SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the twitter-and-facebook-and-twitch-and-snapchat-and... dept.
Twitter permanently suspends Trump's account:
US President Donald Trump has been permanently suspended from Twitter "due to the risk of further incitement of violence", the company says.
Twitter said the decision was made "after close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them".
Mr Trump had earlier been locked out of his account for 12 hours.
Twitter then said that it would ban Mr Trump "permanently" if he breached the platform's rules again.
Reacting to the permanent ban, Trump 2020 campaign adviser Jason Miller tweeted: "Disgusting... if you don't think they're coming for you next, you're wrong."
It comes after Mr Trump tweeted several messages on Wednesday, calling the people who stormed the US Capitol "patriots".
Hundreds of his supporters entered the Capitol building as the US Congress attempted to certify Joe Biden's victory in the presidential election. The ensuing violence led to the deaths of four civilians and a police officer.
The siege took place just hours after Trump addressed supporters and told them: "We will never give up; we will never concede."
[...] On Thursday, Facebook said it had suspended Mr Trump "indefinitely". The popular gaming platform Twitch also placed an indefinite ban on the outgoing president's channel, which he has used for rally broadcasts. So has Snapchat.
Two online Trump memorabilia stores were closed this week by e-commerce company Shopify. On Friday, Reddit banned its "donaldtrump" forum for the president's supporters.
[...] The big question now is, can Trumpism survive without the backing of mainstream media? Or will it simply slip into the shadows of the internet?
(Emphasis retained from original.)
Also at Ars Technica, CNET
Full Twitter explanation at: blog.twitter.com
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @02:04PM (59 children)
Trump's problem is he stayed on Twitter for 4 years, he had 4 years to find alternative and make it robust against Left censorship. Instead he spent his days helping Kikes and Sandniggers get along, funneling money to Israel, and doing fuck all about the wall.
The issue of tech censorship was huge on my radar 5 years ago. By now it's too late to play catch-up. The gatekeepers are on in-league, nut-cupping each-other.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @02:48PM (28 children)
You could have done without the racist invective, but he really should have put up a read-only peep.whitehouse.gov site where he could communicate directly with the people.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @03:06PM (21 children)
But then how could he cry victim when he broke their terms and conditions that he agreed to by clicking Agree? Or maybe the rules only apply to little people.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @03:23PM (20 children)
That's a good point. By sticking to Twatter, he has strongly demonstrated the liberal bias of most of the media companies.
Clearly the left have furthered their stance against Freedom of Speech.
Oh the irony.
(Score: 5, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @03:55PM (2 children)
The victim in chief should have "renegotiated" the TOS that he agreed to. I heard he was good at deals.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @06:47PM (1 child)
He only deals from the bottom of the deck.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Sunday January 10 2021, @04:37PM
and he doesn't have a full deck to use.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 4, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Saturday January 09 2021, @06:33PM (15 children)
It is past time to make the distinction between liberal and left clear. Liberals do not censor -- leftists do. Liberals believe in equality -- leftists believe in equity, which is a word used to obfuscate what they mean, which is racism.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Unixnut on Saturday January 09 2021, @07:46PM (9 children)
At some point in the past (before I was born from what I can see), a great con was born, the con that the "Left" and "Right" wing are opposite ends of the political spectrum.
At school I was taught this, drummed into my head. A line with Marxism on the left, Fascism on the right, but as I grew older I came to realise that both "sides" are in fact the same.
Both of these sides are authoritarian in nature. We get to pick whether we get collectivist authoritarianism from the left, or non-collectivist authoritarianism from the right.
The real divide is not between left and right, but between authoritarians and liberals. A liberal being one who is pro-individualist/anti-authoritarian.
I consider myself a liberal, an anti-authoritarian, but that does (more than often) make people put me on the right side of the spectrum rather than the left, because left-wing ideology is inherently collectivist, which requires authoritarian rule to make sure people all work for the collective good over their natural behaviour.
