Buy 1 Solar Powered Waving USA President $6.95 & Get 1 Dancing Mexican Cactus Free + Shipping (Free MEL C&C) @ Smooth Sales

33376

Buy 1 Solar Powered Waving USA President $6.95 & Get 1 Dancing Mexican Cactus Free + Shipping (Free MEL C&C) @ Smooth Sales

Go to Deal

Cashback

AssociatedArcherVice on 30/07/2024 - 15:41 smoothsales.com.au (7308 clicks)
Last edited 30/07/2024 - 18:15 by 1 other user

My Fellow OzBargainers,

It’s HUGE. It’s TREMENDOUS. You won’t believe this deal – believe me, you just won’t. We’re talking about the best deal in the history of deals. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

For a limited time only, get your hands on a Donald Trump Lookalike Solar-Powered Waving USA President Figure for just $6.95 + shipping. This little guy waves at you, just like the greatest American president waves at all his tremendous fans. And guess what? That’s not all, folks.

Buy this fantastic, incredible, amazing figure and you get a FREE Solar-Powered Dancing Mexican Cactus. That’s right, folks – a FREE Mexican cactus that dances. It’s like a fiesta on your dashboard. The best part? This is all for you, my fellow OzBargainers.

Deal Details:

Price: $6.95 + shipping
Free Click and Collect: Melbourne Warehouse (for the locals)
Metro Shipping: Flat rate $7.95

This deal is going to be yuuuge, believe me. Don’t miss out – get yours now before they’re all gone. It’s going to be tremendous. You’re going to love it, I guarantee* it.

Make your dashboard GREAT again!

*no actual guarantees will be made.
Cactus will be added to your order when shipped. One cactus per order.

Toys & Kids Toy

3 Aug 2024

Related Stores

Smooth Sales

closed Comments

- - - - 1st-Amendment on 30/07/2024 - 17:56
        
        +3
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        I hope this has been educational for you.
        
        It has, but not in the way you hoped. Your definition of 'fascism' doesn't match any official definition. You might want to go look it up before making a fool of yourself.
        
        which your beloved sex offender wants to scrap.
        
        More 'education' lol… You seem to have forgotten what team you are on there. Hint: Republicans are pro-Constitution, Democrats want to replace it. You need to know which team you are before making such clumsy statements.
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 30/07/2024 - 19:00
        
        +4
        
        @1st-Amendment: " A political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy."
        
        All entirely consistent with what I said.
        
        1st-Amendment on 30/07/2024 - 22:47
        
        +2
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        All entirely consistent with what I said.
        
        Well less test your claims:
        
        a dictatorial leader
        US is and always has maintained a separation of powers. Claim = false
        
        centralized autocracy
        As above. Claim = fail
        
        militarism
        Trump was the first president since before WW2 not to start a new war. Claim = fail
        
        forcible suppression of opposition
        Quite the opposite. Free speech enables and encourages opposition. Trump is the biggest proponent of free speech. Claim = fail
        
        belief in a natural social hierarchy
        The President who is most known for standing up for the little guy? The 'deplorables' Claim = fail
        
        subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race
        Again, the opposite. Individual sovereignty is the pillar of the conservative movement. Claim = fail
        
        strong regimentation of society and the economy.
        Again the opposite, GOP is the party of free market economics.
        
        So everything is the opposite of what you said. Every single definition is the entirely inconsistent with that of fascism.
        
        I know it's cool to throw the word 'fascist' around every time you hear an opinion you don't like, but you've really got to engage the brain at some point, rather than simple repeat the lies you've been told.
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 30/07/2024 - 22:52
        
        @1st-Amendment: Insurrection of Jan 6.
        Project 2025.
        "I'll be a dictator on day one"
        Indicted for trying to get a Republican Secretary of State to 'find' him 10,000 extra votes.
        
        I suggest you go and read a book about how Hitler and Mussolini seized power from democracies. Or did you think they magically came into existence overnight?
        
        1st-Amendment on 30/07/2024 - 23:04
        
        +3
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        Insurrection of Jan 6.
        
        This is a media headline, not a fact. You keep demonstrating how easily you swallow and repeat the media lies. It is not reflecting well on your ability to think for yourself. This is why the term NPC and Bot gets used with the Left. The inability to construct an original argument, they just repeat media headlines over and over…
        
        Project 2025.
        
