Pelosi’s Husband
- Thread starter astonmartin708
- Start date
I'm just seeing their coverage of it, and they're searching for every way they can to obfuscate the effects of their constant lies.
Last edited:
You expected Tucker Carlson to come on and enter the vestibule of confession?
Also nice…NewsMax host
https://flip.it/Eah2jjNewsmax Host Deletes Bonkers Tweet Suggesting Pelosi Staged Attack
https://flip.it/Eah2jjNewsmax Host Deletes Bonkers Tweet Suggesting Pelosi Staged Attack
I don't buy that they believe a word of what they say. It's all absurdist theater. I'd like to hear their after show laugh track. The viewership is about 115k per night in primetime, so it's a small basket of deplorables that believe what they are fed. Hopefully they reached their zenith right after the election in 2020.
Last edited:
Alex Jones still makes money describing his grievances and hawking pills at the same time his attorney is in court defending him. Evidently grievances have become the profitable, new, addictive drug to push.
Last edited:
Then Musk shows his true colors, with his tweet of conspiracy theory story about Pelosi attack. He knows that is BS, but wants it's political effects to come to fruition, due to him tweeting it. He's a more intelligent & successful Trump.
Last edited:
Elon Musk is an extremely weird guy and an annoying twitter troll, but that's about where the comparisons between he and Trump end
Well that and his support for conservative leaning conspiracy theories that are false.
True dat. But 'mainstreamish' politicians in the democratic party aren't grabbing a hold of these false conspiracies in such #'s as the republicans are. Politicians supporting these things gives them much more breath than they had before.
I'm old enough to remember way back in 2020 when Dems, including Nancy, propped up the conspiracy theory that Trump was going to steal the election with the post office. It was in major news publications. Completely mainstreamed. It's one of the funnier ones.
Last edited:
Yeah I'm just so far beyond this the other team is worse than my team stuff. There are shades of gray sure, but every bad thing one side does the other side does at least nearly as bad. Individual acts should always be condemned by all sides, but I just don't have the patience for the people that still believe on these political topics they're on the side of right and good and fighting the evil people.
Still doesn't seem like the same #'s of republicans are grabbing a hold of the conspiracy theories. Besides, weren't those two being voiced as suspicions, not things like 'the furries are in schools now, and litter boxes are being used.', bs?(as an example) You are right though, it all should be condemned.
Hillary absolutely said they 2016 election was stolen from her. I do miss the days where Americans weren’t so polarized. Social media, national media sites who openly support one party or the other, etc… all have contributed to the “other side is pure evil” way of thinking. More politicians need to take the high road instead of looking for political gain from every event. Violence should always be condemned. Rhetoric needs to be dialed down.
Yeah, I was talking bout her talking bout 2024 in my remark.
I think you can see this in a hyperextended manner, for the Dr Oz and Fetterman race. Dr Oz is not making statements about his stroke, but allows them from his campaign.
If this election happened in 2012/14, I honestly don't believe he would have let his campaign make remarks about his stroke. All civility from both sides has gone out the window from 2016 & onwards.
Not sure I agree with this. Fetterman is making statements about his stroke promising he will be better by January. If you watched the debate between the two it was fairly obvious that Fetterman currently is mentally challenged. I’m not sure I would make comments directly about the stroke but saying he is currently not mentally fit to serve as a Senator is certainly appropriate and probably fair. I’m not even sure mentioning the stroke is off limits either since Fettermen is talking about it and promising mental improvement.
The Dems were talking about Reagan’s diminished mental capacity 40 years ago. They were likely correct btw and I saw nothing wrong with them at the time.
Having gone through stroke recovery, I am seeing those promises as not that far fetched. He is already in much better shape than I was a year or two after the stroke. That he is having difficulty with things like aphasia, speech impediments, and hearing difficulty,(and quick translations between the three problems) causes him problems in public settings, but does not inhibit him from making rational and reasoned decisions when voting on a bill. I don't advocate him as a candidate.(Some of his views on things like fracing cause me to have problems with him.)
As a recovered stroke victim though, I feel fairly confident this won't inhibit him in the same ways as people are assuming from seeing him in a debate setting. The next few months will see him recover at a strong pace, just as much as he has recovered in the last five months. Recovery doesn't slow down until you hit year 2 to 3 after a stroke. At that point his recovery becomes more gradual.
And I know that Dr Oz knows all these things, at cause that it falls within his specialty. That's why I think he would be much less likely to allow his campaign to make these criticisms, and would have at least tamped them down some before 2016. If he were not running against him, his stated views on his possible recovery would be much more accepting, if asked.
I saw the problems as being much more serious for instance for Gabby Giffords.(Similar stroke like problems from being shot.)
Last edited:
I have been very bothered by Fetterman's situation, and how he was looked at after that debate. I want to get on my soap box for a minute longer. The problems he is having are much more superficial in nature, and cause difficulties in public speaking situations. And they are problems that can be gotten past when you are in a situation where there is a conversation between a few individuals.(For instance congressmen, lobbyists etc.) His problems are generally not cognitive in nature. My problems in the first five years(especially years 0-2) were much more cognitive in nature. I had to make recovery in these areas which don't seem to be his main problems.
I found an article which outlined a scale for disabilities which I can't find now. So I am going to put it in one word terms, and hopefully won't be that far off. He was placed in a lesser pronounced category 3 to a heavily pronounced category 4 by his doctors. Meaning he was in the transition between levels, and in a few months(3-6), he would move more definitively into category 4. At level 4 and 5, especially when your disabilities are not primarily cognitive in nature, this is something you can work around. His disabilities might cause him a slight problem in his first few months, but the more he is pushing himself mentally, the quicker he will recover. I would doubt he has any serious problems 3 or 4 months after his term had started.
1. Severe
2. Moderately Severe
3. Moderate
4. Partial
5. Mild
6. No disability
Stepping off soap box, after this excerpt...
Here is a doctor being interviewed with this as a specialty.(Dr Khullar)
...KHULLAR: So there's no question that he's recovered significantly over the past four or five months since he had the stroke. But, you know, as was obvious to anyone watching the debate yesterday and who've seen him on the campaign trail over the past couple of weeks, he still has some deficits. He has difficulty finding the right word or pronouncing the right word. And he also has auditory processing issues. And so he's not able to always hear words as clearly as he used to be able to. And he uses closed captioning to kind of read the words and then respond as he can.
CHANG: Right. But just to be clear, in terms of his, like, cognitive abilities, his ability to think, to make decisions, those abilities don't seem to be impaired, right?
KHULLAR: Yeah. As a doctor, you know, you never want to weigh in on someone that you haven't personally examined. But as far as we can tell, his intellectual abilities remain intact...
I found an article which outlined a scale for disabilities which I can't find now. So I am going to put it in one word terms, and hopefully won't be that far off. He was placed in a lesser pronounced category 3 to a heavily pronounced category 4 by his doctors. Meaning he was in the transition between levels, and in a few months(3-6), he would move more definitively into category 4. At level 4 and 5, especially when your disabilities are not primarily cognitive in nature, this is something you can work around. His disabilities might cause him a slight problem in his first few months, but the more he is pushing himself mentally, the quicker he will recover. I would doubt he has any serious problems 3 or 4 months after his term had started.
1. Severe
2. Moderately Severe
3. Moderate
4. Partial
5. Mild
6. No disability
Stepping off soap box, after this excerpt...
Here is a doctor being interviewed with this as a specialty.(Dr Khullar)
...KHULLAR: So there's no question that he's recovered significantly over the past four or five months since he had the stroke. But, you know, as was obvious to anyone watching the debate yesterday and who've seen him on the campaign trail over the past couple of weeks, he still has some deficits. He has difficulty finding the right word or pronouncing the right word. And he also has auditory processing issues. And so he's not able to always hear words as clearly as he used to be able to. And he uses closed captioning to kind of read the words and then respond as he can.
CHANG: Right. But just to be clear, in terms of his, like, cognitive abilities, his ability to think, to make decisions, those abilities don't seem to be impaired, right?
KHULLAR: Yeah. As a doctor, you know, you never want to weigh in on someone that you haven't personally examined. But as far as we can tell, his intellectual abilities remain intact...
Last edited:
The real problem with Fetterman is that he didn’t completely absorb his twin in the womb and now it’s sticking out of his neck
I think he looks cyclopsy. Would have not been out of place in the cast of Clash of the Titans.
I just heard a conservative coworker of mine telling another coworker who hadn’t followed the story about the “speculation“ that the man who attacked Pelosi was his gay lover. I was in a meeting or i would have directed them both to the court filings which charged the attacker and made no mention of any such suspicion, and the attacker‘s own admissions while being interrogated would have seemed to contradict.
Which he… tried…. to do…. By both delaying mail ballot deliveries and complaining about ballots not being processed before / by Election Day???
I honestly don’t see how conspiracy theories regarding a man who was just beaten with a hammer (who’s attacker was accusing a public representative of supporting the molestation of minors) are akin to supposing that a president who we know tried every trick available to him including suggesting a March on the Capitol to overturn an election he knew wasn’t stolen from him, might have directed an employee / appointee of his to take actions to finagle how ballots were handled during the election cycle.
Those are two different levels of logical leaps, and when you actually ask yourself Qui Bono… one seems much more plausible.
Self induced hammer blows, yeah, that's it. Despite the fact that the police witnessed it. I hope you self induce a hammer blow. How do you like that for humor.
well after this attack, i do think that Congress needs to pass some hammer control legislation.
Ever think that there actually a chance that he would have been shot and died if it had happened in an open carry state?
Not sure I understand the question. A mentally ill homeless man in the country illegally broke into a house in the middle of the night. Why would open carry have anything to do with this? How could someone in the country illegally even get an open carry license?
in some states you don’t need a license to open carry, and that’s certainly something that many GOP voters would like to get to.
….but someone in this country illegally can’t buy a gun. Not sure I see the logic in this particular case. Furthermore, this guy broke into the house in the middle of the night. Not following here.
Maybe he could have claimed a gun in the lost & found basket.
Similar threads