Unfortunately most people are stuck in the "Right Vs Left" mindset, which is like picking which master a slave will serve. Whichever you pick, you are a slave.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @07:57PM (1 child)
You're still operating under that con. You need at least two axes to describe political space.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @11:42PM
I got a disagree mod so let me propose a set of axes. I also think that the World's Smallest Political Quiz has too few axes.
- Personal: libertarian <-> authoritarian
- Economic: decentralized <-> centralized
- Stratification: equity <-> exploitation
On the right (+) side of all three axes we find systems like feudalism (capitalism is capable of values exploitation- and centralization-wards of feudalism). On the left (-) side of all three axes we find the kinds of theoretical societies that would evolve from a Marxist dictatorship of the proletariat.
(Score: 2, Troll) by hemocyanin on Saturday January 09 2021, @08:04PM (4 children)
Very well stated.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @10:58PM (3 children)
No, pro-individualist is not necessarily liberal. Many of the protections society provides to ensure liberty are authoritarian and communal. Simple logic like less rules equals more freedom are just wrong and must be ignored.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @02:11AM (1 child)
"Many of the protections society provides to ensure liberty are authoritarian and communal." -- you mean like laws? Well, yeah, the concept of a legal framework for a society is communal, but the pro-individualist position on this that isn't actually out-and-out anarchism is not to have no laws, but to restrict what laws can be passed. It's analogous to unconscionable terms in a contract. However, none of that contradicts the idea of pro-individualism being liberal; it contradicts the idea of letting individuals interfere with each other.
So take another swing at explaining why you don't think that liberality correlates with a smaller ruleset, because this one was a whiff.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @04:21AM
So you're a moron? Def a u prob.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 11 2021, @04:48AM
He also mentioned anti-authoritarian.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @08:26PM
That's an interesting statement, but I view you as being at odds with yourself. How do you draw the line? I know, zig-zag, very carefully, etc.
Trouble with all of it is: you're either D or R. Ain't any other choices.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by acid andy on Sunday January 10 2021, @02:23PM
I agree with most of what you say and I think the distinction is vitally important and so often missed. I would have hoped that opposition to authoritarianism could unite a great many people across the left / right divide, even on this site, if only people could think more sensibly.
I don't entirely agree. I'm a slightly left-wing libertarian (both "libertarian" and "liberal" have been misused so much recently--to be clear, I'm in favor of increased civil-liberties for the little guy). I don't think it's a complete contradiction in terms although it might be wishful thinking. I do think that any political ideology other than anarchy will require some degree of authoritarian rule purely to implement the policies. You can always use carrot rather than stick to motivate people to change their behavior though of course you have to work out who works to produce those carrots (robots?).
When the right enforce laws to try to protect big businesses (or indeed any businesses), land ownership, and wealth acquisition, they're making some people work contrary to their natural behavior as well. The thing about authoritarianism (and libertarianism) is it's never applied consistently across the board to all groups of people. So you get authoritarian rule over the poor and unbounded liberty for the rich and big business. I'd prefer the latter groups to receive more regulation and those who have less to get a bit more freedom.
Welcome to Edgeways. Words should apply in advance as spaces are highly limite—
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Saturday January 09 2021, @10:39PM (1 child)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 10 2021, @02:22PM
The obvious rebuttal is taking care of oneself without tapping the resources of society by force. That's a huge responsibility that critics of libertarians traditionally refuse to acknowledge.
And I think it far more responsible to allow hate speech and fight it maturely and fairly with your own speech, than to censor it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @10:47PM
Hemo, you can play that funky music, white boy!
(Score: 3, Informative) by crafoo on Sunday January 10 2021, @11:57PM (1 child)
Liberals may believe in equality, I don't know. I do know equality does not exist in the real world. Trying to force it simply means you must oppress and/or enslave some portion of your population. Which the leftists are certainly fine with.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @06:38AM
Oppressing oppressors is not oppression! I suppose you still want restitution for the slaves your family was forced to let go after the Civil War? Sorry, racist punk, ain't gonna happen. And, we are going to oppress your white privilege until it oozes out your asshole. Prepare yourself!
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday January 10 2021, @03:27AM
You mean the way that Twitter bent over backwards for the last 4 years to excuse his repeated violations of their TOS, then put him on probation and finally kicked him off only after he proved he couldn't manage to live up to the agreement for 24 whole hours in a row?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @06:37PM (5 children)
"You could have done without the racist invective"
why should he when they are in league to destroy the white race and use jew owned big tech to do it? it's completely relevant to the topic at hand.
White Genocide is Real: In Their Own Words: https://www.bitchute.com/video/JY6exTqkTQd1/ [bitchute.com]
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @01:35PM
Racist, stupid, and crazy.
That's a yahtzee!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @06:41AM (3 children)
Well I certainly hope so! No one deserves it more!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @09:01PM (2 children)
Why, because whites make desirable societies that everyone wants to migrate to. I don't see people trying to migrate to third world countries with corrupt governments where everyone is corrupt. In those countries it's the best scammers that make it ahead. That's why we get scammers calling and emailing us from these countries always trying to scam us. Often times their culture is that if you get scammed or if something is stolen from you it's your own fault. Either we need to change their culture (some people see a problem with that) or if we are to accept that their culture is the way it is then we should stop blaming other cultures for the fact that their own culture creates undesirable societies to live in.
Then the whites try to move away from all the corruption with people that leave trash in the streets and graffiti everywhere but then they get followed. Because the corrupt don't want to live with their own kind. When their streets get trashed (because they're the ones trashing it) and their buildings get graffitied and dilapidated instead of maintaining their own buildings, fixing their owns streets, policing themselves (looking around police are disproportionately white. I see many Hispanic police as well which is admirable), stopping the graffiti, not throwing trash in the streets, they simply blame everyone else for their own problems. They say "we're poor", blah blah blah. That's no reason to trash the streets. Money is just a medium of exchange, no one is forcing you not to put in the work required to maintain your own buildings (ie: get some paint and paint the walls). Make your own societies desirable places to live. Don't keep expecting someone else to do it. Don't expect to follow those that create desirable societies and then trash their societies.
With respect to slavery the U.S. got rid of slavery very quickly compared to other countries and slavery didn't originate from white societies.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @09:22PM (1 child)
Also being poor is no excuse to do drugs. It's no excuse to keep creating multi-partner families. People of certain races are disproportionately much more likely to ditch school and have multi-partner families (ie: one mom having multiple children each with different dads. One dad having multiple children each having different moms). These are CHOICES that these people make. There are fundamental cultural differences between people of different races. We can either change their culture or stop blaming everyone else for the problems their own culture brings upon them.
Then the media complains how the Coronavirus has disproportionately affected poor people and 'minorities' and they somehow blame those with money and they just want to find a way to put the blame squarely on whites. Somehow everything is always all their faults, who cares about personal responsibility. It's not that simple and it's not fair for the media to do this. You can even argue that it's racist to keep blaming the whites for everyone else's problems. One can also argue that those with money are more responsible which is how they acquired their money in the first place (they are financially responsible and in general more responsible) and it's their responsible characteristics that resulted in them being less affected. There are different arguments to be made and looked at but the media just wants someone to villainize because that's what gets views and ratings. They need someone to be the villain.
(Multi-partner families disproportionately result in poverty).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 12 2021, @10:30PM
burn in hell you piece of shit :-)
Wait, I mean, thoughts and prayers!
Wait, nope, right the first time, may your soul burn for being the evil fucker you are! White supremacists bad mmmkay?
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @03:39PM
If there is left censorship why are you still here?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday January 09 2021, @04:08PM (28 children)
Trump's problem is that he was on twitter.
No matter your politics, you have to admit that Trump's non-stop tweets were just stoooopid. You don't run a presidential administration like some prom queen seeking popularity. Had Trump actually stopped and though about his tweets, and posted a weekly update, things may have been alright. If Trump had sought advice before posting, and allowed his press secretary to do the actual posting, things may have been alright. Lots of things may have been alright. But sitting around like some kid, trying to manipulate popularity ratings? Stooooopid.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @04:44PM (20 children)
He was being a president of the 21st century. The promise of bringing your message directly to the people was great considering the (traditional) media was trying to shoot him down already as a candidate.
