NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 3

How long before Musk & Trump have a major rift?

  • Under one month

  • Under six months

  • Under one year

  • Under two years

  • Before the term ends

  • Not happening, never!

  • Not until Musk is ready to seize the Presidency

Results are only viewable after voting.

Remove this Banner Ad

Last edited:
CM86 said:
Amazing isn't it. For two months most of the world has been laughing at Musk and spreading years worth of content about him being a liar, fraud and moron. Especially the last two weeks.
Not much in the way of defending him.

Then he does neo-Nazi symbolism.
Suddenly everyone is defending him, and out comes the 'derangement syndrome' playbook again.

I wonder what was different. :moustache:
Click to expand...
Thats a bit of a fairytale or what.

Elon was a god of the left previously thanks to his push for renewables. Then he bought Twitter and wanted to cancel censorship and THEN he came a liar, a fraud and a moron

That was the shift. Musk joining up with Trump was way after people began calling him a liar, a fraud and a moron. That began when he bought Twitter and started aligning it towards more of a free speech platform
 
bourbons said:
4ce.gif


No way dude :tearsofjoy:

No ****ing way :tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy:

The evidence was going to be presented that day! Stuff the courts couldn't wave away!!
Click to expand...

Don't know if you're just strawmanning here or didn't properly read what I wrote. Or maybe I just didn't explain it well enough. My guess is it's #1. I'm 100% certain you'll say #3. If you do I don't mind fleshing it out further.
 
Taylor said:

His direct answer on the purpose of the letter, as you'll see on page 11, was to assist Biden in the upcoming election. In his own words.
Click to expand...


I've read through all of it now. And I've been wondering how to best approach this.

Because it doesn't matter what I say, how I explain it, and even using screenshots/quotes directly from the transcript. It will not change anyone's position on this.



But I will anyway.
Taylor said:
Federal agents working for the people knowingly engaging in misinformation to distort an election has to be labelled something, so enemy of the people is fitting.
Click to expand...

I'll take you at your word that you've read the transcript.
And I'm not saying that your position is wrong, only based on this transcript you've shared.
I'm just going to try and demonstrate that it doesn't put across what you've taken from it.

To me, it seems you've conflated accusations from Jordan and Gaetz, with Blinken, with the actual testimony of Morell.
And you've assigned this created 'fact', and attributed it across all people who signed onto the release.


Blinken worked for Biden, and contacted Morell asking for his input on the Laptop stuff. Blinken did NOT tell Morell to 'cook something up'.
Q Thank you. And you said now Secretary Blinken was employed by the
Biden campaign at the time he sent this email, correct?
A It's my understanding is that he was employed.
Q When he called you, did he direct, suggest, or insinuate in any way that you

should write a letter or statement on this topic?
A My memory is that he did not, right. My memory is that he asked me what
I thought.
Q Okay. It wasn't: The campaign could use some help on this; could you --
A He did not say that.


Morell started looking into it and it had all the hallmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign.
He then reached out to a collection of experts in this area, and they all agreed with his assessment.
Q You said: Just wondering if you think the Russians played in the Hunter
Biden email thing.
And he said: Hey, there.
And you said: It kind of feels that way to me.
And he says: It does to me, too. There was a previous Burisma hack. Plus
Ruby and the orbit he plays is all dirty.
Then you responded: But a strange way to get the material into the public
domain?
Mark responded: They will always look for a dissem mechanism, third party.
Yes, this is odd. A blind computer. But I think of it as throwing crap on a wall.
Whatever sticks.
And then you say: I'm thinking of writing something that says the FBI is
investigating whether there is Russia involvement in this thing, and that makes sense
because it has the feel of a Russian op.
It goes on, and you ask if you want to write it together, and then just send you a
list of what you see as the hallmarks.
When you said "but the strange way to get the material into the public domain,"
did you have any doubt about the veracity of the laptop and what was being reported
about it and --


14
A No, I just meant what I said, right? It's a strange way for the Russians to
put this information into the public domain. And I wanted to give Marc an out, right?
Because I start by saying kind of feels that way to me. I didn't want to leave the witness.
So I wanted to give him an opportunity to say, you know, maybe this isn't what we're
saying it is. This was somebody who was subordinate to me at the Agency, and I didn't
want right my seniority to drive him to a conclusion.
Q And what did Mr. Polymeropoulos come back and tell you?
A He came back and, you know -- he clearly came back and said, he thinks, you
know, he shared my suspicions.
Q Did you have a specific strategy in your outreach efforts to the former
officials that you were soliciting?
A The strategy was to get people who had served on administrations -- you
know, multiple administrations, Republican and Democrat, that was the goal.


He's then drafted and organised a release and then sent it around for people to either put their names to it or to correct anything, such as saying it wasn't disinformation.
A So that's actually a very important paragraph, No. 4. It was very
important to me that the people who knew Russia best, and Marc was one of those, but a
number of the other signatories were as well. Deep Russia experts, Marc was in part a
Russia expert, but some of the people other people were deep Russia experts. They had
worked on the Soviet Union and Russia their entire careers. It was very important to me
that they agreed with what we were saying here. And if any of them had raised their
hand and said, "Hey, I think this is wrong," this never would have happened. So that
paragraph was very important to me


They even actively removed a paragraph that defended Biden.
Q We know that the statement that's published is different from the draft that
was originally circulated. In particular, the last two paragraphs referencing Vice
President Joe Biden taking a private and public stand against the then prosecutor general
of Ukraine Viktor Shokin were taken out for being what you described as too political.
Why?
A Somebody asked that it come out. I don't know who. And that was the point that that person made. I really don't know who asked. And, you know, I didn't necessarily see it as too political. You know, the whole statement is political at the end of the day. But I didn't see it as too political. But the person who asked that it come out did, so we took it out. It's actually an important paragraph for me. But it came out nonetheless.
Q Why was that an important paragraph for you?
A Because the fundamental charge against the Vice President was that he had conducted U.S. policy toward Ukraine, not with the best interest of the United States of America in mind but with the interest of his son in mind. And I thought and I still believe that that to be an inaccurate charge. At this time, you know, there were several investigations, none of which got to that fundamental charge, none of which proved that fundamental charge. And, as somebody who worked at the most senior levels of the Obama administration, I knew that it was an impossibility for the Vice President to conduct foreign policy on his own. So I knew that charge to be false. It was a charge that continued to be made against the Vice President by President Trump, and that is one of the reasons why this letter was important to me: to give the Vice President something to push back on that charge.

Morell testified and was evidenced to have followed all procedures.
A I did not coordinate with the CIA. I would have -- had I known this, I wouldhave reacted very negatively to this. This might -- you know, had I known at the timethis might have been in the letter, then I certainly would have reported this to then theDirector of the Agency.Mr. Gaetz. And why would you have done this?Mr. Morell. Because this is inappropriate.Mr. Gaetz. And why is it inappropriate?Mr. Morell. It's inappropriate for a currently serving staff officer or contractor tobe involved in the political process

I think this is the main part that has convinced you and others.
Blinken's letter to Morell had two goals, in Morell's opinion. One of which was naturally to help Joe Biden.
Morell did not act on anything to help Joe Biden, but he was aware of Blinken's intent.
So the framing around Blinken's intent and letter, is being attributed to Morell and the people who signed the release.
Morell took this on board, and deliberately attempted to find a way to ensure balance, and expertise. To ensure there was no implication of corruption.
Mr. Gaetz. I have two questions for you. So you said that -- you testified that
what triggered this letter was Mr. Blinken's contact to you --
Mr. Morell. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gaetz. -- regarding the Biden campaign's desire to have it?
Mr. Morell. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gaetz. Okay. And then the goal of the letter was to help Joe Biden, right?
Mr. Morell. Let me just say one thing in response. He asked me if I thought the
Russians could be involved in this. As far as I remember, he did not ask me to put out a
statement. So, yes, he triggered the statement; he did not ask for it, as far as my
memory goes.
Mr. Gaetz. And the goal was to help Joe Biden win the Presidential election.
Mr. Morell. One of two goals, yes, sir.
Mr. Gaetz. And the mechanism that you specifically contemplated with a letter
useful in winning that election was the upcoming Presidential debate, right.
Mr. Morell. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gaetz. So how did you decide who to solicit?
Mr. Morell. We wanted -- you know, I'd say three things. Number one -- and I
think I mentioned these before. One is we wanted some senior officials. Two is we
wanted some balance across the administrations. And three is we wanted some Russia
experts. So that's who we targeted.


Morell details his thoughts and actions.
"two individuals close to President Trump, the fact that they had played a role in these emails getting from the computer repair shop to The New York Post was also suspicious to me. "​
Mr. Morell. Okay. Let me just list them all because I -- otherwise I would have
to read the letter here to remind myself. So one was my knowledge of Russian
intelligence capabilities. They are very good. Two was their massive involvement in
the 2016 election. Particularly with regard to hacking and dumping of emails and the
use of social media to promote discord in the United States of America. Three was the

fact that the U.S. intelligence community had, I believe, in August of 2020 said that the
Russians the Chinese and the Iranians were interfering in the election. Four was that I
believe --
Chairman Jordan. Excuse me, Mr. Morell. Is that last one what you I cited in
your counsel's letter to us August 7, 2020, the Office of the Director of Intelligence --
Mr. Morell. Yes.
Chairman Jordan. -- led by Mr. Ratcliffe. This is a press release stating.
Mr. Morell. Yes, sir. Next was the fact that I think it was in September -- I'm
not a hundred percent sure -- and these were the things where I found, right, after Mr.
Blinken had called me and I started doing internet searches. These are all the things
that started coming to me or I found. And this next one is one of the ones I found. So,
in September, the Department of Treasury sanctioned a Ukrainian Parliamentarian for
interference in the U.S. election. Mr. Mnuchin put out a press release praising the
sanction. Secretary Pompeo did exactly the same thing. This person was
identified -- this is Mr. Derkach -- this person was identified by the U.S. government as an
agent of Russia. And part of his interference in the election I learned when I did my
research was that he was -- he was saying an awful lot about Hunter Biden. One of the
things I found that he said was that Hunter Biden had stolen millions of dollars from the
Ukrainian people and diverted that money into Biden family accounts.
Mr. Gaetz. Were you able to assess whether that was a true or false statement?
Mr. Morell. I have no idea whether it was true or false, but it was certainly, in
this case, a Russian agent interfering in our election. And so, you know, I don't know if
that's in here. I don't think it is. But that was concerning to me. And then the fact
that, you know, two individuals close to President Trump, the fact that they had played a
role in these emails getting from the computer repair shop to The New York Post was also
suspicious to me.
Mr. Gaetz. Mr. Morell, all that is circumstantial evidence, isn't it?
Mr. Morell. Intelligence analysts deal with circumstantial evidence every day, sir.

Mr. Morell. One hundred percent consistent with what I know they did 2016
and what I had already heard, right, by reading the media what they were already doing
in 2020. So it's fully consistent with that. The statement -- the morning that we put
this together -- I know it was the morning, or it was different morning, but --
Chairman Jordan. 8:57 a.m. of October 19th, 2020.
Mr. Morell. Okay. I just could not see how he could come to that conclusion;
how you could come to a conclusion that the Russians were not involved in this so
quickly. It just did not make any sense to me.
Chairman Jordan. You just thought he was wrong?

Mr. Morell. I don't know if he was wrong or right. I don't know how --
Chairman Jordan. He was obviously right. You thought he was wrong on that
day.
Mr. Morell. I didn't know if he was right or wrong. I just thought that was way
too quick a judgment to make.
Chairman Jordan. So you were obviously aware of Mr. Ratcliffe's statement that
morning before you sent the letter out?
Mr. Morell. Yes.
Mr. Gaetz. And, as you sit here today, do you believe the Russians were involved
in the Hunter Biden laptop matter?
Mr. Morell. I don't know. I mean, I still have suspicions, Congressman.


Mr. Gaetz. Would you organize such a letter today knowing what you know
now?
Mr. Morell. I would have to write it differently because we now know the emails
are authentic, right? So you couldn't say anymore we don't know whether it's
information or disinformation. But I still have suspicions about a Russian role in these
emails getting to The New York Post.
I would have to write it differently because we now know the emails are authentic, right? So you couldn't say anymore we don't know whether it's information or disinformation. But I still have suspicions about a Russian role in these emails getting to The New York Post. ​


They did not state it was definitive, they just were unsure.
Mr. Morell. The statement itself said, the statement itself said we don't know whether the information is accurate or not. It made that perfectly clear in the statement.

Morell's testimony does not support your statement of "Federal agents working for the people knowingly engaging in misinformation to distort an election".
It does the opposite.
Q So this article is actually a report of an hour-long interview that The Daily
Beast did with Mr. Giuliani in which Giuliani said that he, quote, "viewed his latest leak to
the New York Post," referring to the Biden laptop leak, quote, "as an extension of his
years-long efforts to work with Ukrainians to dig up dirt on the Bidens."
Was it concerning to you or would it have been concerning to you that Rudy
Giuliani viewed the leak of the laptop as part of his ongoing work with the Ukrainians to


124
dig up dirt on the Bidens?
A Yes.
Q Why is that?
A It would've been another data point. I wasn't aware of this at the time.
In my mind, it would've been another data point. Still circumstantial, but it would've
been another data point.
Q Right. And so you do think it's relevant that Rudy Giuliani described it as
part of his --
A Yes.
Q -- ongoing work to dig up dirt?
A Yes. And, in particular, doing so, you know, with a Russian agent.
Q Okay.
And the interview reads, in part, quote, "Derkach for years has tried to pass
damaging -- and largely false -- information about the Ukraine government's supposed
attempts to undermine Trump, and the Bidens' supposed dirty dealings in Kyiv. Derkach
dispatched packets of disinformation about the Obama administration and the Bidens to
lawmakers on Capitol Hill throughout 2019 and finally met with Giuliani in
December 2019 in Kyiv during the middle of the House impeachment process. Derkach
and Giuliani appeared together in an anti-Biden television series produced by the
Trumpist network OAN, and Giuliani has interviewed Derkach about the Bidens on his
YouTube series Common Sense."
Putting aside the comments about this being part of Giuliani's years-long efforts to
dig up dirt with the Ukrainians, is just the fact that he was associating with a known
Russian agent of concern to you?
A Yes. It's either concerning because he knew about it and, therefore, he


125
shouldn't have done it, or it's concerning that he was not warned off, right, that the
government didn't say to him, "Hey, you should not be talking to this guy. He's a
Russian agent." Either way, it's concerning to me.
Q And Giuliani also was known to have ties to an individual named Andrii
Telizhenko, correct?
A I did not -- I don't know that name.
Q Okay.
You said that it was concerning to you that Rudy Giuliani would not have -- either
way, he was associating or people knew he was associating and nobody warned him.
But the sanctions that we just walked through were issued in mid-September, correct?
A Yeah. And I don't know the timing of Mr. Giuliani's contact with Mr.
Derkach.
Q Right. But we know that the Hunter Biden laptop story was in October --
A Yes.
Q -- of 2014.
A Yes.
Q So that would've been after the sanctions.
A Yes, but we don't know when the New York Post acquired the --
Q Right.
A -- hard drive. Right.
Q So the next earmark that the letter -- sorry. Yeah. The next earmark the
letter notes -- that the letter notes that, according to the Post, U.S. intelligence agencies
warned the White House that Giuliani was the target of an influence operation by Russian
intelligence.
I'm going to introduce the Washington Post article that reports that. It was


126
dated October 15, 2020. It's entitled "White House Was Warned Giuliani Was a Target
of Russian Intelligence Operation to Feed Misinformation to Trump."
[Morell Exhibit No. 22.
Was marked for identification.]
BY
Q So the article -- I also want to -- so I want to note for the record, this article
was issued on October 15, 2020. When it was issued, it said that Giuliani himself was
warned that he was a target of an intelligence operation.
A I didn't know that.
Q The Post later issued a correction to that part of the story in May 2021, and
they said Giuliani had not been warned directly --
A Okay.
Q -- but the White House had been warned.
A Okay.
Q And, as you said, Giuliani was President Trump's personal --
A Attorney.
Q -- lawyer for the -- so, presumably, any warning could have been passed
along to him.
The October 15, 2020, Post article says that "the warnings were based on multiple
sources, including intercepted communications, that showed Giuliani was interacting with
people tied to Russian intelligence during a December 2019 trip to Ukraine, where he was
gathering information that he thought would expose corrupt acts by former vice
president Joe Biden and his son Hunter."
"The intelligence raised concerns that Giuliani was being used to feed Russian
misinformation to the president, the former officials said, speaking on the condition of


127
anonymity to discuss sensitive information and conversations."
Was this fact something that added to your concern about the Hunter Biden
emails, or the supposed emails, potentially being part of a Russian intent to interfere in
the 2020 election?
A I was not aware of this at the time


The transcript is over 100 pages.
I don't expect anyone to read this or change anyone's mind. But it is worth reading the transcript and understanding, if anyone gets the chance.
This is Morell's sworn testimony under oath. And it opposes any reason to target the 51 people who signed onto the release.
Who have already been targeted and punished. Who are viewed by some as enemies of the people.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

GoEaglesGoSGIO said:
Cos of the contradictory tone of it. Trump falling down the stairs was pointed at as a key reason to not vote for him, then Biden fell down the stairs and got told that it doesnt matter anymore.
Click to expand...
Eh? :drunk:

We're talking about Elon's kek, mate. Nothing to do with anyone falling down stairs.
 
HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
Don't know if you're just strawmanning here or didn't properly read what I wrote. Or maybe I just didn't explain it well enough. My guess is it's #1. I'm 100% certain you'll say #3. If you do I don't mind fleshing it out further.
Click to expand...
Like talking to a brick wall when it comes to that. Not really worth conversing on. I mean they want to talk about that right. Heres something to talk about instead

Deaths in wars across the globe

In 2019 , the last year of Trumps presidency, worldwide we had 89,853 estimated deaths in war. In 2023 in Bidens last year we had 249,407 deaths in war....

Perhaps we should ask them to discuss the 150,000+ extra deaths in war topic instead of what 500 morons did one day at a building? You know, something thats got a bit more substance to it then a bunch of pictures to point at
 
GoEaglesGoSGIO said:
Thats a bit of a fairytale or what.
Click to expand...
Incredible, you've managed to get pretty much all of this completely wrong :drunk:

GoEaglesGoSGIO said:
Elon was a god of the left previously thanks to his push for renewables. Then he bought Twitter and wanted to cancel censorship and THEN he came a liar, a fraud and a moron
Click to expand...
If you think Elon was a 'god' to the left previously in much the same way as he is now to the right I'm not sure what to tell you. That level of ideological devotion, where you will defend the person no matter what, for example if they're a confirmed sexual abuser or have just thrown out a seig heil for laughs, just doesn't exist on the left, or at least not like it does on the right anyway. Just look at Trump - many of his supporters here are still unable to wrap their heads around the left not having the same level of psychological devotion to their 'side' as they do for their guy, it just doesn't compute for them. They think there are huge numbers of actual Biden fans on these boards, totally bizarre.


GoEaglesGoSGIO said:
That began when he bought Twitter and started aligning it towards more of a free speech platform
Click to expand...
I'm not really sure what to say to anyone who honestly believes he's aligning twitter towards "more of a free speech platform", thats legit incredible.

www.forbes.com

Elon Musk Accused Of ‘Silencing His Critics’ As X Suspends Journalists

“If you are one of those people who actually believe that Elon Musk is a principled champion of free speech, then you maybe one of the dumbest people to have ever walked the earth,” said former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

Easily as bad as the previous management and likely worse, its just that now he's censoring people you don't like. You appear to be operating in a bit of a bubble here.

www.socialmediatoday.com

Elon Musk’s Push for Free Speech Shows Clear Bias Towards His Own Interests

Musk is seemingly making calls on where to push back based on his own interests.
www.socialmediatoday.com www.socialmediatoday.com
 
bourbons said:
Incredible, you've managed to get pretty much all of this completely wrong :drunk:


If you think Elon was a 'god' to the left previously in much the same way as he is now to the right I'm not sure what to tell you. That level of ideological devotion, where you will defend the person no matter what, for example if they're a confirmed sexual abuser or have just thrown out a seig heil for laughs, just doesn't exist on the left, or at least not like it does on the right anyway. Just look at Trump - many of his supporters here are still unable to wrap their heads around the left not having the same level of psychological devotion to their 'side' as they do for their guy, it just doesn't compute for them. They think there are huge numbers of actual Biden fans on these boards, totally bizarre.



I'm not really sure what to say to anyone who honestly believes he's aligning twitter towards "more of a free speech platform", thats legit incredible.

www.forbes.com

Elon Musk Accused Of ‘Silencing His Critics’ As X Suspends Journalists

“If you are one of those people who actually believe that Elon Musk is a principled champion of free speech, then you maybe one of the dumbest people to have ever walked the earth,” said former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

Easily as bad as the previous management and likely worse, its just that now he's censoring people you don't like. You appear to be operating in a bit of a bubble here.

www.socialmediatoday.com

Elon Musk’s Push for Free Speech Shows Clear Bias Towards His Own Interests

Musk is seemingly making calls on where to push back based on his own interests.
www.socialmediatoday.com www.socialmediatoday.com
Click to expand...
Can you find me some articles criticising Musk before his Twitter takeover?
 
Kurve said:
So much pot kettle in this it's amazing
Click to expand...
Nope. Im bringing people back to the conversation they are trying to change....

The left cant discuss Chinas impact on climate change, the cost of energy causing inflation, the Biden war machine causing a large increase in deaths between 2020-2024 as opposed to 2016-2020, the increase in anti-semitisim from 2016-2020 to 2020-2024 despite thise in 2016-2020 supposedly being the Nazi ones

I can go on and on. We are in 2025. We should be discussing 2025. The desire to talk about 2020 in a US Politics PT 3 thread is just the moving of the goalposts im afraid. Nothing that happened on J6 has changed. Topic was done and dusted in PT 2 really. Bringing it up again is just changing the topic cos the above topics are not good ones to discuss if you are a leftie.

No leftie wants to discuss ongoing wars, or inflation, or anti semitism... In other words, no leftie wants to fight a argument they will lose. Unfortunately life isnt really about me or you fighting arguments we can win vs what we cant. Its about discussing the topics that exist today... and that includes the deaths of hundreds of thousands that are occurring right now for example.
 
bourbons said:
Yes mate, I'm the cooked one. Because I think these 2 actions are similar;

Click to expand...


You are most definitely cooked. The legacy media has fried your brain.

Elon Musk: “my heart goes out to you”
CNN, bourbons & 95% of SRP: “ Elon Musk is a Nazi”.

The fact that leftist acolytes have had to scour the internet so hard to find a salute that more closely resembles the gesture he made it still has 'getty images' running across it tells me everything I need to know. It's such a rarely seen version of the original it makes me wonder who that group is. I've not seen this stated anywhere. Hillary's gesture below (where the straightened arm is held aloft for a long time) is a lot closer to a real Nazi salute.





 
HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
Don't know if you're just strawmanning here or didn't properly read what I wrote. Or maybe I just didn't explain it well enough. My guess is it's #1. I'm 100% certain you'll say #3. If you do I don't mind fleshing it out further.
Click to expand...
I mean....
HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
This was evidence that wasn't going to be able to be waved away like some courts later did when they blamed 'standing', or laches and it was evidence the Democrats had a vested interest in not being heard.
Click to expand...
Yeah you should probably flesh it out.

When doing so also make sure to include some rationale as to why Trump and the GOP, being unable to present this evidence on J6, have still not presented it in any other forum to this day, 4 years later. Even Rogan asked Trump about that one, and got the usual deflectory tapdance - Donnie ended up waffling about Hunter's laptop from memory lol
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

pebblesofsand said:
Schrodingers cat - since you don't know whether a baby will be male or female until the fetus is 6 weeks old, you can't know what its sex will be at the point of conception.


All human individuals—whether they have an XX, an XY, or an atypical sex chromosome combination—begin development from the same starting point.

During early development the gonads of the fetus remain undifferentiated; that is, all fetal genitalia are the same and are phenotypically female.

After approximately 6 to 7 weeks of gestation, however, the expression of a gene on the Y chromosome induces changes that result in the development of the testes.
Click to expand...

You CAN know earlier than 6 weeks though. It's just prohibitively expensive and impractical for anyone other than those participating in IVF.
 
GoEaglesGoSGIO said:
The left cant discuss Chinas impact on climate change, the cost of energy causing inflation,
Click to expand...
It's one of the main arguments of actions Australia should be taking...
Reducing our exports of fossil fuels, especially to China.


https://www.unsw.edu.au/newsroom/ne...-australia-among-worlds-top-climate-polluters
Fossil fuel exports place Australia among world’s top climate polluters
“Australia’s own fossil fuel exports are doubling back on us and making devastating events like the 2022 Lismore and NSW floods, and the Black Summer bushfires, more likely to happen, more often and more severely,” said Australian Climate Accountability Project lead Gillian Moon, who is a Senior Visiting Fellow at UNSW Law & Justice.​
​
“Our own exports are helping make Australia’s climate more dangerous and costly to live in, selling our children and their futures short.”​
 
We need more posters in this thread. As much as I love me bonbons you can only read so many multi post melts before it becomes a yawn.

A recruitment drive to bring over rattled lefties from other boards is a very good idea.

Kurve, I’m an ideas man so I will leave the implementation in your capable hands.

Pretend you are Donald Trump - don’t worry if you kill a few smelt fish on the way - and make it happen.
 
EasternTiger said:
We need more posters in this thread. As much as I love me bonbons you can only read so many multi post melts before it becomes a yawn.

A recruitment drive to bring over rattled lefties from other boards is a very good idea.

Kurve, I’m an ideas man so I will leave the implementation in your capable hands.

Pretend you are Donald Trump - don’t worry if you kill a few smelt fish on the way - and make it happen.
Click to expand...
bourbons these guys are infatuated with you.

They post about you more than almost anyone or anything else.

Their god just took office, LGBTQ+ are under renewed attack, Musk is throwing out accidental symbolism.
And yet STILL all they can talk about is YOU!

They love you.
 
CM86 said:
It's one of the main arguments of actions Australia should be taking...
Reducing our exports of fossil fuels, especially to China.


https://www.unsw.edu.au/newsroom/ne...-australia-among-worlds-top-climate-polluters
Fossil fuel exports place Australia among world’s top climate polluters
“Australia’s own fossil fuel exports are doubling back on us and making devastating events like the 2022 Lismore and NSW floods, and the Black Summer bushfires, more likely to happen, more often and more severely,” said Australian Climate Accountability Project lead Gillian Moon, who is a Senior Visiting Fellow at UNSW Law & Justice.​
​
“Our own exports are helping make Australia’s climate more dangerous and costly to live in, selling our children and their futures short.”​
Click to expand...
Albo/Bowen had 4 years to do what takes 15 seconds to do... If they cant do it perhaps they are hypocrites? (this is a different convo though for another thread to be fair)
 
CM86 said:
bourbons these guys are infatuated with you.

They post about you more than almost anyone or anything else.

Their god just took office, LGBTQ+ are under renewed attack, Musk is throwing out accidental symbolism.
And yet STILL all they can talk about is YOU!

They love you.
Click to expand...
He is the only one that stayed when Trump got elected... and you. The rest ran away and hid.
 
GoEaglesGoSGIO said:
Albo/Bowen had 4 years to do what takes 15 seconds to do... If they cant do it perhaps they are hypocrites? (this is a different convo though for another thread to be fair)
Click to expand...
Albo being pissweak doesn't change the actions of the Chinese or US governments
 
bourbons said:
Yeah you should probably flesh it out.
Click to expand...

Well the courts could shut a lot of it down using 'rules'. This wasn't going to happen in a live televised joint session now was it? Democrats had to stop that at all costs. In the end they outplayed Trump. Now in case Ray Epps and his cronies weren't successful in their incitation efforts, it looks like they had a backup.




bourbons said:
When doing so also make sure to include some rationale as to why Trump and the GOP, being unable to present this evidence on J6, have still not presented it in any other forum to this day, 4 years later.
Click to expand...

Well despite what Marc Elias keeps telling the legacy media and everyone else who'll listen, the Trump/GOP actually won more election lawsuits related to the 2020 election than they lost. It took years for some of them but that's the facts.

bourbons said:
Even Rogan asked Trump about that one, and got the usual deflectory tapdance - Donnie ended up waffling about Hunter's laptop from memory lol
Click to expand...

As usual your memory is defective when it suits your argument. :rolleyesv1:

 

Remove this Banner Ad

NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 3

Similar threads

HitTheNailOnTheHead
Conspiracy Theory You have more chance of winning US lotto than drowning and yet the Obama and the Clinton chefs have both apparently drowned. What is going on?
Replies
7
Views
367
Ghost Patrol
Ghost Patrol
Back
Top