413 private links
there's a new debate hoax raging. It centers on Trump's comments about threatening "Abdul," who he cited as a Taliban leader he negotiated with in 2020. The mention sent the fingers of journalists everywhere scurrying on keyboards. Multiple major news outlets, including The Hill and Forbes, wrote mocking headlines and suggested it was "unclear" who Trump was referring to because he's just so darn stupid.
“I got involved. And Abdul is the head of the Taliban. He is still the head of the Taliban,” Trump said. “And I told Abdul, ‘Don’t do it anymore. You do it anymore, you’re going to have problems.’ And he said, ‘Why do you send me a picture of my house?’ I said, ‘You’re going to have to figure that out, Abdul.’ And for 18 months we had nobody killed.”
It’s not clear who Trump was referring to.
Hibatullah Akhundzada is the Taliban’s leader, having been in charge since 2016.
It wasn't unclear, though. I know that because if you read the very same articles I linked above, both go on to explain exactly who Trump was talking about.
Abdul Ghani Baradar is not an obscure figure. He is the co-founder of the Taliban and currently serves as the terrorist government's "prime minister." He was also the lead negotiator and head of policy during the 2020 negotiations. So who is dumber? Trump for citing "Abdul," or the know-nothing journalists who couldn't be bothered to use Google for two minutes? //
RedDog_FLA
an hour ago
This is Golden:
Cable news is filled with over-credentialed mediocrities with the common sense of a lima bean.
That tells everything. //
anon-dion
25 minutes ago
It doesn't matter Journalists can't seem to do their job anymore. Used to be an investigative reporter would run down all the fact and report the results without bias. Now only a handful do. I can think of Catherine Harris, Glen Greenwald, and Matt Tiabi. Everyone else is just trying to score points and get clicks. A sign of a dying media is the need for sensationalism and yellow journalist tactics. //
Arik
27 minutes ago
Wait a minute. Did Kamala mean MANDATORY transgender surgeries for illegals in prison???
Puts a whole new light on it. 😁 //
Rogue Rose
23 minutes ago
Their endless lies are exhausting
KJSpeed Rogue Rose
4 minutes ago
I concur. Kind of like The Boy Who Cried Wolf. They're trying to push us to the point that we challenge everything they say as a lie, then they spin it as "those right-wing MAGA nuts are trying to say that everything we tell you is a lie. Don't believe them!" John and Jane Doe begin to think the liars are telling the truth and everyone that disagrees with them is a liar. Right before the wolf eats them.
Scott Adams
@scottadamsshow
·
Follow
Megyn Kelly went off on the ABC Debate moderators obvious bias and blames their boss and Kamala’s closest friend for over 30 years, Dana Walden, who also just so happens to run ABC News as co-chairwoman at woke Disney. Kamala’s best friend is the moderators boss!
7:17 AM · Sep 11, 2024 //
etba_ss Orwell was right
20 minutes ago
So why did Trump not know this and publicize it ahead of the debate? Obviously, his staff should have known and told him. They should know everything about Harris and anyone she's ever dealt with on any level.
Trump War Room @TrumpWarRoom
·
PENNSYLVANIA VOTER: President Trump "spoke facts" — while Kamala just "repeated everything that Biden has said in the past." Show more
12:02 AM · Sep 11, 2024 //
anon-g58b
2 hours ago
Muir was strong in his debate with Trump. Harris was a lousy moderator
Why would the debate moderators ask about Democrats inciting a would-be assassin when they can just keep recycling the lie that Trump incited a violent mob? //
Imagine refusing to ask the current vice president whether she regrets any of her hateful anti-Trump rhetoric and the Biden administration’s weaponization of the federal government against Trump that may have inspired an armed nutbag to fire at his head, but asking the former president whether he regrets “anything about what [he] did on” Jan. 6, 2021, even after he explicitly told his supporters to protest “peacefully and patriotically.” (Which David Muir lied about, by the way.) You don’t hate the media enough.
As Trump said at the debate, he “probably took a bullet to the head because of the things that they say about me. They talk about democracy. I’m a threat to democracy. They’re the threat to democracy.” Correct. And the moment Trump brought up that uncomfy assassination topic, Muir pivoted because, you know, the moderators “ha[d] a lot to get to.” //
If the debate did nothing else, it reminded us of their true colors. They aren’t biased. They don’t have a slant. ABC News and CNN and NBC and all the rest of the establishment media don’t “lean left.”
They are propagandists. They live and die for the regime. They are wholly and completely corrupt, a hostile force that exists to accrue power for Democrats.
