search results matching tag: wives

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (63)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (3)     Comments (398)   

Okilly Dokilly - White Wine Spritzer (Official Video)

Trump publicly blows his cover for national emergency

simonm says...

List of people in Trump's administration that have quit or been fired. The Trump Administration has seen the highest rate of turnover among White House staff in decades.

During the president’s first year, the administration saw a 34% turnover rate. This is the highest of any recent White House, according to a Brookings Institution report that tracked departures of senior officials over the last 40 years.

The next-highest turnover rate for an administration’s first year was Ronald Reagan’s, with 17% of senior aides leaving their posts in 1981.

Former presidents Barack Obama, George W. Bush, and Bill Clinton saw much lower turnovers during their first year in office—9%, 6%, and 11%, respectively.

------

John Kelly – December 2018. The retired Marine Corps general was hired in July 2017 to bring order to the White House.

Matthew Whitaker – December 2018. Named acting attorney general in November this year, replacing Jeff Sessions. Immediately came under scrutiny over past remarks about the investigation into possible Russian collusion with Mr Trump's presidential election campaign.

Nikki Haley – December 2018. Stepped down as US ambassador to the UN at the end of the year.

Jeff Sessions – November 2018. After months of being attacked and ridiculed by the president, the former senator was forced out as attorney general.

Don McGahn – October 2018. Mr Trump revealed in August that the White House counsel would leave following strains between the two over Robert Mueller’s investigation.

Scott Pruitt – July 2018. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) chief quit after he came under fire over a series of ethics controversies.

David Shulkin – March 2018. He left his position the Veteran Affairs secretary, telling the media he had been fired rather than resigning.

HR McMaster – March 2018. Mr Trump’s national security adviser was replaced by John Bolton.

Rex Tillerson – March 2018. The secretary of state was fired by the president on after a series rifts.

Gary Cohn – March 2018. The National Economic Council director and former Goldman Sachs president said he resigned his advisory role.

Hope Hicks – February 2018. The White House communications director, a long-serving and trusted Trump aide, decided to resign.

Rob Porter – February 2018. The White House staff secretary stepped aside following accusations of domestic abuse from former wives.

Omarosa Manigault Newman – December 2017. The former star of The Apprentice was fired as assistant to the president.

Richard Cordray – November 2017. The US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s first director quit his administration role.

Tom Price – September 2017. The Health and Human Services secretary quit under pressure from Mr Trump over travel practices.

Stephen Bannon – August 2017. Mr Trump’s chief strategist was fired in after clashing with other top White House figures, including the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.

Anthony Scaramucci – July 2017. The White House communications director was fired by Mr Trump after only 10 days on the job. Mr Scaramucci had openly criticised Mr Bannon.

Reince Priebus – July 2017. Replaced as chief of staff by John Kelly, Priebus lost Mr Trump’s confidence after setbacks in Congress.

Sean Spicer – July 2017. Resigned as White House press secretary, ending a turbulent six-month tenure.

Walter Shaub – July 2017. The head of the US Office of Government Ethics, who repeatedly clashed with Mr Trump.

Michael Dubke – May 2017. Resigned as White House communications director.

Katie Walsh – March 2017. The deputy White House chief of staff was transferred out to a Republican activist group.

Michael Flynn – February 2017. Resigned in as Mr Trump’s national security adviser. Mr Flynn later pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. He is set to be sentenced later in December.

Sally Yates – January 2017. Mr Trump fired the acting US attorney general after she ordered Justice Department lawyers not to enforce is immigration ban.

Preview Of The Next Two Years - Pelosi, Schumer, Trump

newtboy says...

No Bob, you don't need to keep crying "but I love him"....we know you'll gladly ignore any foibles he has while viciously attacking others for the same, or similar but lesser crimes he claimed they were guilty of.
We know you allow him to bold faced lie to you about anything.
We know you're ready and willing to repeat any stupidity or nonsense he feeds you.
We know you're 100% prepared to accept his word over your own eyes, ears, or memory.
We know you're prepared to claim financial and civil gains even though reality disagrees.

You really don't need to keep telling us you love your lying fraud of an abuser....we know.

