Page 31 of 31
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2025 8:45 pm
by oxo
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2025 7:41 pm
by Dunners
Ooft.
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2025 8:11 pm
by Hoover Attack
oxo wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2025 8:45 pm
Ooft.
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2025 8:12 pm
by Hoover Attack
Dunners wrote: ↑Sun Jan 26, 2025 7:41 pm
Ooft.
All imports?
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2025 9:12 pm
by Rich Tea Wellin
Surely these tarrifs will just be passed on and things like coffee will just cost the average america a dollar more?
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2025 1:20 pm
by Lost not Found
Rich Tea Wellin wrote: ↑Sun Jan 26, 2025 9:12 pm
Surely these tarrifs will just be passed on and things like coffee will just cost the average america a dollar more?
Nah, the consumers won't be paying tariffs as they'll swap to patriotic coffee sparking a boom in agriculture (all staffed with 'proper' Americans of course).
It's just what happened with Brexit and how all the flag shagging morons have reinvigorated our manufacturing base and high streets.
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2025 2:11 pm
by BoniO
I know some people wonder why any of us in the UK are concerned about what is happening across the pond but you only have to look at the direction that our society is going to realise that we're possibly just a few years behind the US. What's happening there now is probably coming our way in the not too distant future.
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:46 pm
by Currywurst and Chips
Colombians have backed down and will now allow the return of their illegal migrants.
Early win for Trump against the Bogota Bottlejobs!
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:50 pm
by RedDwarf 1881
Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:46 pm
Colombians have backed down and will now allow the return of their illegal migrants.
Early win for Trump against the Bogota Bottlejobs!
Bizarre how they wouldn’t take back their own people. just goes to show you Trump was right to send them back because Columbia doesn’t want them any more than America does.
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2025 6:07 pm
by Long slender neck
I've read they didnt want them sent back on military transport
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2025 6:18 pm
by Currywurst and Chips
Yes, they definitely were happy to receive the plane loads of criminals back but it was the fact they weren’t sent by commercial plane that upset them
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2025 6:51 pm
by RedDwarf 1881
Long slender neck wrote: ↑Mon Jan 27, 2025 6:07 pm
I've read they didnt want them sent back on military transport
Really ? I thought it was because they were criminals.
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Thu Jan 30, 2025 5:35 pm
by Proposition Joe
First test of the Trump administration and he's passing with flying colours. Terrible plane crash? Very sad, but let's wildly speculate on the causes before all the bodies have been pulled from the river and use the whole thing as an excuse to claim shouldn't hire blacks and gays.
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Thu Jan 30, 2025 5:55 pm
by BoniO
Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2025 5:35 pm
First test of the Trump administration and he's passing with flying colours. Terrible plane crash? Very sad, but let's wildly speculate on the causes before all the bodies have been pulled from the river and use the whole thing as an excuse to claim shouldn't hire blacks and gays.
Just when you thought he couldn’t go any lower…
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Thu Jan 30, 2025 5:56 pm
by StillSpike
I've never thought he couldn't go any lower.
Re: Harris v. Trump
Posted: Thu Jan 30, 2025 10:50 pm
by Stowaway
He says he has “a pretty good idea” of what caused the collision. What an absolute thundercunt he is.