Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I read that article too. The extraterrestrials who replaced all of our leaders artificially inseminated monkeys with human DNA and created the Muslims, then planted them on the plane. There should be an investigation!One of the men who was trained to do the attack had a change of heart and turned himself into the FBI, who did not believe him. They turned him over to MI6, who also did not believe him. When asked by the London Times why they did not investigate, an FBI spokesman said they began an investigation, but were told to stand down by someone higher up in the government.Bush was told that the attack was going to happen, but had his eyes in Iraq to impress daddy.We are hearing a lot of smoke from the Right Wing about the sanctity of the Electoral College, and how the Founders truly understood that the Will of the People could not be trusted.
Okay, so let's look at that. Let's look at the three times that someone became President because they won the electoral College while losing the Popular Vote.
·2000 - George W. Bush - Ignored warnings of an imminent terror attack,giving us the worst terror incident in history.
·
·
Not that the rest of your post is much better, but this particular claim is so ridiculously easy to respond to.
Mr. Bush wasn't even inaugurated until 2001. He barely had time to settle into the role when the 9/11 attacks happened.
There was another terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, by those associated with the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack, in 1993; under Bill Clinton's watch; eight years before the 9/11 attacks. We knew, then, that there was an organized Islamist terrorist group, that for whatever reason, wanted to bring down the World Trade Center. They had made one attempt, and we had every reason to expect that there'd be another.
President Clinton's administration had from there to the end of his term, seven years, to address this threat. He did nothing, and predictably, another attack did occur, with devastating results. Though the attack finally happened early in the Bush Administration, it was the Clinton Administration's neglect that allowed it to happen.
This line again? Show proof that Bush was given a date/time for the attack.
This is just as dumb as the "Roosevelt let Pearl Harbor Happen" tripe, and probably even worse.
Okay and how many flights are flown daily? I could only hear the liberal outrage if Bush would've taken enormous steps at the airports searching everyone before they went on flights. Also tell me smart one, did they also tell Bush they were going to use box cutters to hijack those planes, the exact times, the exact places? No, nobody thought that kind of evil existed at that time.He told the FBI that they were going to highjack planes and fly them into buildings. Do you think such information did not reach the White House?So they told Bush when and where the attacks would happen? Sorry Bush didn't know that information like Obama did in Bengazi.Bush was told that the attack was going to happen, but had his eyes in Iraq to impress daddy.We are hearing a lot of smoke from the Right Wing about the sanctity of the Electoral College, and how the Founders truly understood that the Will of the People could not be trusted.
Okay, so let's look at that. Let's look at the three times that someone became President because they won the electoral College while losing the Popular Vote.
·2000 - George W. Bush - Ignored warnings of an imminent terror attack,giving us the worst terror incident in history.
·
·
Not that the rest of your post is much better, but this particular claim is so ridiculously easy to respond to.
Mr. Bush wasn't even inaugurated until 2001. He barely had time to settle into the role when the 9/11 attacks happened.
There was another terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, by those associated with the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack, in 1993; under Bill Clinton's watch; eight years before the 9/11 attacks. We knew, then, that there was an organized Islamist terrorist group, that for whatever reason, wanted to bring down the World Trade Center. They had made one attempt, and we had every reason to expect that there'd be another.
President Clinton's administration had from there to the end of his term, seven years, to address this threat. He did nothing, and predictably, another attack did occur, with devastating results. Though the attack finally happened early in the Bush Administration, it was the Clinton Administration's neglect that allowed it to happen.
This story is a well known fact, that for some reason was not reported in the American media. It is in the investigation on 911.In other word, I am right. Why would the London Times make this stuff up? They are owned by a conservative.One of the men who was trained to do the attack had a change of heart and turned himself into the FBI, who did not believe him. They turned him over to MI6, who also did not believe him. When asked by the London Times why they did not investigate, an FBI spokesman said they began an investigation, but were told to stand down by someone higher up in the government.This line again? Show proof that Bush was given a date/time for the attack.