Here are some of the biggest falsehoods Harris told during her debate with Trump.
The Vigilant Fox 🦊
@VigilantFox
Congressman Wesley Hunt Reveals Jaw-Dropping Trump Story
This is amazing.
In a tense meeting with Taliban leaders, Trump declared, “I want to leave Afghanistan, but it’s going to be a conditions-based withdrawal,” before issuing a stark warning.
“If you harm a hair on a single American, I’m going to kill you,” Trump said. The translator conveyed this exact message.
Trump then “reached in his pocket, pulled out a satellite photo of the leader of the Taliban’s home, handed it to him, got up and walked out the room.”
12:43 PM · Jul 2, 2024
·
9.6M
Views
She spread every hoax about Trump that she could think of, starting with the lie that Trump had anything to do with Project 2025. //
But perhaps the two worst lies — and that was hard to pick because she told so many — were where she claimed police were killed on Jan. 6. and the "fine people" lie about Charlottesville. Both are provably false — the fine people lie has been debunked for years, is on video, and even the liberal Snopes has roundly debunked it. //
etba_ss Don't Tread
an hour ago
He missed a lot of openings, took too much bait and was unprepared. However, he was real, passionate and powerful under control. Harris was totally scripted, boring and all the faces and head shaking made her a real scold.
Trump gets a B-
Harris gets a D
ABC gets a D. They never followed up when she wouldn't answer, but would hit Trump over and over. //
Just Annoyed Billy Wallace
an hour ago
I think he lost but not badly. Kamala struggled at first and really seemed like she wanted to stamp her heels and throw a hissy when Trump got some zingers in early then the moderators tipped the scales. Once the game up on him Kamala relaxed and Trump allowed himself to he baited. After that he seemed angry in most of his responses until just about the very end when he started to recover. His closing was better than hers slightly, but was not seen by as many who tuned in earlier and likely tuned out midway. Just goes to show why "Anytime, anywhere" Kamala was afraid to debate him on fox. She can't do these things without emotional-support humans/moderators.
Trump War Room
@TrumpWarRoom
·
Follow
President Trump UNLEASHED:
"I'm talking now. DOES THAT SOUND FAMILIAR?"
🔥🔥🔥
9:47 PM · Sep 10, 2024
People enjoyed that one, especially when, with Trump going there, if she was planning it, she no longer could use it.
anon-klg1 Leontine
18 minutes ago
Trump said Harris went to negotiate with Russia and 3 days later they invaded Ukraine-
Harris said that wasn’t true - but that doesn’t mean it isn’t.
ABC asked Harris if she’d ever met Putin AND SHE DIDN’T ANSWER THE QUESTION. Starts talking about meeting Zelensky 5 times and then goes into some meaningless word salad.
And they just let her not answer. Didn’t pin her down at all as to whether this happened.
If - as Trump said- Harris was sent to negotiate with Russia and right after that they decide to invade Ukraine—- that’s important for people to know.
To see them not even clarify that point when they’d asked, iirc, repeated follow ups about January 6th, and whether Trump thought the election was stolen, was literally jaw dropping for me….and I didn’t think I had any illusions left about the MSM-
That‘s beyond just bias —- it’s covering for extreme incompetence —- it’s failing to even examine a candidate —
Anyway, the point I’m getting at is that I think the bias has gone so far-( to the point of outright irresponsiblity) that it will be off putting to more than just Republicans and will likely backfire on the Dems.
[Republican consultant and Fox News contributor Ari] Fleischer's advice for Trump is, "Hit her on policy. Just like you did to Biden in the first debate. That was a disciplined, tough, policy-oriented Donald Trump. I would love to see the same Donald Trump against Kamala Harris." //
Louise1
18 hours ago
Two ideas:
1) Tell how your policies will help people, and protect the environment, better than Harris' policies.
Example: Don't say inflation is bad because we want good economic numbers. Say inflation is bad because it hurts people.
Example: Don't say that you're against EV mandates because of cost or convenience. Instead, say that EVs can actually hurt the environment. It's hard to recycle EV batteries. Tires on EVs pollute the air with more fine particles than the tires on ICE vehicles, because EV batteries are so heavy. ( https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2023/07/electric-vehicles-tires-wearing-out-particulates/674750/ ) Etc.
