SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,620
I see Trump is upset with his daughter.
I see Trump is upset with his daughter.
100%Would he still bang her?
I know you’re being sarcastic slightly but the difference is that CNN is a news station and Fox is …. n’tThe lead story on ultra-liberal biased CNN currently. I wonder if Fox would ever lead with such a thing about Trump, or any GOPer.
![]()
Fact check: Biden falsely claims US has 'fastest-growing economy in the world' | CNN Politics
In a Wednesday appearance on the ABC late-night show "Jimmy Kimmel Live!," President Joe Biden made a dramatic claim about the US economy -- and repeated himself for emphasis.www.cnn.com
Have they called you a racist yet? That seems to be their bog standard term for any one who does not agree with their diktatsYou know the ironic thing?
I laugh at the notion that these posters call me a 'purist' for the fact I can criticise my kind of politician... Yet they must see their own as too 'pure' to call out!!
It's laughable the height of their own soapbox when shouting me down!
I see Trump is upset with his daughter.
1
Have they called you a racist yet? That seems to be their bog standard term for any one who does not agree with their diktats
And the way their media covers up anything that is inconvenient reminds of Putin
I don't suppose our Man in San Francisco has mentioned his local prosecutor has been recalled because of the failure of his wishy washy policies. I am not holding my breath.
No. It’s in response to her saying she didn’t believe the election was stolen in her testimony. That’s why he’s saying she wasn’t involved, didn’t know the evidence and had already “checked out”That’s not being upset with her, that’s disassociating her from the events of Jan 6th, the way I read it. Including using her surname (as if we all know another Ivanka) just so it’s on record. The punctuation and spelling is not his, that’s from his (or her) legal team, except maybe for the “he sucked” addition.
You don’t think he’s doing something for someone else then ? I’m shocked ;-)No. It’s in response to her saying she didn’t believe the election was stolen in her testimony. That’s why he’s saying she wasn’t involved, didn’t know the evidence and had already “checked out”
You think he wrote that tweet with its complex use of commas to denote verbal asides and managed to capitalise the proper nouns, without resorting to the use of CAPS LOCK? Hmm, not convinced myself. Think it’s a response to the reporting of her testimony, yes, but it’s also got an eye on whatever political future she might want. Just my opinion of course.No. It’s in response to her saying she didn’t believe the election was stolen in her testimony. That’s why he’s saying she wasn’t involved, didn’t know the evidence and had already “checked out”
You think he wrote that tweet with its complex use of commas to denote verbal asides and managed to capitalise the proper nouns, without resorting to the use of CAPS LOCK? Hmm, not convinced myself. Think it’s a response to the reporting of her testimony, yes, but it’s also got an eye on whatever political future she might want. Just my opinion of course.
No.Is he back on twitter?
And a number of folks got kicked off it for trying to discuss the 1/6 hearings.No.
He posts on his own platform - Truth Social, which is the Social Media equivalent of Trump Steaks or Trump University.
No.
He posts on his own platform - Truth Social, which is the Social Media equivalent of Trump Steaks or Trump University.
I too will be abstentious when it comes to Truth Social.I was being facetious in response to the poster referring to it as a tweet.
Unfortunately/fortunately you can't view Truth social in the UK and I don't have any inclination to create an account or use a VPN to read what the pathetic loser has to say.