Ahahaha, you just don't stop. Female (appointed by male, awarded by male, previously relationship with male), may have been involved, so it was the Females that did the thing.
At least wait till all the information is out before you start declaring victory. If you're right, you're right. But you look foolish jumping the gun, either way.
I'm sorry, but missing a rooftop with clear sight line and ignoring concern from the public about it screams malice.
She almost certainly wasn't onsite herself. Plenty of highly trained men were. If SS agents were in on it, it almost certainly goes higher than the SS itself. She may have been in on it, but she wasn't the lead. Come on.
Look, we've had this discussion multiple times. I don't dislike you, I think you have some very valid points, but you always, always, always take it to absurd lengths and torpedo your own cause.
If this was a deep state hit, were women involved? Statistically, likely? Were women pulling the strings? Potentially, but nowhere near as likely, and definitely not a certainty. Your unwavering confidence that it's always women just doesn't work.
I never said the men were innocent. I haven't even watched the video. His security detail could have been the Israeli army for all I know. I've just been reading what reportedly happened, and the common theme is Secret Service leadership did not act when they should have. Didn't secure the perimeter, didn't send extra security when the campaign asked, didn't listen to public warnings.
The last two attempted assassinations of President Trump were both radfems, it wasn't a big stretch to call #3. First one was a Canadian who got busted trying to cross the border with a bag full of guns, and sent poison to the WH. Second was the heavily connected feminist woman who planned to kill him in the Bronx but everyone saw her schizo posting on the day. Honestly, my money was on her trying again, because Secret Service never detained her (this makes a lot more sense in hindsight.)
Please don't ban Imp again, or at least not for months like his last ban. By starting with the conclusion every single time and working backwards, he makes it clear how ridiculous identity politics can get. If anything, he helps all the rest of us think through situations individually and not in terms of stereotypes...if only because, in the back of our minds, we have a little voice saying "That reflex assumption you just made sounds a bit like Imp".
Yeah, sure, a bit. I get that argument. However, I can't make the dude the exception to the rules forever, especially when he knows he can change the comment to rescind the ban, and openly refuses.
https://x.com/BritMartinez/status/1812272885513465886
Ahahaha, you just don't stop. Female (appointed by male, awarded by male, previously relationship with male), may have been involved, so it was the Females that did the thing.
At least wait till all the information is out before you start declaring victory. If you're right, you're right. But you look foolish jumping the gun, either way.
At the very least he's not claiming how this woman is a slut for not giving birth in her teens. Man those pajeets were annoying
Can't argue with that. He's still being annoying and incorrect, though.
I saw those posts a couple of times. I thought it was some bizarre parody of me at first.
Now, I think it's either Fed or leftist journalist.
Which reminds me, don't say anything violent because you know the leftist scum are going to be on right wing pages trying to both sides this.
Who cares?
Yeah pajeet, we see you.
If he did that then he would never be able to declare victory.
Because the information will never come out?
I mean, I've been waiting months to be vindicated on Audrey Hale.
Closest we've come is an autopsy that doesn't show any of the typical signs of testosterone exposure.
Jumping the gun?
I'm sorry, but missing a rooftop with clear sight line and ignoring concern from the public about it screams malice.
Quota hire might be the popular line, but I've always said the feminist hires are malicious rather than incompetent.
Edit:
Laura Loomer is saying the shooter used a fucking ladder.
I'm sorry but if you miss something that obvious, you're not security, you're making a Monty Python sketch.
She almost certainly wasn't onsite herself. Plenty of highly trained men were. If SS agents were in on it, it almost certainly goes higher than the SS itself. She may have been in on it, but she wasn't the lead. Come on.
Look, we've had this discussion multiple times. I don't dislike you, I think you have some very valid points, but you always, always, always take it to absurd lengths and torpedo your own cause.
If this was a deep state hit, were women involved? Statistically, likely? Were women pulling the strings? Potentially, but nowhere near as likely, and definitely not a certainty. Your unwavering confidence that it's always women just doesn't work.
I never said she was.
I never said the men were innocent. I haven't even watched the video. His security detail could have been the Israeli army for all I know. I've just been reading what reportedly happened, and the common theme is Secret Service leadership did not act when they should have. Didn't secure the perimeter, didn't send extra security when the campaign asked, didn't listen to public warnings.
The last two attempted assassinations of President Trump were both radfems, it wasn't a big stretch to call #3. First one was a Canadian who got busted trying to cross the border with a bag full of guns, and sent poison to the WH. Second was the heavily connected feminist woman who planned to kill him in the Bronx but everyone saw her schizo posting on the day. Honestly, my money was on her trying again, because Secret Service never detained her (this makes a lot more sense in hindsight.)
Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
I have no idea what "female backed" is supposed to mean, but this doesn't appear to be a R16 violation.
Please don't ban Imp again, or at least not for months like his last ban. By starting with the conclusion every single time and working backwards, he makes it clear how ridiculous identity politics can get. If anything, he helps all the rest of us think through situations individually and not in terms of stereotypes...if only because, in the back of our minds, we have a little voice saying "That reflex assumption you just made sounds a bit like Imp".
Yeah, sure, a bit. I get that argument. However, I can't make the dude the exception to the rules forever, especially when he knows he can change the comment to rescind the ban, and openly refuses.