Gotta say - I wasn't too-moved by the Democratic response - the SOTU had a lot of positive points but the Democratic response seemed more like a political-attack (negative and seemingly angry).
Icey, I consider myself very normal. I'm not angry with Trump for putting his country, and its constitution first. I would expect that out of any nation's leader.
Why do you think he's a piece of shit?
Cause women let him grab them by the pussy? Then Bill Clinton is a piece of shit too. Is it because he's rich? That's his American Dream, and he lived it. Is it because he's racist? Yeah, sell that bullshit to someone else. Is it because he's a misogynist? Tell me how he puts down ALL women (yes, he criticizes individual women on their personal merit, but if a woman wants to be equal to men, then she can take the criticism like men have had to).
If you don't like the guy cause he tweets like a buffoon, yeah, I can see that.
But as for a president forcing congress to do their job, he's a winner. All of Obama's accomplishments were done by EO (save the ACA, which many do not consider an accomplishment). Trump is getting congress to pass LAWS. More power to him.
Simply put, Trump made a SOTU speecj that was different because he is a man of action not a politician. The response was empty because it was the words of a politician, and and those key points ecplain damn near everything.
I thought the speech was surprisingly bipartisan (compared to most others, especially during this time of impasse)
The ladies in white acted like they were in junior high school. They wield a lot of power, but damn it's hard to take them seriously. Call me misogynistic if you want, but it's hard to imagine men acting like that.
POTUS got some good digs in at individuals.
Nancy Pelosi makes some hillarious facial expressions.
Here's the litmus test.........take out who gave the speech and look at the context or better still ask yourself if the same speech was given by someone of the other party how would you perceive the information.
Secondly and this is my observation and I freely admit up front I have considered Pelosi part of the problem for decades and that the media is in fact somewhat biased to protect liberals but ask yourself shouldn't she need to explain her actions over the past couple of months. Not to Trump but maybe to the women whose parents were murdered by the "ILLEGAL" immigrant.
Face them. Look them in the eye and tell them there is no difference between legal and illegal immigration.
Consider the facts on an issue-by-issue basis. Immigration President Trump succinctly summed up the immigration stalemate: “No issue better illustrates the divide between America’s working class and America’s political class than illegal immigration. Wealthy politicians and donors push for open borders while living their lives behind walls and gates and guards.” Just five years ago, all 54 Senate Democrats voted for “no fewer than 700 miles” of border fencing and voted to end chain migration, end the visa lottery, and spend $46 billion on border security – more than nine times what the president is asking for now. If the elements of this 2013 plan sound familiar, they should. President Trump has asked for these very components in an immigration deal – yet not a single Senate Democrat supports the measure. What changed in five years? The person sitting in the Oval Office. Once content to work with President Obama on securing our border, radical Democrats now sit on the sidelines, determined to deprive the American people of safety and Trump of a political win. Infrastructure President Trump rightfully noted the bipartisan consensus on infrastructure. “Both parties should be able to unite for a great rebuilding of America’s crumbling infrastructure,” he said. In the first year of the Obama presidency, every single Senate Democrat and all but seven House Democrats voted for a $787 billion infrastructure “stimulus” package that failed to stimulate our economy and also failed to rebuild our infrastructure. In the years that followed, “more infrastructure spending” became the rallying cry of Democrats. President Trump, immediately upon taking office, offered an infrastructure plan that was widely rejected by Democrats. For two years, President Trump repeatedly made infrastructure overtures, only to be rejected by the left. Democrats still pay lip service to infrastructure, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California listing it as a point of commonality. But they nevertheless continue to play political games. Most recently, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that climate change must be tied to any infrastructure deal – a surefire way to raise the bar and complicate any bipartisan effort at change. Trade “To build on our incredible economic success, one priority is paramount: reversing decades of calamitous trade policies,” President Trump said Tuesday night. Like President Trump, Democratic leaders have often criticized President Bill Clinton’s job-hemorrhaging North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). As far back as the 2008 Democratic primary, then-presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama threatened to withdraw from the agreement – a call that many Democrats echoed in the decade to follow. It wasn’t until President Trump that words finally became action. The president successfully exited NAFTA and negotiated the far superior United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Despite unprecedented labor protections, fairer agricultural provisions, and incentivizing auto production within our borders, House Democrats have indicated they may not support the new agreement. Why? Perhaps the answer is found in an article authored by Edward Alden, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, headlined: “In the NAFTA Deal, Trump Got What Democrats Couldn’t.” Therein lies the sad truth of Nancy Pelosi’s divided government: so consumed with disdain for the Trump presidency, Democrats have chosen to forgo the needs of the American people. Now Democrats have a choice, described quite clearly by President Trump in his State of the Union address: “Together, we can break decades of political stalemate. We can bridge old divisions, heal old wounds, build new coalitions, forge new solutions, and unlock the extraordinary promise of America’s future. The decision is ours to make.”
