If States Got LGBT-Friendlier, They Could Earn Billions

by Guest Sun Jan 07, 2018 11:15 am

Studies show that states lose millions when they discriminate against LGBT people. They are also losing out on potentially billions of dollars by failing to pass pro-LGBT laws.

If Texas lawmakers piled up hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars in the middle of an empty field and set it on fire, there would be massive public outrage.

But according to data from the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law, that is effectively what Texas and other states are already doing by not creating a more supportive atmosphere for their LGBT citizens.

As the state-level Williams Institute numbers start to add up nationwide, it’s becoming clear that legislators don’t just cost their states big money by passing attention-grabbing—and boycott-inducing—laws like North Carolina’s HB 2; they are also losing out on potentially billions of dollars by failing to pass laws that protect LGBT people.

Those invisible costs of inaction are hard to estimate—and even harder to convey to the public.
“The boycotts and stuff make headlines because they often involve big companies or famous people and that link is very clear,” Williams Institute State and Local Policy Director Christy Mallory told The Daily Beast. “But we’re trying to illuminate this other link.”

Mallory has co-authored several analyses showing the economic impact of allowing statewide discrimination against LGBT people to continue—and thereby incurring the sort of public health costs associated with “minority stress,” a psychological term for the stress that often accompanies social marginalization.

A Williams Institute report released last year, for example, estimates that if Texas could reduce the disparity in depression rates between LGBT and non-LGBT citizens—one of the many public health outcomes linked to minority stress—by just 25 percent, the state could save nearly $290 million dollars in costs associated with lost productivity, health care, and suicide (PDF).

https://www.thedailybeast.com/if-states-got-lgbt-friendlier-they-could-earn-billions

by 'Wolfie Sun Jan 07, 2018 4:08 pm

If States Got LGBT-Friendlier, They Could Earn Billions 1399249160

Must be a lot of stressed out Gay Texans over there, if they reckon it is costing the state economy nearly $1,200,000,000 a year in "lost productivity" !!!

The mind boggles..

by nicko Sun Jan 07, 2018 4:19 pm

How many LBGT people are out there? load of Pc crap !

by Guest Sun Jan 07, 2018 5:58 pm

Is it possible to. Be more LGBT friendly??

The western world has already disregarded established science and biology to favour the LGBT community

We have assured they are more protected and have more rights than everyone else.

How much more bending over backwards can we do??

by Original Quill Sun Jan 07, 2018 6:41 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:Is it possible to. Be more LGBT friendly??

The western world has already disregarded established science and biology to favour the LGBT community

We have assured they are more protected and have more rights than everyone else.

How much more bending over backwards can we do??

To what measures do you attribute their advantage, Russ?

by Maddog Sun Jan 07, 2018 6:43 pm

I live in the gayborhood. The gay folks that I know don't spend too much time bitching about Texas. They are too busy taking advantage of our economy while being left alone. Wink

by Guest Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:43 pm

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:Is it possible to. Be more LGBT friendly??

The western world has already disregarded established science and biology to favour the LGBT community

We have assured they are more protected and have more rights than everyone else.

How much more bending over backwards can we do??

To what measures do you attribute their advantage, Russ?

Political correctness and liberalism

by Original Quill Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:49 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

To what measures do you attribute their advantage, Russ?

Political correctness and liberalism

How does it work, exactly. What do pc and liberals do to assure, say, gays have more rights and protections? Are there special legislative committees, or enforcement commissions? How do they operate?

by Guest Sun Jan 07, 2018 10:34 pm

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

Political correctness and liberalism

How does it work, exactly. What do pc and liberals do to assure, say, gays have more rights and protections? Are there special legislative committees, or enforcement commissions? How do they operate?

No official bodies as such, but you will probably struggle to understand that things don't always work that way in reality

Well for starters if I were to be mugged, it would be a mugging.

If a gay person were to be mugged under identical circumstances it would automatically be classified as a "hate crime" due to the fact that the victim is gay.

So here we see gays have more protection under law by virtue of the crimes against them will carry greater punishments, this translates loosely into greater deterrent and greater protection.

Police force are keen to be seen as inclusive and aggressively clamping down on homophobic hate crimes, thus they pad the stats by elevating any crime against a gay to hate crime, regardless of whether it is or not, it allows them to artificially exacerbate the problem of homophobic hate crime, and thereby are seen to be doing something about it.

Give them kudos on Twitter, which is really all the British police care about these days

They massage the figures on all sorts of crime of course, black victims are victims of race hate, Muslims are victims of islamophobia, trannies are victims for Transphobia etc, everyone is a special victim of some kind.

except white straight men, you have to have some kind of start point or everyone is treated equally and that just won't do,.

that is one way gays enjoy a special kind of privilege.

The pc liberal mind is obsessed with being "inclusive and diverse" and this translates as "we have too many white heterosexual men, we need more women gays and ethnics"

This is of course demonstrated by the BBC offering jobs to ethnics only as well a police force holding a recruitment drive and then tweeting that white men shouldn't bother turning up.

Politically correct box ticking and diversity targets in the workplace tend to favour gays over straight men, of course if you're a straight black man then the playing field is levelled.

Even having an opinion on homosexuality or transgenderism that is contrary to liberally approved opinions will see you lose your freedom.

By contrast any gay or transgender could hold any opinion on any subject regardless of how contraversial or in many cases, criminal, and not suffer even a hint of censure.

I probably describe a society you don't recognize, not surprising.

by Guest Sun Jan 07, 2018 11:14 pm

nicko wrote:How many LBGT people are out there? load of Pc crap !

The stats and figures say otherwise.

So why ignore them, when clearly it does cost money?

by Guest Sun Jan 07, 2018 11:56 pm

by Original Quill Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:32 am

sb wrote:No official bodies as such, but you will probably struggle to understand that things don't always work that way in reality

Sooo...you are making a political statement, not a factual statement.

by Guest Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:39 am

Original Quill wrote:
sb wrote:No official bodies as such, but you will probably struggle to understand that things don't always work that way in reality

Sooo...you are making a political statement, not a factual statement.

Like when you say trump colluded with Russia without providing a single shred of evidence??

Like I said, you're a bureaucrat, if it's not written down in triplicate, with official stamps, bells and whistles, it doesn't exist for you.

by Guest Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:43 am

Or like when you claim there is systematic and institutionalised racism across America without providing evidence??

by Original Quill Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:47 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Sooo...you are making a political statement, not a factual statement.

Like when you say trump colluded with Russia without providing a single shred of evidence??

No, actually, we've got a shit load of evidence on that. Four indictments, two convictions. It's a done deal.

sb wrote:Like I said, you're a bureaucrat, if it's not written down in triplicate it doesn't exist for you

No, I'm a former professor of political theory and law, who is schooled in methodology and substantiation. It's not at all bureaucratic to ask for evidence. It's common sense.

by Original Quill Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:49 am

smelly-bandit wrote:Or like when you claim there is systematic and institutionalised racism across America without providing evidence??

Um, so you weren't watching on TV when Charlottesville happened? Pity. Mad

by Guest Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:55 am

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:Or like when you claim there is systematic and institutionalised racism across America without providing evidence??

Um, so you weren't watching on TV when Charlottesville happened? Pity.

Yeah

But I don't see how a bunch of white people killing each other is indicative of institutionalised racism.

Perhaps you are struggling with the term "institutionalised racism"??

by Guest Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:56 am

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

Like when you say trump colluded with Russia without providing a single shred of evidence??

No, actually, we've got a shit load of evidence on that. Four indictments, two convictions. It's a done deal.

sb wrote:Like I said, you're a bureaucrat, if it's not written down in triplicate it doesn't exist for you

No, I'm a former professor of political theory and law, who is schooled in methodology and substantiation. It's not at all bureaucratic to ask for evidence. It's common sense.

In that case please provide me with the evidence of Trump's collusion with Russia

by Guest Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:58 am

And while you're at it please provide me with evidence to official government sponsored policies of racism that provide specific parameters for discrimination based on race alone

by Original Quill Mon Jan 08, 2018 3:01 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Um, so you weren't watching on TV when Charlottesville happened? Pity.

Yeah

But I don't see how a bunch of white people killing each other is indicative of institutionalised racism.

Perhaps you are struggling with the term "institutionalised racism"??

Listen to their message.

by 'Wolfie Mon Jan 08, 2018 4:01 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
And while you're at it please provide me with evidence to official government sponsored policies of racism that provide specific parameters for discrimination based on race alone

If States Got LGBT-Friendlier, They Could Earn Billions 3489511464

Wasn't that pretty much why you abandoned Sarf Arfrika, Smelly' ???

