captkronos
Caneguru
If you loved the Shovelglove, here comes the Paddletub!
"You Eat Life or Life Eat You"
Posts: 480 
|
Post by captkronos on Sept 28, 2021 9:38:18 GMT
|
|
macky
Caneguru
Upside down
CLUELESS TOSSER
Posts: 2,828
|
Post by macky on Sept 28, 2021 10:09:03 GMT
You're not wrong Capt. But with the barcodes, mandate for a bank account, tax number etc, we've been under the Mark of the Beast for the last 40 years.
But like you say, it'll get worse.
|
|
pierinifitness
Caneguru
I do burpees, then I drink slurpees
Posts: 2,719
|
Post by pierinifitness on Sept 28, 2021 14:48:31 GMT
This is what's typically called an affinity card, designed to appeal to a select group of people. I say let these knuckleheads have their stupid affinity card. What I'm waiting to see, if it doesn't already exist, is an rainbow colored LGBT credit card.
Businesses will do anything to capture a segment of the market they believe is large enough to pander to. I'm sure there is an NRA affinity credit card. I think a MAGA affinity credit card with a photo of Donald Trump would be a huge hit. Surprised they haven't thought about it.
|
|
macky
Caneguru
Upside down
CLUELESS TOSSER
Posts: 2,828
|
Post by macky on Sept 28, 2021 19:04:10 GMT
Probably get the holder into unmanageable debt  What would be the nature of the limit on a MAGA card, do you think, pierini ? |
|
captkronos
Caneguru
If you loved the Shovelglove, here comes the Paddletub!
"You Eat Life or Life Eat You"
Posts: 480
|
Post by captkronos on Sept 28, 2021 20:04:18 GMT
There would never be a MAGA affinity card, MasterCard would be “canceled” like the MyPillow guy. Only Left leaning ideas are allowed to be commercialized without reproach in the U.S.
the companies don’t have the balls to resist
|
|
brothersteve
Caneguru
He ain't heavy, he's my brother
Posts: 2,254
|
Post by brothersteve on Sept 28, 2021 21:39:16 GMT
This is what's typically called an affinity card, designed to appeal to a select group of people. I say let these knuckleheads have their stupid affinity card. What I'm waiting to see, if it doesn't already exist, is an rainbow colored LGBT credit card. Businesses will do anything to capture a segment of the market they believe is large enough to pander to. I'm sure there is an NRA affinity credit card. I think a MAGA affinity credit card with a photo of Donald Trump would be a huge hit. Surprised they haven't thought about it. Ever see the Hodge Twins? They came out with these cards.....too funny IMO.   |
|
macky
Caneguru
Upside down
CLUELESS TOSSER
Posts: 2,828
|
Post by macky on Sept 28, 2021 21:54:20 GMT
There would never be a MAGA affinity card, MasterCard would be “canceled” like the MyPillow guy. Only Left leaning ideas are allowed to be commercialized without reproach in the U.S. the companies don’t have the balls to resist Left leaning ideas are only used for a while to give the "Right-wingers" an opponent, something to focus their anger on, while the PTB keep on keeping on through generations of their families, self-interested elites that are neither left or right, but simply the Ones Who Control. And their colleagues in high places. Wealth disparity in the US grows by the week, with the majority owning less and less. That's through Rep and Dem terms of govt and presidencies. Your last president showed clear signs of mental and emotional disability, the present Prez is 'out to lunch' quite frequently and should have retired when Obama finished up. Those are the standards the PTB have served up for The People and it's a disgrace to The People's intelligence, whether they are Rep or Dem. And it seems to keep most of them scrapping in the street while the PTB just carry on with business as usual. The sooner The People wake up and realize they've been had on both "sides", the better. |
|
|
|
Post by Magnus on Sept 29, 2021 1:04:58 GMT
There would never be a MAGA affinity card, MasterCard would be “canceled” like the MyPillow guy. Only Left leaning ideas are allowed to be commercialized without reproach in the U.S. the companies don’t have the balls to resist Your last president showed clear signs of mental and emotional disability, the present Prez is 'out to lunch' quite frequently and should have retired when Obama finished up. Those are the standards the PTB have served up for The People and it's a disgrace to The People's intelligence, whether they are Rep or Dem. And it seems to keep most of them scrapping in the street while the PTB just carry on with business as usual. The sooner The People wake up and realize they've been had on both "sides", the better. I think you're wrong, Trump was never part of the plans of the so-called "PTB"... There's no doubt that Hillary was supposed to win, but unfortunately for her there was a 'skip in the cog' somewhere and Trump prevailed to everybody's surprise  Look at this pre-election headline... LOLOLOLOLOLOL Survey finds Hillary Clinton has ‘more than 99% chance’ of winning election over Donald Trump[a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sam-wang-princeton-election-consortium-poll-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-victory-a7399671.html www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sam-wang-princeton-election-consortium-poll-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-victory-a7399671.html[a href= |
|
macky
Caneguru
Upside down
CLUELESS TOSSER
Posts: 2,828
|
Post by macky on Sept 29, 2021 5:19:44 GMT
Your last president showed clear signs of mental and emotional disability, the present Prez is 'out to lunch' quite frequently and should have retired when Obama finished up. Those are the standards the PTB have served up for The People and it's a disgrace to The People's intelligence, whether they are Rep or Dem. And it seems to keep most of them scrapping in the street while the PTB just carry on with business as usual. The sooner The People wake up and realize they've been had on both "sides", the better. I think you're wrong, Trump was never part of the plans of the so-called "PTB"... There's no doubt that Hillary was supposed to win, but unfortunately for her there was a 'skip in the cog' somewhere and Trump prevailed to everybody's surprise Look at this pre-election headline... LOLOLOLOLOLOL Survey finds Hillary Clinton has ‘more than 99% chance’ of winning election over Donald Trump[a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sam-wang-princeton-election-consortium-poll-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-victory-a7399671.html www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sam-wang-princeton-election-consortium-poll-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-victory-a7399671.html[a href= Well we will never know for sure, will we ? But I would say that every prez has been part of the plans of the PTB. They would have to be. Trump no less. Trump certainly wouldn't know anyway. He can hardly finish a sentence, let alone have any concept of a group above him (horrors !) pulling the strings while he rants on. Now there's a new prez doing the PTB's bidding, who drifts off into dreamland every so often and confabularoringinsefaliattes his sentences. Btw, did you attend the rally, m8 ? |
|
moxohol
Caneguru
Biohacker
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Posts: 3,339
|
Post by moxohol on Sept 29, 2021 8:22:33 GMT
Your last president showed clear signs of mental and emotional disability, the present Prez is 'out to lunch' quite frequently and should have retired when Obama finished up. Those are the standards the PTB have served up for The People and it's a disgrace to The People's intelligence, whether they are Rep or Dem. And it seems to keep most of them scrapping in the street while the PTB just carry on with business as usual. The sooner The People wake up and realize they've been had on both "sides", the better. I think you're wrong, Trump was never part of the plans of the so-called "PTB"... There's no doubt that Hillary was supposed to win, but unfortunately for her there was a 'skip in the cog' somewhere and Trump prevailed to everybody's surprise Look at this pre-election headline... LOLOLOLOLOLOL Survey finds Hillary Clinton has ‘more than 99% chance’ of winning election over Donald Trump[a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sam-wang-princeton-election-consortium-poll-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-victory-a7399671.html www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sam-wang-princeton-election-consortium-poll-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-victory-a7399671.html[a href= The Clinton Campaign failed to take Trump seriously by elevating him above other republican candidates because they thought he would be easier to beat. Trump talked about real issues & targeted disaffected areas. The Clintons talked about the party platform & targeted democratic strongholds with dense populations (they ignored rural areas & pivotal swing states). Obviously, Trump campaigned better then the Clintons who took their voters for granted. |
|
moxohol
Caneguru
Biohacker
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Posts: 3,339
|
Post by moxohol on Sept 29, 2021 8:48:17 GMT
|
|
macky
Caneguru
Upside down
CLUELESS TOSSER
Posts: 2,828
|
Post by macky on Sept 29, 2021 8:57:38 GMT
The Clinton Campaign failed to take Trump seriously by elevating him above other republican candidates because they thought he would be easier to beat. Trump talked about real issues & targeted disaffected areas. The Clintons talked about the party platform & targeted democratic strongholds with dense populations (they ignored rural areas & pivotal swing states). Obviously, Trump campaigned better then the Clintons who took their voters for granted. And with possibly a little help from the Outside.  documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/Report_Volume3.pdf" II. (U) FINDINGS 1. (U) The Committee found that the U.S. Government was not well-postured to counter Russian election interference activity with a full range of readily-available policy options. One aspect of the administration's response-high-level warnings of potential retaliation-may or may not have tempered Moscow's activity. The Committee found that after the warnings, Russia continued its cyber activity, to include further public dissemination of stolen emails, clandestine social media-based influence operations, and penetration of state voting infrastructure through Election Day 2016. 