^ not a Democrat, not a fan of Trump, outreach needs to come from both directions, and should start at the top, at this point in time the president is a Republican this is now his responsibility, I don’t think one speech delivered means anything.
She can kill with a clap, she can wound with her eyes And she’s far from impressed with your Soviet ties And she’s like to stab you and laugh as you bleed She thinks you’re a child, but she’s always Nancy Pelosi to me
We’ll see if his actions match his bipartisan words. He gave a similar bipartisan SOTU last year and forgot all about it once they turned off the teleprompter.
He’s a shitty negotiator so I’ll set the bar low and be pleased with any accomplishments. I’ll keep an open mind. Hard to see how any significant infrastructure deal gets done without raising taxes which won’t happen.
I am a Republican who is not particularly fond of Trump. but from a pure policy and execution standpoint, the guy has accomplished more in 2 years than many modern Presidents did in 8. If only G.W. had been nearly as effective during his brief time with a Congressional majority, but instead he used that time to get us mired in a war.
Overall I thought it was a hell of a speech. We'll see what it accomplishes, but it should tell us something that a vast majority of Independents who watched it, and even 15% of the Democrats tuning in, overall approved of what he had to say. That should cause Democrats some concern, especially since this SOTU was the most watched of any ever based on the Nielsen ratings..
I saw a few minutes ago 80% of the Independents approved of the speech ( to follow up on RD's point) which should tell "kill with the clap Pelosi" if she wants to remain Speaker and not be de-broomed again she might want to give her actions a second thought.
There is a lot about Trump I don't like and I wasn't for him as he worked his way through the Primaries but when it came down to him and the Hildabeast there wasn't a moment's hesitation on my part.
Papi, I begged for a Dem to give me any reason to not vote for Trump. He's a fucking Reality Star FFS. But even the queen of the Dems could not come up with one reason for me to vote for her, other than "She's not Trump".
If y’all think that speech is going to wipe out his tweets, you’re being delusional. As for myself I’ll reserve judgement, I want to see him shut the fuck up and stop spooking the markets and our allies. Until that comes to pass I don’t think he’s going to be very successful. And no I don’t think he’s accomplished very much, just remember anything done by executive order can be undone the same way, and probably will be, because he’s not trying to expand his support.
Twentyfive I think right now all that anyone is discussing and reviewing is the speech as well as the days leading up to it. Where things go in the future is anyone's guess but I wouldn't put all my eggs in what the MSM is reporting either.
A fair amount of people are starting to wonder if at least part of the problem isn't Pelosi---not that I didn't bring this up weeks ago but supposedly some of the people voted back in office or in office were not going to give her Speaker position back--so already there are voters that have been lied to. And if I was Trump I would be actively asking the same question I did......go sit down and tell the people who were targets to illegal immigrants that were criminals why border security isn't necessary.
As a side note I heard the mayor of El Paso a few weeks ago on CBS---his attitude is the right one....everyone in DC needs to STFU and let the people on the border dealing with issue each and every day tell then what they are seeing. In his area the wall concept seems to have helped and the border patrol has told him it is part of the reason they are having a level of success.
