Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Right Wing Grifters

Options
1…2122242627…35

Comments

  • Options
    #692
    SaintLeibowitz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 163 ✭✭SaintLeibowitz


    notobtuse wrote: »
    LOL. Duh. See how much I know about the term. You don't hear it over here in the US, much.

    Your attempt at humour was cringe.


  • Options
    #693
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    It was a term which originated in the states and is very much still used.

    John Cusack was in a movie called it.
    Heard of John Cusack. Never heard of the movie. So I looked it up. It’s basically a con artist. Seems to me that Nancy Pelosi, with her impeachment coup, fits that description much better than any right wingers. She claims there has been an abuse of power by President Trump. This is evident by Trump having a phone call with the president of Ukraine in which both spoke frankly about their concerns of election interference and corruption? She is only doing this because the Democrats have a terrible crowd running for election and they know they can’t beat Trump at the polls. So her only recourse is to either remove him from office or hurt him as hard as she can in the eyes of the voters. She's a con artist (grifter) of top caliber... perhaps even treasonous.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #694
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,745 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Heard of John Cusack. Never heard of the movie. So I looked it up. It’s basically a con artist. Seems to me that Nancy Pelosi, with her impeachment coup, fits that description much better than any right wingers. She claims there has been an abuse of power by President Trump. This is evident by Trump having a phone call with the president of Ukraine in which both spoke frankly about their concerns of election interference and corruption? She is only doing this because the Democrats have a terrible crowd running for election and they know they can’t beat Trump at the polls. So her only recourse is to either remove him from office or hurt him as hard as she can in the eyes of the voters. She's a con artist (grifter) of top caliber... perhaps even treasonous.

    Jesus you are fair obsessed with that man.

    Not even remotely healthy dude.


  • Options
    #695
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,098 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Timely for this thread:
    "Trump Has Now Shifted $1.7 Million From Campaign Donors To His Private Business"

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2019/12/06/trump-has-now-shifted-17-million-from-campaign-donors-to-his-private-business

    Trump's defense: all legal, paying inflated rents in the basement of Trump Tower to his campaign group (inflated for Trump Tower - you can imagine what that means versus the real world.) Legal, yes. Ethical? It's Trump.

    So, keep those donations coming! Trumpy needs them.

    FWIW, he's not contributed to his own campaign yet - but of course, he might not be available to run in 2020


  • Options
    #696
    1800_Ladladlad
    Registered Users Posts: 3,352 ✭✭✭1800_Ladladlad


    Igotadose wrote: »
    Timely for this thread:
    "Trump Has Now Shifted $1.7 Million From Campaign Donors To His Private Business"

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2019/12/06/trump-has-now-shifted-17-million-from-campaign-donors-to-his-private-business

    Trump's defense: all legal, paying inflated rents in the basement of Trump Tower to his campaign group (inflated for Trump Tower - you can imagine what that means versus the real world.) Legal, yes. Ethical? It's Trump.

    So, keep those donations coming! Trumpy needs them.

    FWIW, he's not contributed to his own campaign yet - but of course, he might not be available to run in 2020

    Orange Man Bad - angry trans fluid emoji -


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #697
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    Jesus you are fair obsessed with that man.

    Not even remotely healthy dude.
    Just part of a politically active family so it helps to keep informed. You should try it sometime.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #698
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,108 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    1800_Ladladlad wrote: »
    Orange Man Bad - angry trans fluid emoji -
    To be fair LLL, trump is a good example of a bombastic gombeen man fcukwit and the American Dream(tm) gone woefully wrong. Yeah, some go batsh1t daft over him(and on both "sides" of US politics), but jesus, he's a far cry from someone you'd want to support. Even as an alternative to the usual fcukwits in politics in that country.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #699
    rgossip30
    Registered Users Posts: 2,451 ✭✭✭rgossip30


    Wibbs wrote: »
    To be fair LLL, trump is a good example of a bombastic gombeen man fcukwit and the American Dream(tm) gone woefully wrong. Yeah, some go batsh1t daft over him(and on both "sides" of US politics), but jesus, he's a far cry from someone you'd want to support. Even as an alternative to the usual fcukwits in politics in that country.

    Trump is disliked for his image and personality his policies are a sideline issue .


