There are many more accurate words for that behavior. "Grifter" fits her perfectly. "Whore" doesn't.
How is Kassam, Brueswitz and Loomer in any way associated with the writing of this piece on Gonzalez?
How is Trump 2024 in any way associated with the writing of this piece on Gonzalez?
Breitbart is not at all in the tank for Trump, it is far more neocon than that now.
Breitbart editors are FAR more motivated by Israel and "fighting antisemitism" than they are for anything else.
You clearly have literally NO IDEA who and what you are talking about. I have direct experience with Breitbart. You can't just fucking pull your de Simp lies out of your De Simp ass and pass them over on me. I literally know better.
Also, De Santis' numbers are in fucking free fall. Bullshitters like you are not helping him reverse that steep descent. Quite the opposite.
Nobody at Breitbart even speaks to Raheem Kassam or Steve Bannon. Lots of bad blood from when both were editors there and left.
You have no fucking idea what you are talking about, De Simp.
You are literally inventing things out of thin air and claiming they are fact.
YOU are exactly why De Santis has no chance. You are typical of the disastrous people he has "influencing" for him. Disingenuous liars who are unpleasant to be around to boot.
Go back and tell your boss Christina, or Karl, or whoever's running that shitshow.
Who did Owens whore around with? She's only had one boyfriend since coming on the scene and she's married to him now.
Since when is Breitbart "The Trump Campaign"?
Also, Candace Owens (who he terms "The Negress") is a De Simp just like Gonzalez.
Finally, that article has at least 10 examples in his own words, so it's not exactly a "smear".
They certainly did, didn't they? I'm still amazed at the Time magazine article by Molly Ball which detailed much (not all) of it:
Jeb!'s endorsement is one of the very worst endorsements possible. Right up there with being endorsed by Paul Ryan. To be endorsed by Jeb! is to lose populists everywhere.
Caitlyn's endorsement is relatively meaningless either way. It won't help, but it won't hinder either.
They never fired him. They removed him from air, barred him from company email, but kept paying him. The idea was to keep him silent through 2024 because he was leaning too far Trumpwards and Fox is pushing De Santis.
The conflict now is over whether it was him or them who first breached the contract. They are trying to enforce a non-compete, but apparently Twitter was never listed as a "competitor" so it looks like they've fucked up their silencing gambit entirely.
This is a satire site.
Someone ought to tell that to the Celts.
All A-H cares about is an high ESG score.
A big corporation cares mainly about government and regulations over profits.
A low ESG score means the government will be ON you and hunt you as if as if you were Trump, but a high ESG score means they will breezily ignore you as if you were Epstein. Or Clinton. Or Biden.
No. Be straight and true. Like an arrow.
I am certain that that you have now put me on a De Santis watchlist for merely disagreeing with you, De Santis person.
Also, I would contend that YOU are the cultist, De Santist, not me.
You are willing to go down with the obviously sinking De Santis ship.
This is why I earlier said that you should join the Democrat Party, De Santist.
The money for nothing and the dicks for free.
You sound very much like the multimillion Babylon Bee's CEO Seth Dillon on his trainwreck suicide mission twitter space in which he imploded himself for De Santis.
Poor Babylon Bee writers. Their bidness man has let them down. All for De Santis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xb3bM2T8YAU&t=8565s&ab_channel=NapTown
Let's take your De Santis-issued talking point nonsense one by one, shall we?
To Your Point 1:
----------"I have always said that fraud played a role in 2020. You exaggerate that role and make it sound like some type of magical fraud changed the results in every state when in reality, it was merely suspicious ballots which were counted thanks to mail in balloting laws being changed. This only made a marginal difference in three states but it was decisive in tipping the electoral college victory to Biden. The key issue is that we are not in 2020 anymore."---------
'Magical fraud'? Oh, sorry - do you mean my reference to your "Fortification" of the 2020 election?: Time Magazine The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election by Molly Ball https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/
Not at all "magical". The Democrats thoroughly and proudly detail (in the Time Magazine article of February 5 2021) some of the worst election corruption the West has ever seen, and then attempt to paper over that minor crack by re-terming your "corruption" as "election fortification".
There are no "marginal differences" when mass election fraud is at play. I know you RNC/De Santis Campaign people want to convince us all of this, but the historical numbers still stand in the way of your false rhetoric. (Yes, some of us still read actual history.)
To Your Point 2:
---------"The Trump of 2024 is quite weaker than the Trump of 2020. He no longer has incumbency advantage and he has accrued much more baggage via Stop the Steal, J6 and Operation Warp speed. No way in hell that in 2024, Trump outperforms what he officially received in 2020." -------
"Quite weaker"? Interesting usage of (apparently) English words. Also, No. He's the only President who appears to have de-aged rather than withered and greyed over his tenure. Nonsense argument. Trump, last I checked, is up over 30 points over De Santis. Also I see that you believe that the government was correct in prosecuting J6 when The Antifa May Insurrection had FAR more police officers injured (160, at the last count), genuinely threatened a seat of American power (the White House itself) and even a burned a church thrown in - with zero prosecutions. But as a De Santis person I suppose you have no idea what I'm talking about, do you?
Further, if there is "no way in hell" that Trump can win in 2024, why are all the expected powers aligning against him still? If he "can't win", then why not let him fail humiliatingly? After all, you say the voters are against him, yes? You say there is "No way he can win", yes? Then let him publicly fall down as humiliatingly as Biden does in nearly every other public appearance. As Biden did only a few hours ago, even.
You also say De Santis CAN win, when De Santis is at my last check over 30 points behind Trump.
I say that you are WORRIED that Trump CAN win, and yet, as a corrupt NeoCon, are fighting hard against truth (as ever).
To Your Point 3:
--------"You think by saying the election was stolen, he is owed a re-do and that you can coronate him again without fighting for the nomination."--------
I never said he was owed anything. I said you De Santis people and your DNC comrades are AFRAID that he will win a third term, and so are happy to assent to DNC/RNC corruption of ballots in order to avoid it.
To Your Point 4:
---------"I have made it clear on many different occasions that I prefer DeSantis for 2024 because of Trump's fatal mistakes during COVID and that due to the baggage Trump has accrued, he has a miniscule chance of winning 2024. Winning 2024 is much more important than the OnlyTrumpers yearning for Trump getting some meaningless revenge."--------
I KNEW IT! I FUCKING KNEW IT! Yes, I spotted you earlier as a De Santis supporter, happy with the fraud of 2020 so long as you got What You Want, and happy with whatever government corruption will be thrown at Trump and his supporters right now, so long as You Get What You Want. Just relent and finally join the Democrat Party, as I'm sure you've often been tempted to do. The money is easier and more plentiful.
To Your Point 5/Addendum:
--------- "Winning 2024 is much more important than the OnlyTrumpers yearning for Trump getting some meaningless revenge. Edit added more info: Oh yeah btw the Dems are persecuting Trump not because they are afraid of him winning but because by persecuting him, the dumb people in the GOP base will rally around him and nominate him again. The Dems want to win so they would prefer to run against the weakest candidate: Trump."---------
Good God, man. Upthread, I've explained why Trump CAN win, NeoCon/Leftist/De Santis shill, rather more clearly than you have managed to garble out why he "Trump must lose" using your De Santis talking points.
You are an absolute nonsense person. Completely unserious. I hope De Santis is paying you very handsomely for your efforts.
While I am heartened to see De Santis hiring Dunning-Kruger Syndrome victims such as yourself as part of his diversity and inclusion outreach, it's still TRUMP 2024, and it's not even close.
As I said, ALL U.S. VOTING RECORDS BROKEN in 2020, after Biden stayed home 90% of the time, only to emerge to speak to groups of tens of people.
He only had tens of individuals come out for him on the rare occasions he deigned us with his presence, but somehow got 10 more million votes than the Democrats' own God Barack Obama? Is that what you would have us believe?
It's patently obvious nonsense, and no one with an IQ over 80 actually believes it.
Yes, there are many who are happy in the knowledge that the fraud successfully dislodged Trump, such as the entire US permanent gov't, the DNC, 70%-80% of the Democrat voting base, the leadership of the corrupt GOP, and the De Santis people, but even those who celebrate the results of the fraud - sorry, "fortification" - do not actually believe that Biden won legitimately.
Of course they all still loudly proclaim, as you do, that the success of the Biden campaign is not evidence of fraud but instead means "Trump can't win". But they also all know that Trump already won twice. That's why they are all united in so haphazardly, desperately, clumsily and corruptly trying to keep him from running, much less winning, a third time.
They know he was robbed of the election, they also know he is the most investigated politician in Western history, and they know they can't find much wrongdoing by him. Yet they are willing to destroy the reputation of the United States itself in order to lower it to the sort of banana republic which would lock him up on spurious charges merely for daring to run.
They would not be going to these lengths unless they knew that Trump had already won twice and can win again.
No.
I think you'll find that the very idea that Biden somehow legitimately "won" 81 million votes, breaking all records and besting Obama himself by 10 million, is preposterous on its face.
In the same race Trump broke records for the most votes any Presidential incumbent has ever added to his original term's vote numbers.
Only Totalitarian Leftists and anti-Trump Neocons are still spouting the by now very obvious lie that Biden "won legitimately".
De Santis campaign's Christina Pushaw (who helped to get Zelensky elected while working in Ukraine) made some comment or accusation and he responded "What is your fucking problem?"
The Seth, the CEO of the BEE, white knighted for Pushaw almost immediately, and publicly fired Wax when a private phone call would have made all involved look far better.
Then seth went on twitter spaces and was demolished, admitted to having taken money from De Santis, and used the words "we" when describing De Santis supporters and "You" when describing Trump supporters.
@DDCobra did an excellent breakdown of the spaces trainwreck a few nights ago on YT.
For anyone who wants to hear the numbers of what actual Britons think, this week's Spectator interview with Matt Goodwin hits statistic after statistic after statistic.
HIGHLY recommended:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xx5GTtFbgp8&ab_channel=TheSpectator
I notice the FT studiously fails to ask the most salient questions for the British population:
"Would you like to have a Muslim family next door?" Or, "Would you like to have a Roma family next door?"
In America, the answers would be, basically, "Whatever."
In Britain, if freedom of speech were actually allowed, the answers would be Hard NO across the board.
All the poll questions are obviously steered to prove the point the pollsters want to fake. Yes Britain is not a place riled about abortion, or, despite what you may have heard, riled about race. But ideological differences light them up - whether the respondants would admit to that (at risk of being jailed) or not. Britian is still a culturally conservative country.
By the way, Muslim respondants would answer the question "Would you like to live next to a Christian family?" with a hard NO as well.
Tony Blair single-handedly destroyed what was once a peaceful and beautiful country.
Exactly. De Santis's online defenders are indistinguishable from lecturing, finger wagging Leftists. Not a shred of humor among them. They do De Santis absolutely no favors.
Why not just go for full-on Burqas? That's what, essentially, they are claiming they need. Also has the added benefit of there looming a potential "hate crime" accusation to be launched at anyone who so much as looks at them the wrong way.
"Whoring" is selling sex for money. Get a dictionary.