Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Very impressed of those who can see this article is biased... I happen to agree with this person’s assessment, so fucking sue me. Of course it’s biased—so what? Do ya’ll see the unhinged shit some anti-Trumpers post here and ya’ll can’t handle a biased article that challenges your beliefs? I’m more reasonable than many of the Trumpers here and I put this in the CDZ so we could have a discussion about it. I won’t respond to whiners and those who won’t even try to see from others’ POV.
If you have a problem with this article, I see that as evidence you want to keep whining and bitching and HATING on Trump in the face of evidence maybe you should have hated other presidents just as much. Let’s not forget who was president when this alleged “meddling” took place.
What is to discuss? The OP is frankly just bullshit.
There is no 'hysteria'- that is just an invention of the author.
My disagreeing with the idiocy written by the author of the article you quote is not because I hate Don the Con- I don't hate anyone- or even because I disagree with the lying Don the Con. I disagree with the idiocy of the OP because there is no 'hysteria'.
Let me respond to one specific quote:
— for which there is still no evidence — that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
What media is saying that Trump's campaign DID collude with the Russian government?
What is being discussed in the media- is the ongoing investigation into the Russian meddling in the 2016 election that Don the Con alternately disputes and then doesn't dispute.
Certainly there is discussion- here and elsewhere as to the possibility that there was collusion- but that is reasonable considering both Trump's own actions and the odd facts that do keep trickling out.
And no one in the media is saying that Trump works for Putin- the hysteria in that statement is the authors alone. Again- there are posters here who will say that Trump is working for Putin- but this is not a widespread media claim.
What is being discussed in the media is Trump's reluctance to confront Putin about Russia's meddling in America's president election- not just the media of course- but a wide range of elected officials- Democrat and Republican.
Trump does want to call everything that is happening to him a 'witch hunt'- and the 'worst witch hunt in history'- and the OP does a good job of parroting Trump's basic premise.
And nothing else.
I stopped reading after “there is no hysteria.” The definition of hysteria is “exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion of excitement, especially among a group of people”
So let’s take a look at this “no hysteria.”
View attachment 207031
View attachment 207033
View attachment 207035
I’m sure I can find more, and correct me if I’m wrong, but it looks like this last example of people screaming at the sky encompasses the definition of hysteria perfectly.
And that is 'hysteria' how?
Kathy Griffin posting an image?
People posted nasty images about President Obama for 8 years.
Somehow you didn't consider that 'hysteria' then.
I disagree with any images of any person that suggest violence- but the rest- are free speech and free expression.
Which the far right does support- when it comes to condemnation of Obama or Clinton.
Back to the OP:
that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Not a single one of your images of 'hysteria' was related to accusations of collusion between Trump and Russia.
You appear to confuse legitimate criticism of our President- with mass hysteria.
- it was the closed door meeting that he had with the Russian Ambassador in his office.
OMG... THere's a rule you can't close the door? Where are you triggered accomplices of Putin getting this outrage from without using your OWN brain and whatever critical thinking, logic and reason you were ever taught?
You want to know why this thread is about HYSTERIA???
Very impressed of those who can see this article is biased... I happen to agree with this person’s assessment, so fucking sue me. Of course it’s biased—so what? Do ya’ll see the unhinged shit some anti-Trumpers post here and ya’ll can’t handle a biased article that challenges your beliefs? I’m more reasonable than many of the Trumpers here and I put this in the CDZ so we could have a discussion about it. I won’t respond to whiners and those who won’t even try to see from others’ POV.
If you have a problem with this article, I see that as evidence you want to keep whining and bitching and HATING on Trump in the face of evidence maybe you should have hated other presidents just as much. Let’s not forget who was president when this alleged “meddling” took place.
What is to discuss? The OP is frankly just bullshit.
There is no 'hysteria'- that is just an invention of the author.
My disagreeing with the idiocy written by the author of the article you quote is not because I hate Don the Con- I don't hate anyone- or even because I disagree with the lying Don the Con. I disagree with the idiocy of the OP because there is no 'hysteria'.