Do I need to remind you about Carter again? A politician who was never two faced or untruthful. Please, please don't display your stupidity by attempting to attack his undeniably excessive levels of intelligence or morality. Dumb people don't design nuclear submarines, immoral people don't command them with honor....they get phantom bone spurs that miraculously disappear the minute the draft ends so they can screw the wives of their honorable associates while they go to war.

Good, if Trump is really done playing politician, that's great for all of us. I hadn't heard he had quit.
It's just asinine to claim the person holding the most powerful political position in the world isn't a politician. You might as well claim he's not a fraud, not a thief, not a philanderer, not a business failure, not a hypocrite, not immoral, not a misogynist, and not dishonest while you're denying reality.

As noted above, your video evidence and your claims have nothing in common.

bobknight33 said:

Do I really need to do this again.. Again Politicians are 2 faced until rubber meets the road.
Good thing Trump is not a Politician, Just a man wanting to MAGA.

The Best Bouncer Fight Ever

Mordhaus says...

I got lazy on the title, that is the video one. The best bar fight I ever saw was outside of a Korean bar in Harker Heights, Texas back in the 90's. I had exited the bar next to it with some friends when we saw the bouncers toss out two elderly Korean gentlemen in full suits. I would guess they were at least 50 or so.

Anyway, once they were outside, the bouncers left and these two guys proceeded to get into a full fledged Tae Kwon Do (or maybe Hap Ki Do, I don't think it was that though because it had a lot of power kicks) fight. I mean they were going at it, and I mean HARD. Much more contact than in any of the TKD matches I had been in at tournaments. After about a minute of not landing a solid hit, they stopped and mutually allowed one another to remove their suit jackets. Then back to the fray. They did get a few kicks in and got a bit bloody, but that is when the bouncers returned, apparently with their WIVES.

Hilarity ensued, because both wives basically glanced at one another and then waded into the fracas. They each started slapping and kicking on their husband, screaming at them. I don't speak Korean, but you could tell by the tone they were dressing them down hardcore. The fight stopped and two bloody, formerly distinguished looking guys looked like a couple of kids who had really torqued off their mom. I was dying off to the side from laughter. I swear if camera phones had existed back then it would have been an instance classic.

Payback said:

Best bouncer fight ever?

You have a low bar for what you consider bar fights. Around here, this is what happens every 10 minutes after 9pm until closing.

It happened before video phones became a thing, but the "Best bouncer fight" I ever watched was between two bouncers from competing clubs hanging out at a third club. Both were over 6'6", both had years of experience in their chosen martial arts, and each was built like a brick shithouse. Epic. Purely Epic.

White House revokes CNN reporters press pass

newtboy says...

Sticking Fox in there as well shows you aren't serious. Fox is pure propaganda to the extent their top rated hosts (they don't have reporters) actually went on the campaign trail with Trump and spoke at his rallies....talk about agenda.

Trump's actions and words are 98% negative, it's who he is. Reporting on him in a negative light IS honest reporting....for Christ's sake, he repeatedly lusted after his under age daughter publicly, how do you report that as a positive? "He has the fortitude of character to not act on his incestuous fantasies....at least publicly."? Can't say the same about his friend's wives or work subordinates, though.

The day of the synagogue shooting, which was targeted specifically because Trump said repeatedly that Jews are paying dangerous illegal aliens to invade the country, and with more bombs still in the mail, Trump again shirked any responsibility for his rhetoric and blamed the media for his named enemies (including the same media) being targeted by people who quoted his words in their manifestos, and again called the news media enemies of the people, the words that triggered the right wing terrorists in the first place. You argue that, by reporting his complete lack of civil leadership and his targeted threats that are being acted on, they are the problem and the one's taking jabs?! Trump didn't hold off media bashing for a single sentence, his call for unity and his blame and attack were in the same opening sentence of his remarks.

Trump is the leader of the free world, but he never once has he lead towards civility, and excessively rarely honesty or rationality. You expect cable news anchors to be the moral compass of the nation, and completely excuse president from that obligation?! *facepalm
Trump ran on being insulting and derisive of any non Trumpian coverage, Jim is just his latest target by proximity, it would be someone else if it wasn't him. Baby needs a bad man to spit up on.