I didn’t watch the SOTU. Trump lies and bullshits so often that it’s more time-effective to read through the NY Times fact-checks. He’s responsible for countless outright lies and exaggerations. If I had to summarize Trump’s first two years it would read like this:
(1) GOP did everything possible to gut Obamacare. It didn’t fail in the Senate (thanks to John McCain) so, instead, there’s a lawsuit challenging its constitutionality. The lawsuit is considered laughable and will probably fail. Obamacare succeeded in getting healthcare to tens of millions and there is no GOP plan to protect those with pre-existing conditions if Obamacare is repealed.
(2) We had a tax-cut that went mostly into stock buybacks and largely benefits CEOs and executives (since their compensation is often in the form of company stocks). It will not pay for itself, and the CBO projects it will add about $1T to the deficit over 10 yrs. It’s unpopular and an example of the failure of trickle-down-economics.
(3) Even though illegal immigration has been on the decline for the past two decades, Trump succeeded in shutting down the government, punishing innocent workers, because he couldn’t keep his promise that Mexico would pay for the wall.
Trump has a lot of trouble getting his facts straight and he has a reputation for having no intellectual curiosity, not reading, and watching TV constantly.
Extends to TUSCL too. As I said in another thread, just getting the facts straight is a big challenge on TUSCL. We have outright conspiracy theories (e.g. Obama was born in Kenya or Google intentionally altered it’s search engine to link searches for “Trump” to “idiot”). Or more important but laughable contentions like (1) the global consensus of scientists is wrong about climate change or (2) the financial crisis was caused by the government forcing innocent Wall Street banks to lend to the poor. The latter is especially galling and ridiculous since the financial crisis wiped $5T out of the US economy. It really is a waste of time to discuss politics if you can’t nail down the facts.
Well 25, the tax cuts and removal of the hated Obamacare mandate were both legislative wins that future politicians will be reluctant to reverse. But with that said, I agree that another President could indeed undo much of the good that Trump has done.
For example, another President could re-weaponize the EPA, NLRB, banking and securities regulators, the FTC and myriad other regusltory agencies to go back to punishing businesses for the great sins of making too much money for their investors and employing too many people.
Another President could go back to allowing other countries to apply stiff tariffs on our products, protect their own industries at our expense and steal our intellectual property while we do nothing about it, sending back the 600k net new manufacturing jobs that we have picked up in the process.
Another President could pander to the Arabs and other freedom haters and go back to punishing Israel for the great sin of wanting to exist while surrounded by angry Islamic states who challenge their very right to do so, with violence where needed.
I could go on, but that's a good starting point. ;)
I anticipated your response @WarrenboyBoy. Papers like the NY Times and the WSJ live and die by doing a good job of separating news from editorial content. I don't know where you get your information; you're absolutely clueless about the most important things like the cause of the financial crisis.
LOL if you are reading the NYTimes and consider them to be what they were 20 years ago it isn't me who is clueless.
You need to understand what has happened in the past decades to what constitutes as news.
These are the same people who thought Hillary had the election won and repeatedly predicted her victory months, weeks, days before the election.
I've been saying since 2008 people are better off looking at things for themselves. What they see with their own eyes and ears means as much as what they read or hear on the news. And mentioning WSJ in the same context as the NYTImes really shows more about your mindset than mine.
25, the only people who are less informed than those who get their news from Fox are those who get their news from whatever you are reading. ;)
I get most of my news from the WSJ, Financial Times and, to a lesser degree, CNN, though CNN can sometimes go the way of rags like Huffpost. I agree with Random about the WSJ doing a good job with separating news from editorials, but not so much with the NYT, which has blown it too many times to have any real credibility in my eyes now.
Rick and yet he placed the two of them in the same classification.
I watch CBS probably more than any other network for news. Yet almost to a 100% level what you hear out of a liberal the minute you comment from anything but their perspective is you must watch "Faux News".........
As a side note when I do watch Fox it typically is the news--not the pundits. Anyone who has ever watched Sheppard Smith's news report and thinks he is Shaun Hannity needs to pull their head out of their ass.