This is just as dumb as the "Roosevelt let Pearl Harbor Happen" tripe, and probably even worse.
Oh, The "stand down" meme? You are a truther idiot then. My low opinion of you has now gone down to SHE WHO MUST NOT BE NAMED LEVELS.
No, you are an idiot.
A story told to a person by another person about a person who may have been part of something or other.....
You are being plain stupid to defend Bush. You hold on to the guy and investigate. Bush's administration was certainly not opposed to 'interrogations'.Okay and how many flights are flown daily? I could only hear the liberal outrage if Bush would've taken enormous steps at the airports searching everyone before they went on flights. Also tell me smart one, did they also tell Bush they were going to use box cutters to hijack those planes, the exact times, the exact places? No, nobody thought that kind of evil existed at that time.He told the FBI that they were going to highjack planes and fly them into buildings. Do you think such information did not reach the White House?So they told Bush when and where the attacks would happen? Sorry Bush didn't know that information like Obama did in Bengazi.Bush was told that the attack was going to happen, but had his eyes in Iraq to impress daddy.We are hearing a lot of smoke from the Right Wing about the sanctity of the Electoral College, and how the Founders truly understood that the Will of the People could not be trusted.
Okay, so let's look at that. Let's look at the three times that someone became President because they won the electoral College while losing the Popular Vote.
·2000 - George W. Bush - Ignored warnings of an imminent terror attack,giving us the worst terror incident in history.
·
·
Not that the rest of your post is much better, but this particular claim is so ridiculously easy to respond to.
Mr. Bush wasn't even inaugurated until 2001. He barely had time to settle into the role when the 9/11 attacks happened.
There was another terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, by those associated with the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack, in 1993; under Bill Clinton's watch; eight years before the 9/11 attacks. We knew, then, that there was an organized Islamist terrorist group, that for whatever reason, wanted to bring down the World Trade Center. They had made one attempt, and we had every reason to expect that there'd be another.
President Clinton's administration had from there to the end of his term, seven years, to address this threat. He did nothing, and predictably, another attack did occur, with devastating results. Though the attack finally happened early in the Bush Administration, it was the Clinton Administration's neglect that allowed it to happen.
Being in the official 911 report and on the front page of a respected newspaper would make it just that.This story is a well known fact, that for some reason was not reported in the American media. It is in the investigation on 911.In other word, I am right. Why would the London Times make this stuff up? They are owned by a conservative.One of the men who was trained to do the attack had a change of heart and turned himself into the FBI, who did not believe him. They turned him over to MI6, who also did not believe him. When asked by the London Times why they did not investigate, an FBI spokesman said they began an investigation, but were told to stand down by someone higher up in the government.
Oh, The "stand down" meme? You are a truther idiot then. My low opinion of you has now gone down to SHE WHO MUST NOT BE NAMED LEVELS.
No, you are an idiot.
A story told to a person by another person about a person who may have been part of something or other.....
Whenever says something is a "well known fact" and then doesn't back it up.....
To truly understand the will of the people, look at the election map. The Democrat areas are narrowly defined at the coasts. The People who populate this country will never agree to have their voices silenced and be ruled by the congested cities along the coast.
When democrats are a national party again they can talk about the will of the people.
Ask me how hard Im laughing..........reports are there is ONE elector ready to defect!! These progressives..........really are mental cases. So easily led around by the nose.........they'd buy a bag of dog doo for $1,000/pop if you packaged it up just right!!
These story has about a week.........maybe.............of leg time left.
So......
- The demonstrations were going to overturn Trump.......dead
- The recount was going to overturn Trump..............dead
- The electors were going to overturn Trump..........dead
s0ns.....nobody cares about your policies in 2016 and especially your k00k ideology which has gotten spectacular kicks in the nut sack the last few elections at every level.
Its called............not winning!!