After the collapse of your beloved Apartheid system left you all afloat without a boat..

by 'Wolfie Mon Jan 08, 2018 4:06 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

How does it work, exactly. What do pc and liberals do to assure, say, gays have more rights and protections? Are there special legislative committees, or enforcement commissions? How do they operate?

No official bodies as such, but you will probably struggle to understand that things don't always work that way in reality

Well for starters if I were to be mugged, it would be a mugging.

If a gay person were to be mugged under identical circumstances it would automatically be classified as a "hate crime" due to the fact that the victim is gay.

So here we see gays have more protection under law by virtue of the crimes against them will carry greater punishments, this translates loosely into greater deterrent and greater protection.

Police force are keen to be seen as inclusive and aggressively clamping down on homophobic hate crimes, thus they pad the stats by elevating any crime against a gay to hate crime, regardless of whether it is or not, it allows them to artificially exacerbate the problem of homophobic hate crime, and thereby are seen to be doing something about it.

Give them kudos on Twitter, which is really all the British police care about these days

They massage the figures on all sorts of crime of course, black victims are victims of race hate, Muslims are victims of islamophobia, trannies are victims for Transphobia etc, everyone is a special victim of some kind.

except white straight men, you have to have some kind of start point or everyone is treated equally and that just won't do,.

that is one way gays enjoy a special kind of privilege.

The pc liberal mind is obsessed with being "inclusive and diverse" and this translates as "we have too many white heterosexual men, we need more women gays and ethnics"

This is of course demonstrated by the BBC offering jobs to ethnics only as well a police force holding a recruitment drive and then tweeting that white men shouldn't bother turning up.

Politically correct box ticking and diversity targets in the workplace tend to favour gays over straight men, of course if you're a straight black man then the playing field is levelled.

Even having an opinion on homosexuality or transgenderism that is contrary to liberally approved opinions will see you lose your freedom.

By contrast any gay or transgender could hold any opinion on any subject regardless of how contraversial or in many cases, criminal, and not suffer even a hint of censure.

I probably describe a society you don't recognize, not surprising.

Very few people would recognise your "society", oh SmellyOne...

That's because most people don't reside in your altered-reality puniverse..

by Guest Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:16 am

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

Yeah

But I don't see how a bunch of white people killing each other is indicative of institutionalised racism.

Perhaps you are struggling with the term "institutionalised racism"??

Listen to their message.

Ahhhhhh yes the "message"

Yeah I'm gonna have to press you for some actual evidence

by Original Quill Mon Jan 08, 2018 4:41 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

No, actually, we've got a shit load of evidence on that. Four indictments, two convictions. It's a done deal.

No, I'm a former professor of political theory and law, who is schooled in methodology and substantiation. It's not at all bureaucratic to ask for evidence. It's common sense.

In that case please provide me with the evidence of Trump's collusion with Russia

Conspiracy Russ....concentrate. Probably two or more counts--CFAA, wire fraud, perhaps mail fraud--which elevates it to RICO violations. The December meeting between Kushner and Kislyac, in which Kushner asked for a back channel through the Russian mission, could be construed as treason as well as Logan Act violations. And what was Flynn calling Kislyac and telling him that sanctions would be lifted? Perhaps a reassurance that previous promises would be met, in fulfillment of the conspiracy?

The biggest problem Trump has begins in October 2008, when the crash comes down. He was in debt to Deutsche Bank for about $640-million for the construction of Trump Tower, Chicago. Deutsche Bank sues Trump. While the litigation is pending, another branch of Deutsche Bank, representing private, well-off depositors, from the Moscow office, swoops in like a white knight, and lends Trump the money to pay off the debt.

WTF...a borrower (Trump) is already in default, and in litigation, and the same bank lends him the money on his signature? Huh??? The money comes from the bank's left back-pocket, and goes into the bank's right back-pocket. Is the bank walking away from a half-billion dollars?

Or is a covert depositor in Moscow--with more assets than Trump or Deutsche Bank--securing a loan for Trump, one which gets Deutsche Bank out from under, and setting the hook in Trump's left cheek for future demands/favors from Moscow? I think it's called Kompromat. And of course, Trump is already obligated, due to past indiscretions, to go along with it. Who knows? Maybe the pot was sweetened with a 20% share of Rosneft Oil.

