Every house and car with an American flag is voting for Trump too.
You can make a solid argument that those who have no political signage on their property is probably voting Trump. Same people lie to pollsters, or ignore them.
Every house and car with an American flag is voting for Trump too.
Nice, Steelworth. Been in the Tarzana square dozens of times, and that place has one of the most awesome bakeries imaginable.
You remember the name? (I won't know it but just for ***** & giggles)
You remember the name? (I won't know it but just for ***** & giggles)
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">After decades of division and conflict, we mark the dawn of a new Middle East. Congratulations to the people of Israel, the people of the United Arab Emirates, and the people of the Kingdom of Bahrain. God Bless You All! <a href="https://t.co/gpeqFDtr0S">pic.twitter.com/gpeqFDtr0S</a></p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1305975008750194688?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 15, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
But orange man bad. **** sake.
Unbelievable. I was SURE that the Taliban was targeting US military ONLY to get that prize money. Otherwise, no way would they shoot our military.
NO.
FREAKING.
WAY.
So the story turns out to be 100% bullshit. Just you wait for the NYT, WaPo, NPR, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN to hear this, hoo-boy, it will be game over for the lying liars telling lies to smear Trump.
Just you wait.
I have no doubt, Sarge, none at all that the cadre of lying, preening know-it-alls repeating pure propaganda will be here ANY SECOND to admit their stupidity in believing and fostering a bullshit rumor generated by Media Matters.
I posted that as a wisecrack, cause that's my role around here. I don't care how she dresses, just thought it was funny.
For the record, it's not the military drab per se, but the style of the dress that seems to have raised a few eyebrows.
<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Oh, nothing to see here, just <a href="https://twitter.com/MELANIATRUMP?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MELANIATRUMP</a> serving us her best fascist-fashion look at the Rose Garden the other night. Video by <a href="https://twitter.com/diet_prada?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@diet_prada</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TrumpChaos?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TrumpChaos</a> <a href="https://t.co/HnsycTj6Wt">pic.twitter.com/HnsycTj6Wt</a></p>— Sari Beth Rosenberg (@saribethrose) <a href="https://twitter.com/saribethrose/status/1298965865874980867?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 27, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp>
CNN is a disease at this point, or a symptom of raging lunacy of its fat, bald, dumpy little owner, Jeff Zucker.
Here is what Dershowitz actually said.
He began by noting that some forms of a “quid pro quo” were unlawful and impeachable: “The only thing that would make the quid pro quo unlawful would be if the quo were in some way illegal.”
He then explained: “If a president does something which he believe will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.”
CNN repeatedly claimed and continues to claim through its reporters and talking heads — that during the impeachment trial I had told senators, in the words of Paul Begala, that presidents are “immune from every criminal act, so long as they could plausibly claim they did it to boost their re-election effort.”
Some talking heads went so far as to say that I told the senate that a president could shoot his opponent, or tamper with voting machines, as long as he believed his re-election was in the public interest. Joe Lockhart compared me to Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini and said my argument would lead to genocide.
A simple truth-check, if CNN had bothered to conduct one, would have shown that I said exactly the opposite of what CNN said I had said: I told the senators — both in my speech and in answers to questions — that if a president did anything that was “in some way illegal” or “corruptly motivated” or that involved “personalpecuniary.” benefit, he could be impeached, even if his motive was to help his re-election, which he believed was in the public interest. My point was that if a president did something entirely lawful that was motivated in part by helping his re-election, that mixed motive would not turn a legal act into an impeachable offense.
CNN turned my statement on its head, wrenched a few words out of context while omitting other crucial words, and lied to its viewers.