If this behavior warrants removing credentials, Fox, Breightbart, and Alex Jones would have been permanently barred over a decade ago, but they're all more than welcome....largely because they were constant rude assholes to Obama and had zero respect for the office when he held it.
Good luck demanding professionalism and civility now, after 8 years of birtherism that ship sailed with Trump at the helm. Whining about it now like a thin skinned 3rd grader only makes Trump more ridiculous and hypocritical.....which is astonishing as he had already raised the bar of hypocrisy into orbit.

Briguy1960 said:

I would disagree on your description of the news media as it stands today.
I refuse to call it unbiased when I see an agenda,
an obvious agenda to discredit Trump at most anything he does.
CNN isn't the only trashy one.
I stick Fox in there as well but both have moments of clarity when they do simply report the news without adding their own bias to it or even editing out certain parts to make it look worse.
As an example I used to hate that Gutfield character on Fox News but anymore I find I agree with him on the insanity going on.
He has made several jabs at Trump as well.
How can you not call CNN fake news when the majority of their programming is all about Trump in a negative light?
The day of the mass shooting of Jews CNN said one minute they needed to try to cool things off with Trump etc and the next I knew they were right back bashing him.
I'd say about half an hour tops they held off the bashing.
If you are insanely jealous of Trumps winning ways than I can see how you may think CNN is legit.
Acosta wasn't even close to being civil.
Watch the original clip again and see how long he grandstanded for.
He does this far too often.
If you are that dense you need Jim Acosta to harass the President to show you what's up then I feel bad for you.
He could be much more effective if he was more professional and probably a much greater thorn in Trumps side.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Lol....no you aren't, you admitted you don't get information from news sources, only talking heads and conspiracy cabals....Rush, Dore, and Q to quote you. You're just buying what the propagandists and conspiracy theorists are selling.

That is simply not true. Trump was never a "great nation figure" (whatever that means, I'm guessing you mean great national figure, which is still not true). Trump was a joke in the 90's and 2000's except to those who knew him personally, to them he was an unmitigated douchbag that tried to buy sex from their wives, and late 2000's till now he's been a destructive cancer eating the brain of gullible America, starting in earnest with the birther/Kenyan Muslim nonsense and ramping up from there with meth addict level insanity.
The only thing odd is your complete lack of memory and willingness to let a known liar rewrite what happened 1984 style.

bobknight33 said:

Nope just buying what the news is selling.

Trump was a great nation figure till the day he decided to run then nothing but shit Trump this Shit Trump that. Kind of odd.

The Kind of Story We Need Right Now: Server Bodyslams Jerk!

Digitalfiend says...

Don't get me wrong, I'm of the same mindset but aren't we all supposed to be treating each other equally now? Aren't we trying to get rid of these stereotypes (e.g. you don't think women should just be house-wives and get back to the kitchen, do you?) Therefore, women are the same as men and the law should apply equally to all? Clearly, that isn't the case.

As I said, I don't really care that this woman knocked the idiot down but she could have just as easily grabbed his arm and confronted him that way, without yanking him by the neck and throwing him backwards - it's not a proportional response to the sexual assault. Once detained - and I'm sure other employees or customers would have assisted - the police could have been called with the same outcome (i.e. the man being charged with sexual battery). But then she wouldn't have been able to "feel empowered"...

Mordhaus said:

That ship done sailed. Men are supposed to just suck it up and not retaliate.

Rick Wiles Says 'Every Christian Should Disavow Alex Jones'

newtboy says...

Absolutely not.
Jones Jones is a lunatic who spouts pure insanity, and your chosen president believes the nonsense is news. Your ridiculous equivocation is absolutely insane.

You aren't the only conservative voice here, but you are a minority.

Your admitted fraud, pedophile (miss teen America), pedophile supporting (Roy Brown), incestuous (daughter lusting), adulterous (with his friend's wives), consummate liar, political flip flopping (see any interviews before 2000), Russian stooge, ally debasing, repeatedly failed businessman has debased American values, and your ilk have gone along hand in hand, erasing those values from your mind as he violated them.

