing  Yes and it's intentional. DUH! There has been ZERO response to "normal" posts so I'm TRYING  to get someone (besides you) to call me on it. Nobody wants to play anymore.  Laughing  

I'm the anti-Hannity of the RVF.  Laughing

If I didn't include a link to the sourse, it was baiting. Pure and simple.  Big Grin

It appears that you are a one man circle jerk.

I suppose so.  Rolling Eyes

Why do you bother to come here and ask about ads you think are being intentionally kept from you, then not respond when it's not the answer you were looking for? I truly thought you were looking for truth and knowledge, but it seems you don't even want to take the time to read the indictment. Which by the way was INTENTIONALLY simply written for us layman to understand (Trumpsters more than the rest of us)  Laughing Even DAG Rosenstein came out to attempt to help you understand, which they normally wouldn't  do. 

Sorry your conspiracy theory didn't work out for you...

What?  Of course I read it.  I still don't know that I personally ever saw a single "Russian" ad on facebook.  Yes I am on there.  I just want to know what ads the Russians pushed down our throats to make us vote different than we would have.

Saw today that CNN and MSNBC heavily pushed for one anti-trump rally, attended by Michael Moore, that was 100% directed by the Russian mobsters indicted.  So even though I never saw one of the propaganda ads, you are correct that they had influence.

I suspect you're not trying very hard or you're trying to push an agenda of your own. I don't do Facebook but a simple search using the search engine of your choice would likely provide you a good starting point. Maybe you could satisfy your curiosity and report to us what you find out. You know, contribute to the discussion.
Reply
#68
(02-20-2018, 08:38 PM)Someones Dad Wrote:
(02-20-2018, 08:25 PM)Valuesize Wrote: I suppose so.  Rolling Eyes

Why do you bother to come here and ask about ads you think are being intentionally kept from you, then not respond when it's not the answer you were looking for? I truly thought you were looking for truth and knowledge, but it seems you don't even want to take the time to read the indictment. Which by the way was INTENTIONALLY simply written for us layman to understand (Trumpsters more than the rest of us)  Laughing Even DAG Rosenstein came out to attempt to help you understand, which they normally wouldn't  do. 

Sorry your conspiracy theory didn't work out for you...

What?  Of course I read it.  I still don't know that I personally ever saw a single "Russian" ad on facebook.  Yes I am on there.  I just want to know what ads the Russians pushed down our throats to make us vote different than we would have.

Saw today that CNN and MSNBC heavily pushed for one anti-trump rally, attended by Michael Moore, that was 100% directed by the Russian mobsters indicted.  So even though I never saw one of the propaganda ads, you are correct that they had influence.

Well there you go then.  Big Grin

I'm going to move this discussion back to the proper thead.
Reply
#69
[Image: 8639ecc0ba0ac6cd5a3f47270f6c7547.jpg]

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk
Reply
#70
(02-26-2018, 01:38 PM)Scrapper Wrote: [Image: 8639ecc0ba0ac6cd5a3f47270f6c7547.jpg]

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

That's not an accurate quote. I was changed to make him look like a fool. There's no reason to do that. He is a fool.



"You don't know until you test it, but I really believe I'd run in there even if I didn't have a weapon,” Trump told a gathering of governors at the White House. "And I think most of the people in this room would have done that, too."
Reply
#71
(02-26-2018, 01:42 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(02-26-2018, 01:38 PM)Scrapper Wrote: [Image: 8639ecc0ba0ac6cd5a3f47270f6c7547.jpg]

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

That's not an accurate quote. I was changed to make him look like a fool. There's no reason to do that. He is a fool.



"You don't know until you test it, but I really believe I'd run in there even if I didn't have a weapon,” Trump told a gathering of governors at the White House. "And I think most of the people in this room would have done that, too."

When my son was in high school there was a shooting at a dance. (outside the event).
He told me the kids all ram towards the gun fire to see what was happening.

Big disappointment for me, I thought I taught him better.  Run in the opposite direction from gun fire.
So I guess I'm one of the few, who would not have run into the school.
Reply
#72
(02-26-2018, 01:51 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(02-26-2018, 01:42 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(02-26-2018, 01:38 PM)Scrapper Wrote: [Image: 8639ecc0ba0ac6cd5a3f47270f6c7547.jpg]

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

That's not an accurate quote. I was changed to make him look like a fool. There's no reason to do that. He is a fool.



"You don't know until you test it, but I really believe I'd run in there even if I didn't have a weapon,” Trump told a gathering of governors at the White House. "And I think most of the people in this room would have done that, too."

When my son was in high school there was a shooting at a dance. (outside the event).
He told me the kids all ram towards the gun fire to see what was happening.

Big disappointment for me, I thought I taught him better.  Run in the opposite direction from gun fire.
So I guess I'm one of the few, who would not have run into the school.
Well I've seen where there was gunfire in a large crowd and 99.999999% of the people get as far away from it as possible.
It's actually quite remarkable how fast  there is a huge area devoid of people in a matter of seconds.

Anyway anyone who runs toward a shooter and is unarmed is extremely brave and extremely stupid. So Trump partly qualifies. Razz
Reply
#73
(02-26-2018, 01:42 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(02-26-2018, 01:38 PM)Scrapper Wrote: [Image: 8639ecc0ba0ac6cd5a3f47270f6c7547.jpg]

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

That's not an accurate quote. I was changed to make him look like a fool. There's no reason to do that. He is a fool.