2. (U) The Committee found that the administration was constrained in its response to Russian meddling by (1) the heavily politicized environment; (2) the concern that public warnings would themselves undermine public confidence in the election, thereby inadvertently helping the Russian effort; (3) the unknown extent to which the Russians could target and manipulate election systems; (4) the delay in definitive attribution of some efforts to Russia; (5) the time and resources required to compose policy options prior to execution; and (6) challenges in how to address WikiLeaks. These constraints affected the response options available, as well as the timing and sequencing of their implementation. 3. The Committee found etc... Note : "...clandestine social media-based influence operations, and penetration of state voting infrastructure through Election Day 2016." |
|
moxohol
Caneguru
Biohacker
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Posts: 3,339
|
Post by moxohol on Sept 29, 2021 18:24:23 GMT
The Clinton Campaign failed to take Trump seriously by elevating him above other republican candidates because they thought he would be easier to beat. Trump talked about real issues & targeted disaffected areas. The Clintons talked about the party platform & targeted democratic strongholds with dense populations (they ignored rural areas & pivotal swing states). Obviously, Trump campaigned better then the Clintons who took their voters for granted. And with possibly a little help from the Outside. documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/Report_Volume3.pdf" II. (U) FINDINGS 1. (U) The Committee found that the U.S. Government was not well-postured to counter Russian election interference activity with a full range of readily-available policy options. ....................................The Committee found etc... Note : "...clandestine social media-based influence operations, and penetration of state voting infrastructure through Election Day 2016." That theory might gain some traction if not for one itty bitty obscured fact: Part & parcel of campaigning is spending money on propoganda--erm?....media campaigns. It is generally accepted if u spend a bigger war chest, you get elected. It's well documented in the public domain that Trump spent 500m on his campaign. If he spent more, we'd know about it. U can't pretend to ignore the intrinsic value of media costs & campaigning. It can't be hidden very well from public view. HLR spent 1.2bn on campaigning & yet still lost. Don't forget the media has been stridently against Trump 100% before, during & after. HLR was a horrible candidate. Pure & simple. Yet, we are led to believe that a bunch of tweets on FB from a russian troll farm is supposed to have swung the election in Trump's favor. That was what they hung their hat on to make a case for Russian collusion & by extension "interference". The US Attorneys Office indicted all involved in that russian troll farm for alleged election interference. Did u know that ALL the indicted co-defendants unexpectedly showed up for their court date & the US Attorneys weren't ready at all to proceed? Did u know the case was eventually dismissed? Richard Grenell, the interim appointed DNI, declassified transcripts of the House intelligence committee interviewing all those prominent people who had also appeared on legacy media & the national spotlight declaring undeniable evidence of russian collusion on behalf of Trump & they had PROOF beyond reproach. Not one of those swinging dicks touting such claims confirmed any shred of evidence about collusion or interference while under oath in private testimony. Not one. The US House & Senate concurrently investigated Trump of Russian collusion in ADDITION to the Mueller Investigation team of 12 angry democrats. None of the aforementioned agencies found a shred of evidence of Russian collusion other than the Mueller Team prosecuting people on the periphery for "process crimes". Not on collusion or evidence of criminal interference. After all that time & money spent, they couldn't come up with a more solid case? Here's the final kicker: Trump never refused any document or witness during the entire time that the Mueller Team investigated him. Not one case except being called in for a witness interview. He balked on that one but he gets a free pass. It's an obvious perjury trap & any good lawyer would say the same. Don't bother bringing up the Obstruction of Justice charge either. The justification is a pretext conjured up by that same idiot, Andrew Wiseman, who was unanimously reversed on appeal by SCOTUS for the Arthur Andersen case. Russian interference u still say? It's all a conspiracy theory as of now. Sorry. |
|
macky
Caneguru
Upside down
CLUELESS TOSSER
Posts: 2,828
|
Post by macky on Sept 30, 2021 0:40:01 GMT
"It's all a conspiracy theory as of now."
Absolutely not. Unfounded conclusion based on extended reasoning for which I've never asserted.
The Committee Report, some of which I've presented (their findings) was a 'Russia Investigations Only' report, not whether Trump had anything to do with it or not.
We all know that the more money a candidate may have to conduct his or her campaign can only be an overall advantage if they have more than their opponent(s). It's irrelevant to what I'm saying, which is "Russia interfered with the US 2016 elections". Whether Trump targeted his campaign in a more coherent manner or not is also irrelevant.
I've never said Trump was in on the deal or even knew about it, whether he did or not. Therefore your outlined court sessions are another example of overthinking the implications of what I'm saying. You should also remember that those court sessions were highly political and that there was genuine fear/worry among top officials that public disclosure of successful election tampering by Russia may undermine American citizen confidence in the US electoral process, not to mention the slow US response to allegations of Russian tampering with American systems and media until the Intelligence community presented more evidence, much of which has been heavily redacted.
The point is, the Committee findings re Russian interference were conclusive that Russia had indeed interfered, but in ways that were THEN unknown as to extent of influence including access to state voting systems before and through the 2016 elections. That media had also been compromised in some way.
They have stated that they now know more in hindsight, but in fact those "early" findings have not been changed.
Russian 2016 electoral interference is/was a reality, but whether Trump was in on it or not I cannot say, nor have I said. Sorry.
|
|
moxohol
Caneguru
Biohacker
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Posts: 3,339
|
Post by moxohol on Sept 30, 2021 10:17:08 GMT
"It's all a conspiracy theory as of now." Absolutely not. Unfounded conclusion based on extended reasoning for which I've never asserted. The Committee Report, some of which I've presented (their findings) was a 'Russia Investigations Only' report, not whether Trump had anything to do with it or not. We all know that the more money a candidate may have to conduct his or her campaign can only be an overall advantage if they have more than their opponent(s). It's irrelevant to what I'm saying, which is "Russia interfered with the US 2016 elections". Whether Trump targeted his campaign in a more coherent manner or not is also irrelevant. I've never said Trump was in on the deal or even knew about it, whether he did or not. Therefore your outlined court sessions are another example of overthinking the implications of what I'm saying. You should also remember that those court sessions were highly political and that there was genuine fear/worry among top officials that public disclosure of successful election tampering by Russia may undermine American citizen confidence in the US electoral process, not to mention the slow US response to allegations of Russian tampering with American systems and media until the Intelligence community presented more evidence, much of which has been heavily redacted. The point is, the Committee findings re Russian interference were conclusive that Russia had indeed interfered, but in ways that were THEN unknown as to extent of influence including access to state voting systems before and through the 2016 elections. That media had also been compromised in some way. They have stated that they now know more in hindsight, but in fact those "early" findings have not been changed. Russian 2016 electoral interference is/was a reality, but whether Trump was in on it or not I cannot say, nor have I said. Sorry. |
|