        Another media headline…
        
        "I'll be a dictator on day one"
        
        And another…
        
        I suggest you go and read a book about how Hitler and Mussolini seized power from democracies.
        
        I have read a few, I also studied Marx, Lenin, Mao, Castro, Pol Pot, and the various Communist revolutions, which specific parts did you have in mind? Feel free to quote the exact passages you feel are parallel to today so I can debunk your silly claims just like I have with the claims of 'scrapping the Constitution' and 'Trump is a Fascist' crazy talk.
        
        Let me give you a hint. All of the tyrants throughout history all were made possible first by suppression of speech. It's the one common theme that runs throughout all human history, and it the one thing the Trump defends. Only once you have controlled the speech can you control a population. This is why your claims are so laughable. Had you read any of the books you mentioned you would know this and wouldn't make such ludicrous claims
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 30/07/2024 - 23:09
        
        +1
        
        @1st-Amendment: Ah, you've 'done your own research' by watching some crackpot YouTube videos. Newsflash, champ, communism and fascism are two sides of the same coin.
        
        As for all your 'fake news' responses. It's amazing how the guy you support (who is a habitual liar - you can't be so dimwitted as to deny that documented fact) is at odds with literally everybody but his own supporters/family, and his hand picked judges. People like you would likely be brownshirts in the 1930s.
        
        1st-Amendment on 31/07/2024 - 09:11
        
        +1
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        Newsflash, champ, communism and fascism are two sides of the same coin.
        
        Well they aren't actually. Communism is far left, and Fascism is far right. They are opposites. There are some similarities with approaches to authoritarianism, but they are not the same at all.
        
        But thanks for yet another demonstration of how you get everything wrong…
        
        deny that documented fact
        
        Your poorly thought-out opinion is not a fact.
        
        and his hand picked judges
        
        Each party nominates candidates to be judges, the is how the system works. It's like you've just read click-bait headlines and gotten angry. That is precisely what the click-bait wants you to do. Stop being so gullible.
        
        People like you would likely be brownshirts in the 1930s
        
        Awesome logic. The people promoting greater freedom are the people who want less freedom? This is your game winning argument? How many bongs can you see right now?
        
        Mr Bob Dobalina on 31/07/2024 - 02:44
        
        +2
        
        @1st-Amendment: What war did Trump start?
        
        1st-Amendment on 31/07/2024 - 09:22
        
        +1
        
        @Mr Bob Dobalina:
        
        What war did Trump start?
        
        None. I think the quotes went wonky in my responses above. I'm making the claim that Trump got involved in no new wars, which is a good thing.
        
        Bimbobob on 30/07/2024 - 22:22
        
        +2
        
        @1st-Amendment: Replace or amend? Lol
        
        1st-Amendment on 30/07/2024 - 22:49
        
        @Bimbobob:
        
        Replace or amend? Lol
        
        I have no idea what you are talking about. If you are responding to one of my comments, it helps to quote to give context.
        
        Maloo on 30/07/2024 - 19:36
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows: An easier way of defining a literal fascist would be done in two words then - "Dan Andrews".
        
        McFly on 30/07/2024 - 19:52
        
        @Maloo: Hey, watch your language!
        
        Rick Sanchez on 31/07/2024 - 11:02
        
        @Maloo: I think everyone in this conversation finds this comment to make zero sense
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 31/07/2024 - 11:09
        
        @Rick Sanchez: Indeed. The man who stood down after winning three elections is a literal fascist.
        
        1st-Amendment on 31/07/2024 - 12:10
        
        +1
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        The man who stood down after winning three elections is a literal fascist.
        
        You keep using those words without understanding what they mean…
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 31/07/2024 - 13:12
        
        @1st-Amendment: In case you can't tell, that was a thing called sarcasm. It's often used to highlight the absurdity of a notion, like calling a leader who respects democratic conventions a fascist.
        
        1st-Amendment on 31/07/2024 - 15:48
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        like calling a leader who respects democratic conventions a fascist.
        
        So the Democratic Party then? What democratic convention was performed to anoint Harris as leader of the party?
        