A little story about CNN.......I happened to have it on in front of me while I was sitting in a clients office in NYC and they were reporting on a Trump rally in my home town.......they reported the place was basically empty....showed shots of how empty the seats were.....poor attendance...Hillary had this thing.......one of the swing states was leaning her way and this was blue collar union country.
The problem was I had a friend attending the rally--so I called him........he sent me pictures of the rally.........talk about a bullshit con job from CNN. In my mind their assess should have been fined and thrown in jail for trying to throw the election and at that point I knew people in the MSM were scared. They were willing to do just about anything to sway the voters Trump had no chance.
I have a real long memory when it comes to past attempts to deceive --it's also why I am not a Trump fan because of some of his past actions but trusting the MSM to give him a fair report.........you might as well read Little Red Riding Hood and believe it.
RickiBoi you love to throw shade I’m gonna give it to you straight I grew up in NYC and DT was a joke in those days , I lived around the corner from where he grew up, my dad was in the garment industry and I know more than many about what went before, I’m not the smartest guy in the room unlike you and your idol DT, but I knew many old timers back in the day and iDGAF what you think, I know you don’t know anything about what’s really going on but that’s your own problem Trump is out for himself and you see a kindred spirit in him, so enjoy your ignorance I don’t really care.
25, without disclosing too much about myself, I am well aware of Trump's sordid history. In the construction funding and debt investing worlds, the word "Trump" is synonymous with payment defaults and bankruptcy. His playbook was always the same, suck investment professionals in with rosy promises and glitzy showmanship, build up the business assets by racking up far too much debt, and then declare bankruptcy when the debt payments become too burdensome. There are many savvy hedge fund and other investment professionals who will never again touch a piece of paper with the name Trump on it, regardless of how good the securitization appears, how juicy the interest rate seems or how much of a discount the paper is selling at.
But as a voter, I'm a supporter of most of his policies and thus far he has done everything he can to keep his promises. That's more than can be said for any President that I can remember. Until that changes, I will prefer him to any other option.
business all throughout NYC and elswhere who wouldn't buy a
^?If I wanted opinions from a news source I’d watch one of the three msnbc, cnn, or fox , I’m sick and tired of those editorial channels telling me what’s news none of them get it right
Intersection of San Simon and Limon, next to a park, close to Catholic Church.
Close to their international airport
Yes, so she is about 600ft West of H. Congresso de La Union, its west side, San Simon and Limon, adjacent to a park, close to a Catholic Church, Paroquia de la Santa Cruz y Nuestra....
Parroquia de la Santa Cruz y Nuestra Señora de la Soledad
52 comments
Get to work Congress. Do your fucking job.
Why do you think he's a piece of shit?
Cause women let him grab them by the pussy? Then Bill Clinton is a piece of shit too.
Is it because he's rich? That's his American Dream, and he lived it.
Is it because he's racist? Yeah, sell that bullshit to someone else.
Is it because he's a misogynist? Tell me how he puts down ALL women (yes, he criticizes individual women on their personal merit, but if a woman wants to be equal to men, then she can take the criticism like men have had to).
If you don't like the guy cause he tweets like a buffoon, yeah, I can see that.
But as for a president forcing congress to do their job, he's a winner. All of Obama's accomplishments were done by EO (save the ACA, which many do not consider an accomplishment). Trump is getting congress to pass LAWS. More power to him.
I thought the speech was surprisingly bipartisan (compared to most others, especially during this time of impasse)
The ladies in white acted like they were in junior high school. They wield a lot of power, but damn it's hard to take them seriously. Call me misogynistic if you want, but it's hard to imagine men acting like that.
POTUS got some good digs in at individuals.
Nancy Pelosi makes some hillarious facial expressions.
‘’If you don't like the guy cause he tweets like a buffoon, yeah, I can see that. ’’
Some times I wish someone would take his phone from him! Bless his heart!
QUESTION
Is DT a member here and if so does he have VIP status?
Secondly and this is my observation and I freely admit up front I have considered Pelosi part of the problem for decades and that the media is in fact somewhat biased to protect liberals but ask yourself shouldn't she need to explain her actions over the past couple of months. Not to Trump but maybe to the women whose parents were murdered by the "ILLEGAL" immigrant.
