NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 4

Remove this Banner Ad

Here is PART 3

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.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

GoEaglesGoSGIO said:
Nope. If I did id have voted for the Democrats of course.

Maybe I should have sold them some Bigfooty subscriptions so id make nice posts about them instead? So many ways to scam money from the US govt. Im just annoyed I didnt realise how bad the scam was and get in on it
Click to expand...

Ah, back to pretending you are a US voter again.

Flip flop.
 
GoEaglesGoSGIO said:
Unchecked executive power is ignoring federal law at the state level… like the lefties are doing. Your only rebuttal to the Main governor ignoring federal law is to say she can ignore federal law and provide zero proof as to how its constituonal or correct

The rest is your imagination when it comes to current overreach because you refuse to go look at how the consitution works. If you did you would know you are wrong
Click to expand...

Pure projection.

You’re screeching about "unchecked executive power" while cheerleading for an administration that:

  • Overruled the courts on DOJ independence
  • Gave the AG sole authority to decide legality
  • Created DOGE, an unelected, unchecked entity slashing government at will
  • Fired inspectors general and watchdogs who provided oversight
  • Defunded police accountability databases to shield bad actors

You’re pretending a state governor has more authoritarian power than a federal government that just rewrote the executive branch in its own image.

Your argument isn’t just false, it’s projection on steroids.

Try again.
 
RCAB said:
Pure projection.

You’re screeching about "unchecked executive power" while cheerleading for an administration that:

  • Overruled the courts on DOJ independence
  • Gave the AG sole authority to decide legality
  • Created DOGE, an unelected, unchecked entity slashing government at will
  • Fired inspectors general and watchdogs who provided oversight
  • Defunded police accountability databases to shield bad actors

You’re pretending a state governor has more authoritarian power than a federal government that just rewrote the executive branch in its own image.

Your argument isn’t just false, it’s projection on steroids.

Try again.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that’s dictatorship material at all. He won the electoral vote on all of this I’m afraid. The reason no one has taken him to court against all of this is because he can do it. You crying that he is doing it doesn’t make it a dictator situation

Who said I’m against the above ? CM86 said I’m all for it which I am. A state governor rewrote the executive branch against the will of the people. Trump simply followed the rules he has, no matter how stupid and overreaching they may be.

Your argument is that you are upset he is doing what he wants so why not just admit it ? Why lie about him breaking the rules of thenconstitution and provide zero evidence for it?
 
RCAB said:
Crankyn, you’re desperately grasping at straws.
Click to expand...

bourb's/chief or whichever sock puppet you really are, I see you've gone back to quantity over quality again. I'm actually pleased in a way. It means today's exercise will be more fruitful than it otherwise would've been. Today's exercise? Counting the strawmen, lies and disinformation in your latest post calamitous misadventure.

RCAB said:
Within seconds of the gunfire (6:11 PM EDT) [/B]– CNN’s first update:
"Trump falls to the ground onstage at rally; unclear what is happening."
This was literally as the shots were fired. No verified information was available yet.

One minute later (~6:12 PM EDT) – CNN updates the subheading:
"Secret Service rushes Trump off stage after he falls at rally."
Again, this was before any media outlet had confirmed what actually happened.

36 minutes after the incident – CNN officially reports Trump is safe.

“An incident occurred at a Trump rally. The Secret Service has implemented protective measures and the former President is safe.”
So, by this point, they knew he was alive and safe but still didn’t have full details. This according to Anthony Guglielmi, US Secret Service chief
Click to expand...

gold.jpg

I love your footnote to the CNN commentary at the 36 minute mark after the 'incident'. "So by this point..."

(36 minutes after he was shot at)

"...they knew he was alive and safe."

Thank goodness for CNN. where would we be without them? I can imagine the CNN chief congratulating his staff the next day in the aftermath. "

8fc83a63-44d6-44b8-aaf6-a932b1634b87_text.gif


RCAB said:
60 minutes after the incident – CNN acknowledges blood on Trump's face and reports gunfire.

“Trump had blood on his face as he was rushed off stage following the sound of loud bangs.”
Click to expand...

8fc83a63-44d6-44b8-aaf6-a932b1634b87_text.gif


RCAB said:
Your claim: “CNN hid the truth for 2 hours.”
Click to expand...

Straw Man Hippies.jpg

As you know very well I never complained about the live commentary. I complained about the headline. Quite ironic that you started your post accusing me of grasping at straws and then your whole post is nothing but you grasping at straws. Classic Goebbels strategy. Accusing others of what you habitually carry out yourself.

RCAB said:
... CNN’s live feed was continuously updated as facts became clear. They didn't “hide” anything...
Click to expand...


Straw man argument AGAIN. I never accused them of hiding anything I criticised their ridiculous headline which they didn't bother to change for far too long despite "continually updating the minor text/feed as facts became clear". So what you're basically saying is they knew well before the 2 hour mark that this story was bigger than him merely falling at a rally and being taken off stage but the only way anyone would know that if they relied on CNN, was if you read the fine print? 🥴


RCAB said:
✅ CNN did report gunshots well before the 2-hour mark.
✅ Your entire argument relies on pretending CNN never updated their coverage which is objectively false.
Click to expand...

Straw man argument AGAIN. I complained about their ridiculous headline. I never complained they didn't report gunshots in the feed.


RCAB said:
You still claim CNN “hid” the truth
Click to expand...


Straw man argument AGAIN. 4 times in one post. Congratulations. I don't recall anyone else being that brazen. I complained about their headline which was patently ridiculous and remained unchanged for far too long despite them updating their commentary feed more regularly.
 
GoEaglesGoSGIO said:
I don’t think that’s dictatorship material at all. He won the electoral vote on all of this I’m afraid. The reason no one has taken him to court against all of this is because he can do it. You crying that he is doing it doesn’t make it a dictator situation

Who said I’m against the above ? CM86 said I’m all for it which I am. A state governor rewrote the executive branch against the will of the people. Trump simply followed the rules he has, no matter how stupid and overreaching they may be.

Your argument is that you are upset he is doing what he wants so why not just admit it ? Why lie about him breaking the rules of thenconstitution and provide zero evidence for it?
Click to expand...

I'm not alone in saying this but your response/s is/are a mess structurally, logically, and syntactically.

Throwing in half-formed thoughts, contradictions, and rhetorical dodges, making it hard to follow.

Key issues in this post

1. Conflating legality with morality

You say, "He won the electoral vote on all of this I’m afraid," implying that just because Trump was elected, anything he does is fair game.

But winning an election does not give someone unlimited power... that’s the entire point of constitutional checks and balances. That's the core fallacy.



2. Misrepresenting the argument

You claim: "Your argument is that you are upset he is doing what he wants so why not just admit it?"

No. The argument isn't just that "we don’t like it"; the argument is that it's an unprecedented expansion of executive power, bypassing Congress, the judiciary, and independent agencies in a way that fundamentally reshapes democracy into a strongman government.



3. Contradicting yourself mid-sentence

"Trump simply followed the rules he has, no matter how stupid and overreaching they may be."

You admit Trump’s actions are overreaching, therefore admitting the central issue... they are violating democratic norms.

You're essentially saying, "Well, he’s allowed to do it, so it’s fine," which is one of the fallacies authoritarians always use.



4. False equivalency between trump and the maine governor

"A state governor rewrote the executive branch against the will of the people."

Completely different scenario.

A governor pushing back on one federal law ≠ the President dismantling institutional checks and stacking every branch with loyalists.

Also, where’s the proof that the people of Maine oppose the governor’s actions? You just assumed "will of the people" means "will of Republicans."



5. Projection & Deflection

Instead of addressing specific constitutional violations, you shift the burden of proof and say, "Why lie about him breaking the rules of the constitution and provide zero evidence for it?"

But the evidence is already laid out.. from the AG’s unchecked power, DOGE's unprecedented authority, to the erosion of independent oversight.

Instead of engaging with those points, you ask to prove something that’s already been proven.






”You should quit while you're already behind" RCAB

Unfortunately you guys have not just met your match, but met your maker.

I understand exactly what you're doing. Trumpists use bad-faith arguments that follow predictable rhetorical dodges.


I'm cutting through your BS...half of your posting is noise to muddy the waters.


I'm too logical. I can analyse whether statements are consistent, and for the most part... they aren’t.
 
More people coming out to state Trump is a Russian asset.

‘Trump Recruited as Moscow Asset,’ Says Ex-KGB Spy Chief

Alnur Mussayev, former head of Kazakhstan’s security service, who rose up the ranks of the Soviet KGB, claims Moscow groomed Trump under pseudonym “Krasnov” in 1987.
www.kyivpost.com
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mofra said:
More people coming out to state Trump is a Russian asset.

‘Trump Recruited as Moscow Asset,’ Says Ex-KGB Spy Chief

Alnur Mussayev, former head of Kazakhstan’s security service, who rose up the ranks of the Soviet KGB, claims Moscow groomed Trump under pseudonym “Krasnov” in 1987.
www.kyivpost.com
Click to expand...

The Kyiv Post? :laughing: Are they still operating? Most of Ukraine's media were propped up by USAID. So those funds aren't exhausted yet?



What are they relying on? A Facebook Post. 🤔

Do we have any evidence this Facebook account is genuine?

 
HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
Click to expand...


Democrats tackling the big issues.

Republicans are rebuilding to an efficient government, saving the tax payer trillions, AND ending wars.

Democrats are doing ‘nuance’

Having said that, I’ve always encouraged democrats to double down on the woke stuff.
 
EasternTiger said:
Democrats tackling the big issues.

Republicans are rebuilding to an efficient government, saving the tax payer trillions, AND ending wars.

Democrats are doing ‘nuance’

Having said that, I’ve always encouraged democrats to double down on the woke stuff.
Click to expand...

Saving trillions? Someone didn't pass maths in primary school.
 
RCAB said:
I'm not alone in saying this but your response/s is/are a mess structurally, logically, and syntactically.

Throwing in half-formed thoughts, contradictions, and rhetorical dodges, making it hard to follow.

Key issues in this post

1. Conflating legality with morality

You say, "He won the electoral vote on all of this I’m afraid," implying that just because Trump was elected, anything he does is fair game.

But winning an election does not give someone unlimited power... that’s the entire point of constitutional checks and balances. That's the core fallacy.



2. Misrepresenting the argument

You claim: "Your argument is that you are upset he is doing what he wants so why not just admit it?"

No. The argument isn't just that "we don’t like it"; the argument is that it's an unprecedented expansion of executive power, bypassing Congress, the judiciary, and independent agencies in a way that fundamentally reshapes democracy into a strongman government.



3. Contradicting yourself mid-sentence

"Trump simply followed the rules he has, no matter how stupid and overreaching they may be."

You admit Trump’s actions are overreaching, therefore admitting the central issue... they are violating democratic norms.

You're essentially saying, "Well, he’s allowed to do it, so it’s fine," which is one of the fallacies authoritarians always use.



4. False equivalency between trump and the maine governor

"A state governor rewrote the executive branch against the will of the people."

Completely different scenario.

A governor pushing back on one federal law ≠ the President dismantling institutional checks and stacking every branch with loyalists.

Also, where’s the proof that the people of Maine oppose the governor’s actions? You just assumed "will of the people" means "will of Republicans."



5. Projection & Deflection

Instead of addressing specific constitutional violations, you shift the burden of proof and say, "Why lie about him breaking the rules of the constitution and provide zero evidence for it?"

But the evidence is already laid out.. from the AG’s unchecked power, DOGE's unprecedented authority, to the erosion of independent oversight.

Instead of engaging with those points, you ask to prove something that’s already been proven.






”You should quit while you're already behind" RCAB

Unfortunately you guys have not just met your match, but met your maker.

I understand exactly what you're doing. Trumpists use bad-faith arguments that follow predictable rhetorical dodges.


I'm cutting through your BS...half of your posting is noise to muddy the waters.


I'm too logical. I can analyse whether statements are consistent, and for the most part... they aren’t.
Click to expand...
All those words and zero evidence for any of your claims . In argument form you are nothing more then emotion and vibes. You can’t and won’t quote literature or any evidence base because frantic emotive posts have none.

US is overreaching at a federal level… I mean Joe pardoned his son for future crime he commits…. Thinking the DOJ having a opinion on a court case is a over reach but that is fine is nothing short of brainwashed delusion

You should quit while you have no choice but to give evidence for your baseless claims. I mean you said DOGE is undemocratic…. So prove it
 
EasternTiger said:
Anyone else get the feeling rcb really isn’t enjoying the Trump presidency?

I could just be reading too much into it, but I’m not getting a positive vibe from his posts.
Click to expand...
I’ve asked many times. Name one change Trump has made that you like. No answers

Based on this I’d expect RCAB and bourbons drinking their morning latte through a paper straw while watching CNN screaming “your damn right” at the TV after the end of every sentence
 

Remove this Banner Ad

NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 4

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
12
Views
971
LuvtheKangas
LuvtheKangas

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top