Win uses cookies necessary for site functionality, as well as for personalization. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies as described in our Privacy Policy.
Honestly, thanks to nonsense like this, redpilling has never been easier. All I have to do is have someone pull up an article, and I can easily show them how the headline is lying straight to their face about what the referenced tweet explicitly says.
The GSA is an independent agency and the release explicitly states that the decision was neither positively nor negatively influenced by anyone connected with the White House. It does require a bit of basic reading comprehension to understand. Not everyone is capable of getting it.
He did mention the attacks against her and her safety. He doesn't have to approve or oppose it or even acknowledge it, the office isn't under his control at all.
I'm sorry, I know you mean well but we are literally becoming NPCs. The cognitive dissonance in our side is abysmal.
, in the best interest of our Country, I am recommending that Emily and her team do what needs to be done with regard to initial protocols, and have told my team to do the same.
What part of "I am recommending [the transition]" do you not understand?
Trump has cucked out, at least in this occasion. A chick gets some threats and suddenly Trump is recommending the transition?
"As stated, because of recent developments involving legal challenges and certifications of election results, I have determined that you may access the post-election resources and services described in Section 3 of the Act upon request. The actual winner of the presidential election will be determined by the electoral process detailed in the Constitution."
And that's just some of her letter, read it your self. You're the one sounding like an NPC. Trump has not cucked out, she started the process on her own and he is going to have his team match her protocols AS stated in the GSA. This isn't a concession or the start of one.
Either way this isn't worth arguing about with you. Time will tell and you're free to sit here and doom until someone bans you.
Nope. Read thr document.
Also Biden has to name any conflicts of interest before he can receive funding AND it still notes that he may not ultimately be president even in tbe text about opening transition funds to him.
Absolutely, the BBC is a joke. It was actually the BBC that was the most effective redpill for my mom, so I owe the BBC that much. BBC wrote an article about a European couple who did nothing but lie about how they were treated by Taiwan towards the official beginning of covid in March. BBC didn't even contact anyone in Taiwan before publishing the story. My mom was astonished at the BBC (e.g., their fact-checking, lack of apology, etc.). I reminded my mom that I had been telling her that most if not all mainstream media has been like this for years. It finally sunk in for her once a lie was published about something she knew about, like with most people I assume. But anyway, I don't think the BBC is any worse than the others though.
I'm sure it is, just like the other mainstream media. Seems to go hand in hand with being pro-China. In the case I was describing above, the BBC published a hit piece on Taiwan using lies from the European couple.
I can't tell you how many times I've attempted to tone down the RT Wikipedia article and harshen the BBC article. But the bias is everywhere, even on youtube. A big branding below RT saying that RT is Russian state funded, but BBC is just a 'British public broadcaster'. The difference between RT and BBC on bias is clear as day. RT just monotonously reports events to inform people of factual occurrences. BBC writes a targeted propaganda campaign to have an effect on the audience. Wikipedia is just another propaganda organisation by extension of the brainwashed people who edit it. I've tried to edit the Sidney powell article because it said 'she made false allegations' and cited media organisation fact checkers. I tried to change it to 'she made allegations' because THEY DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE ALLEGATIONS ARE FALSE OR NOT SO IT ISN'T NEUTRAL LANGUAGE WHEN WIKIPEDIA IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE A NEUTRAL LANGUAGE POLICY.. NOWHERE WOULD THIS HAPPEN ON ANY NON POLITICAL SUBJECT FIELD OR AN ARTICLE ABOUT A CONFLICT IN A COUNTRY THE WEST HAD NO AGENDA WITH. NEVER
Do not be afraid of what to say. Tell the truth even if people think it is unsavory. They will allways tell lies about you so you may as well stick with your convictions
I called it here that they would do this.
They didn't go as far as I expected (i figured they would straight up lie and say he conceded to demoralize his supporters), but this is essentially the same thing.
This is a totally expected headline
Honestly, thanks to nonsense like this, redpilling has never been easier. All I have to do is have someone pull up an article, and I can easily show them how the headline is lying straight to their face about what the referenced tweet explicitly says.
This headline is 100% true. Trump has authorized the beginning of the transition, and even indicated that threats of violence against us work.
The GSA is an independent agency and the release explicitly states that the decision was neither positively nor negatively influenced by anyone connected with the White House. It does require a bit of basic reading comprehension to understand. Not everyone is capable of getting it.
u/aparition42 u/AppalachianTactical u/Fluffy_Indigo
Trump has approved the GSA decision with his tweet.
If Trump opposed the transition, he would have attacked Emily or said she was forced.
He did mention the attacks against her and her safety. He doesn't have to approve or oppose it or even acknowledge it, the office isn't under his control at all.
I'm sorry, I know you mean well but we are literally becoming NPCs. The cognitive dissonance in our side is abysmal.
What part of "I am recommending [the transition]" do you not understand?
Trump has cucked out, at least in this occasion. A chick gets some threats and suddenly Trump is recommending the transition?
"As stated, because of recent developments involving legal challenges and certifications of election results, I have determined that you may access the post-election resources and services described in Section 3 of the Act upon request. The actual winner of the presidential election will be determined by the electoral process detailed in the Constitution."
And that's just some of her letter, read it your self. You're the one sounding like an NPC. Trump has not cucked out, she started the process on her own and he is going to have his team match her protocols AS stated in the GSA. This isn't a concession or the start of one.
Either way this isn't worth arguing about with you. Time will tell and you're free to sit here and doom until someone bans you.
You keep ignoring that Trump used the word "recommending". He didn't merely acknowledge the GSA decision. He supported it
You know you can't win the argument so you resort to threats and attempting to silence me. As I said, you're becoming an NPC.
She was getting death threats. Pretty sure his campaign have since said they are not conceding regarding this.
Nope. Read thr document. Also Biden has to name any conflicts of interest before he can receive funding AND it still notes that he may not ultimately be president even in tbe text about opening transition funds to him.
Time to wake up pede and stop swallowing those msm pills, spit them out.
Absolutely, the BBC is a joke. It was actually the BBC that was the most effective redpill for my mom, so I owe the BBC that much. BBC wrote an article about a European couple who did nothing but lie about how they were treated by Taiwan towards the official beginning of covid in March. BBC didn't even contact anyone in Taiwan before publishing the story. My mom was astonished at the BBC (e.g., their fact-checking, lack of apology, etc.). I reminded my mom that I had been telling her that most if not all mainstream media has been like this for years. It finally sunk in for her once a lie was published about something she knew about, like with most people I assume. But anyway, I don't think the BBC is any worse than the others though.
BBC is openly anti white.
They literally break the law to discriminate against white people
I'm sure it is, just like the other mainstream media. Seems to go hand in hand with being pro-China. In the case I was describing above, the BBC published a hit piece on Taiwan using lies from the European couple.
FUCKING FAKE NEWS BBC!
Can't the limey BBC get ANYTHING right?
It can source children for you if you are a wealthy pedo. It gets that right.
I can't tell you how many times I've attempted to tone down the RT Wikipedia article and harshen the BBC article. But the bias is everywhere, even on youtube. A big branding below RT saying that RT is Russian state funded, but BBC is just a 'British public broadcaster'. The difference between RT and BBC on bias is clear as day. RT just monotonously reports events to inform people of factual occurrences. BBC writes a targeted propaganda campaign to have an effect on the audience. Wikipedia is just another propaganda organisation by extension of the brainwashed people who edit it. I've tried to edit the Sidney powell article because it said 'she made false allegations' and cited media organisation fact checkers. I tried to change it to 'she made allegations' because THEY DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE ALLEGATIONS ARE FALSE OR NOT SO IT ISN'T NEUTRAL LANGUAGE WHEN WIKIPEDIA IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE A NEUTRAL LANGUAGE POLICY.. NOWHERE WOULD THIS HAPPEN ON ANY NON POLITICAL SUBJECT FIELD OR AN ARTICLE ABOUT A CONFLICT IN A COUNTRY THE WEST HAD NO AGENDA WITH. NEVER
The difference is that RT is not racist, while the BBC is openly anti white.
They literally break the law to discriminate against white people
BBC should stick to porn, journalism clearly isn't their strong suit 🤭
Kek!
MY BBC is no joke! Joe can barely take it!
Username checks out.
The international media are shilling super hard right now; it’s definitely not just cucked UK news trying to push this garbage.
We stopped caring what the British thought hundreds of years ago. If they want to misinform their own viewers/readers, who cares?
heh heh heh
1776 said what?
AMEN
According to Barry, Big mike's bbc ain't no joke
Do not be afraid of what to say. Tell the truth even if people think it is unsavory. They will allways tell lies about you so you may as well stick with your convictions
I called it here that they would do this. They didn't go as far as I expected (i figured they would straight up lie and say he conceded to demoralize his supporters), but this is essentially the same thing.
Fuck off Brits!
We don't wanna have to Fuck You Up . . .
AGAIN!