And who, in Moscow, would be powerful enough to cow the biggest bank in Germany out of $640-million, or rich enough to help Trump avoid a 6th bankruptcy?

Oh, and um...why don't we have Trump's tax returns, which would answer all these questions?

So many questions, Russ...so little time.

by Guest Mon Jan 08, 2018 6:08 pm

That's not really evidence is it??

"Probably two or more counts--CFAA, wire fraud, perhaps mail fraud,"

Which is it??

2 or more, if more then how much more??

I ask for evidence and you give me this shit.

You're supposed to have a PhD in law and this shit is what you consider evidence??

You're a joke

I take it your evidence of institutionalised racism will be of equally low quality??

If so please spare me the details

by Original Quill Mon Jan 08, 2018 6:24 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:That's not really evidence is it??

That's for the jury to decide.

Original Quill wrote:"Probably two or more counts--CFAA, wire fraud, perhaps mail fraud,"

sb wrote:Which is it??

All three, going into a RICO conspiracy. Throw in Espionage Act, Logan Act and even a possible §1001 vioaltion (Trump lied to Comey that Flynn was a "good guy"). Cool

sb wrote:2 or more, if more then how much more??

See above. Of course, as evidence arises, more counts may be added.

sb wrote:I ask for evidence and you give me this shit.

That's the beauty of a jury system. What you and I think is not the concern.

sb wrote:You're supposed to have a PhD in law and this shit is what you consider evidence??

There is no such thing as a PhD in law. It's called a JD (professional law degree), or a JSD (advanced research law degree). But you digress...it's not about me.

I accept, however, that you are speechless. Laughing

by Guest Mon Jan 08, 2018 8:32 pm

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:That's not really evidence is it??

That's for the jury to decide.

Original Quill wrote:"Probably two or more counts--CFAA, wire fraud, perhaps mail fraud,"

sb wrote:Which is it??

All three, going into a RICO conspiracy. Throw in Espionage Act, Logan Act and even a possible §1001 vioaltion (Trump lied to Comey that Flynn was a "good guy").

sb wrote:2 or more, if more then how much more??

See above. Of course, as evidence arises, more counts may be added.

sb wrote:I ask for evidence and you give me this shit.

That's the beauty of a jury system. What you and I think is not the concern.

sb wrote:You're supposed to have a PhD in law and this shit is what you consider evidence??

There is no such thing as a PhD in law. It's called a JD (professional law degree), or a JSD (advanced research law degree). But you digress...it's not about me.

I accept, however, that you are speechless.

"As evidence arises "

So like I said, you don't have any actual evidence because it hasn't arisen yet

Glad we cleared that up

by Original Quill Mon Jan 08, 2018 9:28 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

That's for the jury to decide.

All three, going into a RICO conspiracy. Throw in Espionage Act, Logan Act and even a possible §1001 vioaltion (Trump lied to Comey that Flynn was a "good guy").

See above. Of course, as evidence arises, more counts may be added.

That's the beauty of a jury system. What you and I think is not the concern.

There is no such thing as a PhD in law. It's called a JD (professional law degree), or a JSD (advanced research law degree). But you digress...it's not about me.

I accept, however, that you are speechless.

"As evidence arises "

So like I said, you don't have any actual evidence because it hasn't arisen yet

Glad we cleared that up

There is plenty of evidence. "As evidence arises..." speaks prospectively, and means there may be more to come.

You're being petulant and childish, Russ. Hmmm...isn't that what they are saying about Trump?

by Guest Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:07 pm

Bored now

Gave you the chance to present your evidence that Trump colluded AND that there is institutionalised racism in America

You declined on both occasions

I can't force you to stand by your own argument Quill.

Hey ho

by Original Quill Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:48 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:Bored now

Gave you the chance to present your evidence that Trump colluded AND that there is institutionalised racism in America

You declined on both occasions

Not at all. I have done my job, and rather well. Nuff said... Razz

sb wrote:I can't force you to stand by your own argument Quill.

Hey ho

We've got almost a year to go. We'll leave it to the jury.

by Guest Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:Bored now

Gave you the chance to present your evidence that Trump colluded AND that there is institutionalised racism in America

You declined on both occasions

Not at all. I have done my job, and rather well. Nuff said...

sb wrote:I can't force you to stand by your own argument Quill.

Hey ho

We've got almost a year to go. We'll leave it to the jury.

