User Controls
Donald Trump just got shot
-
2024-07-18 at 7:22 PM UTCThree of the bullets came within a half inch of Trump's head. Two shooters, and one of them was allowed to escape the scene.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2024-07-18 at 7:39 PM UTC
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Ironic that you never hear any of this sentiment when it comes to the tactics of the left. Only the right gets criticized for it. They remain silent when the left does it.
You do hear it when it comes to the tactics of the left! From people on the right! Or you used to, at least, before the right decided "lol this is okay, actually, now that we have an opportunity to do it". -
2024-07-18 at 8:09 PM UTC
-
2024-07-18 at 8:11 PM UTC
-
2024-07-18 at 8:22 PM UTCIn this case two wrongs does make a right, because shooting both candidates is the best outcome for everyone.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2024-07-18 at 8:26 PM UTC
Originally posted by Elbow Do you know what hypocrisy is, oldje man? smh
There's no double standard! People were saying it was bad when the left did it, people are saying it again now that the right is doing it! Stop being antisocial lunatics!
The way you talk, it's almost like you don't believe double standards from the left exists. Enlighten me, please. -
2024-07-18 at 8:31 PM UTC
-
2024-07-18 at 8:33 PM UTCRemember when people living in the closet had to hide their sexuality and if there was even a rumor or whisper of it they could lose everything. Now it's the same way but with cancel culture, which isn't new. Cancel culture has always existed, it just shifted in the other extreme direction which proves people are always scumbags no matter how much you change the cycle of cheekyl will always repeat and the pendulum will swing
-
2024-07-18 at 8:37 PM UTC
Originally posted by the man who put it in my hood Remember when people living in the closet had to hide their sexuality
Those were the days...no open faggotry to be seen, you could walk through the park and a beautiful sunny day and not have it spoiled by seeing to gay blokes kissing and fondling each other on a grassy bank.
THE GOOD OL DAYZThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2024-07-18 at 8:41 PM UTC
Originally posted by the man who put it in my hood Remember when people living in the closet had to hide their sexuality and if there was even a rumor or whisper of it they could lose everything. Now it's the same way but with cancel culture, which isn't new. Cancel culture has always existed, it just shifted in the other extreme direction which proves people are always scumbags no matter how much you change the cycle of cheekyl will always repeat and the pendulum will swing
That has never been the case anywhere that wasn't a Wahhibist hellhole. -
2024-07-18 at 8:54 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Those were the days…no open faggotry to be seen, you could walk through the park and a beautiful sunny day and not have it spoiled by seeing to gay blokes kissing and fondling each other on a grassy bank.
THE GOOD OL DAYZ
So you think cancel culture is good?
Originally posted by Donald Trump That has never been the case anywhere that wasn't a Wahhibist hellhole.
-
2024-07-18 at 9 PM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2024-07-18 at 9:36 PM UTCSo you think those people should be cancelled and lose career and finance opportunities and have banks close their accounts and refuse business because people don't like what they say/do ? It's a slippery roof, because if you support that than why should it be any different than how cancel culture currently is? Like the Disney woke media?
Technically they are just self regulating but I think the problems arise when people try to force the government to participate in extremes in cancel culture (but the government participating in anything is almost always bad so...) -
2024-07-18 at 10:19 PM UTC
-
2024-07-18 at 10:20 PM UTC
-
2024-07-18 at 10:25 PM UTC
Originally posted by the man who put it in my hood So you think those people should be cancelled and lose career and finance opportunities and have banks close their accounts and refuse business because people don't like what they say/do ? It's a slippery roof, because if you support that than why should it be any different than how cancel culture currently is? Like the Disney woke media?
Technically they are just self regulating but I think the problems arise when people try to force the government to participate in extremes in cancel culture (but the government participating in anything is almost always bad so…)
It surprised me the banks could do this. I think they should lose Federal Secured backing if they do so. just like the feds refuse to give money to States or Counties that violate any form of civil rights like refuse to give aid to road repairs and bridges or school programs not approved like shit that have happened in the past.
these are private entities and not ran by the Government so to do what they did is just as bias as the statements made by people like 'Ye
if the Banks get FDIC then that is Tax Payers money and 'Ye is a Tax Payer. so he should sue the banks for controlling that -
2024-07-18 at 11:58 PM UTC
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Three of the bullets came within a half inch of Trump's head. Two shooters, and one of them was allowed to escape the scene.
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Three of the bullets came within a half inch of Trump's head. Two shooters, and one of them was allowed to escape the scene.
Source? -
2024-07-19 at 12:07 AM UTC
Originally posted by the man who put it in my hood So you think those people should be cancelled and lose career and finance opportunities and have banks close their accounts and refuse business because people don't like what they say/do ? It's a slippery roof, because if you support that than why should it be any different than how cancel culture currently is? Like the Disney woke media?
Technically they are just self regulating but I think the problems arise when people try to force the government to participate in extremes in cancel culture (but the government participating in anything is almost always bad so…)
If the left is going to initiate these cancel attacks, the right has full rights to retaliate in kind. Tit for tat. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. A punch in the stomach for a kick in the testicles. All's fair in love and war and politics. -
2024-07-19 at 12:10 AM UTC
Originally posted by RIPtotse Source?
An audio forensic analysis conducted by experts from the National Center for Media Forensics at the University of Colorado in Denver suggests the possibility of a second shooter in the incident that took place in Butler. According to Catalin Grigoras and Cole Whitecotton, "The first three shots were consistent with alleged weapon A, the next five were consistent with alleged weapon B and the final 'acoustic impulse' was emitted by a possible weapon C." While one of the shooters has been identified and another was a Secret Service sniper, the identity of the third potential shooter remains unknown.
As per a substack by Stephen Bryen, former deputy under secretary of defense, despite the FBI's assertion that the identified shooter acted alone, this controversial audio forensic analysis raises questions that warrant further investigation and peer review. Beyond the audio forensics, other aspects of the incident require attention.
The initial burst of gunfire originated from the identified shooter's location. A second burst was detected from an unclear location, distinct from the first. Additionally, there may have been a third shooter who fired a single shot. Forensic acoustic experts propose the involvement of at least two shooters, excluding the Secret Service snipers, Bryen wrote in his substack "weapons and strategy".The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2024-07-19 at 12:13 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Lanny It surprised me the banks could do this. I think they should lose Federal Secured backing if they do so. just like the feds refuse to give money to States or Counties that violate any form of civil rights like refuse to give aid to road repairs and bridges or school programs not approved like shit that have happened in the past.
these are private entities and not ran by the Government so to do what they did is just as bias as the statements made by people like 'Ye
if the Banks get FDIC then that is Tax Payers money and 'Ye is a Tax Payer. so he should sue the banks for controlling that
Over here in Commie Canada, they freeze your bank account AND insurance if what you do or say goes against the government narratives.