Open borders exist only in Trump's deluded lies he sells you to get you riled up and unthinking. No one in power advocates open borders, that's just a bold faced lie. Your willingness to repeat it only demonstrates your gullibility and naivete.

bobknight33 said:

CNN is unhinged just like MSNBC. Each wacked. Like Jones Jones is just more theatrical.

You bet. I use You people. Since there is no conservative voice here. It’s me against you people. The lost degenerate soles who desires are to debace America values and dilute its citizenship with open borders.

Trump wants all to be proud.

Mordhaus (Member Profile)

New Rule: The Good Sex Economy

newtboy says...

Well, if you want to go that route, sure, still no equivalency between slick Willie who inappropriately got a blow job from a willing subordinate and tried to obfuscate out of it earning him an impeachment along with a few unverified and mostly unreported accusations of groping and a pedophile, or a blackmailing mistress abuser, or Dumb Donald who bragged on tv and radio about groping and leering at underage girls in pageants he ran and offering bribes and gifts to sleep with his friends wives while he was married....not to mention the multiple sex workers/models/porn stars he paid for sex (or to be quiet about how bad it was) and accusations of everything from groping to outright rape, and is being sued over it.
Or ran charities he used as a personal piggy bank to pay off legal debts and buy portraits of himself and fake magazines with him on the cover.
Or ran fraudulent schools and admitted it.....and has yet to pay a price for any of it besides the fines levied over his fraudulent schools.

Pretty sure the Clinton foundation has been thoroughly investigated, and I'm not hearing any charges pending....Trump can't say the same.

So no....no equivalency.

drradon said:

ummm, you mean like Slick Willie???? serial groper supreme? who "never had sex with that woman" - no, definitely not equivalent... no way....

and a secretary of state who has a foundation that receives multi-million dollar donations from foreign governments (or their toadies) because they believe in the alleged purposes of that foundation.... no possible equivalency there....

only good thing about defending the indefensible is that there will always be job security....

Trump Won't Win

newtboy says...

Poor Bob, the BBC light ribbing over Trump's anemic "biggest inauguration audience ever in the nation's history" dwarfed by the wedding crowd upset you? Snowflake. ;-)

Not a memory lane of me saying that.
I called it for Trump when the DNC got caught....actually before then but not with certitude until then. I knew he was right, he could murder someone publicly in cold blood and not lose a vote, because his supporters are morally bankrupt tribalists. I knew decades of philandering, often with his friends wives, pussy grabbing, daughter lusting, school fraud, charity fraud, repeated bankruptcy, thousands of lawsuits, hush money, mob/Russia ties, a long history of cheating the little guy, blatant racism, being narcissism personified, and having zero capacity for honesty had no effect on them, it was clear that Clinton, whose voters had morals, was a huge long shot at best when the primary underhandedness came to light, she only drove the right to the polls, not the left. They couldn't have created a more polarizing candidate with more baggage.

Never underestimate the stupidity and gullibility, or count on the morality of the American voter or you'll look the fool like these people did.

bobknight33 said:

@newtboy

Memory lane.. Just Saying...

What Mormon Missionaries Talk About Before You Open the Door

newtboy says...

Bill didn't repeatedly grab pussies against their will, or go on to brag about it...and he was impeached over the consensual sex he did have....and it was a problem for me, such infidelity coming from my president proves he's disloyal...and the cigar thing...WTF?!

Doesn't make him moral by far, but there's a huge difference between cheating on your wife by having consensual (oral) sex and cheating on all of your wives by raping your friends' wives, assaulting numerous co workers, paying porn stars, paying prostitutes, pressuring beauty pageant contestants, and likely raping your own daughter.

Get a grip, he's an admitted abuser, philanderer, and clearly has no respect for women or marriage, and his concept of loyalty goes one way, he's loyal to nothing.

Also whataboutism is akin to no defense at all, and is just plain dumb when your comparisons are 1/10 as bad as what you're trying to distract from.

bobknight33 said:

The chip on your shoulder is quite large.


Bill C has been grabbing pussy for years.. No problem from you..

Lighten up.

ABC News: Purity Balls: Lifting the Veil on Special Ceremony

shinyblurry says...

When you're talking about something that clearly skews the stats, like hyper religious people thinking divorce is totally a slap at God, that's not confirmation bias, it's statistics.