2) When you say a Harris policy is bad, offer a better policy. Example: To cut pollution, do these things:
a) Put pressure on China to stop polluting the air so much.
b) Tell people how to keep their houses cool or warm by using simple, cheap insulation in their windows such as bubble wrap.
c) Encourage research in extinguishing wildfires better, so that they don't release a huge amount of smoke. ( https://redstate.com/wardclark/2024/08/29/canadas-carbon-footprint-is-massive-but-its-because-of-wildfires-n2178698 )
If you tell how your policies will help people and protect the environment, and if you tell how your policies are better than Harris', then people will be more likely to vote for you. //
Carey J
19 hours ago
I heard Trump was preparing for the debate by going to bars and arguing with drunks.
Carey J Randy Larson
12 hours ago
Yeah, I heard it from the Bee. You'll note I didn't say where I heard it.
Sanders let viewers in on an insider analysis/preview for the debate Tuesday, and why she thinks we aren't really hearing about Trump but pages and pages of stories on Harris' debate prep:
This Week @ThisWeekABC
·
Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders tells @JonKarl that “every day is debate prep for Donald Trump.”
“He'll go in game time ready just as he does for every interview, every rally that he does. This is not something that is a heavy lift for him.” https://trib.al/oEgjREO
0:12 / 1:59
11:42 AM · Sep 8, 2024 //
This Week @ThisWeekABC
·
Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders on former Rep. Liz Cheney endorsing Kamala Harris: “I’m not trying to be rude, but you don't get to call yourself a conservative or a Republican when you support the most radical nominee that the Democrats have ever put up.” https://trib.al/eFffgiO
12:06 PM · Sep 8, 2024 //
That doesn’t make you a conservative, it certainly doesn’t make you a Republican. I think it makes you somebody who wants to protect the establishment.
But there is yet another dose of hypocrisy at play, from the very news outlets bleating about Trump’s alleged offensive use of the cemetery images. Look back over the past weeks of this outrage coverage, and you notice something curious: Nearly every report mewling about the disrespect these photos deliver includes those very images. Somehow, it is offensive for him to use the pics, but not the outlets displaying them.
And it gets worse. Many of these photos sport attribution from the news syndicates, meaning the pictures have been licensed – not only are the outlets receiving paid traffic while wailing about the dishonor, but the syndicates, like Getty Images, are charging for the use of their photos from Arlington.
If Trump using these photos is disrespecting the memory of the fallen, what is to be said of news providers who turn a profit from those same types of pictures? //
cupera1
7 hours ago
There are three big problems with the NPR Arlington National Cemetery story.
First: It is a story that had no named witnesses or named people that were harmed. In every reported story about ANC there is an un-named person that is reporting it and another un-named person that was pushed out of the way by the Trump campaign people. It is basic journalism. When a news story has the: Who, What, Where, When, Why and How, verified evidence, documentation or a named source to can be relied on to be a factual news story. When left wing news sources, like NPR is missing any of these important items it can be deduced that it is a fake story or a hoax.
Second: ALL seven gold-star families and all other people that were there the entire time stated that they had permission to take pictures and video. The Trump people did the same and were also given permission for both. Also, there was nobody from the cemetery that objected to them being there, so the story is a hoax.
Third: The Trump people stated that have video of the entire event. From the time that people got out of their cars to when they left the cemetery. When the people in charge of ANC heard this they abruptly dropped any and all charges, none were ever listed. It was a hoax story.
Sean Agnew @seanagnew
·
She’s a bad candidate with no policy proposals but be prepared for the YAASS QUEEN moment
NBC News @NBCNews
VP Harris is preparing for a variety of potential unscripted — and perhaps history-making — moments, including the possibility that former President Trump makes derogatory comments about her, according to sources familiar with her preparations. https://nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/kamala-harris-prepares-volatile-moments-trump-debate-rcna170013
Brittany @bccover
·
We know. That’s always been the plan. To have a comeback that goes viral, rather than be clear about policy which actually informs Americans. //
It shows how empty she is, if she's not concentrating on conveying her policies, but working more on "comebacks" and anticipating what he might do. It's wrongheaded, so quite frankly, keep it up for Tuesday.
Vivek Ramaswamy @VivekGRamaswamy
·
If Trump trounces Kamala at the debate, get ready for some very strange things to happen before November. They’ve already sued him, prosecuted him, tried to kick him off the ballot, and swapped out his opponent. All of it could be just a preview of what’s to come.
11:11 AM · Sep 7, 2024 //
He did not outline any of the "tricks" that he thinks might be pulled. But there is one obvious move they haven't played yet. If Kamala tanks badly, they may pull something big out, assuming they can. That's making Biden resign and giving her the Oval Office before November, so she can have the title going into the election. //
Bottom line, the folks in power don't want to release control and we need to be ready for anything. They've already thrown out a lot and failed. //
Hank Reardon
25 minutes ago
”Prepare for "strange things" to happen before November, he warns, if Harris "tanks."