Do you think he would have even become president if he had not been able to talk directly to the people? The RNC would have anointed iJeb! or Kasich the same way the DNC strongarms their anointed candidates through the process.
Trump's problem was that he was unsuspecting how the elites were conspiring against him, and failed to act in time. Three years of a healthy economy unmarred by new wars. Then the impeachment distraction while (in PA, and probably other states too) the Republican dominated legislature worked with the Democrats to allow mail-in voting, around November last year. The actual impeachment itself, followed by the politically motivated Covid panic. Here's where I think he grossly failed as a leader.
Led around by the nose by Cuomo about hospital resources, the media about ventilators and testing. He tried to provide it all, but after being ridiculed in April, instead for standing up for America, he then pretty much stepped away for two months until the riots started and his balls grew back. By the time the elections were approaching his team saw the fraud potential of mail-in votes, but his lawsuits were shot down: "The signatures will be checked, so only valid votes will be counted". Twitter was tightening the noose, but Trump was too chicken to use an Alt-Twitter and/or too oblivious to provide his own backup on the whitehouse.gov domain YEARS ago. Trump, experienced in the backstabbing games like no other, now for the first time in his life is seeing his allies having to plan for life after Jan 20 and abandoning him.
Best he can do right now is to swing the pardon and declassification pen, move out, and plan for 2024.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by helel on Saturday January 09 2021, @06:43PM (2 children)
You are completely right, up to here. Trump never could have gotten the nomination without Twitter and even as president it played an important roll in maintaining his support.
And here you go off the rails. If "the elites" really were conspiring against him they would have kicked him off Twitter and Facebook years ago. It's not some secret that Twitter was an absolutely vital component of his grip on power.
The alternative would be to suggest that "the elites" did try to get him kicked off social media but that the executives at Twitter and Facebook were firmly in his camp and could not be persuaded. But that would mean that the last four years of complaints I've heard about those companies "censoring the right" were honestly mistaken, at best, or outright lies trying to cover up the hard right lean of both platforms!
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @06:59PM (1 child)
This is where you're mistaken. Before the riots, they didn't feel the Overton window covered censoring him yet. When the riots started happening, there were slight feelers of censorship for supposedly inciting the riots further. The push became stronger once he questioned the results of the "most secure election ever". Now in Trump's last days and with the show at the Capitol, the left is portraying Trump and half the country that voted for him as the plotters of a coup attempt. With so few days remaining, nobody's going to put their neck out for no reward and say "Hey, this is (still) our President, we should hear what he has to say!".
You're wrong if you think Twitter is his lifeline of support. His followers are sitting on discussion sites (that haven't been deplatformed yet) and relaying info from Twitter. They could relay from any other medium he chooses to use.
(Score: 3, Informative) by helel on Saturday January 09 2021, @07:28PM
Nobody is portraying all of the 23% of the nation that voted for Trump as treasonous, just Trump himself and those who helped him engage in his coup attempt [businessinsider.com.au]. That said, anyone who still supports Trump is supporting a traitor against the United States.
As for banning from Twitter four years ago vs now... It's not like they've been shy about banning Trumps critics [foxnews.com]*. Maybe it's some kind of 4D chess to help him so much it hurts him but Occam's Razor would suggest that it's more likely they were just strait up helping him.
* Twitter claims they banned the accounts for using bot's to boost their follower count but Trump does the same thing [msn.com]...
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Saturday January 09 2021, @07:23PM (14 children)
Yes, you seem to understand how things worked.
Most of my post just says that slower, considered, deliberate posting would have achieved his goals better. It seems that Trump just posted whatever was on his mind - shooting from the hip, if you please.