  • Options
    #700
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    rgossip30 wrote: »
    Trump is disliked for his image and personality his policies are a sideline issue .

    Trump is simply a reaction to the way American politics have developed over the last two/three decades with Americans gradually racking up different levels of extremes. Trump personifies many of the attributes of American attitudes. He's a very hit and miss kind of guy. Sometimes he's completely spot on and other times he shows himself to be a complete muppet. He's the opposite of the smooth deceitful politicians of Obama, and the Clinton's, but he's probably what we're going to see more of. The brutish aggressive American lacking in common decency and politeness because they've seen too much of the opposite already. He's a reaction to the cesspit that is American politics.

    Can't stand him myself, but he's still better than Bush Jnr. :D And I suspect a better option than Hilary Clinton. She's far dodgier in soooo many ways. ;)


  • Options
    #701
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,745 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Just part of a politically active family so it helps to keep informed.

    Depends where you are getting "informed".

    Anyway good for you, can't see you getting him many votes around these parts though.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #702
    Bellbottoms
    Registered Users Posts: 1,003 ✭✭✭Bellbottoms


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    She's far dodgier in soooo many ways. ;)


    What claptrap, much dodgier. Nonsense. If anything she was probably the most qualified person to ever run for the office.

    How exactly is HRC dodgier the Donald Trump?


  • Options
    #703
    Tasfasdf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 660 ✭✭✭Tasfasdf


    Bellbottoms wrote: »
    What claptrap, much dodgier. Nonsense. If anything she was probably the most qualified person to ever run for the office.

    How exactly is HRC dodgier the Donald Trump?

    :pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:


  • Options
    #704
    20Cent
    Registered Users Posts: 8,934 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Paul Joseph Watson posts a photo of a rich woman with a refugees welcome bag ignoring a refrugee begging. Quickly it's established as a Photoshop and the original photo found. None of his followers give a sh1t though and act as if it's real. If it fits their narrative so what. The left don't do stuff like that, reality and honesty are important to them.


  • Options
    #705
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    Bellbottoms wrote: »
    If anything she was probably the most qualified person to ever run for the office.

    Why? I think she's largely responsible for Trump winning which makes her the greatest loser in the history of Presidential run-offs. Imagine losing to that balloon.
    How exactly is HRC dodgier the Donald Trump?

    She's a total warmonger - she supported every single foreign US intervention. Trump is an idiot but he hasn't gotten the US embroiled in any new conflicts as far as I know.


  • Options
    #706
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    Why? I think she's largely responsible for Trump winning which makes her the greatest loser in the history of Presidential run-offs. Imagine losing to that balloon.

    Agreed. The sheer dishonesty and contempt she has for the average voter, pushed a lot of otherwise sensible people into voting for trump. Besides the fact she's the only candidate to avoid congratulating the opponent that won... That doesn't win her much kudos. She's a paper bag just like Bush Junior was although Bush jnr retained an element of innocence. She's like a jaded hooker whose been playing the same streets too often. Her degrees of corruption just shine ever so brighter each time she turns in the spotlight.
    She's a total warmonger - she supported every single foreign US intervention. Trump is an idiot but he hasn't gotten the US embroiled in any new conflicts as far as I know.

    Agreed. H. Clinton would have caused a war with either Russia or China by now. A major power, not a piss ant country in the M.East.


  • Options
    #707
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,098 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Agreed. The sheer dishonesty and contempt she has for the average voter, pushed a lot of otherwise sensible people into voting for trump. Besides the fact she's the only candidate to avoid congratulating the opponent that won...
    Just listened to her interview on Howard Stern. She said she called up Trump to congratulate him. So, where are you getting that she didn't do that?

    As for sensible people voting for Trump, well, that's debatable....
    That doesn't win her much kudos. She's a paper bag just like Bush Junior was although Bush jnr retained an element of innocence. She's like a jaded hooker whose been playing the same streets too often. Her degrees of corruption just shine ever so brighter each time she turns in the spotlight.

    This is, however, the right-wing grifters thread. Notice how whenever Trump's brought up, up pop his defenders bringing up HRC.