Not if all those votes came from California.To truly understand the will of the people, look at the election map. The Democrat areas are narrowly defined at the coasts. The People who populate this country will never agree to have their voices silenced and be ruled by the congested cities along the coast.
When democrats are a national party again they can talk about the will of the people.
When you win the national vote by 3 million, you are a national party.
Being in the official 911 report and on the front page of a respected newspaper would make it just that.This story is a well known fact, that for some reason was not reported in the American media. It is in the investigation on 911.In other word, I am right. Why would the London Times make this stuff up? They are owned by a conservative.Oh, The "stand down" meme? You are a truther idiot then. My low opinion of you has now gone down to SHE WHO MUST NOT BE NAMED LEVELS.
No, you are an idiot.
A story told to a person by another person about a person who may have been part of something or other.....
Whenever says something is a "well known fact" and then doesn't back it up.....
To truly understand the will of the people, look at the election map. The Democrat areas are narrowly defined at the coasts. The People who populate this country will never agree to have their voices silenced and be ruled by the congested cities along the coast.
When democrats are a national party again they can talk about the will of the people.
When you win the national vote by 3 million, you are a national party.
Bush was a good president, it took the liberal media six years to bring down his approval ratings. If the media did the same to Obama, he would already be impeached. I mean the other day Obama said no terrorist attack on US soil under his watch. That should get him another lie of the year award.You are being plain stupid to defend Bush. You hold on to the guy and investigate. Bush's administration was certainly not opposed to 'interrogations'.Okay and how many flights are flown daily? I could only hear the liberal outrage if Bush would've taken enormous steps at the airports searching everyone before they went on flights. Also tell me smart one, did they also tell Bush they were going to use box cutters to hijack those planes, the exact times, the exact places? No, nobody thought that kind of evil existed at that time.He told the FBI that they were going to highjack planes and fly them into buildings. Do you think such information did not reach the White House?So they told Bush when and where the attacks would happen? Sorry Bush didn't know that information like Obama did in Bengazi.Bush was told that the attack was going to happen, but had his eyes in Iraq to impress daddy.Not that the rest of your post is much better, but this particular claim is so ridiculously easy to respond to.
Mr. Bush wasn't even inaugurated until 2001. He barely had time to settle into the role when the 9/11 attacks happened.
There was another terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, by those associated with the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack, in 1993; under Bill Clinton's watch; eight years before the 9/11 attacks. We knew, then, that there was an organized Islamist terrorist group, that for whatever reason, wanted to bring down the World Trade Center. They had made one attempt, and we had every reason to expect that there'd be another.
President Clinton's administration had from there to the end of his term, seven years, to address this threat. He did nothing, and predictably, another attack did occur, with devastating results. Though the attack finally happened early in the Bush Administration, it was the Clinton Administration's neglect that allowed it to happen.
Bush was a good president, it took the liberal media six years to bring down his approval ratings. If the media did the same to Obama, he would already be impeached. I mean the other day Obama said no terrorist attack on US soil under his watch. That should get him another lie of the year award.You are being plain stupid to defend Bush. You hold on to the guy and investigate. Bush's administration was certainly not opposed to 'interrogations'.Okay and how many flights are flown daily? I could only hear the liberal outrage if Bush would've taken enormous steps at the airports searching everyone before they went on flights. Also tell me smart one, did they also tell Bush they were going to use box cutters to hijack those planes, the exact times, the exact places? No, nobody thought that kind of evil existed at that time.He told the FBI that they were going to highjack planes and fly them into buildings. Do you think such information did not reach the White House?So they told Bush when and where the attacks would happen? Sorry Bush didn't know that information like Obama did in Bengazi.Bush was told that the attack was going to happen, but had his eyes in Iraq to impress daddy.
We are hearing a lot of smoke from the Right Wing about the sanctity of the Electoral College, and how the Founders truly understood that the Will of the People could not be trusted.
