Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

It's rather curious actually...seeing that a left leaning philosophy can really only thrive in places that don't allow opposing viewpoints space to be heard.

I'm sure there a very good reason why Reddit can't let conservative poster post opinions. Very good reason indeed.
Even worse, T_D where you get very mild boomer & highschool young republican type views.

Its like constantly claiming you can stand down wolves in the wild yet unable to handle a rodent infection in your kitchen.
 
I feel like this is a complete lie made by a person who claimed to be his doctor given these are also the same idiots who tried to have a "psychologist" analyze him with no data or meeting with him at all.
And in fact it is a lie, just not in the way you think. If you read the quote, the guy never says they "hid" it, just that it was put in. That doesn't automatically imply hidden, but that's how the headline is written. The media wanted to say it was hidden because that makes him look worse. You guys know how this works already. They always lie by deliberately misinterpreting things people say or do. It's entirely possible for this to be truthful, but rewritten into an attack.
 
Yeah, that's what happens to quarantined subs.
Nah even pre-quarantine they created /r/popular and made that the new default sorting method entirely so T_D threads wouldn't show up in /r/all and be visible to unregistered users. I vaguely recall hearing they were removed from /r/all pre-quarantine as well, but I'm not sure if that is actually what happened or if the previous actions were just summarized as "removed from /r/all", for simplicity's sake.
 
Didn't they eventually just straight up make it not appear on the site unless you specifically searched for it or were already subbed to it?

They quarantined the sub after some posts and comments allegedly were threatening cops in Oregon that were being told by the governor to round up and arrest any Republican state congress members that refused to show up for a vote. Some have said this was a false flag carried out by subs like ChapoTrapHouse and AgainstHateSubreddits to get The_Donald either banned or quarantined but the plan was successful if it did indeed happen.

And they did change the way upvoted and stickied posts work too because the sub was frequently in top posts across the entire the site which seemingly angered the top brass at Reddit. Also there was a controversy where Steve Huffman, aka Spez, was editing comments made by The_Donald users because people on the sub were making fun of him and it pissed him off.
 
Last edited:
I honestly find some of the stuff r/The_Donald cult like. That said, I think trying to puppet the place is even more skeevy than straight up shutting it down.
Looking at it from a practical mindset, isn't it a better idea to keep those posters "contained" (out of sight, out of mind)?

Actively fucking with how the subreddit operates or shutting it down will cause the "wrongthinkers" to spread out across Reddit.
 
Looking at it from a practical mindset, isn't it a better idea to keep those posters "contained" (out of sight, out of mind)?

Actively fucking with how the subreddit operates or shutting it down will cause the "wrongthinkers" to spread out across Reddit.
That's exactly their mindset, and it was important to shut them off in the corner while their ideas were still virile because they represent at least half of the website's userbase if not more. /r/the_donald is the most active sub in terms of user engagement out of any subreddit, and by any neutral measure they would be made a default sub.

Reddit even changed their default sub policy to ban political subreddits so they wouldn't be able to say they were being shut out of the process.
 
That's exactly their mindset, and it was important to shut them off in the corner while their ideas were still virile because they represent at least half of the website's userbase if not more. /r/the_donald is the most active sub in terms of user engagement out of any subreddit, and by any neutral measure they would be made a default sub.

Reddit even changed their default sub policy to ban political subreddits so they wouldn't be able to say they were being shut out of the process.
despite this, it took so long for r/atheism to be taken off as a default sub despite nobody liking it.
 
Nah even pre-quarantine they created /r/popular and made that the new default sorting method entirely so T_D threads wouldn't show up in /r/all and be visible to unregistered users. I vaguely recall hearing they were removed from /r/all pre-quarantine as well, but I'm not sure if that is actually what happened or if the previous actions were just summarized as "removed from /r/all", for simplicity's sake.
Naturally nothing regarding the super secret formula has ever been confirmed, but one day The_Donald posts simply stopped showing up on the front page, after the admins announced they had altered the algorithms to prevent gaming the system that some bad eggs were using to take over the front page. Which, fair enough, behavior on that sub was even more spammy than the defaults. What was curious was the day when literally the entire front page was T_D posts for a short time. The prevailing theory is there was a rule added to the front page algorithm that either deemphasized posts from the sub or straight up excluded them, and somebody goofed with the back end and the rule got applied incorrectly.
 
It's rather curious actually...seeing that a left leaning philosophy can really only thrive in places that don't allow opposing viewpoints space to be heard.

I'm sure there a very good reason why Reddit can't let conservative poster post opinions. Very good reason indeed.
And what will anyone do about? That is right, nothing.
 
I just want to know why I can’t block the police officer who wrote me the speeding ticket as a witness like how foghorn leghorn did.

No matter your political affiliation, you have to admit that blocking witnesses with relevant testimony in any other courtroom proceeding is witness tampering plain and simple.