Face them. Look them in the eye and tell them there is no difference between legal and illegal immigration.
Immigration
President Trump succinctly summed up the immigration stalemate: “No issue better illustrates the divide between America’s working class and America’s political class than illegal immigration. Wealthy politicians and donors push for open borders while living their lives behind walls and gates and guards.”
Just five years ago, all 54 Senate Democrats voted for “no fewer than 700 miles” of border fencing and voted to end chain migration, end the visa lottery, and spend $46 billion on border security – more than nine times what the president is asking for now.
If the elements of this 2013 plan sound familiar, they should. President Trump has asked for these very components in an immigration deal – yet not a single Senate Democrat supports the measure.
What changed in five years? The person sitting in the Oval Office. Once content to work with President Obama on securing our border, radical Democrats now sit on the sidelines, determined to deprive the American people of safety and Trump of a political win.
Infrastructure
President Trump rightfully noted the bipartisan consensus on infrastructure. “Both parties should be able to unite for a great rebuilding of America’s crumbling infrastructure,” he said.
In the first year of the Obama presidency, every single Senate Democrat and all but seven House Democrats voted for a $787 billion infrastructure “stimulus” package that failed to stimulate our economy and also failed to rebuild our infrastructure.
In the years that followed, “more infrastructure spending” became the rallying cry of Democrats.
President Trump, immediately upon taking office, offered an infrastructure plan that was widely rejected by Democrats.
For two years, President Trump repeatedly made infrastructure overtures, only to be rejected by the left. Democrats still pay lip service to infrastructure, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California listing it as a point of commonality. But they nevertheless continue to play political games.
Most recently, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that climate change must be tied to any infrastructure deal – a surefire way to raise the bar and complicate any bipartisan effort at change.
Trade
“To build on our incredible economic success, one priority is paramount: reversing decades of calamitous trade policies,” President Trump said Tuesday night.
Like President Trump, Democratic leaders have often criticized President Bill Clinton’s job-hemorrhaging North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
As far back as the 2008 Democratic primary, then-presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama threatened to withdraw from the agreement – a call that many Democrats echoed in the decade to follow.
It wasn’t until President Trump that words finally became action. The president successfully exited NAFTA and negotiated the far superior United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).
Despite unprecedented labor protections, fairer agricultural provisions, and incentivizing auto production within our borders, House Democrats have indicated they may not support the new agreement.
Why? Perhaps the answer is found in an article authored by Edward Alden, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, headlined: “In the NAFTA Deal, Trump Got What Democrats Couldn’t.”
Therein lies the sad truth of Nancy Pelosi’s divided government: so consumed with disdain for the Trump presidency, Democrats have chosen to forgo the needs of the American people.
Now Democrats have a choice, described quite clearly by President Trump in his State of the Union address: “Together, we can break decades of political stalemate. We can bridge old divisions, heal old wounds, build new coalitions, forge new solutions, and unlock the extraordinary promise of America’s future. The decision is ours to make.”
Did you copy/paste his entire speech?
She can kill with a clap, she can wound with her eyes
And she’s far from impressed with your Soviet ties
And she’s like to stab you and laugh as you bleed
She thinks you’re a child, but she’s always Nancy Pelosi to me
We’ll see if his actions match his bipartisan words. He gave a similar bipartisan SOTU last year and forgot all about it once they turned off the teleprompter.
He’s a shitty negotiator so I’ll set the bar low and be pleased with any accomplishments. I’ll keep an open mind. Hard to see how any significant infrastructure deal gets done without raising taxes which won’t happen.
Overall I thought it was a hell of a speech. We'll see what it accomplishes, but it should tell us something that a vast majority of Independents who watched it, and even 15% of the Democrats tuning in, overall approved of what he had to say. That should cause Democrats some concern, especially since this SOTU was the most watched of any ever based on the Nielsen ratings..
There is a lot about Trump I don't like and I wasn't for him as he worked his way through the Primaries but when it came down to him and the Hildabeast there wasn't a moment's hesitation on my part.
If the Dems own the House and she wants to be Speaker nobody is going to stop her.
