Jump to content
IGNORED

Trump - hoće li biti impeachment ili 8 godina drugačijeg predsednikovanja?


radisa

Recommended Posts

1 Maddow metla Navarro

2 Cripple fight, Oliver dobija na brit akcenat

3 Brennan pravi upset, Morning Joe nije bio 100% into that

4 još jedan slab par, Lemon je previsoko seeded, Hayes je wishy-washy

 

5 Kristol samouvereno najavljuje pobedu svoje protivnice, ali fejluje u predviđanju i prolazi dalje

6 Chait dobija na iskustvo, optužuje Lizu za antisemitizam

7 Najneizvesniji par prve runde, sedam utakmica, Krugman bolje izvodi slobodna bacanja u finišu drugog produžetka

8 Boot, naravno. Fear the Fedora!

 

9 Baldwin komotno, još jedan sweep

10 Lorre prolazi, Kimmela izdaju puns u ključnom trenutku

11 Colbert sa najmonstruznijim zakucavanjem ove runde ("Putin ubedio Trumpa da se povuče iz ICBM treaty")

12 Avenatti je nisko sidovan, Behar potpuno zalutala u plej-of

 

13 Wittes na Brookings Institute autoritet, treći sweep

14 Milano, nošena podrškom najvatrenijih navijača

15 Glavoseča Griffin, ovog drugog ni ne znam

16 Tribe službenim rezultaom, De Niro senilno zaboravlja kad se igra

 

Link to comment

Colbert prolazi ovaj njegov deo kostura, prilično je tu loša konkurencija, većina iz njegovog bracketa je ili otpuštena ili ima probleme sa zakonom. Najtežeg rivala ima u prvoj rundi, neke stvari koje Dilejnian izgovori su stvarno wtf, ali ipak prolazi on to na široku narodnu masu koja mu skandira Stiven Stiven 

Link to comment

Jos je duuuugo do izbora a Tramp svake nedelje generise gluposti i skandale. To sto sada ima jednu optuzbu manje, ne znaci da ce mu se skinuti s vrata citava gomila ostalih stvari.

Polako, daleko je 2020, a Demokrate mozda izaberu boljeg kandidata nego prosli put. Ne bi bilo tako tesko.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

"We will continue to increase financial pressure."

 

Pussy :fantom: Zato se nad Venecelom širi, tu su mu "all options on the table", dok ovde izričito najavljuje oštri ekonomski rat protiv mrskog šiitskog terorizma...

Link to comment

 

Neki komentari:

 

Quote

@StarkGlenn
18m18 minutes ago
More
Replying to @BernieSanders
By paying these outrageous prices in the US, we are funding lower-cost drugs in single-payer pharma markets in other countries.


 

@nicospitsjive
14m14 minutes ago
More
Replying to @BernieSanders
I'm skipping 2 different vision-saving eye pressure medications, necessitated by steroid therapy for recurrent anterior uveitis, because it costs $100 for one+$50 for another every 2-wk course -- that's with GREAT insurance. 

#MedicareForAll

Johnny Rivas

@kinvore
19m19 minutes ago
More
Replying to @BernieSanders
I haven't been able to afford it for a long time. Now I'm slowly going blind and I can't afford to do anything about it. Best case scenario, Bernie wins and manages to immediately enact something, that's almost 2 years away and I don't think I have that much time. I'm scared.

Kristina Martha

@KristinaMarth10
20m20 minutes ago
More
Replying to @BernieSanders
But Illegals get it for free?

Wolverfan

@Wolverfan
55m55 minutes ago
More
Replying to @voxdotcom
Intermittent fasting is free, safe, and works wonders for type II diabetes. No drugs needed.

 

 

Zašto Amerikanci trpe ovo, što se ne bune? Kako je moguće da su Guns and Religion važnije stvari na izborima, jel toliko ispran mozak?

Link to comment

Pa bune se polako, ali za zdravstvo je nezgodno jer ljudima dolazi iz dupeta u glavu tek kad pogodi njih ili nekog njima bliskog. Pritom ti je džabe da se buniš kad si često prinuđen da glasaš za nekog korumpiranog skota koji ti vitla ispraznim idpol pričama dok tiho glasa protiv reforme zdravstva, coughreybookercough.

 

A ovom što predlaže post kao alternativu insulinu bolje da ne pišem šta bih radio.

Link to comment

prvi komentar je genijalan takodje, sve je to zbog pomaganja single payer pharma u drugim zemljama.

u zemlji u kojoj je jedna Elizabeth Holmes skupila milijarde na cistoj prevari.

 

Link to comment

South Dakota Sued Over New Laws Aimed at Preventing Another Standing Rock

 

 

Quote

Civil liberties organizations and activists are pushing back against new laws which criminalize protests and free speech related to pipeline projects.
 

In late March, a coalition of Native activists, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the ACLU of South Dakota filed suit against the State of South Dakota in an effort to repeal recently passed state laws aimed at curbing “rioters” during the upcoming construction of the TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline. South Dakota Senate Bill 189 and SB 190 have created controversy due to the potential to prevent peaceful and legal protest of environmental projects.
 

Senate Bill 189, also known as the Riot Boosting Act, grants the state the authority to sue any individual or organization for what they call“riot-boosting,” or encouraging and/or participating in acts of force or violence. SB 190 sets up funding to pay for state, county, and local police to combat potential pipeline protesters. This means that any individual who is attending a protest or rally against the Keystone Pipeline (or other future pipeline) could become subject to civil or criminal penalties, whether they engage in violence or not. The plaintiffs in the suit argue that the language of the bill is vague and does not clearly define what type of conduct or speech is considered “riot-boosting” or encouraging a riot.

 

Link to comment
  • James Marshall locked this topic
  • James Marshall unpinned this topic
  • Redoran unlocked this topic
×
×
  • Create New...