The left will do whatever it takes.
Read that again and recall how the b. hussein obama regime weaponized the DOJ/FBI and intell agencies against candidate and then President Trump, beginning in 2016.
- The FBI’s fraudulent FISA warrants against Carter Page. (Peter Strzok, et. al.)
- The FBI’s illegal alteration of an email to frame Carter Page. (FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith.)
- The FBI’s ”insurance policy” against a Trump presidency. (Sexmates Strzok, Lisa Page and then FBI Dep. Dir. Andy McCabe.)
- The framing of Trump Natl. Security Advisor Micheal Flynn. (Strzok. Again.)
- The FBI’s assistance in creating and hyping Marc Elias’s DNC ‘dossier’, through Fusion GPS staffer Nellie Ohr, and her husband, FBI deputy assistant director Bruce Ohr.
- James Clapper’s ‘Russia Collusion’ October surprises in both 2016 and again 2020.
- Nanzi Pelosi’s faux articles of impeachment; numbers I and II.
- The democrat’s willful leveraging of the Chinese WuFlu in 2020 to destroy Trump’s economic gains.
They will do whatever it takes to hold power and protect themselves from We The People. What ever it takes. //
Desertball
an hour ago
October surprise is the 25th amendment and President Harris emphatically stating that the government will not be turned over to a felon awaiting a Supreme Court emergency ruling on whether or not the DC judge can order Pres Trump gagged. Or something
David K
6 hours ago edited
RFK Jr understands the basics of the Reagan 80/20 rule: i.e., "The person who agrees with you 80% of the time is a friend and ally, not a 20% traitor." Never Trumpers have the Reagan Rule backwards and support Democratic candidates that have less than 20% agreement with their so-called "True Conservative" values and they hate Trump and MAGA supporters even thought they arguably have more than 80% policy agreement with them. Unlike these Never Trumpers, RFK Jr isn't taking his ball and going home in a hissy fit, but following the Reagan 80/20 Rule. Similarly, Trump understands that 100% political alignment with the majority of voters is an impossible dream. He also understands that he and RFK Jr don't need to be in complete agreement for each of them to get their best possible outcome in the 2024 election. Like life, politics is not a strict zero-sum, all-or-nothing game.
etba_ss David K
2 hours ago
These people endorsing Harris to "save conservatism/democracy/the republic" are lying. They don't really believe that. They just hate Trump. Just like the left didn't believe Dick Cheney was "literally Hitler". As soon as he turns a trick for them, they like him again. The left thinks like Voldomort, both being pure evil, that there is no good or evil, only power. Only evil claims that.
Let's also acknowledge people like Dick Cheney hate us. They tolerated us when we knew our place, sat down, shut up and let them run the country. Since that gig is up, they expose themselves. They don't agree with us 80% of the time. That's why they hate us. They agree with Harris closer to 80% of the time than they do with us. They just want to funnel favors to a different set of friends. They are all for power, forever war, globalism and elitism. If they just hated Trump, they wouldn't also be campaigning against Ted Cruz. They wouldn't hate Ron DeSantis too.
These are the people who hated Reagan. Then when he got power and was so popular, they pretended they were like him. Reagan also spent a lot of money on defense, which lined their pockets. Reagan was winning the Cold War. This isn't 1980 anymore. There is no USSR. China is a real threat, but we are doing next to nothing about them. We are too busy meddling in everything else in the world to get serious about the real threat.
But now, to be on the safe side and avoid the possibility of confusion, Kennedy has altered his strategy and is now urging all of his supporters to simply vote for Trump. Kennedy explained the rationale for changing up the strategy in an appearance on NewsNation Thursday afternoon, sharing the clip to his X timeline on Friday. //
anon-oh34
9 hours ago
I'm sure this was hard for Mr. Kennedy to do, but I give the man credit for standing up for what he believes. He knows he'll be vilified if Trump wins, and anytime Trump does something he doesn't like he'll feel get burned, but that's better than allowing the deeply unprincipled, frankly scary Democrat party to retain power. //
Temujin
9 hours ago edited
In Reagan's time, the number one priority was defeating the Soviet Empire, and he accomplished that. Today, the greatest threat is the totalitarian domestic Marxist Left with its weaponization of govt. agencies. It looks as if we are seeing an alliance form against that.
etba_ss Temujin
2 hours ago edited
What Reagan fought in the USSR, and defeated, is now manifest within one of America's major political parties. The Democrats are wholly given over to communism, regardless of what lipstick they put on the pig.