There's blocking and then there is what the republicans did which was decide not to bring in more "witnesses" that would just delay the farce. I get it not many people know how the legal system works, you make your case and collect all your information before presenting it and going to court. It's on you to provide testimony and evidence for your case not your opponents. Also it is very rare for new information to be brought up once a case is in trial. I get it the media said the reps blocked them but all the rep's did was decide to not use their time to bring in witnesses the democrats didn't think were good enough to bring up in their time.

To use your metaphor that be like the cop complaining that you didn't track down the people that were driving around you during the time of the ticket to see if any of them had a dash cam. Then claiming you are blocking them by not letting randos claiming to have seen you driving use your time to incriminate you.

Second the testimony wasn't relevant it was hersay and if it is solid enough they can impeach him again and actually bring in the evidence this time. Please don't parrot talking points when you have no idea how the system works.
 
Last edited:
I predict some salt from the Dems over this one...


Court rules Trump can withhold funds from 'sanctuary' jurisdictions
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-sanctuary-idUSKCN20K2P0 (http://archive.vn/WvTlo)
NEW YORK (Reuters) - President Donald Trump’s administration can withhold millions of dollars in law enforcement funds from states and cities that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, a U.S. appeals court ruled on Wednesday.

The unanimous decision by a three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan was a victory for Trump in his years-long fight with so-called sanctuary jurisdictions.

It overturned a lower court ruling directing the release of federal funds to New York City and the states of New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Virginia and Washington.

The states and city sued over a 2017 policy conditioning receipt of the funds by state and local governments on their giving federal immigration officials access to their jails, and advance notice when immigrants in the country illegally are being released from custody.

Three federal appeals courts in Chicago, Philadelphia and San Francisco have upheld injunctions barring enforcement of at least some of the administration’s conditions on the so-called Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants.

Wednesday’s decision sets up a possible appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which often resolves legal disputes that divide lower courts.

In the decision, Judge Reena Raggi said the case “implicates several of the most divisive issues confronting our country” including immigration policy and law enforcement, illegal immigrants, and the ability of state and local governments to adopt policies the federal government dislikes.

The office of New York Attorney General Letitia James said it was reviewing the decision. New York City’s law department had no immediate comment.

A U.S. Justice Department spokesman called the decision a “major victory for Americans” in recognizing Attorney General William Barr’s authority to ensure that grant recipients do not thwart federal law enforcement priorities.

Trump, a Republican seeking re-election on Nov. 3, takes a hardline stance toward legal and illegal immigration.

His battle against Democratic-led “sanctuary” jurisdictions focuses on laws and policies making it harder for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to find and arrest immigrants they consider deportable.

The funding conditions announced by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions affected nearly $26 million of annual grants to the seven states and $4 million to New York City.

U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos in Manhattan in Nov. 2018 declared the conditions unconstitutional, saying the administration acted arbitrarily and capriciously in withholding grants without considering the impact on local law enforcement.

Raggi, however, said the conditions “help the federal government enforce national immigration laws and policies supported by successive Democratic and Republican administrations.”

Byrne was a New York City police officer shot to death at age 22 in 1988 while guarding the home of a Guyanese immigrant helping authorities investigate drug trafficking.

The case is New York et al v U.S. Department of Justice et al, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Nos. 19-267, 19-275.
 

Attachments

I feel like this is a complete lie made by a person who claimed to be his doctor given these are also the same idiots who tried to have a "psychologist" analyze him with no data or meeting with him at all.

The news media lying about trumps health, never


wait, shit, no, ignore that I didn't mean to put that there.

That being said replacing mashed potatoes with cauliflower, or mixing it in is kind of a trendy way to make food healthier. This story is like claiming a chef making cauliflower pizza is trying to hide vegetables to improve American diets.
 
Last edited:
Why do they have such a raging hate boner for /r/The_Donald?

Are they that authoritarian that they can't handle the thought of these people congregating in an isolated subreddit?
As much as I think r/TheDonald is a subreddit filled with boomers and tryhard edgelords that blindly worship Donald Trump (and yes everyone, there's also nothing wrong with providing any criticism towards the people that you support too), it still really doesn't change anything that many of these types of legacy social media platforms are just pure garbage.

If you want my honest opinion, I think when Web 3.0 finally arrives it will be the solution to both government and corporate censorship and the many other unethical things that governments and corporations do too. The next evolution of the Internet (whether both governments and big tech likes it or not) will be the decentralization of the Internet where no one truly ones any faction of the Internet, it will be next to impossible to deplatform people, it will be impossible for governments to block websites, and it will be a true platform for free speech and free expression; just how it should be.

So far the decentralized Internet is still in its infancy stage as I type this but I do think it will eventually take over the Internet much like how HTML5 did. It's going to happen and when this happens then you can bet that both governments and companies will then truly be afraid of the people because you really cannot ever kill an idea and ideas are bulletproof.
 
Last edited:
The coronavirus thread in A&H is being shit up by some guy claiming drumpft defunded the CDC and fired everybody who could save us and the sky is falling. He's not exactly convincing

The coronavirus thread was being shit up by the Doomers long before that.

Speaking of which, how will the media react to Trump's talk about it in an hour?
 
Back