"You don't know until you test it, but I really believe I'd run in there even if I didn't have a weapon,” Trump told a gathering of governors at the White House. "And I think most of the people in this room would have done that, too."
Close enough.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk
Reply
#74
Former deputy Scot Peterson says why he didn't go inside Stoneman Douglas during shooting

“Let there be no mistake, Mr. Peterson wishes that he could have prevented the untimely passing of the 17 victims on that day, and his heart goes out to the families of the victims in their time of need,” he said “However, the allegations that Mr. Peterson was a coward and that his performance, under the circumstances, failed to meet the standards of police officers are patently untrue.”
Peterson said the initial report was of firecrackers, not gunshots, in the 1200 building, where the killer was shooting his victims. When he reached the building, he heard gunshots, but “believed that those gunshots were originating from outside of any of the buildings on the school campus,” the statement said, in a quotation attributed to Peterson.
[url=http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/parkland/florida-school-shooting/fl-bz-florida-school-shooting-scot-peterson-20180223-story.html][/url]
In the event of outdoor gunshots, sheriff’s office training calls for deputies to “seek cover and assess the situation in order to communicate what one observes to other law enforcement,” the statement said.
“Consistent with his training, Mr. Peterson ‘took up a tactical position between the 700-800 buildings corridor/corner,” the statement said. Radio reports of a victim on the football field reinforced his belief that the shooter was outside, according to the statement.

He was the first sheriff’s office to advise BSO dispatch of shots fired and he initiated the code red that locked down the entire campus.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/browar...story.html
Reply
#75
(02-26-2018, 05:15 PM)Valuesize Wrote: Former deputy Scot Peterson says why he didn't go inside Stoneman Douglas during shooting

“Let there be no mistake, Mr. Peterson wishes that he could have prevented the untimely passing of the 17 victims on that day, and his heart goes out to the families of the victims in their time of need,” he said “However, the allegations that Mr. Peterson was a coward and that his performance, under the circumstances, failed to meet the standards of police officers are patently untrue.”
Peterson said the initial report was of firecrackers, not gunshots, in the 1200 building, where the killer was shooting his victims. When he reached the building, he heard gunshots, but “believed that those gunshots were originating from outside of any of the buildings on the school campus,” the statement said, in a quotation attributed to Peterson.
[url=http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/parkland/florida-school-shooting/fl-bz-florida-school-shooting-scot-peterson-20180223-story.html][/url]
In the event of outdoor gunshots, sheriff’s office training calls for deputies to “seek cover and assess the situation in order to communicate what one observes to other law enforcement,” the statement said.
“Consistent with his training, Mr. Peterson ‘took up a tactical position between the 700-800 buildings corridor/corner,” the statement said. Radio reports of a victim on the football field reinforced his belief that the shooter was outside, according to the statement.

He was the first sheriff’s office to advise BSO dispatch of shots fired and he initiated the code red that locked down the entire campus.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/browar...story.html

BULL FUCKING SHIT he should have went to where he though the shots were coming from. So lets add LIAR to COWARD.
A REAL police officer who hears gunshots at a school that HIS DUTY is to protect has no fucking excuse to do what he did.


In the event of outdoor gunshots, sheriff’s office training calls for deputies to “seek cover and assess the situation in order to communicate what one observes to other law enforcement,” the statement said

HORSESHIT!!!  Communicate my ass, you can do that AND try and stop the shooter. You can't do that if you HIDE!!



 He was the first sheriff’s office to advise BSO dispatch of shots fired and he initiated the code red that locked down the entire campus.

What" he was the "sheriff's office" That make no fucking sense. But I think they are trying to say he was the first DEPUTY from the Sheriff's office to initiate the code red.
BIG FUCKING DEAL.. Are we supposed to give him a medal for that? There were probably calls to 911 before he initiated anything
Reply
#76
Yup, he could "seek cover" while actively engaging with the situation, what he did was hide and wait, you nailed it, he is a liar AND a coward.
Reply
#77
(02-26-2018, 01:38 PM)Scrapper Wrote: [Image: 8639ecc0ba0ac6cd5a3f47270f6c7547.jpg]

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

[Image: trump-eagle-03a.gif]
Reply
#78
(02-26-2018, 06:31 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(02-26-2018, 01:38 PM)Scrapper Wrote: [Image: 8639ecc0ba0ac6cd5a3f47270f6c7547.jpg]

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

[Image: trump-eagle-03a.gif]

Reply
#79
(02-26-2018, 01:42 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(02-26-2018, 01:38 PM)Scrapper Wrote: [Image: 8639ecc0ba0ac6cd5a3f47270f6c7547.jpg]

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

That's not an accurate quote. I was changed to make him look like a fool. There's no reason to do that. He is a fool.



"You don't know until you test it, but I really believe I'd run in there even if I didn't have a weapon,” Trump told a gathering of governors at the White House. "And I think most of the people in this room would have done that, too."

What he meant was he'd send his driver in pronto! Since he would be doing the sending he'd be taking the credit.
Reply
#80
[Image: DW_E5piX0AErPbU.jpg]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)