It's also evidence that it is a better way of life, but that is something you apparently refuse to consider. That is why I am calling confirmation bias.

Do you feel the same about those who imprison women, force their silence with abuse, and treat them like abused pets because their religion says that's proper? What if they're Christians?

The bible says that husbands should lay down their lives for their wives, like Christ loved the church and died for it.

What say you about those God has chosen to be non believers? According to you, God created them with no purpose besides eternal torture in hell, because according to you they have no alternative since God never revealed himself to them so heaven is barred to them. Pretty fucked up God imo. I prefer Mt (Mot, Mewt, etc). He's older than Yahweh and far more honest and stable.

It's not that God wouldn't reveal Himself to them; a lot of ex-christian atheists simply inherited the faith of their parents, and when they got turned loose in the world, they fell away because they didn't really know God. They need to have their own faith that is wholly theirs. No one can make you or by proxy give your life to Christ. That is a decision each individual person has to come to on their own.

ABC News: Purity Balls: Lifting the Veil on Special Ceremony

00Scud00 says...

Sorry, but that's just silly. Limited sexual experience doesn't mean you can't be aware that it's bad sex, you can still be unhappy with it but not know why. You might also think that it's just the way it is.

I wonder how many long suffering wives have just lain there while their clueless husbands mindlessly plowed away, they'll go through the motions while quietly waiting for it to be done. All the while assuming this is just part of their wifely duties.

I've heard a lot about how these days, despite our sex soaked culture there are women who have never really learned about their bodies and can't even get themselves off. And to be fair, the clueless husbands are often no better educated than they are.

greatgooglymoogly said:

I don't know, it seems pretty arbitrary to me either way. Actually the best argument for it IMO is that if you only have sex with one person, you aren't going to know if it's good or terrible. You won't have anything to compare it to and therefore something to make your life more unhappy if you think it's bad; one less issue to divorce for as well. Similarly, maybe if you were poor and couldn't afford fancy food, consciously avoiding ever trying the things you couldn't regularly afford so you would never be unhappy with not having it. It would be a question in the back of your mind, but not a source of unhappiness.

It would also have been nice to have some interview questions about how the sons are taught and treated by the same parents.

What Happens When A Woman Abuses A Man In Public?

Asmo says...

No, not take Weinstein for example, that is an entirely different case and it undermines your position to use such an obvious straw man.

Society promotes the concept that men are violent, women are not. Any man that uses physical violence on a women is evil and if a woman raises a hand to a man and he strikes her in defense, he would still be the one that had to explain himself. Look at the Duluth model re: domestic violence sometime to see how truly baked in the myth that men are the perps and women are the vics...

https://medium.com/iron-ladies/men-are-still-pigs-the-politicization-of-domestic-violence-2cfa7488c204 (written by a woman for noting)

Particularly salient.

[i]It’s clear to me that despite the fact the Duluth Model has proven to be worthless, programs still adhere to the same principles. Men are still the automatic perpetrators, women are always victims. What’s worse is the men under attack by violent wives have no way of protecting themselves. Their right to self-defense in domestic violence cases has been cancelled.[/i]

I'm all for acknowledging that differences between the sexes is an absolutely real thing, but the long and the short of it is that women are basically allowed to assault men almost without consequences, but in the reverse situation the man would (justifiably) have the book thrown at him. And while men do have the physical advantage (although not always), they are hamstrung by society. The mere threat of a rape accusation (or far worse, the accusation that the husband has been abusing the kids) would silence most men in a heartbeat because they understand that the police, the judge, the social workers will believe the woman first.

Violence is wrong as is giving women a free pass because they rolled vagina in the game of life.

AeroMechanical said:

Fair enough, but these are separate issues, I agree with the premise of the video. But, while it would be a mistake to assume that men cannot be victims of abuse, it would also be a mistake to assume general equivalency. Take, Weinstein for example. Once he'd isolated his victims, they had to handle their situation with the added fear that he may physically overpower and rape them. With the gender roles reversed, the situation would in most cases not be the same. There is an extra dimension that needs to be considered resulting from the biological fact that men are bigger and stronger than women. I believe you do need to consider gender, even though it would be nice if you didn't.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists