Jump to content

Battling billionaires: Trump and candidate Bloomberg swap insults and attacks


webfact

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, Berkshire said:

Classic bully tactic and quite childish.  One thing I've noticed is that Trump would never insult Putin about his height, even though Putin is even shorter than Bloomberg.  Wonder why that is? 

With Putin diplomacy is called for.

 

That is unnecessary for  domestic political opponents.

 

Trump hates MB and MB hates Trump. It's hardly advanced psychology.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, candide said:

So where is information acceptable, according to you? 

Does it have to be only media outlets dominated by liberal "journalists*" to satisfy your own opinions, or can anything actually backed up with factual references and names be accepted by you? 

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chiphigh said:

What a desperate post. Please feel free to give us a detailed policy from the democrats to build the economy and employment market. 

 

 

Typical head in the sand deflection response. As to be expected...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chiphigh said:

Does it have to be only media outlets dominated by liberal "journalists*" to satisfy your own opinions, or can anything actually backed up with factual references and names be accepted by you? 

Facts, please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Chiphigh said:

Does it have to be only media outlets dominated by liberal "journalists*" to satisfy your own opinions, or can anything actually backed up with factual references and names be accepted by you? 

Axios.com is quite reliable for facts, so is the BBC website. Some less known sources such as Justice Security are quite good too. Politico is not bad. Oh! The Economist is a top one!

 

For a variety of opinions: a mix of CNN, Fox News (not Hannity and F&F, lol), and Al Djazeera provide a good overview. 

A few European sources may be interesting to get a non Anglo-saxon view: DW, Le Monde, etc...

 

What are your usual sources?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, candide said:

It's not only about citing sources, it's about not being biased by only selecting facts and sources that confirm the author's stance. I can demonstrate that the earth is flat or the existence of flying saucers by selecting only some sources.

 

John Solomon is biased. He cites sources but 'forgets' to cite facts that contradict his assertions. Compare, for example, his chronology of the Trump/Biden/Ukraine story with the one from Justice Security and you will find out that he conveniently omitted plenty of contradictory evidence. I also quickly checked some facts in this chronology proudly quoted in one of the TVF threads and there were some blatant errors (i.e. he states that Shokin was prosecutor in 2014 and he was only nominated in 2015). As I often do with Trumpers I checked if the source was really stating was he wrote and also found it sometimes didn't (ex the key N.Y. post one). 

 

I did not check the other sources but they are obviously not neutral.

There we are again with another "Trumper" insult. 

 

You just can't help yourself. 

 

One thing is blatantly clear. One side only allows one side to be critically examined and the blatantly corrupt on the left goes unreported and ignored. 

  • Confused 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Redline said:

Trump is only a fraction of the man Bloomberg is-Donny must have gotten picked on wicked bad as a child, so he’s taking it out on people now-man child poster boy 

So you have deep insight into the minds and hearts of people you have never met or spoken with. That is an amazing ability. It seems like people on the left have this magical ability alot. You must be rich with this kind of talent. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chiphigh said:

There we are again with another "Trumper" insult. 

 

You just can't help yourself. 

 

One thing is blatantly clear. One side only allows one side to be critically examined and the blatantly corrupt on the left goes unreported and ignored. 

Which insult? Trump himself talks about Trumpers and never Trumpers.

 

Come on, Trump and Republicans are full steam against the Bidens and the left in media and social networks, with full coverage.

 

Then comes the question that Trumpers never want to answer: despite such "blatant" evidence, why is it that the Republicans don't start any investigation into the Bidens and only want to make shows?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, candide said:

Which insult? Trump himself talks about Trumpers and never Trumpers.

 

Come on, Trump and Republicans are full steam against the Bidens and the left in media and social networks, with full coverage.

 

Then comes the question that Trumpers never want to answer: despite such "blatant" evidence, why is it that the Republicans don't start any investigation into the Bidens and only want to make shows?

I believe Lindsay Graham just announced that he will push for an independent investigation into the entire Biden issue. Isn't a remarkable thing that his entire family experienced great increases in business deals and wealth when he was vice president. That is of course, a mere coincidence. 

 

Because there aren't any "valid" news sources that fit into the narrative you have,it can't possibly be true. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Chiphigh said:

I believe Lindsay Graham just announced that he will push for an independent investigation into the entire Biden issue. Isn't a remarkable thing that his entire family experienced great increases in business deals and wealth when he was vice president. That is of course, a mere coincidence. 

 

Because there aren't any "valid" news sources that fit into the narrative you have,it can't possibly be true. 

As I said many times, no problem for me if they do. The timing starts to be good for the Republicans as they may not have finished the investigation before elections.

Well, at least Biden is not trying to hide his financial information (contrary to Trump).

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/joe-biden-net-worth

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, candide said:

As I said many times, no problem for me if they do. The timing starts to be good for the Republicans as they may not have finished the investigation before elections.

Well, at least Biden is not trying to hide his financial information (contrary to Trump).

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/joe-biden-net-worth

Does the net worth include all the relatives who have gotten rich while he was vp? Or is selling influence not to be looked at? 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Chiphigh said:

Does the net worth include all the relatives who have gotten rich while he was vp? Or is selling influence not to be looked at? 

That's all I know. Do you have such information? (Ok we know more or less for Hunter)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...