        You keep using words that you clearly don't understand…
        
        Bdawg on 01/08/2024 - 14:38
        
        -1
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows: I lost IQ reading all your dribble. 1st-Amendment thoroughly schooled you.
      - Ghost47 on 30/07/2024 - 21:05
        
        +2
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows: Great username LOL.
Mydc5r on 30/07/2024 - 16:12

-3

Jawohl, mein Führer
- McFly on 30/07/2024 - 17:28
  
  The good news is TDS isn't deadly, and it can be cured.
  - pharcyde on 30/07/2024 - 18:14
    
    +6
    
    TDS can be cured by turning off CNN, shaving your neckbeard and finally standing up to your Wife's Boyfriend.
    - jackspratt on 30/07/2024 - 20:11
      
      +8
      
      I can't remember you ever standing up to me.
darkly on 30/07/2024 - 16:13

+10

Junk
zzymurgy on 30/07/2024 - 16:16

+20

This is going to be hard for some to grasp, but they changed the President back in 2021.
- - RolandWaites on 30/07/2024 - 16:26
    
    +7
    
    2021, Trump's crazed supporters stormed the Capitol in January 2021 for a reason.
    - Dogstar on 30/07/2024 - 16:52
      
      +2
      
      Crazy is as crazy does.
    - smartazz104 on 30/07/2024 - 20:02
      
      +1
      
      Oh no that was just some tourists visiting the Capitol, please ignore all the cowering politicians.
asrey1975 on 30/07/2024 - 16:22

+8

This is going to be great to put on top of my 2024 Election Cake tribute to Trump! Fight Fight Fight! :)
Temptation on 30/07/2024 - 16:25

+8

Trash….
- MattyD on 30/07/2024 - 17:48
  
  +1
  
  Agreed. And the plastic figure isn't much better.
JohnHowardsEyebrows on 30/07/2024 - 16:26

+8

Any bundle deals with Mussolini or the pencil-moustache fellow?
- andresampras on 30/07/2024 - 16:35
  
  +2
  
  clark gable?
  dick dastardly?
  - McFly on 30/07/2024 - 17:25
    
    Some greats here
RolandWaites on 30/07/2024 - 16:26

+8

Hands too big, skin too white, tie too short. This is barely even a resemblance!
cmyk on 30/07/2024 - 16:26

+8

Why would anyone put a coward who won't debate Kamala on their dashboard?
- AlteredBeast on 30/07/2024 - 16:35
  
  +3
  
  He destroyed Hilary and Biden who are x10 more knowledgeable in politics.
  You don't think he'll destroy Kamala? lol
  - furiousgeorge on 30/07/2024 - 16:47
    
    +2
    
    But but the ABC said she super smart lol.
  - Mydc5r on 30/07/2024 - 16:50
    
    +15
    
    He is the only president I know that opening fantasies on his own daughter, what is disgusting person.
    
    Btw he is also a convicted rapist. Someone that tested positively negative when he did his COVID test.
    
    Someone that said we should drink bleach.
    
    Someone that cheated on his wife with a porn star while she was pregnant.
    
    Person, woman, man, camera, TV.
    Someone that confuses between A cognitive test and an IQ test.
    
    Mexico never paid for the wall.
    
    He asked people to find votes that doesn't exist.
    
    Also said grab them by the …. In the bus.
    - Lets Go Brandon on 30/07/2024 - 17:00
      
      Gropey Biden apparently has fantasies of his own.
      
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4PLSPvJ9BY
      - Mydc5r on 30/07/2024 - 19:11
        
        @Lets Go Brandon: Wanna make a bet who will win the presidency this year?
        
        How about $1,000 Aud?
      - Mydc5r on 30/07/2024 - 19:15
        
        +4
        
        @Lets Go Brandon: Biden is like eating expired food.
        
        Trump is like eating expired food covered by dog poop.
        
        Maloo on 30/07/2024 - 19:41
        
        +1
        
        @Mydc5r: Thank you preschooler for the joke.
      - ihfree on 30/07/2024 - 20:22
        
        +1
        
        @Lets Go Brandon: Biden is out. It's time to let go.
    - 1st-Amendment on 30/07/2024 - 18:08
      
      +4
      
      Btw he is also a convicted rapist
      
      Is that what you read in The Guardian then instantly believed?
      Civil trials are not 'convictions' just so you know. This is common mistake made by people who have no idea what they are talking about, and who simply regurgitate lies fed to them from the media. It might be time to upgrade your source of info to something more reliable…
      - Mydc5r on 30/07/2024 - 19:09
        
        +3
        
        @1st-Amendment: I bet you are on Jeffrey Epstein "list" also. Trump is.
        