    So, back to right-wing grifters. Laura Ingraham - grifter extraodinaire - apparently has had her podcast dropped. https://www.mediamatters.org/laura-ingraham/laura-ingrahams-podcast-was-bigoted-propagandistic-and-grift-if-its-finished-it-wont


  • Options
    #708
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,098 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    And, in other right-wing grifter news, "Fisher Sand and Gravel," whose CEO appears on Fox and Friends and praises you know who, just got a contract for building some of the wall. Army Corp of Engineers had rejected their proposal, but what the heck, they made nice to Trump and got a taxpayer pat on the head.

    https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/fox-trump-feedback-loop-nets-company-400-million-contract


  • Options
    #709
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    Igotadose wrote: »
    Notice how whenever Trump's brought up, up pop his defenders bringing up HRC.

    Criticism of Clinton isn't defence of Trump. Hillary Clinton is despicable and Trump is a degenerate. That these two ended up as the choices for US president shows how utterly broken US politics is.


  • Options
    #710
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,098 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    Criticism of Clinton isn't defence of Trump. Hillary Clinton is despicable and Trump is a degenerate. That these two ended up as the choices for US president shows how utterly broken US politics is.

    Yes, but this remains the right-wing grifters thread. Bringing up HRC is just a lame deflection from criticism of the POTUS, a grifter of extraordinary power and influence these days. Scary.


  • Options
    #711
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    Igotadose wrote: »
    Yes, but this remains the right-wing grifters thread. Bringing up HRC is just a lame deflection from criticism of the POTUS, a grifter of extraordinary power and influence these days. Scary.

    Fair enough. Yeah, it's interesting to see the separation-of-powers tested to its limits in the US and Britain in the last couple of years.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #712
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Igotadose wrote: »
    Just listened to her interview on Howard Stern. She said she called up Trump to congratulate him. So, where are you getting that she didn't do that?

    Strange. I remember media reports suggesting that she was too drunk after the campaign to make the gesture. That was the excuse anyway. It was a common criticism of her at the time.

    I'll check it out tomorrow (going to bed now 5.45 am). Maybe someone else can confirm/deny it before I log back on.

    Interesting that this was what you thought worthy of commenting on. Does that mean you accept my other statements about H.Clinton?
    As for sensible people voting for Trump, well, that's debatable....

    Not what I said.
    This is, however, the right-wing grifters thread. Notice how whenever Trump's brought up, up pop his defenders bringing up HRC.

    Notice how you cannot say anything even remotely positive about Trump? Gosh. The man's an ass, but he's a relatively honest (for US politics) ass. Still corrupt but an altar boy compared to his competition.
    Igotadose wrote: »
    Yes, but this remains the right-wing grifters thread. Bringing up HRC is just a lame deflection from criticism of the POTUS, a grifter of extraordinary power and influence these days. Scary.

    Hilarious. Your views are so slanted to be beyond biased. Wow. Just wow.


  • Options
    #713
    rossie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 11,342 ✭✭✭✭rossie1977


    Deleted User wrote: »

    Agreed. H. Clinton would have caused a war with either Russia or China by now. A major power, not a piss ant country in the M.East.

    Based on what though? Hillary politically is pretty much identical to her husband and Obama who oversaw defence budget cuts, very little military foreign involvement and cutting back on the nationalism and supremacy of the military rhetoric during their combined 16 years as president.

    Yet we are to believe Hillary is some crazed lunatic who would have started wars with massively nuclear powered nations like Russia and China likely resulting in hundreds of millions of deaths...


  • Options
    #714
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,098 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Strange. I remember media reports suggesting that she was too drunk after the campaign to make the gesture. That was the excuse anyway. It was a common criticism of her at the time.
    2 seconds of google show that she called Trump. I found articles as far back as the day after the election stating same.

    So, exactly where did you find this common criticism at the time? A reliable news source like Infowars or Breitbart?
    Interesting that this was what you thought worthy of commenting on. Does that mean you accept my other statements about H.Clinton?
    They're not rational. You mildly praise GWB, who started the second Iraq war and escalated Afghanistan. The former, using false premises. But, oh, HRC was a worse warmonger. Not rational at all.

    She's a Washington swamp-creature. She would have made an infinitely better President than the current WH occupant.
    Not what I said.
    Apologies. I missed the 'otherwise' bit. We can argue separately if someone voting for Trump is otherwise sensible, that'd be best done on the perma-Trump threads, this one is about right-wing grifters of which Trump is an outstanding example.