If the man had conferred with even one or two trusted people, and considered his posts for a few hours, or a day even, he could have had more impact. More impact, and at the same time, avoided some of the traps that made him look stupid. Face it - Trump isn't the smartest of all presidents. He really needed to consider his words more carefully than he did. One stupid slip-up is more than enough for your enemies. Several stupid slipups are more than enough for non-fan non-enemies. Enough slips can begin alienating friends and allies. Careful consideration helps to eliminate those stupid slips.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 5, Insightful) by aristarchus on Saturday January 09 2021, @09:03PM (11 children)
Runaway! If possible, you are becoming more stupid!
Trump hired "the best people, the smartest people", so what he did on Twitter was the best, and some people are saying the best ever, tweeting ever done! So it was not the traps that made him look stupid, it was the stupid that made him look stupid.
Impeach Trump, Again! And Runaway, you need to ask for forgiveness. Such stupidity cannot be unintentional, can it?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @11:02PM (5 children)
It is not. He is a Russian troll that rides a very fine line between inciting chaos and remaining sane enough that he can radicalize more people. His style is very similar to Trump's, unhinged lunacy with just enough plausible deniability, otherwise he'd be written off just like Ethanol-Fueled and his username wouldn't have enough value.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday January 10 2021, @01:03AM
Runaway I don't think is any sort of foreign asset. He really is this insane and evil. He's putting way too much effort across way too much time for this to be anything but a personal obsession of his. My take is that he's a bitter old mediocrity who thinks the world owes him everything on a silver platter and is determined to burn it all down since it won't give him what he wanted.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @01:09AM (1 child)
Call everyone a Russian troll is always a good comeback when you have nothing...
I've never seen so much name calling! Keep it up; it works! /s
I wonder: Do the "cyber core" in various countries have AI that answers forum post. I bet you can train your AI very easy with all the partisan forums around to use as data.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @01:27AM
Works especially well when they are a Russian operative! But you have to think, who would have an interest in fomenting an insurrection by the less intelligent sectors of America? I mean, this is not something a genius like Runaway could come up with all by him self. And he doesn't even realize he is committing treason by working for the Russians, some thing he shares with Flynn, Manafort, Stone, Bannon, and a curiously large proportion of the Trump "administration".
So, not name calling, just reasonable identification. Just arrest him first, and if he has nothing to hide, and really is too stupid to realize what he has done, he can confess and ask for forgiveness, as aristarchus keeps suggesting.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Sunday January 10 2021, @04:07AM (1 child)
I'm sure Putin is gleefully cackling about all the stuff Trump has managed to muck up in this country, but I'm sorry, the "Russian troll" thing just doesn't make sense. Sure, it seems like he's acting like one, but I don't think it's because Russia actually put him up to it. What advantage would this give to Trump? Is he going to move there after he leaves office and live in luxury, after being paid extremely handsomely by Putin? Really, what's in it for Trump? Because that's the *only* thing that ever matters to Trump.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @05:29AM
Put him up to it? No, not quite. On the other hand, my best guess is that Trump is up to his eye teeth in debt to Russian oligarchs. It seems to me that would go a long way to explain a lot about his extreme deference to Putin.
For my part, I will not be at all surprised if Trump makes a sudden dash for Moscow just after Biden is sworn in as President. Remember, you saw it here first!
(Score: 2, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Sunday January 10 2021, @12:53AM (4 children)
No, dude, YOU need to ask forgiveness.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 2, Insightful) by aristarchus on Sunday January 10 2021, @01:20AM (3 children)
Again, Runaway, recent events seem too fast for you, or you are too slow for them. I did not commit treason against my country, you did. We already have one Arkansas man under arrest. Don't be the next, Runaway! Confess! Confess! The Power of Christ Compels you! Confess, Runaway, before it is too late. Sic semper tryannis, you know.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by aristarchus on Sunday January 10 2021, @10:40AM (2 children)
I am seeing aristarchus getting modded down for factually correct posts. Does this mesn we should ban him further? I mean, if he is saying true stuff that hurts the feefees of our nazi soylentils, should he not be banned? At least shadow-banned, to save the feelings of our extremely light-skinned and racist soylentils? Or are we just going to let some Ancient Greek Philosopher point out how stupid they are? Huh? I mean, they are idiots, but do we need aristarchus to keep pointing it out in such hurtful ways?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @02:01PM
Nah, it means you're trolling too much. When you have the upper hand you give people a hug, you don't corner them.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @05:53AM
Sorry, Bubba, it's your personality more than anything. Also the scarcity of "facts" in your posts. As has often been pointed out, when you resort to name calling, it means you have lost, and you have nothing.