        1st-Amendment on 30/07/2024 - 19:20
        
        +2
        
        @Mydc5r:
        
        I bet you are on Jeffrey Epstein "list" also. Trump is.
        
        Another Guardian lie you so easily swallowed. Let me know when you come up with an original thought…
        
        flatwinesmoke on 30/07/2024 - 20:08
        
        +4
        
        @1st-Amendment: Everything that goes against your cult leader has to be fake news, right? "Because an educated person would know" that ignoring an abundance of verifiable facts is what makes you truly intelligent. Many people are saying facts do not care about your feelings.
        
        1st-Amendment on 30/07/2024 - 22:52
        
        +1
        
        @flatwinesmoke:
        
        Everything that goes against your cult leader has to be fake news, right?
        
        No. Unsubstantiated and already debunked claims are fake news though.
        
        that ignoring an abundance of verifiable facts
        
        Please provide theses verifiable facts. You conveniently forgot to do so…
        
        Many people are saying facts do not care about your feelings.
        
        So far you've only provided your feelings. Try presenting some actual facts rather than your opinion and let's see where that takes us.
        
        flatwinesmoke on 31/07/2024 - 07:10
        
        +2
        
        @1st-Amendment: @1st-Amendment Your claim of it being debunked is unable to be verified unfortunately.
        
        Your comments come across as a bit old and weird, I guess worshipping someone long enough can make you start acting like them. Might be time to pick a better role model.
        
        1st-Amendment on 31/07/2024 - 07:43
        
        @flatwinesmoke:
        
        Your claim of it being debunked is unable to be verified unfortunately.
        
        I didn't make the claim, you did. Please present this evidence of Trump being on Epstein's 'list'. Facts/Feelings, you know the drill…
        
        Your comments come across as a bit old and weird,
        
        Feelings…
        
        I guess worshipping someone long enough can make you start acting like them.
        
        Feelings…
        
        Might be time to pick a better role model.
        
        Feelings…
        
        Many people are saying facts do not care about your feelings.
        
        Remember when you said this? Maybe you should follow your own advice.
        
        flatwinesmoke on 31/07/2024 - 20:54
        
        +1
        
        @1st-Amendment: You certainly did claim it was debunked without providing any evidence.
        
        You seem to spend many hours a day defending a guy you wouldn't leave your kids alone with. I stand by my advice that you need to pick someone less old and weird to look up to.
        
        1st-Amendment on 01/08/2024 - 09:34
        
        @flatwinesmoke:
        
        You certainly did claim it was debunked without providing any evidence.
        
        The original claim was that Trump is on Epstein's 'list' whatever that means. When this hit the headlines I looked into it and found no evidence of any criminal activity, just lots of media exaggeration playing the Orange Man Bad routine which gullible people swallowed. If you have evidence to support this then please provide it, Otherwise these claims remain in the bunk column, and those who believe it remain in the gullible column.
        
        You seem to spend many hours a day defending a guy you wouldn't leave your kids alone with
        
        I don't have TDS, I haven't bought into the media lies which you clearly have.
        
        pick someone less old and weird to look up to.
        
        I see you got the DNC talking points memo. Try not to be so gullible. It's embarrassing when you just repeat the party line like a lemming…
        
        youfnc on 01/08/2024 - 10:22
        
        +1
        
        @1st-Amendment:
        
        I don't have TDS
        
        2 days and 40+ comments spent furiously defending a weird foreign politician.
        
        1st-Amendment on 01/08/2024 - 10:50
        
        @youfnc:
        
        2 days and 40+ comments spent furiously defending a weird foreign politician.
        
        Looks like I have another fanboy to add to the list.
        Imagine what level of 'weird' you have to be to think that stalking is a winning move.
        
        youfnc on 01/08/2024 - 11:04
        
        +1
        
        @1st-Amendment: You got me there! My morbid curiosity often gets the best of me when I dive down your comment history rabbit hole. I now understand why my wife loves TV shows like the housewives of beverly hills.
        
        flatwinesmoke on 01/08/2024 - 22:08
        
        +3
        
        @1st-Amendment: Calling anything you don't want to believe "the media" isn't the defence you think it is. I know you, so far as to know that you never looked into it. You saw somewhere that the lefties were diminishing the name of your leader and immediately sought refuge in Facebook groups and random conspiracy bloggers to avoid the feeling you so dread that is cognitive dissonance.
        
