xparasite9

Speaking of which, I have heard he was planning to "control" freedom of speech to some extent? I think that might be good IF he targets the insanes that support cases like GG. This crossed so many lines, it left this dimension completely. Even if people love to say freedom of speech is important, there are limits (and MANY will agree on that).

GamerGate was a revolt against the lying, hideously corrupt Video Games Journalism Industry.
I sincerely hope there is a similar revolt against CNN, MSNBC, HuffPo, Buzzfeed, and all the other media who lied to us constantly over the past 18 months.

The biggest challenge that we will see in this next 4 years is the fact that President-elect Trump has some very anti-establishment promises.
Promises that run contrary to the very establishment Congress.
The fight is not over, it has only just begun.

He didn't say he would "force the military to commit war crimes". He recognizes the fact that families of terrorists are complicit in the activities of terrorists, and need to be dealt with accordingly. That does not necessarily mean death, although I guess under extreme circumstances that might have to be an option. Under your moral busy-body attitude, you would say these wonderful upstanding members of society should be left alone by our soldiers.

"Proposed to create a database system to track Muslims in the U.S."? LMAO, newsflash, this system already exists. next.

"Advocated assassinating terrorists’ families"? see point 1

"Urged supporters to beat up protesters at his rallies"? How about the Clinton Campaign paying mentally ill people to instigate violence, as shown in the O'Keefe videos?

"Promised to deport U.S. citizens whose parents immigrated illegally, in violation of the 14th Amendment"? The 14th Amendment that was only meant to apply to the newly-freed slaves, and which has been grossly misused by legislating-from-the-bench justices for all kinds of progressive agendas? Yeah sorry, anchor babies aren't citizens.

"Called for a ban on Muslims entering the U.S." ONLY UNTIL WE CAN GET A HOLD ON EVERYTHING AND CREATE A SYSTEM THAT CAN PROPERLY VET IMMIGRANTS.

"Doesn’t know how many articles are in the Constitution" A small mixup between articles and Amendments, when speaking off-the-cuff rather than from a teleprompter. mountain out of a molehill.

"Doesn’t pay his bills" Doesn't pay full price to contractors who don't hold up their end of the deal.

"Praised North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un" Ridiculously out of context, you should be ashamed of yourself. http://www.factcheck.org/2016/05/did-trump-praise-kim-jong-un/

"Named and threatened former students who criticized Trump University" does this look like a threat to you?

"Refused to rule out using nuclear weapons against ISIS" It's not as crazy as you think.

"Suggested that he might refuse to serve as president if elected" once again cherrypicked out of context

"Hired a suspicious number of advisers who have done work on behalf of Vladimir Putin"

"Praised the U.K.’s vote to leave the EU because a falling pound would be good for his Scottish golf course" He praised the E.U. referendum's outcome because it's a reclamation of sovereignty. Deal with it.

"Said that the U.S. military should withdraw from Japan and South Korea and allow those countries to defend themselves with nuclear weapons
( and that is despite both of these countries being a member ofAnti-nuclear organisations ) " And they were forced into it shortly after WWII. These nations see American military presence as stifling. Removal will grant them more sovereignty. You hate freedom don't you?

"Proposed to have China assassinate Kim Jong-un (which is likely as America handing Aleska back to Russia for free) " Not even close. I already explained this one to you a few pages back.

"Referred to 9/11 as 7-Eleven" Wow you're right. That makes him LITERALLY HITLER. Better let western civilization collapse over a freudian slip. It's 2016 after all.


How about instead of regurgitating poorly-constructed arguments from your favorite filthy globalist rags (word for word), you actually grow the agency to formulate your own arguments?

and you use old evidence of how Hillary is a criminal like here

Oh you mean the part where Hillary harassed and threatened Bill's sexual assault victims? Yeah I guess that has nothing to do with her.

as something that is relevant and when i post something of Trump that is just as old it is irrelevant because it is old?
double standard much?

it's not a double standard when you're the one trying to apply a false equivalency between the public policy opinions of someone who had absolutely no political advisors at the time, versus a very spiteful woman who had already been in politics for decades, and whose actions sharply contradict her claims of being a "champion of women's rights".
Furthermore, that's not "my evidence" of her being a criminal. Nowhere in our comment chain was an allegation of criminal activity being made.
Also please review my previous post, it has been updated with new information: it's not "irrelevant because it is old", it's irrelevant because a lot has changed in 16 years. PDRK has gone from "is nowhere near close to having nukes" to "has already conducted nuclear tests".
Trump has changed much from an interventionist view to "let's get other countries to take care of the problem since they are closer in proximity to the places of trouble".

whatever go and worship Saint Trump...
seriously you have double standard right here and you keep on make excuses on why it is not a double standard...
you treat Trump much MUCH more leniently than Hillary. If Trump said something it is just satire and/or just outdated view.
If Hillary did something then she is a devil and Hitler reincanted!
seriously your view is full of faults.

You're making false equivalencies and you're not even trying to argue why they aren't false equivalencies.
Ever hear the phrase "actions speak louder than words"?

Proved my point, you didn't even watch a single minute of any of the videos I linked.

Now get out.