And that was before MAD Magazine - the "must read" publication for all children when I was growing up.
Posted on 04/24/2016 2:58:24 AM PDT by markomalley
I've started to see Breitbart host more and more pro-Cruz propaganda items on their sites. If they're going to continue posting anti-Trump lies and deception, they should go the way of "Right Scoop" and not be allowed to be posted on this site.
For example, this morning I come across a scurrilous piece by Dr Susan Berry, Donald Trump Foundation Donated $20K to Public School LGBT Activist Group GLSEN. Not saying that it's true, but even if it was, since when would Donald Trump have day-to-day management control on each and every donation made. Besides, it was 4 years ago. What relevance is this to today?
This just shows that it may not be a reliable news source any longer. I think articles from this source should be banned from FR.
Wait....what? Now I’m confused. Won’t it be too late by then? (more satire, perhaps?)
And that was before MAD Magazine - the "must read" publication for all children when I was growing up.
Hey, don’t leave. We need your perspective.
Good question:
:=”So if it gets to a second ballot and Cruz wins that, everybody here is going to support him ?
Just askin.”
I’d like an answer to that question also.
That is a perfect description of trump fanatics. Thanx.
I'm guessing we both know the answer to that question....
I no longer visit Breitbart because it is full of pop-ups and other garbage. It causes my computer to seize up and then I have to restart.
It’s worse than useless, imho.
It always amuses me when freepers point out that it is polite to ping the person you are discussing.
This comment was just directed to me: “You should be banned, you horrid little crust-covered POS.”
And you want to talk about politenss?
The relevance was, if you read the story was Trump’s recent comments about the NC law on the Today Show and his amended, clarified, more explained….whatever… follow up comments on Hannity.
It is true that the Donald J. Trump Foundation donated $20k to GLSEN. It was discussed on this tread.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3405377/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3405377/posts?page=219#219
The article doesn't mention that the donation came from a contestant on a Trump show won 20k to a charity of her choice and that awful gay rights one is the charity she picked. This issue was brought and debunked moths ago.
Trump did donate to LGBT. Do you know why? Do you recall a show called “The apprentice”? The winners chose who Trump was to donate to in their name. That was the rule of the show. Trump donated as a businessman and not as a private person or politician.
That is true and the article left that part out. And shame on them for leaving that out. But then Brietbart has gone way downhill since Andrew died. It’s become more like a blog than a site for investigative journalism. And I note the sloppiness in reporting not only in those articles deemed “anti-Trump” but also some anti-Cruz like this one (note original source was Brietbart):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3414857/posts?page=95#95
However, as I noted on the previous thread, on Celebrity Apprentice, the bulk of the monies donated to the contestant’s chosen charities came from NBC/the show’s producers. Trump directed his charity, the Donald J. Trump Foundation to make donations to the contestant’s charities over and above what the show did, it is supposed, as some have said, as a consolation prize for being “fired”.
My issue is that when one looks at what GLSEN is about and what they promote, it’s not really much different from NAMBLA. So I suppose if a Celebrity Apprentice contestant’s chosen “charity” was NAMBLA, that would be OK if Trump directed a donation to them. Or should not Donald be more discerning about who his foundation donates money to?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2002/05/07/critics-slam-gay-agenda-in-public-schools.html
The thing about social issues is that the President under our constitution has no power in that area. The ONLY way to fix the social issue cancer is to fix the Courts and education. Trump listed 3 judges for possible nomination. all were more Conservative then Roberts appeared before he betrayed us. His plan to give control of education back to the States is also in line with real world repairing of social issues.
It boggles the mind why so many Constitutional Conservatives belive Cruz can do anything without changing out the courts and education first. The only one who brought it up first and specifically targeted these Areas was Trump.
Moreover, because hes not beholden to the special interest, many of which are not American, he is more likely then not to do something in theses areas where Cruz would be blocked by his Special interest owners.
I cannot support this with hard data, but I suspect the reason Trump is waving theses liberal issues out there when he was very quite on them prior even berating the Gaystapo for asking, is because he is gearing to win the General with Conservatives, Moderates and Democrats with such a mandate they will not dare to try to impeach him as they have been making sounds about.
Reality check, Nothing objective says Hillary can beat Trump. All hard data says the exact opposite. Such as the demographics, turnout numbers, enthusiasm, etc. However all hard data says Cruz will be beat like a drum by pretty much anything on the Dem side.
People who think Cruz is going to win on any ballot are not too smart. The Establishment Delegates of #neverTrump are loyal to the party not Cruz. He will not have enough loyal to him ever to win.
And so it begins.
They also post straight news about Trump and positive articles about Trump. It seems to depend on the individual authors.
I couldn't agree more. 99.9% of the strife on this forum is due to mobys, paid ops, concern trolls, etc.
Are you sure you’re in the right forum? Leftists ban speech they don’t agree with. Conservatives turn the channel.
I do love it so when imploders like you know better than Jim how to run his website ... meow.
Is propping up Soviet Communists conservative - yes or no?
Dear Jack and Phil:
You're just on the wrong side this time. Suck it up.
You don’t really get satire, do you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.