I made me sad when I watched the Reagan movie to think how hard he and that generation fought communism, only for half of America to openly embrace it a generation or two later.
anon-m6q6
8 hours ago
Post this on all MSN, CNBC, Huff Post and other leftist on-line articles. It drives the libs crazy.
Someone recently asked me why I like Trump. My answer was that I don't really like a lot of things about Trump.
But this election is not about choosing the most likeable person.
Trump represents the future and has proven that he can deliver. He is a patriot to the core and even served his country for 4 years without pay.
That moment when someone says,
"I can't believe you're voting for Trump". I simply reply, “I'm NOT voting for Trump.”
I'm voting for the First Amendment and freedom of speech. I'm voting for the right to speak my opinion and not be censored.
I’m voting for secure borders and LEGAL immigration. I am voting for election integrity to include mandatory voter ID. (Why would anyone vote against this?)
I'm voting for the Second Amendment and my right to defend my life and my family.
I'm voting for the police to be respected once again.
I am voting for law & order and an end to allowing protesters to trespass and burn our cities, destroying innocent small business. (Tim Walz)
I am voting for personal responsibility and the end of the revolving door where criminals are being put back on the street. (Kamala Harris)
I'm voting for the next Supreme Court Justice(s) to protect the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
I am voting for doing away with all of the freebies given to all of the illegals and not looking after the needs of the American citizens and homeless veterans.
I'm not voting for Trump. I'm voting for America.
Trump Lawyers Will Scharf and Alina Habba took to the podium at Donald Trump's press conference in New York City following appeal arguments in the E. Jean Carroll Sexual Assault Case.
The federal judge overseeing former President Donald Trump’s criminal trial in Washington, D.C., scoffed at the Supreme Court’s decision this summer that recognized presidential immunity for official acts in office.
On Thursday, attorneys representing the ex-president objected to continued proceedings they argued run afoul of the high court’s ruling in July. In that decision a concurring opinion from Justice Clarence Thomas questioned the legitimacy of Jack Smith’s appointment as special counsel. //
The New York Times reported that Chutkan “chuckle[d]” and slightly rolled her eyes in the courtroom Thursday when Trump’s attorneys argued the Supreme Court was “crystal clear” in rulings on immunity.
The Biden donor judge overseeing Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s criminal prosecution and a New York jury’s coached conviction of former President Donald Trump this week delayed Trump’s sentencing hearing until after the 2024 election.
Judge Juan Merchan, the acting justice of the New York State Supreme Court, announced Friday that he will postpone his decision on how long Trump should be jailed until November 26, exactly three weeks after Election Day 2024. Trump faces up to 136 years in prison after a jury found him guilty of 34 counts of bookkeeping fraud.
Bragg initially indicted Trump on claims that he violated the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) when his former attorney Michael Cohen paid pornographic actress Stormy Daniels to keep quiet about an alleged affair.
Nondisclosure deals like Trump’s are perfectly legal and don’t meet the threshold for criminal charges beyond a misdemeanor. Bragg, who campaigned on vengeance against the Republican, however, ignored the FEC and Department of Justice’s decision not to charge Trump over the payment and pursued a felony prosecution. //
Merchan, whose “rabid pro-Democrat bias” plagued how he presided over the Trump case, claims he indulged Trump lawyers’ requests to push back the sentencing because “the Court is a fair, impartial and apolitical institution.”
“The imposition of sentence will be adjourned to avoid any appearance – however unwarranted – that the proceeding has been affected by or seeks to affect the approaching Presidential election in which the Defendant is a candidate,” the judge wrote.
The electoral and financial momentum Trump found through his various convictions and his survived assassination attempt in July, however, could have been the motivation the hyperpartisan judge needed to do everything he could to further keep Trump from becoming a political martyr.
The DOJ announced these actions 62 days out from the presidential election, a number which should not go unnoticed since the department has a longstanding policy to avoid announcing any investigative steps within 60 days of an election.
The first question that arises is: How bad are Kamala Harris’s internal polling numbers that they have to dust off the Russia boogeyman to try and sway an election? //
Disinformation from China and Iran is apparently okay. Russia? Not so much.
The DOJ wants voters to believe Russia is spreading disinformation, and Russia wants Trump to win. And, as a good red-blooded American, you must vote for Harris instead.
Putin, however, has said he’d prefer to see Biden defeat Trump. And that likely extends to Harris now as well, considering she would represent a de facto second term for him. //
ThatGuy81
a day ago
I'm more concerned with Democratic interference in the election than Russia, but that's just me.