A fair amount of people are starting to wonder if at least part of the problem isn't Pelosi---not that I didn't bring this up weeks ago but supposedly some of the people voted back in office or in office were not going to give her Speaker position back--so already there are voters that have been lied to. And if I was Trump I would be actively asking the same question I did......go sit down and tell the people who were targets to illegal immigrants that were criminals why border security isn't necessary.
As a side note I heard the mayor of El Paso a few weeks ago on CBS---his attitude is the right one....everyone in DC needs to STFU and let the people on the border dealing with issue each and every day tell then what they are seeing. In his area the wall concept seems to have helped and the border patrol has told him it is part of the reason they are having a level of success.
(1) GOP did everything possible to gut Obamacare. It didn’t fail in the Senate (thanks to John McCain) so, instead, there’s a lawsuit challenging its constitutionality. The lawsuit is considered laughable and will probably fail. Obamacare succeeded in getting healthcare to tens of millions and there is no GOP plan to protect those with pre-existing conditions if Obamacare is repealed.
(2) We had a tax-cut that went mostly into stock buybacks and largely benefits CEOs and executives (since their compensation is often in the form of company stocks). It will not pay for itself, and the CBO projects it will add about $1T to the deficit over 10 yrs. It’s unpopular and an example of the failure of trickle-down-economics.
(3) Even though illegal immigration has been on the decline for the past two decades, Trump succeeded in shutting down the government, punishing innocent workers, because he couldn’t keep his promise that Mexico would pay for the wall.
Extends to TUSCL too. As I said in another thread, just getting the facts straight is a big challenge on TUSCL. We have outright conspiracy theories (e.g. Obama was born in Kenya or Google intentionally altered it’s search engine to link searches for “Trump” to “idiot”). Or more important but laughable contentions like (1) the global consensus of scientists is wrong about climate change or (2) the financial crisis was caused by the government forcing innocent Wall Street banks to lend to the poor. The latter is especially galling and ridiculous since the financial crisis wiped $5T out of the US economy. It really is a waste of time to discuss politics if you can’t nail down the facts.
For example, another President could re-weaponize the EPA, NLRB, banking and securities regulators, the FTC and myriad other regusltory agencies to go back to punishing businesses for the great sins of making too much money for their investors and employing too many people.
Another President could go back to allowing other countries to apply stiff tariffs on our products, protect their own industries at our expense and steal our intellectual property while we do nothing about it, sending back the 600k net new manufacturing jobs that we have picked up in the process.
Another President could pander to the Arabs and other freedom haters and go back to punishing Israel for the great sin of wanting to exist while surrounded by angry Islamic states who challenge their very right to do so, with violence where needed.
I could go on, but that's a good starting point. ;)
Care to expand?
Did he not sign a funding bill that made it to his desk?
Where did their sources come from this time....unknown source== from the mens toilet?
You need to understand what has happened in the past decades to what constitutes as news.
These are the same people who thought Hillary had the election won and repeatedly predicted her victory months, weeks, days before the election.
I've been saying since 2008 people are better off looking at things for themselves. What they see with their own eyes and ears means as much as what they read or hear on the news. And mentioning WSJ in the same context as the NYTImes really shows more about your mindset than mine.
I get most of my news from the WSJ, Financial Times and, to a lesser degree, CNN, though CNN can sometimes go the way of rags like Huffpost. I agree with Random about the WSJ doing a good job with separating news from editorials, but not so much with the NYT, which has blown it too many times to have any real credibility in my eyes now.
I watch CBS probably more than any other network for news. Yet almost to a 100% level what you hear out of a liberal the minute you comment from anything but their perspective is you must watch "Faux News".........
As a side note when I do watch Fox it typically is the news--not the pundits. Anyone who has ever watched Sheppard Smith's news report and thinks he is Shaun Hannity needs to pull their head out of their ass.
A little story about CNN.......I happened to have it on in front of me while I was sitting in a clients office in NYC and they were reporting on a Trump rally in my home town.......they reported the place was basically empty....showed shots of how empty the seats were.....poor attendance...Hillary had this thing.......one of the swing states was leaning her way and this was blue collar union country.
The problem was I had a friend attending the rally--so I called him........he sent me pictures of the rally.........talk about a bullshit con job from CNN. In my mind their assess should have been fined and thrown in jail for trying to throw the election and at that point I knew people in the MSM were scared. They were willing to do just about anything to sway the voters Trump had no chance.
I have a real long memory when it comes to past attempts to deceive --it's also why I am not a Trump fan because of some of his past actions but trusting the MSM to give him a fair report.........you might as well read Little Red Riding Hood and believe it.
I actually prefer to see things on my own like Warrenboy
I was at a Superbowl party in Vegas with 1200+ people. The room stood for the national anthem. Trump will win by a landslide in 2020
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-02-0…
Oddly this seems to have slipped by the informed sources of NY Times and CNN when she announced her intentions to run for president.
They both supposedly vetted her background ---correct?
I grew up in NYC and DT was a joke in those days , I lived around the corner from where he grew up, my dad was in the garment industry and I know more than many about what went before, I’m not the smartest guy in the room unlike you and your idol DT, but I knew many old timers back in the day and iDGAF what you think, I know you don’t know anything about what’s really going on but that’s your own problem Trump is out for himself and you see a kindred spirit in him, so enjoy your ignorance I don’t really care.
It's the only network I've found that broadcasts real news and offers opinions from both sides of issues.
But as a voter, I'm a supporter of most of his policies and thus far he has done everything he can to keep his promises. That's more than can be said for any President that I can remember. Until that changes, I will prefer him to any other option.
business all throughout NYC and elswhere who wouldn't buy a
Good chance for the otherside to take his stuff apart line item by line item. People have wised up since 2016.
SJG
Sexy Girls World Map ( consider Ecuador and Argentina )
https://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-co…
Argentina
https://www.argentinaxp.com/wp-content/u…
Year of the Pig
http://media.gettyimages.com/vectors/hap…
:) :) :)
SJG
Conscious Love with Richard Smoley
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3VktF4e…
Mexico City
http://doxyspotting.com/yellow-dress/
http://doxyspotting.com/?p=146666
http://doxyspotting.com/?p=112666
http://doxyspotting.com/?p=141203
Ninos Heros seems to be the main street hooker place in Mexico City
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ni%C3%…
Calzada de Tlalpan ( its West side ) and then from Viaducto Piedad going South to Napolean.
So let me see what I can find in street view:
In red dress:
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.3981727,…
another in red dress:
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.3980731,…
Notice their rubber tired public transit train, running down the center of:
Calzada de Tlalpan
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.3897964,…
Black Mini Dress
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.3895654,…
Hotel
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.3882771,…
Red Dress in front of small hotel
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.3853347,…
Giant Size PEMEX station
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.3841061,…
Starting over at the Northern Boundary, as I am seeing it.
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.403126,-…
Diverting Right Down Calle Segovia, not disapointed
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.3999486,…
Certainly not
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.3999888,…
back to going South on the East side of Calzada de Tlalpan
Little bit further South than Napoleon
Lots of Hotels on this East side of Calzada de Tlalpan
at Napoleon
http://doxyspotting.com/?p=149332
http://doxyspotting.com/?p=146666
Remember this awesome find? I think the effect is mainly in how she is dressed.
http://doxyspotting.com/?p=129645
Yes, seems to be this corner:
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.4312328,…
Intersection of San Simon and Limon, next to a park, close to Catholic Church.
Close to their international airport
Yes, so she is about 600ft West of H. Congresso de La Union, its west side, San Simon and Limon, adjacent to a park, close to a Catholic Church, Paroquia de la Santa Cruz y Nuestra....
Parroquia de la Santa Cruz y Nuestra Señora de la Soledad
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Parroq…
Yes, here, found her anew from the world map!
http://doxyspotting.com/?p=129645
Second Pic
http://doxyspotting.com/?p=129641
Poetry Slam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k8qf5FZ…
More Poetry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJ--Nr0_…
Howl, Ginsberg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-P2fILs…