    Notice how you cannot say anything even remotely positive about Trump? Gosh. The man's an ass, but he's a relatively honest (for US politics) ass. Still corrupt but an altar boy compared to his competition.
    Please. relatively? Convicted and barred from running a charity. Perhaps you have different views of altar boys. Exactly what convictions has HRC had? Again, more appropriate for a perma-Trump thread. Feel free to start a 'left wing' grifters thread. I think in Ireland that'd get a lot of activity
    Hilarious. Your views are so slanted to be beyond biased. Wow. Just wow.

    Says the guy who thinks GWB was less warlike than HRC. Or whatever you meant. Cop on already, you're just foxbottering.


  • Options
    #715
    20Cent
    Registered Users Posts: 8,934 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Hilary being a warmonger and that there was dirt in her emails is a good example of misinformation spread by right wing grifters. They repeat it so much people who are normally pretty rational end up believing conspiracy theories.


  • Options
    #716
    AllForIt
    Registered Users Posts: 8,319 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    So, I've heard of Alex Jones, seems a bit of a nutter alright, but never heard of Paul Joseph Watson, so I though I'd google him and came across this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyAwCJaC2uY

    PJW is clearly not a right wing nutter or a grifter even if there were such a thing. He clearly sets himself up in direct opposition to lefty loons which does not necessarily mean he's on the right at all. In my case I'd describe myself politically as center-left and I would also be as anti lefty-loon as PJW is.

    So who would go to the trouble of opening a thread designed to smear PJW? Who else but exactly the type of person JPW skillfully and humorously ridicules - your stereotypical lefty loon anftifa member/sympathizer type. What a scourge on society these ppl are. One shouldn't feed the trolls or feed the loons either frankly.


  • Options
    #717
    20Cent
    Registered Users Posts: 8,934 ✭✭✭20Cent


    AllForIt wrote: »
    So, I've heard of Alex Jones, seems a bit of a nutter alright, but never heard of Paul Joseph Watson, so I though I'd google him and came across this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyAwCJaC2uY

    PJW is clearly not a right wing nutter or a grifter even if there were such a thing. He clearly sets himself up in direct opposition to lefty loons which does not necessarily mean he's on the right at all. In my case I'd describe myself politically as center-left and I would also be as anti lefty-loon as PJW is.

    So who would go to the trouble of opening a thread designed to smear PJW? Who else but exactly the type of person JPW skillfully and humorously ridicules - your stereotypical lefty loon anftifa member/sympathizer type. What a scourge on society these ppl are. One shouldn't feed the trolls or feed the loons either frankly.

    You know Watson started working with Alex Jones?
    Spreading 911, chemtrails, and new world order conspiracy theories.
    He's the definition of grifter.


  • Options
    #718
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    PJW the 'brain force' supplement seller who claims eating soya products turns people into left-wing 'virtue signalling' 'beta' pussies. I mean, who in the hell listens to such unmitigated bullshit? PJW speaks the lexicon of alt-right morons.
    AllForIt wrote: »
    So who would go to the trouble of opening a thread designed to smear PJW?.

    Yeah he does such a good job of making an idiot of himself.


  • Options
    #719
    1800_Ladladlad
    Registered Users Posts: 3,352 ✭✭✭1800_Ladladlad


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    PJW the 'brain force' supplement seller who claims eating soya products turns people into left-wing 'virtue signalling' 'beta' pussies. I mean, who in the hell listens to such unmitigated bullshit? PJW speaks the lexicon of alt-right morons.



    Yeah he does such a good job of making an idiot of himself.

    I believe the term used is soy-boys :D


  • Options
    #720
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    Die Linke wrote: »
    live rent free in your head.

    The thread is about 'right wing grifters'. People who contribute to the thread will bring up any number of names you could dumbly respond with 'xxxxx is living rent free in your head' and you'd still have contributed less than nothing.

    Well done, you must feel really proud of yourself.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #721
    20Cent
    Registered Users Posts: 8,934 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Die Linke wrote: »
    My words cut deep I see.

    Yes you have "owned" the left with that comment.
    The left are officially disbanding now and going to stop drinking soy milk.


Advertisement