        Kinda weird that in an interview with Fox, Trump said he would be reluctant to release the Epstein files.
        
        Quite weird he stated that Epstein "likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.” He also wished Maxwell well during her trial multiple times. Not to mention he has talked about Prince Andrew being "a lot of fun", only to deny knowing him later on.
        
        Weird that Trump appears in Epstein's flight logs 7 times, while others that appeared just once were accused by MAGA as being pedos.
        
        Very weird that his name pops up so many times in the Epstein files, with what appears to be many more times as Doe ##.
        
        Trump has made beyond weird comments about his daughter many, many times over the years; not to mention the way he holds and touches her, and that's just in public when he knows he's being filmed.
        
        At some point weird ends up being something more than just weird. There are dozens more facts I could list about just how weird Trump is with Epstein and kids, but I know your mind has already retreated to the comfort of ignorance at this point. Your reaction will always be to call everything fake news that is contrary to your desired beliefs, or deflect and say something like "but what about Clinton", or even just flat out call people "woke".
        
        I sincerely hope you find a less old, and very much less weird person to provide you with the motivation to get up in the morning.
        
        1st-Amendment on 02/08/2024 - 12:37
        
        -2
        
        @flatwinesmoke:
        
        Calling anything you don't want to believe "the media" isn't the defence you think it is.
        
        It is actually. If it isn't, then feel free to post you non-media sources for the your claims here:
        
        I know you
        
        Lie
        
        so far as to know that you never looked into it.
        
        Lie
        
        You saw somewhere that the lefties were diminishing the name of your leader and immediately sought refuge in Facebook groups and random conspiracy bloggers to avoid the feeling you so dread that is cognitive dissonance.
        
        Lie. But these wild assumptions tell me a lot about your ability to think clearly…
        
        Kinda weird that in an interview with Fox
        
        So media then? Exactly like I said. This comedy writes itself…
        
        I also note the use the word 'weird' which is the DNC media talking point this week. Yet more evidence you are just a victim of media brainwashing.
        
        Weird that Trump appears in Epstein's flight logs 7 times
        
        Is it? Post your non-media link to this data and let's see. Because sharing flights doesn't seem weird to me, I do it all the time. Have you ever been on flight with other people?
        
        At some point weird ends up being something more than just weird.
        
        Well that's what the DNC talking points told you to think… so I guess.
        You have to wonder about the party of diversity and inclusion suddenly decided that being 'weird' is now a bad thing. Lady Gaga and her Little Monsters won't be pleased about that.
        
        Your reaction will always be to call everything fake news that is contrary to your desired beliefs, or deflect and say something like "but what about Clinton"
        
        Citation required.
        Fake news is anything uncited that was likely read in the some biased media article, You know exactly like what you've done here.
        If you cite it, I will read it. If not your opinion goes in to the same bucket as the other 8 billion opinions that are equally worthless.
        
        I sincerely hope…
        
        This post delivered more than I could ever hope for. All I asked for was as citation and instead of doing that you did what can only be described as an overdoes of cope.
        
        If you ever find a non-media source for your claims, just post them next time. Save yourself a lot of time.
        
        I'm going to help you out a bit here. OP said that 'Trump is a convicted rapist'. I know that isn't true since the only court case involved was a civil trial ( which only deal with damages, not convictions - words are important here), and even then they found the claim if rape was not substantiated
        Here's the Case Law document: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/1146…
        Here's the relevant quote "The only point on which Ms. Carroll did not prevail was whether she had proved that Mr. Trump had “raped” her "
        
        So the claim of 'Trump is a convicted rapist" is actually fake news. Stop swallowing that garbage, it's rotting your brain.
        
        flatwinesmoke on 03/08/2024 - 12:14
        
        -1
        
        @1st-Amendment: First you claim I lied when I stated you did not look into it; then you follow up by saying everything in "the media" is false, including a video interview from the very source you and your Q-ultists get their talking points from? Applying your logic, you are saying you disbelieve everything - unless, maybe, you are in the room as an eye witness. Add that to the fact you ignored the other points I included in my argument - so tell me again I am lying when I stated you did not look into it? You have nowhere to look if all secondary sources, and in this case all primary sources, of information are "fake news".
        
