100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Community > Posts By > germanchoclate1981
|
Topic:
MAKE who GREAT AGAIN?
|
|
Oh yeah, profit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
MAKE who GREAT AGAIN?
|
|
What trump is telling you is not what he is selling you, literally. He's making China Not as far as his hats go. They are made in SOCAL as this article from the not-so-conservative LA Times shows.... http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-trump-hats-cali-fame-carson-20151124-story.html Snopes has even found the claim that his official hats are made in China false.... _______________ Claim: Donald Trump's "Make America Great Again" caps are manufactured in China. FALSE _______________ http://www.snopes.com/donald-trump-hat-china/ So your whole thread scenario of asking "Who has a Trump Hat?" and claims of ",It's just a simple question" before jumping out of the shadows and screaming "Aha, you support someone who supports China!!" wouldn't have worked anyway. Better luck next time. Funny, why would Trump himself say otherwise? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
MAKE who GREAT AGAIN?
|
|
The hats point to his taxes. His taxes..... They don't speak for themselves. What does speak for itself is how much of his loaned campaign contributions that have gone into his own businesses He is self financing his campaign, has done so since the start, He's earned the right to funnel some bucks back into his companies, influence peddling is strong in the US, finally someone trying to break the electoral mould that has crippled those candidates who wish to improve the system...if he makes a few bucks on a couple of hats from China, no biggie I say Trump fundraising 3 mill$ Clinton fundraising 27 Mill$ Shouldn't you be asking who is really financing the Democrooks instead of smearing Trumps measly 3 mill war chest? I hope she gets her azz kicked in November by Trump, the underdawg! Nothing personal, but do you hear yourself? " He's earned the right to funnel some bucks back into his companies"???!!!!! What is he claiming 'crooked hillary' is doing? "using the State Department a personal hedge fund." So Chelsea Winery or Clinton Tower or Arkilago golf course resort or hotel owned by Hillary Chelsea or Bill are recieving money DIRECTLY from campaign funds? Wake up. The only reason trump is talking about Hillary funneling money through the Clinton foundation is because he's using MEXICO CHINA HONDURAS to do things that could be done at nearly any mall, sewing shop, Eastbay New Era or LIDS. Then he sells it to YOU for a Made in America price. I don't care what he spent to make the damn hats, the hats themselves are oxymoronic. American companies or stores could have made them. What trump is telling you is not what he is selling you, literally. He's makChina Mexico Honduras and any other country making his goods better by taking money from YOU and shipping it to the NAFTA TTP or whatever other trade deal countries he's always railing. He LOVES NAFTA and TTP. He makes money, YOUR money, from it. And he's laughing at you. your liberals sidesteps don't work... the people aren't forgetting who started nafta and the tpp... just stick to the basics, the liberals ruined this country, and all your spins and sidesteps won't change that.. Pointing out that trump IS a liberal is not a sidestep when discussing trump. Trump is for gay rights. Trump is for gay marriage. Trump is for transsexual rights. Trump uses immigrant workers to build and staff his companies and properties. Trump uses bankruptcy after he runs his businesses in the ground while keeping his own money, the money to help the business is YOURS. Trump (not a) university has been described as a bait and switch scheme and the judge who gave him the kindness of holding the hearing until after the election who legally cannot defend himself was attacked relentlessly. Trump is for abortion 3/5 times in 3 contiguous minutes though he said there should be some form of punishment. For the woman. Which he llater said was a mistake. Trump is for gun control for people on no fly and terror watchlists. Trump is pro NAFTA so much so that he uses it to further his candidacy for president when it's use is 100% OPTIONAL. Why? Because he gets to spend less of the money he has lent to his campaign and charge YOU more for it. Much more. He denies the local government and constituents tax dollars from his properties by having them assessed as worth much less than he spent on them and tells YOU they are worth more than he paid for them so when YOU go there he can charge YOU more than the place product or service is worth. YOU voter, are bailing HIM out. He isn't necessary in any way to keep America going. At least banks and auto manufacturers have something that every American needs. Trump's a liberal alright, the liberty he's taking is YOURS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
MAKE who GREAT AGAIN?
|
|
The hats point to his taxes. His taxes..... They don't speak for themselves. What does speak for itself is how much of his loaned campaign contributions that have gone into his own businesses He is self financing his campaign, has done so since the start, He's earned the right to funnel some bucks back into his companies, influence peddling is strong in the US, finally someone trying to break the electoral mould that has crippled those candidates who wish to improve the system...if he makes a few bucks on a couple of hats from China, no biggie I say Trump fundraising 3 mill$ Clinton fundraising 27 Mill$ Shouldn't you be asking who is really financing the Democrooks instead of smearing Trumps measly 3 mill war chest? I hope she gets her azz kicked in November by Trump, the underdawg! Nothing personal, but do you hear yourself? " He's earned the right to funnel some bucks back into his companies"???!!!!! What is he claiming 'crooked hillary' is doing? "using the State Department a personal hedge fund." So Chelsea Winery or Clinton Tower or Arkilago golf course resort or hotel owned by Hillary Chelsea or Bill are recieving money DIRECTLY from campaign funds? Wake up. The only reason trump is talking about Hillary funneling money through the Clinton foundation is because he's using MEXICO CHINA HONDURAS to do things that could be done at nearly any mall, sewing shop, Eastbay New Era or LIDS. Then he sells it to YOU for a Made in America price. I don't care what he spent to make the damn hats, the hats themselves are oxymoronic. American companies or stores could have made them. What trump is telling you is not what he is selling you, literally. He's making China Mexico Honduras and any other country making his goods better by taking money from YOU and shipping it to the NAFTA TTP or whatever other trade deal countries he's always railing. He LOVES NAFTA and TTP. He makes money, YOUR money, from it. And he's laughing at you. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
MAKE who GREAT AGAIN?
|
 Straight from the horses mouth. If anybody is grasping at straws it's the dump trump movement inside the republican party or trump himself. After all, he's the one who told you all via his own scheduled media appearances that the hats were made elsewhere and he's spending campaign money on his own properties. Isn't that an FEC violation? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
MAKE who GREAT AGAIN?
|
|
http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/21/news/donald-trump-spending/index.html?section=money_news_international/ Donald Trump spent $207,868 on hats and $120,174 on ads last month $1.3mn v $42mn: Donald Trump has massive fundraising deficit against Hillary Clinton http://www.rt.com/usa/347652-trump-fundraising-problem-campaign/ http://www.lyingcrookedhillary.com/  * #44 Donald Trump Thread  * I wasn't making reference to the budget for the NOT MADE IN AMERICA hats. That is quite a bit of dough for him to spend outside America though. This from the 'Silent Majority' 'America First' 'Successful Businessman' candidate. Yes trump profited from yet another flat out lie. He claims to have tried to find a company in the U.S.to make those hats but wasn't able to find anyone able to do it. This is just like his furniture and ties made outside the USA . I tried and they just weren't going to do it. When asked if they were anything like his ties made in Chyna he replied give me a tax I would love to pay a tax. The hats point to his taxes. His taxes..... They don't speak for themselves. What does speak for itself is how much of his loaned campaign contributions that have gone into his own businesses. Im begining to think that whether or not he pays himself back for the loan he gave himself he is still going to profit from the campaign win or lose. Maybe that's the real reason his campaign is broke now. I think the general election donors pledges incumbents w/e are holding out campaign funds and trying to devise a plan to donate down ticket without donating to his campaign. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
MAKE who GREAT AGAIN?
|
|
You know those hats that trump and his campaign are tossing or selling? Anyone buy one? Clarity, GermanChocolate. What are you infering? It's a question, pretty straight forward. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
germanchoclate1981
on
Tue 06/21/16 05:18 PM
|
|
2 quick questions. 1 How many presidents kings or heads of state have been assassinated in countries in the middle east? 2 How many presidents have been assassinated in the United States? Let's narrow answers down to the last 200 years. Quite a few. One was pretty recently Butto and also Quaddafi were both recent. Technically, Ghaddafi was deposed via proxy, not an single act of assassination. Bhutto was assassinated, by whom??????? The last I can think of is Arafat that was just outright assassination. History has put a bit of distance and a lack of media coverage since it happened. If I had to venture a guess I would say that it's not a single act of assassination. Right sassy, MLK and Malcolm X were assassinated along with Medgar Evars and countless others. John Lennon would fall into their broad category as political activists who were not actual politicians. I named , the Kennedys Lincoln Garfield and McKinley, and attempts on Regan and Teddy Roosevelt. Gerald Ford wasn't assassinated. Be that as it may if you throw in the activists the count DWARFS the middle east count of a possible 2, 1 being just kinda quietly dead for hmmm, why did Bhutto die again? Foreign wars don't count as assassinations. On the other hand, U.S. Politicians presidents and activists were quite public spectacles often at rallies or innagurals and in common public places with media and many witnesses present. Again OP called the attempt on trump 'something you'd expect to see in the middle east or third world country' but when weighing the entire middle east against U.S. only expounds on the fact that apart from acts of foreign policy, wars or proxy wars, outright assassinations in the middle east are EXTREMELY rare. Ousters included, they still don't come close to U.S. assainations in the past 200 years. It's a uniquely American problem, not a hijacking. Whether or not I like trump or not is irrelevant. The fact that it happened (s) more in the U.S. IS relevant and related to OP. Another good question was how was this kid from the U.K. with an expired VISA allowed to go to a gun shop and procure a pistol to practice with after coming to the site of the last so called act of terrorism (actually workplace violence) and then go on to a trump rally and get close enough to have actually pulled this off? Secret Service? FBI? Beuller? Beuller...?  Procure a Pistol? Some fancy way of reading the Original Article,hmm? He was going to "PROCURE" (STEAL)an Officer's Pistol for the simple reason that his Status didn't allow him to "Procure" a Pistol in any other way! Wrong " Another good question was how was this kid from the U.K. with an expired VISA allowed to go to a gun shop and PROCURE A PISTOL TO PRACTICE WITH after coming to the site of the last so called act of terrorism (actually workplace violence) and then go on to a trump rally and get close enough to have actually pulled this off? He never stole a gun, he tried to grab an officers gun and failed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 quick questions. 1 How many presidents kings or heads of state have been assassinated in countries in the middle east? 2 How many presidents have been assassinated in the United States? Let's narrow answers down to the last 200 years. so,you think Political Assassination is a proper way of Political Expression?  You said that not me. Unless you haven't noticed those curly things at the end of the sentence means those are questions. As does the above qualifier "2 quick questions" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
MAKE who GREAT AGAIN?
|
|
You know those hats that trump and his campaign are tossing or selling? Anyone buy one?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 quick questions. 1 How many presidents kings or heads of state have been assassinated in countries in the middle east? 2 How many presidents have been assassinated in the United States? Let's narrow answers down to the last 200 years. Quite a few. One was pretty recently Butto and also Quaddafi were both recent. Technically, Ghaddafi was deposed via proxy, not an single act of assassination. Bhutto was assassinated, by whom??????? The last I can think of is Arafat that was just outright assassination. History has put a bit of distance and a lack of media coverage since it happened. If I had to venture a guess I would say that it's not a single act of assassination. Right sassy, MLK and Malcolm X were assassinated along with Medgar Evars and countless others. John Lennon would fall into their broad category as political activists who were not actual politicians. I named , the Kennedys Lincoln Garfield and McKinley, and attempts on Regan and Teddy Roosevelt. Gerald Ford wasn't assassinated. Be that as it may if you throw in the activists the count DWARFS the middle east count of a possible 2, 1 being just kinda quietly dead for hmmm, why did Bhutto die again? Foreign wars don't count as assassinations. On the other hand, U.S. Politicians presidents and activists were quite public spectacles often at rallies or innagurals and in common public places with media and many witnesses present. Again OP called the attempt on trump 'something you'd expect to see in the middle east or third world country' but when weighing the entire middle east against U.S. only expounds on the fact that apart from acts of foreign policy, wars or proxy wars, outright assassinations in the middle east are EXTREMELY rare. Ousters included, they still don't come close to U.S. assainations in the past 200 years. It's a uniquely American problem, not a hijacking. Whether or not I like trump or not is irrelevant. The fact that it happened (s) more in the U.S. IS relevant and related to OP. Another good question was how was this kid from the U.K. with an expired VISA allowed to go to a gun shop and procure a pistol to practice with after coming to the site of the last so called act of terrorism (actually workplace violence) and then go on to a trump rally and get close enough to have actually pulled this off? Secret Service? FBI? Beuller? Beuller...?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 quick questions. 1 How many presidents kings or heads of state have been assassinated in countries in the middle east? 2 How many presidents have been assassinated in the United States? Let's narrow answers down to the last 200 years. What is your point?  To NOT talk about the OP's topic ? To NOT talk an assassination attempt? Nope, I'm on topic. The attempted shooting of Trump is not a lone occurrence in U.S. history. In fact: Assassination attempts and plots on Presidents of the United States have been numerous: more than 20 attempts to kill sitting and former presidents, as well as the Presidents-elect, are known. Four sitting presidents have been killed, all of them by gunshot: Abraham Lincoln (the 16th President), James A. Garfield (the 20th President), William McKinley (the 25th President) and John F. Kennedy (the 35th President). Two presidents were injured in attempted assassinations, also by gunshot: Theodore Roosevelt (the 26th President) and Ronald Reagan (the 40th President). With the exception of Lyndon Johnson, every president's life since John F. Kennedy has been threatened with assassination. -Wikipedia Add in the tragic murder of Bobby Kennedy and the near killing of congresswoman Gabby Giffords and it's much more widespread than just the president and the people near the president at the time of the shooting. It's a particularly American problem. Saddam was hung by Shiite countrymen (or so we are told) after his capture by U.S. Forces. Ghaddafi was shot stabbed who really knows what actually killed him but there was a significant lengthly coup before. Who in the middle east was just assassinated? What third world country in the area assassinated their king, president, emir, caliph, emper- you get it. How many compared to the U.S. in the past 200 years? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 quick questions.
1 How many presidents kings or heads of state have been assassinated in countries in the middle east? 2 How many presidents have been assassinated in the United States? Let's narrow answers down to the last 200 years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can we get side by side headlines with uuge captions and start the primaries over? Please?!?! Lock both of them up. Decriminalize our government! I agree with you... its true. both candidates are not good. Matter of fact I didn't like any of the candidates 4 months ago. In my opinion, the entire crop was no good. we need a "" do over" like you used to do when playing stickball. Let Obama run out his office .. put a voice mail in the white house , like the one you hear from the cable company when you call.. where you actually never speak to a human. We would be better off. Push the voting violations investigations and charges, trace where the white powder sent to Marco Rubio's campaign hq (threat) before he dropped out, return respective delegates to all candidates and discount all votes for criminal candidates and recount remaining votes. This would be the actual outcome in a real democratic election. Commission of a felony (like vote suppression or threatening a politician) disqualifies a candidate for the highest office in the land even if they are just a figure head they should not have a criminal record as these two actually in reality do. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can we get side by side headlines with uuge captions and start the primaries over? Please?!?!
Lock both of them up. Decriminalize our government! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
germanchoclate1981
on
Sat 06/11/16 02:12 AM
|
|
No it wasn't a distraction. It was a FOCUS.
BBC, oopsied CNN, and FOX followed suit and you should take a good listen to what the FOX anchor says after the building actually does come down. Fox 5 news reports building 7 collapsed before it happens https://youtu.be/QOVnvFl5jZo CNN.... Before it happens https://youtu.be/2PqbGfCcef0 BBC... (the first oopsie) before it happens https://youtu.be/yx4p9pUREZ8 Unfact those. You can't. FACT. BBC's Jane Standley actually moves out of the focal point of the camera so you can see the building standing before her video feed is conveniently interrupted. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And WTC7 specifically tells us the outcome of the 9/11 commission report cannot be the result of what they told us happened on that day. Buildings do not catch on fire and THEN get wired for demolition with other buildings burning and exploding around them. No company or government agency in the United States in one of the most densely populated areas of the WORLD (Manhattan) would allow explosives in large amounts to be taken to the scene of an active crime, fire, explosions, accident, or anything else that could have caused the sheer magnitude of destruction we saw that day before it was under control which we all know didn't happen until months later. A building can however be wired and have the structure weakened in a deliberate and professional manner as it admittedly was, THEN catch or be set on fire. It cannot be explained in any other way given the admission that WTC7 was "pulled". Not legally, not logically, not realisticly, not at all. Check your facts. BBC, PBS and from the horses mouth. Larry Silverstein. yep,real smart,inducing Fire into a Building that is prepared to be taken down with Explosives! Sure preserves your Sequence! Never heard of Explosives cooking off above a certain temperature? Besides,there is no evidence that ANY of the Buildings have been structurally weakened! Besides,you are way off Topic! 'Larry Silverstein, his unjust claim, the act that was the foundation of the claim and it's DIRECT connection to the topic is in the article Moe posted. Pointing out his foreknowledge unjustifying his claim and his complicity in the act is not off topic. It gives credence to the conspiracy that was also in the O.P. There is proof that WTC7 was strategically weakened prior to being pulled as there is with the towers in the 45 degree cuts int the structural steel beams and the presence of thermite which is used to do exactly that. The NYFD describe the collapse as a series of booms (thermite charges also seen as tiny puffs going down the building ahead of above floors collapsing) "just like a demolition". Larry Silverstein confirmed it in a documentary on PBS. Are you telling Larry Silverstein who made the decision to pull the building that it wasn't pulled? He made it pretty clear. As for the sequence, the charges aren't just set around file cabinets. They have to be on the steel columns themselves which are not visible from outside the building. Once whatever needed to be done inside WTC7 that morning was done, it didn't matter if a superficial fire was set or a separate explosion causing an externally visible damage as the building was just going to be pulled anyway. Logically there had to be some externally visible damage for the 'justification' for 7 to be pulled, though 3,4,5,and 6 were not. Of all the standing damaged burning buildings 7 was the least damaged. The reason WHY 7 was pulled would be the EXACT REASON Zurich Insurance would be at odds with LARRY SILVERSTEIN, THE FBI, THE PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY, and the BUSH ADMINISTRATION. This makes the O.P. articles point that given the executive's connection and legal fight to deny double indemnity clause in the policy with Silverstein, there is very little likelihood that he committed suicide. 9/11 is in the title of the O.P. as is: Zurich Insurance 2nd executive suicide and connection to (9/11) the only thing i agree with with is that he was sucided, but i think it had more to do with the Chinese explosion than 9/11... Funny thing about confessions.... You don't have to agree with it for it to be the truth, or a fact. There is such a thing as a false or coerced confession, but since this was not an interview or interrogation by law enforcement or congress or a judge. It was voluntary contribution to an official documentary on an educational network. The explosion in China was at least first reported as an accident, incorrect possibly, but largely viewed as negligence or just an accident. There was no zealot somewhere in a cave saying how much he hates China that they broadcast on major media to all their citizens. The likelihood is that both insurance execs were suicided there was just an 'accident' placed before the second execs death to divert attention away from the huge scandal of 9/11. The explosion in China wasn't a small thing by any means but it pales in comparison to 9/11 as every crime or act of terrorism since Dec 7th 1941. Hmmmm. A catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor.... I've heard that somewhere before...... I digress. It doesn't matter if you don't agree with a fact, it's still a fact. Larry Silverstein wasn't in stripes, behind bars in an interrogation room or a courthouse. He could have declined to speak or deny they pulled WTC7. He admitted it. That is something every American needs to know and accept the implications of. He knew. you should look up what the difference between "truth and facts" and "opinions" are... everything you've said is your opinion, which i respect, but don't agree with... When a historical event is discussed in a documentary film by a person who played a significant role in the lead up to the event holds a lease to the no longer existing property the event took place in and the eventual claim for insurance on said property and it airs on public television during that persons lifetime.... That pretty much means that it's a fact. Unless 9/11 is a figment of the world's collective imagination your constipation is clouding your judgments. Watch the publicly broadcast PBS Documentary and the BBC broadcast on 9/11 WTC7 is reported to have collapsed before the order to pull it is given where it can still be seen in focus undeniably standing in the background. It is officially documented video recorded and archived fact. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 WHAT!!!!?????!!!!!!!????????? A year later? Offical oppression? Civil rights? What about a RAPE charge? Abuse of authority, authorities charges multiple? Registration as a sex offender? Possibly kidnapping charge for being held and forced against her will 'all-night' ? What about aiding and abetting a VIOLENT criminal? Neglecting to uphold the oath of office or appointment? The Cheif saw a video of a sexual assault and didn't arrest this officer on the spot? ACCOMPLICE!! As is every person who saw the video and didn't arrest or beat the ****ing **** out of this punk *** *****. Why is anyone in this story besides the Texas Ranger not behind bars? The city manager included. The judge in the Stanford swimmers case is being boycotted and petitioned to ouster, this judge should be charged with every crime possible and be imprisoned indefinitely. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cool another reason to avoid Oklahoma. Right up there with the militant policing action states. You get pulled over. The hic makes a mistake takes you in. Steals your money, the lawyer won't take your case cause you have no money. You are give a lawyer that don't know anything. You are imprisoned indefinetly. This is ileagle. Someone should take them to the Supreme court. All they need now is an unconstitutional law so they can confiscate your smartphone or have false messages sent and recieved from it.  Oh wait they already do that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How soon before hackers get ahold of this technology... Maybe credit cards will become obsolete.  How soon can they get their hands on it? Who do you think they got this idea from? Scammers, skimmers, scanners, and hackers. The 'elements' of this use have been in existence and use separately for ages and in combination recently by criminals. It should be no surprise that Leo's would do the same for the same reasons. The motive is clear in the without warrant or proof that a crime has been committed or involved the use of the funds. If they seized El Chapo's assets and skimmed his bank data transferring his balance no one would take issue with that aside from El Chapo. I doubt that this will be used in that manner. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