Let me respond to one specific quote:
— for which there is still no evidence — that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
What media is saying that Trump's campaign DID collude with the Russian government?
What is being discussed in the media- is the ongoing investigation into the Russian meddling in the 2016 election that Don the Con alternately disputes and then doesn't dispute.
Certainly there is discussion- here and elsewhere as to the possibility that there was collusion- but that is reasonable considering both Trump's own actions and the odd facts that do keep trickling out.
And no one in the media is saying that Trump works for Putin- the hysteria in that statement is the authors alone. Again- there are posters here who will say that Trump is working for Putin- but this is not a widespread media claim.
What is being discussed in the media is Trump's reluctance to confront Putin about Russia's meddling in America's president election- not just the media of course- but a wide range of elected officials- Democrat and Republican.
Trump does want to call everything that is happening to him a 'witch hunt'- and the 'worst witch hunt in history'- and the OP does a good job of parroting Trump's basic premise.
And nothing else.
I stopped reading after “there is no hysteria.” The definition of hysteria is “exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion of excitement, especially among a group of people”
So let’s take a look at this “no hysteria.”
View attachment 207031
View attachment 207033
View attachment 207035
I’m sure I can find more, and correct me if I’m wrong, but it looks like this last example of people screaming at the sky encompasses the definition of hysteria perfectly.
And that is 'hysteria' how?
Kathy Griffin posting an image?
People posted nasty images about President Obama for 8 years.
Somehow you didn't consider that 'hysteria' then.
I disagree with any images of any person that suggest violence- but the rest- are free speech and free expression.
Which the far right does support- when it comes to condemnation of Obama or Clinton.
Back to the OP:
that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Not a single one of your images of 'hysteria' was related to accusations of collusion between Trump and Russia.
You appear to confuse legitimate criticism of our President- with mass hysteria.
So a bunch of adults screaming helplessly at the sky isn’t considered hysteria. ].
Syriusly you are seriously NAIVE about the state of things...How is an investigation by a Republican, appointed by a Republican- appointed by President Trump- hysteria?
Very impressed of those who can see this article is biased... I happen to agree with this person’s assessment, so fucking sue me. Of course it’s biased—so what? Do ya’ll see the unhinged shit some anti-Trumpers post here and ya’ll can’t handle a biased article that challenges your beliefs? I’m more reasonable than many of the Trumpers here and I put this in the CDZ so we could have a discussion about it. I won’t respond to whiners and those who won’t even try to see from others’ POV.
If you have a problem with this article, I see that as evidence you want to keep whining and bitching and HATING on Trump in the face of evidence maybe you should have hated other presidents just as much. Let’s not forget who was president when this alleged “meddling” took place.
What is to discuss? The OP is frankly just bullshit.
There is no 'hysteria'- that is just an invention of the author.
My disagreeing with the idiocy written by the author of the article you quote is not because I hate Don the Con- I don't hate anyone- or even because I disagree with the lying Don the Con. I disagree with the idiocy of the OP because there is no 'hysteria'.
Let me respond to one specific quote:
— for which there is still no evidence — that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
What media is saying that Trump's campaign DID collude with the Russian government?
What is being discussed in the media- is the ongoing investigation into the Russian meddling in the 2016 election that Don the Con alternately disputes and then doesn't dispute.
Certainly there is discussion- here and elsewhere as to the possibility that there was collusion- but that is reasonable considering both Trump's own actions and the odd facts that do keep trickling out.
And no one in the media is saying that Trump works for Putin- the hysteria in that statement is the authors alone. Again- there are posters here who will say that Trump is working for Putin- but this is not a widespread media claim.
What is being discussed in the media is Trump's reluctance to confront Putin about Russia's meddling in America's president election- not just the media of course- but a wide range of elected officials- Democrat and Republican.
Trump does want to call everything that is happening to him a 'witch hunt'- and the 'worst witch hunt in history'- and the OP does a good job of parroting Trump's basic premise.
And nothing else.
I stopped reading after “there is no hysteria.” The definition of hysteria is “exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion of excitement, especially among a group of people”
So let’s take a look at this “no hysteria.”
View attachment 207031
View attachment 207033
View attachment 207035
I’m sure I can find more, and correct me if I’m wrong, but it looks like this last example of people screaming at the sky encompasses the definition of hysteria perfectly.
And that is 'hysteria' how?
Kathy Griffin posting an image?
People posted nasty images about President Obama for 8 years.
Somehow you didn't consider that 'hysteria' then.
I disagree with any images of any person that suggest violence- but the rest- are free speech and free expression.
Which the far right does support- when it comes to condemnation of Obama or Clinton.
Back to the OP:
that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Not a single one of your images of 'hysteria' was related to accusations of collusion between Trump and Russia.
You appear to confuse legitimate criticism of our President- with mass hysteria.
While I don't believe that a small portion of the left has been taken up in mass hysteria nor do those same ones tend to try and stifle free speech, I do believe that the larger share of the left is heeded on that train at breakneck speed. You are seeing it in not allowing conservatives to speak at events. You are seeing it with people being refused service because of a hat. You are seeing it with some calling for members of Trumps staff to be harassed. You are seeing it with the media calling the meeting with Putin treason. You are seeing it with the FISA warrant. With the FBI texts. You see it in those that try and claim that Manafort and others are not only complicit but some how linked to the Russians that Mueller has indicted.
Very impressed of those who can see this article is biased... I happen to agree with this person’s assessment, so fucking sue me. Of course it’s biased—so what? Do ya’ll see the unhinged shit some anti-Trumpers post here and ya’ll can’t handle a biased article that challenges your beliefs? I’m more reasonable than many of the Trumpers here and I put this in the CDZ so we could have a discussion about it. I won’t respond to whiners and those who won’t even try to see from others’ POV.
If you have a problem with this article, I see that as evidence you want to keep whining and bitching and HATING on Trump in the face of evidence maybe you should have hated other presidents just as much. Let’s not forget who was president when this alleged “meddling” took place.
What is to discuss? The OP is frankly just bullshit.
There is no 'hysteria'- that is just an invention of the author.
My disagreeing with the idiocy written by the author of the article you quote is not because I hate Don the Con- I don't hate anyone- or even because I disagree with the lying Don the Con. I disagree with the idiocy of the OP because there is no 'hysteria'.
Let me respond to one specific quote:
— for which there is still no evidence — that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
What media is saying that Trump's campaign DID collude with the Russian government?
What is being discussed in the media- is the ongoing investigation into the Russian meddling in the 2016 election that Don the Con alternately disputes and then doesn't dispute.
Certainly there is discussion- here and elsewhere as to the possibility that there was collusion- but that is reasonable considering both Trump's own actions and the odd facts that do keep trickling out.
And no one in the media is saying that Trump works for Putin- the hysteria in that statement is the authors alone. Again- there are posters here who will say that Trump is working for Putin- but this is not a widespread media claim.
What is being discussed in the media is Trump's reluctance to confront Putin about Russia's meddling in America's president election- not just the media of course- but a wide range of elected officials- Democrat and Republican.
Trump does want to call everything that is happening to him a 'witch hunt'- and the 'worst witch hunt in history'- and the OP does a good job of parroting Trump's basic premise.
And nothing else.
I stopped reading after “there is no hysteria.” The definition of hysteria is “exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion of excitement, especially among a group of people”
So let’s take a look at this “no hysteria.”
View attachment 207031
View attachment 207033
View attachment 207035
I’m sure I can find more, and correct me if I’m wrong, but it looks like this last example of people screaming at the sky encompasses the definition of hysteria perfectly.
And that is 'hysteria' how?
Kathy Griffin posting an image?
People posted nasty images about President Obama for 8 years.
Somehow you didn't consider that 'hysteria' then.
I disagree with any images of any person that suggest violence- but the rest- are free speech and free expression.
Which the far right does support- when it comes to condemnation of Obama or Clinton.
Back to the OP:
that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Not a single one of your images of 'hysteria' was related to accusations of collusion between Trump and Russia.
You appear to confuse legitimate criticism of our President- with mass hysteria.
Very impressed of those who can see this article is biased... I happen to agree with this person’s assessment, so fucking sue me. Of course it’s biased—so what? Do ya’ll see the unhinged shit some anti-Trumpers post here and ya’ll can’t handle a biased article that challenges your beliefs? I’m more reasonable than many of the Trumpers here and I put this in the CDZ so we could have a discussion about it. I won’t respond to whiners and those who won’t even try to see from others’ POV.
If you have a problem with this article, I see that as evidence you want to keep whining and bitching and HATING on Trump in the face of evidence maybe you should have hated other presidents just as much. Let’s not forget who was president when this alleged “meddling” took place.
What is to discuss? The OP is frankly just bullshit.
There is no 'hysteria'- that is just an invention of the author.
My disagreeing with the idiocy written by the author of the article you quote is not because I hate Don the Con- I don't hate anyone- or even because I disagree with the lying Don the Con. I disagree with the idiocy of the OP because there is no 'hysteria'.
Let me respond to one specific quote:
— for which there is still no evidence — that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
What media is saying that Trump's campaign DID collude with the Russian government?
What is being discussed in the media- is the ongoing investigation into the Russian meddling in the 2016 election that Don the Con alternately disputes and then doesn't dispute.
Certainly there is discussion- here and elsewhere as to the possibility that there was collusion- but that is reasonable considering both Trump's own actions and the odd facts that do keep trickling out.
And no one in the media is saying that Trump works for Putin- the hysteria in that statement is the authors alone. Again- there are posters here who will say that Trump is working for Putin- but this is not a widespread media claim.
What is being discussed in the media is Trump's reluctance to confront Putin about Russia's meddling in America's president election- not just the media of course- but a wide range of elected officials- Democrat and Republican.
Trump does want to call everything that is happening to him a 'witch hunt'- and the 'worst witch hunt in history'- and the OP does a good job of parroting Trump's basic premise.
And nothing else.
I stopped reading after “there is no hysteria.” The definition of hysteria is “exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion of excitement, especially among a group of people”
So let’s take a look at this “no hysteria.”
View attachment 207031
View attachment 207033
View attachment 207035
I’m sure I can find more, and correct me if I’m wrong, but it looks like this last example of people screaming at the sky encompasses the definition of hysteria perfectly.
And that is 'hysteria' how?
Kathy Griffin posting an image?
People posted nasty images about President Obama for 8 years.
Somehow you didn't consider that 'hysteria' then.
I disagree with any images of any person that suggest violence- but the rest- are free speech and free expression.
Which the far right does support- when it comes to condemnation of Obama or Clinton.
Back to the OP:
that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Not a single one of your images of 'hysteria' was related to accusations of collusion between Trump and Russia.
You appear to confuse legitimate criticism of our President- with mass hysteria.
While I don't believe that a small portion of the left has been taken up in mass hysteria nor do those same ones tend to try and stifle free speech, I do believe that the larger share of the left is heeded on that train at breakneck speed. You are seeing it in not allowing conservatives to speak at events. You are seeing it with people being refused service because of a hat. You are seeing it with some calling for members of Trumps staff to be harassed. You are seeing it with the media calling the meeting with Putin treason. You are seeing it with the FISA warrant. With the FBI texts. You see it in those that try and claim that Manafort and others are not only complicit but some how linked to the Russians that Mueller has indicted.
Glad to address each of those points:
You are seeing it in not allowing conservatives to speak at events. - How many times were people prevented from speaking at Trump events?
You are seeing it with people being refused service because of a hat.
I am seeing Conservatives refusing service because of sexual orientation. Personally I find both wrong- what about you?
You are seeing it with some calling for members of Trumps staff to be harassed.
Personally I find all this kind of harassment wrong- but certainly Conservatives have called for that and even worse:
The Case for Incivility
The Resurgent’s Erick Erickson.... who responded to the passage of a ban on phosphates in dish soap in Spokane County, Washington, in 2009 by invoking the possibility of armed insurrection. “At what point do the people tell the politicians to go to hell?” he asked in a post at RedState. “At what point do they get off the couch, march down to their state legislator’s house, pull him outside, and beat him to a bloody pulp for being an idiot?
You are seeing it with the media calling the meeting with Putin treason.
Media- and a former CIA director called that.
And of course the same thing not only happened with Obama- but continue to happen with Obama.
HHS official shared post saying 'forefathers' would have hung Obama, Clinton for treason - CNNPolitics
(CNN)A political appointee at the Department of Health and Human Services shared an image in 2017 that said "our forefathers would have hung" Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for treason, a CNN KFile review has found.
Ximena Barreto is a far-right political pundit who in December 2017 joined the Trump administration as deputy director of communications at the department.
You are seeing it with the FISA warrant.
What about the FISA warrant? Lawfully applied for, approved by 3 different Republican appointed judges. How is that in anyway 'hysteria'?
With the FBI texts.
Two FBI agents texting each other about their personal disgust with Donald Trump?
You see it in those that try and claim that Manafort and others are not only complicit but some how linked to the Russians that Mueller has indicted.
I have seen Contards say crap about the Clintons for 30 years now- and many of them still insist on telling us how the Clinton's killed Vince Foster. The fact is we don't know whether Manafort is complicit in anyway with the Russians. I have seen plenty of contards insist that Manafort is innocent- and we don't know that either.
All we know now is that Manafort is under trial for crimes- and we will certainly learn more as the trial goes on.
Again- that is not hysteria- that is just the news this week.
What is to discuss? The OP is frankly just bullshit.
There is no 'hysteria'- that is just an invention of the author.
My disagreeing with the idiocy written by the author of the article you quote is not because I hate Don the Con- I don't hate anyone- or even because I disagree with the lying Don the Con. I disagree with the idiocy of the OP because there is no 'hysteria'.
Let me respond to one specific quote:
— for which there is still no evidence — that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
What media is saying that Trump's campaign DID collude with the Russian government?
What is being discussed in the media- is the ongoing investigation into the Russian meddling in the 2016 election that Don the Con alternately disputes and then doesn't dispute.
Certainly there is discussion- here and elsewhere as to the possibility that there was collusion- but that is reasonable considering both Trump's own actions and the odd facts that do keep trickling out.
And no one in the media is saying that Trump works for Putin- the hysteria in that statement is the authors alone. Again- there are posters here who will say that Trump is working for Putin- but this is not a widespread media claim.
What is being discussed in the media is Trump's reluctance to confront Putin about Russia's meddling in America's president election- not just the media of course- but a wide range of elected officials- Democrat and Republican.
Trump does want to call everything that is happening to him a 'witch hunt'- and the 'worst witch hunt in history'- and the OP does a good job of parroting Trump's basic premise.
And nothing else.
I stopped reading after “there is no hysteria.” The definition of hysteria is “exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion of excitement, especially among a group of people”
So let’s take a look at this “no hysteria.”
View attachment 207031
View attachment 207033
View attachment 207035
I’m sure I can find more, and correct me if I’m wrong, but it looks like this last example of people screaming at the sky encompasses the definition of hysteria perfectly.
And that is 'hysteria' how?
Kathy Griffin posting an image?
People posted nasty images about President Obama for 8 years.
Somehow you didn't consider that 'hysteria' then.
I disagree with any images of any person that suggest violence- but the rest- are free speech and free expression.
Which the far right does support- when it comes to condemnation of Obama or Clinton.
Back to the OP:
that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Not a single one of your images of 'hysteria' was related to accusations of collusion between Trump and Russia.
You appear to confuse legitimate criticism of our President- with mass hysteria.
While I don't believe that a small portion of the left has been taken up in mass hysteria nor do those same ones tend to try and stifle free speech, I do believe that the larger share of the left is heeded on that train at breakneck speed. You are seeing it in not allowing conservatives to speak at events. You are seeing it with people being refused service because of a hat. You are seeing it with some calling for members of Trumps staff to be harassed. You are seeing it with the media calling the meeting with Putin treason. You are seeing it with the FISA warrant. With the FBI texts. You see it in those that try and claim that Manafort and others are not only complicit but some how linked to the Russians that Mueller has indicted.