Okay, so let's look at that. Let's look at the three times that someone became President because they won the electoral College while losing the Popular Vote.
1876- Rutherford B. Hayes. Won the electoral college because a commission awarded several states to him AFTER he promised to withdraw the remaining troops from the South and ended Reconstruction. As a result, the South was able to roll back the rights of African Americans with impunity and gave us 100 years of Jim Crow. Clearly one of the worst Presidents we've ever had.
1888 - Benjamin Harrison- Made good on a promise to pay lifetime benefits to Civil War Veterans, giving America its first "Billion Dollar Budget". Gave us a recession in 1890 that lead to the Panic of 1893 right before he left office,
2000 - George W. Bush - Ignored warnings of an imminent terror attack,giving us the worst terror incident in history. Went to war on a lie, killing 5000 Americans and a million Iraqis. Fumbled the response to a major hurricane, rendering a major city uninhabitable. And, oh, yes, gave us the worst recession in 80 years by letting his Wall Street Cronies run amok. easily the worst president ever.
So don't worry, guys. This time will be different! I'm sure the Game Show Host who kept a copy of Hitler's speeches next to his bed will do just fine. No, really.
We are hearing a lot of smoke from the Right Wing about the sanctity of the Electoral College, and how the Founders truly understood that the Will of the People could not be trusted.
Okay, so let's look at that. Let's look at the three times that someone became President because they won the electoral College while losing the Popular Vote.
1876- Rutherford B. Hayes. Won the electoral college because a commission awarded several states to him AFTER he promised to withdraw the remaining troops from the South and ended Reconstruction. As a result, the South was able to roll back the rights of African Americans with impunity and gave us 100 years of Jim Crow. Clearly one of the worst Presidents we've ever had.
1888 - Benjamin Harrison- Made good on a promise to pay lifetime benefits to Civil War Veterans, giving America its first "Billion Dollar Budget". Gave us a recession in 1890 that lead to the Panic of 1893 right before he left office,
2000 - George W. Bush - Ignored warnings of an imminent terror attack,giving us the worst terror incident in history. Went to war on a lie, killing 5000 Americans and a million Iraqis. Fumbled the response to a major hurricane, rendering a major city uninhabitable. And, oh, yes, gave us the worst recession in 80 years by letting his Wall Street Cronies run amok. easily the worst president ever.
So don't worry, guys. This time will be different! I'm sure the Game Show Host who kept a copy of Hitler's speeches next to his bed will do just fine. No, really.
Joey- it's over. Your bulldyke lost. She lost according to the constitution. The voice of the voters has been heard. Get some therapy boi so you can show up to your job and be the best burger flipper you can be.
For those Libs who are still whining and crying about the unfairness of the electoral process, I may have a way for you to get closer to appreciating it. Think about it like a tennis match where the first player to win 3 sets wins the match. They don't count the total of the games won. A set won 6-0 counts just as much as a set won by a 2 point tie breaker. I'm sure there are many examples of champions in grand slam tennis matches losing more games but winning more sets. It means to be the winner you have to be better over three sets no just dominate 1 or 2. Just like to be President, you have to be elected over the entire country, broad and wide support, not just a few large states.
Not that the rest of your post is much better, but this particular claim is so ridiculously easy to respond to.
Mr. Bush wasn't even inaugurated until 2001. He barely had time to settle into the role when the 9/11 attacks happened.
There was another terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, by those associated with the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack, in 1993; under Bill Clinton's watch; eight years before the 9/11 attacks. We knew, then, that there was an organized Islamist terrorist group, that for whatever reason, wanted to bring down the World Trade Center. They had made one attempt, and we had every reason to expect that there'd be another.
To truly understand the will of the people, look at the election map. The Democrat areas are narrowly defined at the coasts. The People who populate this country will never agree to have their voices silenced and be ruled by the congested cities along the coast.
When democrats are a national party again they can talk about the will of the people.