You pointed to Charlottesville as your evidence of institutionalised racism.

That was white people fighting other white people and neither group worked for the government.

I hope your trump collusion evidence is more.......... Evidency

by Original Quill Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:18 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Not at all. I have done my job, and rather well. Nuff said...

We've got almost a year to go. We'll leave it to the jury.

You pointed to Charlottesville as your evidence of institutionalised racism.

Yes, along with 400- years of history.

sb wrote:That was white people fighting other white people and neither group worked for the government.

Correct...some blacks and Asians, too.

sb wrote:I hope your trump collusion evidence is more.......... Evidency

That's what we have already? There are two prongs: conspiracy, and obstruction.

I think there will be more. We haven't begun to study all the money laundering. And I know that Mueller has more on Deutsche Bank. And there's the Rosneft Oil deal to look into...all of which are the length and depth of the conspiracy. As I say, we've got a year to look into it.

by Guest Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:22 pm

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

You pointed to Charlottesville as your evidence of institutionalised racism.

Yes, along with 400- years of history.

sb wrote:That was white people fighting other white people and neither group worked for the government.

Correct...some blacks and Asians, too.

sb wrote:I hope your trump collusion evidence is more.......... Evidency

That's what we have already? There are two prongs: conspiracy, and obstruction.

I think there will be more. We haven't begun to study all the money laundering. And I know that Mueller has more on Deutsche Bank. And there's the Rosneft Oil deal to look into...all of which are the length and depth of the conspiracy. As I say, we've got a year to look into it.

Not surprising that there were blacks and asians in the riot, they like a good riot and a good raping.

But yeah still no evidence of institutionalised racism

by Original Quill Tue Jan 09, 2018 12:53 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Yes, along with 400- years of history.

Correct...some blacks and Asians, too.

That's what we have already? There are two prongs: conspiracy, and obstruction.

I think there will be more. We haven't begun to study all the money laundering. And I know that Mueller has more on Deutsche Bank. And there's the Rosneft Oil deal to look into...all of which are the length and depth of the conspiracy. As I say, we've got a year to look into it.

Not surprising that there were blacks and asians in the riot, they like a good riot and a good raping.

But yeah still no evidence of institutionalised racism

They weren't rioters. The demonstrators that engaged in malice and violence were the white supremacists, Neo-Nazis and KKK-types. There was a clear distinction, we all could see. And of course, the murderer was among the white supremacists, Neo-Nazis and KKK'ers.

by Guest Tue Jan 09, 2018 2:20 am

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

Not surprising that there were blacks and asians in the riot, they like a good riot and a good raping.

But yeah still no evidence of institutionalised racism

They weren't rioters. The demonstrators that engaged in malice and violence were the white supremacists, Neo-Nazis and KKK-types. There was a clear distinction, we all could see. And of course, the murderer was among the white supremacists, Neo-Nazis and KKK'ers.

So the killer was white

And the victim was white

And neither the killer nor the victim worked for the government

Yet you consider this isolated and random white on white violence amongst private citizens to be evidence of institutionalised racism??

I don't know who is more confused about this

by Original Quill Tue Jan 09, 2018 4:16 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

They weren't rioters. The demonstrators that engaged in malice and violence were the white supremacists, Neo-Nazis and KKK-types. There was a clear distinction, we all could see. And of course, the murderer was among the white supremacists, Neo-Nazis and KKK'ers.

So the killer was white

And the victim was white

And neither the killer nor the victim worked for the government

Yet you consider this isolated and random white on white violence amongst private citizens to be evidence of institutionalised racism??

I don't know who is more confused about this

That's because you dichotomize everything. In America, yes racists are white. But, fortunately, those who oppose racism are white too. This ain't South Africa.

by Guest Tue Jan 09, 2018 4:52 am

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

So the killer was white

And the victim was white

And neither the killer nor the victim worked for the government

Yet you consider this isolated and random white on white violence amongst private citizens to be evidence of institutionalised racism??

I don't know who is more confused about this

That's because you dichotomize everything. In America, yes racists are white. But, fortunately, those who oppose racism are white too. This ain't South Africa.

Got a lot of black racists in America too Quill

Black lives matters for one are the black version of the KKK.

Obama himself supported BLM, now that qualifies as institutionalised racism

Trump in the other hand repeatedly denounced the KKK over more than 30 years, Obama never once denounced the violence of BLM

black is what black does

by 'Wolfie Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:58 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

That's because you dichotomize everything. In America, yes racists are white. But, fortunately, those who oppose racism are white too. This ain't South Africa.

Got a lot of black racists in America too Quill

Black lives matters for one are the black version of the KKK.

Obama himself supported BLM, now that qualifies as institutionalised racism

Trump in the other hand repeatedly denounced the KKK over more than 30 years, Obama never once denounced the violence of BLM

black is what black does

More outright racist lies and downright racist crappola...

Courtesy of NewsFix's #1 resident scumbag racist twat..

Trump has never genuinely denounced the KKK, you lying piece of shit.

by nicko Tue Jan 09, 2018 12:34 pm

Do you have to be so insulting Wolfie? Ithought you were better than that !

by Guest Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:42 pm

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

Got a lot of black racists in America too Quill

Black lives matters for one are the black version of the KKK.

Obama himself supported BLM, now that qualifies as institutionalised racism

Trump in the other hand repeatedly denounced the KKK over more than 30 years, Obama never once denounced the violence of BLM

black is what black does

More outright racist lies and downright racist crappola...

Courtesy of NewsFix's #1 resident scumbag racist twat..

Trump has never genuinely denounced the KKK, you lying piece of shit.

oh dear, bang goes your narrative

by Guest Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:43 pm

nicko wrote:Do you have to be so insulting Wolfie? Ithought you were better than that !

wolfie has a small flaccid cock and cant fufill his manly duties

so he has to poster around on line where its safe and he can be "hard"

by Original Quill Tue Jan 09, 2018 4:37 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

More outright racist lies and downright racist crappola...

Courtesy of NewsFix's #1 resident scumbag racist twat..

Trump has never genuinely denounced the KKK, you lying piece of shit.

oh dear, bang goes your narrative

A proven liar, tells a proven lie...and I feel so much better.

That speech--so obviously forced upon a vexed Trump by his handlers--was delivered after a weekend in which he said white-supremacists, KKK'ers and Neo-Nazis were his "good people". It was his penance, and he hated it.

by Guest Tue Jan 09, 2018 4:42 pm

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

oh dear, bang goes your narrative

A proven liar, tells a proven lie...and I feel so much better.

That speech--so obviously forced upon a vexed Trump by his handlers--was delivered after a weekend in which he said white-supremacists, KKK'ers and Neo-Nazis were his "good people". It was his penance, and he hated it.

god youre so desperate arent you??

does trump name and shame the KKK??

yes he does

youre a liar and so is wolfie, the video is there for all to see and no amount of feet stamping, temper tantrumming, and teddy throwing on your part will change that

lol!

by Original Quill Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:28 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

A proven liar, tells a proven lie...and I feel so much better.

That speech--so obviously forced upon a vexed Trump by his handlers--was delivered after a weekend in which he said white-supremacists, KKK'ers and Neo-Nazis were his "good people". It was his penance, and he hated it.

god youre so desperate arent you??

does trump name and shame the KKK??

yes he does

And on the Saturday before, he said they were morally good. He called them "a lot of good people."

sb wrote:youre a liar and so is wolfie, the video is there for all to see and no amount of feet stamping, temper tantrumming, and teddy throwing on your part will change that

I've not lied; I've merely clarified that, that was the post-weekend speech. You are the liar by omission. You have neglected the fact that 2-3 days before, he had called the white-supremacists, KKK'ers and Neo-Nazis "a lot of good people."

Shame on you.

by 'Wolfie Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:14 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

A proven liar, tells a proven lie...and I feel so much better.

That speech--so obviously forced upon a vexed Trump by his handlers--was delivered after a weekend in which he said white-supremacists, KKK'ers and Neo-Nazis were his "good people". It was his penance, and he hated it.

god youre so desperate arent you??

does trump name and shame the KKK??

yes he does

youre a liar and so is wolfie, the video is there for all to see and no amount of feet stamping, temper tantrumming, and teddy throwing on your part will change that

You're the lying dumbfuck, SmellyNoClue...

A video of a stage-managed embarrassed Dumpster being rolled out to claim he has "always" opposed the KKK, only produced after he had stupidly proclaimed that the KKK and alt.rigjt groups were full of "good people"..

In no way does that support your opening racist and fascist lying crap.

by Sponsored content