Glad to address each of those points:
You are seeing it in not allowing conservatives to speak at events. - How many times were people prevented from speaking at Trump events?
You are seeing it with people being refused service because of a hat.
I am seeing Conservatives refusing service because of sexual orientation. Personally I find both wrong- what about you?
You are seeing it with some calling for members of Trumps staff to be harassed.
Personally I find all this kind of harassment wrong- but certainly Conservatives have called for that and even worse:
The Case for Incivility
The Resurgent’s Erick Erickson.... who responded to the passage of a ban on phosphates in dish soap in Spokane County, Washington, in 2009 by invoking the possibility of armed insurrection. “At what point do the people tell the politicians to go to hell?” he asked in a post at RedState. “At what point do they get off the couch, march down to their state legislator’s house, pull him outside, and beat him to a bloody pulp for being an idiot?
You are seeing it with the media calling the meeting with Putin treason.
Media- and a former CIA director called that.
And of course the same thing not only happened with Obama- but continue to happen with Obama.
HHS official shared post saying 'forefathers' would have hung Obama, Clinton for treason - CNNPolitics
(CNN)A political appointee at the Department of Health and Human Services shared an image in 2017 that said "our forefathers would have hung" Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for treason, a CNN KFile review has found.
Ximena Barreto is a far-right political pundit who in December 2017 joined the Trump administration as deputy director of communications at the department.
You are seeing it with the FISA warrant.
What about the FISA warrant? Lawfully applied for, approved by 3 different Republican appointed judges. How is that in anyway 'hysteria'?
With the FBI texts.
Two FBI agents texting each other about their personal disgust with Donald Trump?
You see it in those that try and claim that Manafort and others are not only complicit but some how linked to the Russians that Mueller has indicted.
I have seen Contards say crap about the Clintons for 30 years now- and many of them still insist on telling us how the Clinton's killed Vince Foster. The fact is we don't know whether Manafort is complicit in anyway with the Russians. I have seen plenty of contards insist that Manafort is innocent- and we don't know that either.
All we know now is that Manafort is under trial for crimes- and we will certainly learn more as the trial goes on.
Again- that is not hysteria- that is just the news this week.
We could go down the whole list point by point and I could show you that what you tried to make out is "just the news this week" and you would try again to find some way to try and point a finger or deflect. The problem lies in the fact a large number of the left are not only ramping up the retroact but the physical abuse. The thing I will tell you is don't be surprised if it is a while before the left is given a chance at power. Too many are seeing the left.
While the senate has always been a rough row to hoe for the Ds it has gotten much worse for them as the election draws near. Manchin is acting and talking like he might flip and Nelson is dead in the water due to a lack of funding. The house seats are likely to miss D expectations as well but probably not as bad
While the senate has always been a rough row to hoe for the Ds it has gotten much worse for them as the election draws near. Manchin is acting and talking like he might flip and Nelson is dead in the water due to a lack of funding. The house seats are likely to miss D expectations as well but probably not as bad
The danger of what is going here cannot be taken lightly. People both in this country and outside the country rely on "The News" to provide accurate information about the greatest country in the world and it's President. That is not happening, they are providing a distorted partisan view of everything President Trump does and does not do. They create hysteria such as the "Crisis Of Families Torn Apart" for purely political purposes.
Our Media and the DOJ have been hijacked by the Left and that is more dangerous to us than any Russian cyber attack.
While the senate has always been a rough row to hoe for the Ds it has gotten much worse for them as the election draws near. Manchin is acting and talking like he might flip and Nelson is dead in the water due to a lack of funding. The house seats are likely to miss D expectations as well but probably not as bad
The danger of what is going here cannot be taken lightly. People both in this country and outside the country rely on "The News" to provide accurate information about the greatest country in the world and it's President. That is not happening, they are providing a distorted partisan view of everything President Trump does and does not do. They create hysteria such as the "Crisis Of Families Torn Apart" for purely political purposes.
Our Media and the DOJ have been hijacked by the Left and that is more dangerous to us than any Russian cyber attack.
The alleged 'mass hysteria' is merely a false impression being generated by the media in their failed attempts at regaining credibility, is all. It generates an increase in cranks, loons, and gimps running around annoying people, but it is largely non-existent in real life. The back lash is costing the gimps a lot of votes.
What 'mass hysteria'?
Despite what Don the Con tweets- there is no 'mass hysteria'
While the senate has always been a rough row to hoe for the Ds it has gotten much worse for them as the election draws near. Manchin is acting and talking like he might flip and Nelson is dead in the water due to a lack of funding. The house seats are likely to miss D expectations as well but probably not as bad
The danger of what is going here cannot be taken lightly. People both in this country and outside the country rely on "The News" to provide accurate information about the greatest country in the world and it's President. That is not happening, they are providing a distorted partisan view of everything President Trump does and does not do. They create hysteria such as the "Crisis Of Families Torn Apart" for purely political purposes.
Our Media and the DOJ have been hijacked by the Left and that is more dangerous to us than any Russian cyber attack.
What left? Who is talking about a 90% tax bracket again?
I think sometimes we need to step back and look at where the Tee was to tell which way the wind blew our ball.
Very impressed of those who can see this article is biased... I happen to agree with this person’s assessment, so fucking sue me. Of course it’s biased—so what? Do ya’ll see the unhinged shit some anti-Trumpers post here and ya’ll can’t handle a biased article that challenges your beliefs? I’m more reasonable than many of the Trumpers here and I put this in the CDZ so we could have a discussion about it. I won’t respond to whiners and those who won’t even try to see from others’ POV.
If you have a problem with this article, I see that as evidence you want to keep whining and bitching and HATING on Trump in the face of evidence maybe you should have hated other presidents just as much. Let’s not forget who was president when this alleged “meddling” took place.
What is to discuss? The OP is frankly just bullshit.
There is no 'hysteria'- that is just an invention of the author.
My disagreeing with the idiocy written by the author of the article you quote is not because I hate Don the Con- I don't hate anyone- or even because I disagree with the lying Don the Con. I disagree with the idiocy of the OP because there is no 'hysteria'.
Let me respond to one specific quote:
— for which there is still no evidence — that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
What media is saying that Trump's campaign DID collude with the Russian government?
What is being discussed in the media- is the ongoing investigation into the Russian meddling in the 2016 election that Don the Con alternately disputes and then doesn't dispute.
Certainly there is discussion- here and elsewhere as to the possibility that there was collusion- but that is reasonable considering both Trump's own actions and the odd facts that do keep trickling out.
And no one in the media is saying that Trump works for Putin- the hysteria in that statement is the authors alone. Again- there are posters here who will say that Trump is working for Putin- but this is not a widespread media claim.
What is being discussed in the media is Trump's reluctance to confront Putin about Russia's meddling in America's president election- not just the media of course- but a wide range of elected officials- Democrat and Republican.
Trump does want to call everything that is happening to him a 'witch hunt'- and the 'worst witch hunt in history'- and the OP does a good job of parroting Trump's basic premise.
And nothing else.
I stopped reading after “there is no hysteria.” The definition of hysteria is “exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion of excitement, especially among a group of people”
So let’s take a look at this “no hysteria.”
View attachment 207031
View attachment 207033
View attachment 207035
I’m sure I can find more, and correct me if I’m wrong, but it looks like this last example of people screaming at the sky encompasses the definition of hysteria perfectly.
And that is 'hysteria' how?
Kathy Griffin posting an image?
People posted nasty images about President Obama for 8 years.
Somehow you didn't consider that 'hysteria' then.
I disagree with any images of any person that suggest violence- but the rest- are free speech and free expression.
Which the far right does support- when it comes to condemnation of Obama or Clinton.
Back to the OP:
that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Not a single one of your images of 'hysteria' was related to accusations of collusion between Trump and Russia.
You appear to confuse legitimate criticism of our President- with mass hysteria.
So a bunch of adults screaming helplessly at the sky isn’t considered hysteria. ].
Not a single one of your images of 'hysteria' was related to accusations of collusion between Trump and Russia.
You appear to confuse legitimate criticism of our President- with mass hysteria.[
