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

  • Not happening, never!

  • Not until Musk is ready to seize the Presidency


Results are only viewable after voting.

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here is US Politics Pt 2

Donald Trump was sworn in as president of the United States on Monday 20th January, 2025 in Washington DC.

Take Note

Anti-trans commentary will be deleted and warnings issued, that includes mockery and trying to pass it off as a joke.

Play nice, please.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Last edited:
Despite this the statement is correct the WSJ is left leaning. I have a subscription and see it in day to day articles. They have a broader variety of opinion pieces and you can find stories from different perspective but as a whole they still lean left.

I laughed the other day when they had an article about Trump "backing down" on his threats against Columbia as if Trumps plan had somehow failed and not that the threat had caused the desired result of Columbia accepting the repatriation flights and therefore Trump not needing to sanction Columbia.
 
Despite this the statement is correct the WSJ is left leaning. I have a subscription and see it in day to day articles. They have a broader variety of opinion pieces and you can find stories from different perspective but as a whole they still lean left.

I laughed the other day when they had an article about Trump "backing down" on his threats against Columbia as if Trumps plan had somehow failed and not that the threat had caused the desired result of Columbia accepting the repatriation flights and therefore Trump not needing to sanction Columbia.
Here is the Headline. This is pure double speak misinformation.

1320102162.jpg
 
Despite this the statement is correct the WSJ is left leaning. I have a subscription and see it in day to day articles. They have a broader variety of opinion pieces and you can find stories from different perspective but as a whole they still lean left.

I laughed the other day when they had an article about Trump "backing down" on his threats against Columbia as if Trumps plan had somehow failed and not that the threat had caused the desired result of Columbia accepting the repatriation flights and therefore Trump not needing to sanction Columbia.

I'd suggest your confusion is related to being aligned with Trump's far right views.

Center right is to the left of your mindset, your persona.
 
Finally something on the drones.

... the drones that were flying over New Jersey in large numbers were authorized to be flown by the FAA for research and various other reasons.

Pathetically low on detail and totally unfathomable not one reporter asked any questions about it.
 
Despite this the statement is correct the WSJ is left leaning. I have a subscription and see it in day to day articles. They have a broader variety of opinion pieces and you can find stories from different perspective but as a whole they still lean left.

I laughed the other day when they had an article about Trump "backing down" on his threats against Columbia as if Trumps plan had somehow failed and not that the threat had caused the desired result of Columbia accepting the repatriation flights and therefore Trump not needing to sanction Columbia.

Hundreds of other readers from all sides of politics agree with you. For some reason All Sides Editorial panel disagreed with them.

Wall Street Journal Rated Lean Left in Aug. 2023 Blind Bias Survey; AllSides Keeps Center Rating Following Sept. 2023 Editorial Review​

The Wall Street Journal was rated Lean Left (-2.76). A total of 792 people rated WSJ. AllSides conducted an Editorial Review and opted to keep WSJ's bias rating as Center (-0.2).

Respondents who rated their own bias as Left, Lean Left, Center, and Right rated WSJ as Lean Left; respondents with a Lean Right bias rated it Left. Republicans rated WSJ as Left; Democrats and Indpendents rated it Lean Left.

scale-wsj.png
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I agree overall but her statement on the drones was a pretty poor effort. Can only work with what she's given I suppose.


Yep, the drones happened in the previous admin. Can only do so much.
 
Yep, the drones happened in the previous admin. Can only do so much.

I initially liked this post and then I thought about it again. Yes it happened under Biden but Trump complained that Biden or at least his administration knew what these things were and weren't being straight with the public. Trump promised to release a report into them "about one day" into his administration. Setting aside the normal and unnecessary hyperbole we've come to expect from Trump (9 days vs 1) I really find the short vague explanation totally inadequate. I can't believe so called professional journalists seemed to have no problem with it and let it pass through to the keeper unchallenged.
 
It's been confirmed the family don't want it to be released.

Still finding that strange. The death would be classified as 'in the line of duty'. There might be a memorial service to honour the fallen service member. "Died in service of her country". Unusual that the name hasn't been released.



When you look at the second video below (12 second mark) it looks a bit suspicious yes. Add to that the strange flight path of the Blackhawk which deviated from their approved route and it looks more so. Always possible one of the pilots shot the other two and went on a suicide mission or even all three were dead and it was flown remotely. Can't see a motive for the last scenario since from the list of people on the plane released so far, none would appear to be targets.



View attachment 2215916


From the evidence I've seen I'm struggling with how the Blackhawk didn't see the American Airlines jet with its full landing lights on. The Blackhawk was also above its height limit and off its route.

If the pilot was an ethnic minority it wouldn't be the first time a radicalised soldier went rogue.

 
Still finding that strange. The death would be classified as 'in the line of duty'. There might be a memorial service to honour the fallen service member. "Died in service of her country". Unusual that the name hasn't been released.



From the evidence I've seen I'm struggling with how the Blackhawk didn't see the American Airlines jet with its full landing lights on. The Blackhawk was also above its height limit and off its route.

If the pilot was an ethnic minority it wouldn't be the first time a radicalised soldier went rogue.


The Blackhawk confirmed they had eyes on or visual separation of another aircraft but they had eyes on the wrong one and smashed straight in to the aircraft they were supposed to be looking out for.

Apparently.
 
Still finding that strange. The death would be classified as 'in the line of duty'. There might be a memorial service to honour the fallen service member. "Died in service of her country". Unusual that the name hasn't been released.

Agreed. I don't think they would be able to keep it a secret indefinitely. Sooner or later an extended family member, friend or associate of the deceased will tell someone and the information will quickly find it's way into the public domain. I think there's even slight acknowledgement of that in the statement from the Army "At the request of the family, the name of the third soldier will not be released at this time."

From the evidence I've seen I'm struggling with how the Blackhawk didn't see the American Airlines jet with its full landing lights on.

I think we all are.

The Blackhawk was also above its height limit and off its route.

Yep. The first reports I heard were that it was at double it's height limit (400ft when the limit is 200ft). I've since heard it was more likely 350 or 300 feet but even this is regarded as a serious FAA violation at a busy airport like this and a possible loss of licence for a first offence. If the difference between their actual height and allowed height was only 100 feet, that's about the length of 1 & a half cricket pitches this seems pretty strict but understandably so in light of what has occurred.

If the pilot was an ethnic minority it wouldn't be the first time a radicalised soldier went rogue.

I'm sure and anything is possible. Equally though if it does turn out to be just an unfortunate accident and the third pilot is from an ethnic minority I can understand why the family doesn't want the name to be released in an environment where the fingers of blame appear to have been prematurely pointing. I agree with the steps the administration has taken to end DEI programs, returning to merit based appointment and it's also true that individuals have recounted instances where these programs might have been detrimental to safety. That doesn't mean that it was to blame in this case.

 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top