Also, you still have that same bit of brisket gristle stuck between your teeth from LAST weekend.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Saturday January 09 2021, @09:31PM
I wondered in the first year if Twitter shouldn't have escrowed [sic] his tweets, called the White House press secretary, and asked: "Hey, he just tweeted this, and ... uh ... [rustle, rustle, 'hey, um, say this', rustle rustle] 'We offer no opinion on its content.' Do you want to approve this post, have us find a way for you to approve them for release on a tweet-by-tweet basis, or just give us the goahead to pass through all his posts from here on as-is?"
"We can wait a couple days for your response -- I think there will be a lot more of these in the future."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @01:04PM
Like instead of a failed insurrection and failed coup attempt, he could have had the Capitol burned to the ground the night before and then blame Democrats and the "weak RINOs" and have them arrested by the morning? Is this what you would have preferred?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @08:36AM (1 child)
When it comes to voting you want each vote to have a chain of custody from the actual voter to whoever is counting the votes. This chain of custody needs to be unbroken until the results are finalized (ie: election guards and publicly accessible/broadcasted cameras should be present the whole time. Those cameras should be recording, the footage should be downloadable).
One of the issues with mail in ballots is that they break this chain of custody. I don't know if a vote originated from a voter or from a printer mass printing random votes.
Voters can fill out their ballots at home. However they should individually drop their votes off at polling stations, present their photo IDs to election guards in front of publicly accessible video cameras, have their photos taken and publicly cataloged with their identifying information, and be crossed off the list of eligible voters before dropping off their ballot. I want to know who voted.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @11:53PM
You can already find that out. It's public information. It's just that we do it in a way that preserves anonymity, and that's the part you don't like.
(Score: 2, Informative) by legont on Saturday January 09 2021, @05:29PM
He just fixed this problem https://t.me/trump [t.me]
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 1) by crafoo on Sunday January 10 2021, @11:59PM (5 children)
Trump is a harmless clown. The best thing he did was to not do much of anything for 4 years. If only every president could be this way.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @01:12AM (1 child)
So you're not only a supporter of seditious traitors but now you're trying to lay cover for him? What happened to 11D chess? What happened to the master troll? What happened to the master negotiator?
Such garbage, do you have any thoughts of your own? Or just the propaganda narrative given to you by OANN, Hannity, Carlson, et all?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @06:23AM
A President who does nothing is an ideal President. No new wars. A Congress that does nothing is an ideal Congress. Bipartisanship means the little guy is about to get screwed over.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday January 11 2021, @05:57AM (2 children)
Well, to be fair, he did have a third rate general from a second world nation assassinated. Fekkin warmonger!!
But, you're right. It seems he has killed off fewer brown people than even our half-white president.
Question: Isn't half-white and half-black something like brown?
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @06:49AM (1 child)
Shut up, Runaway, you racist cracker of a disgusting shade of pale! Obama is ten times the man you will ever be! Just admit that this is the source of all your hate, a black president! In the White House! Galls you, don't it, you racist fuck. Worse than Clinton, the first black president? Ouuuhh! Stings more? You are a loser, Runaway, you are the worst sort of white trash. And you are stupid and ignorant. And butt ugly.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday January 11 2021, @03:13PM
You maroon, there was no black president. There was a half-white president who exploited the color of his skin to identify with the sons and daughters of American slaves. Obama has no kinship to any American slave. He's an outsider, an interloper.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz