Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751
On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The > bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended > inauguration.... Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let > me Trumpspeak... So sad. > > On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> there is this gem now >> http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ >> 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult >>> to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very biased >>> even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA is biased, >>> too. >>> >>> E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it >>> was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is unthinkable >>> here. It would be the one point which would dominate the discussion and >>> would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the discussion >>> away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him votable. >>> >>> Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which >>> is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. >>> >>> I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if >>> media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a problem >>> than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would find 100 >>> reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics to report. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure you >>> have a problem. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *Von:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *Im Auftrag von *That One Guy >>> /sarcasm >>> *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 22. Januar 2017 07:05 >>> *An:* [email protected] >>> *Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >>> >>> >>> >>> Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to >>> effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current >>> environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA >>> responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and >>> yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting >>> information. We know more in real time then the press could ever package up >>> and present. The current mindset of media in press conferences is that of >>> militants (both sides of the media isle) and there is zero professionalism >>> from either one. Neither really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, >>> theyre going to report whatever their preconceived response was either way. >>> >>> >>> >>> Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? >>> >>> >>> >>> Answer: Yes >>> >>> >>> >>> CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS >>> fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who >>> would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the >>> transition of power. >>> >>> >>> >>> Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day >>> before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous >>> time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. >>> >>> >>> >>> Had the same attack been authorized today: >>> >>> >>> >>> CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top >>> military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify >>> there were no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime >>> charges possible? >>> >>> >>> >>> Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 >>> ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS >>> surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the >>> first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an >>> amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's >>> uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with >>> one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other >>> stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have >>> four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the >>> CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don't....save yourself the pain. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Can we talk about politics yet? :P >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team >>> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team >> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >> >