        You have isolated yourself so far from reality, I am certain you no longer recognise the person you were prior to idolising a WEIRD reality TV billionaire. Might be time to back away from whereever you spend all your time during the day and realise that the world is much bigger than the one inside your head. Go outside, maybe attempt to reinitiate some old friendships you had before pushing everyone away with your absurd opinions.
        
        1st-Amendment on 13/08/2024 - 15:08
        
        -2
        
        @flatwinesmoke:
        
        First you claim I lied when I stated you did not look into it
        
        Because that is a lie. I did look into it. So by definition you are lying since it is not true.
        
        then you follow up by saying everything in "the media" is false
        
        I never said that. Feel free to quote where I did. You can't though because I never did. Another lie.
        
        including a video interview
        
        I didn't post a video either. Another lie.
        
        Applying your logic, you are saying you disbelieve everything
        
        That is not how logic works. This says a lot about your ability to think logically though…
        
        so tell me again I am lying when I stated you did not look into it?
        
        You are lying.
        
        and in this case all primary sources, of information are "fake news".
        
        And you don't seem to know what a primary source is…
        
        You have…
        
        Blah blah, more emotion and opinion…
        
        Thanks for the demonstration, it went exactly as expected. All I asked for was a simple citation and you couldn't do that. That speaks volumes about why you believe in things that never happened…
        
        flatwinesmoke on 19/08/2024 - 19:49
        
        @1st-Amendment: Stop spreading disinformation. Trump was found guilty of forced digital penetration - otherwise known as rape outside of a court setting.
        
        Donald Trump is a rapist.
        
        You do realise how deplorable your view is here, right? The weird old man you spend so much of your life defending is a felon and a rapist who, by his own admission, does not believe in repentance despite claiming to be Christian. In your defence, you didn't know any better because you never spent any time researching his actions or character. If only someone had pointed that out earlier…
        
        1st-Amendment on 20/08/2024 - 10:16
        
        -2
        
        @flatwinesmoke:
        
        Stop spreading disinformation
        
        'dIsInFoRmAtIoN!' lol… you're the one unable to provide a simple citation.
        
        because you never spent any time researching
        
        Yet you're the one unable to provide a simple citation.
        TDS can be cured, you just have to learn how logic works first…
        
        Maloo on 30/07/2024 - 19:44
        
        @Mydc5r: Don't forget Ol' Billy Clinton. His on the list multiple times. Joe Biden probably used his know alias of Robert Peters. Just like he uses for all other criminal activity
        
        Mydc5r on 30/07/2024 - 22:37
        
        +1
        
        @Maloo: Agree. They should all go to prison. Some more than the others. But unfortunately, we live in an unfair world.
        
        Maloo on 31/07/2024 - 00:08
        
        +1
        
        @Maloo: The lefties are a strange lot. They neg a comment of facts because it makes them think that they can change them. Haha. They just can’t handle the truth. No wonder they backed Bernie Biden and now the one that fell out of the coconut tree.
        
        SevereComplaint on 31/07/2024 - 12:49
        
        +1
        
        @Maloo: Did you just reply to yourself lol?
    - zubzub on 30/07/2024 - 23:55
      
      +1
      
      A convicted rapist? You mean the civil case for battery? Imagine someone called you a rapist.
  - JohnHowardsEyebrows on 30/07/2024 - 16:57
    
    +10
    
    Biden beat him easily 4 years ago, in both the debates and the election. He stepped down because he's too old. Trump is also too old, he is clearly unhinged, and he's apparently incontinent lol.
    
    Harris is a law abiding person who can speak in coherent thoughts. Trump is a literal criminal who meanders on stream of consciousness rants.
    - Lets Go Brandon on 30/07/2024 - 17:01
      
      +13
      
      Kamala is unburdened by what has been and what is to be.
      - JohnHowardsEyebrows on 30/07/2024 - 17:20
        
        +1
        
        @Lets Go Brandon: You think the nappy man can beat Kamala in a comparison of speech coherence, champ?
        
        Lets Go Brandon on 30/07/2024 - 17:22
        
        +1
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows: Yes.
        
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Jc-kL22fQU
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 30/07/2024 - 17:34
        
        @Lets Go Brandon: Word salads vs raving lunatic rants.
        
        https://youtu.be/adZYjigrqtI?si=7P6cowsLA87Q2eNA
        
        pharcyde on 30/07/2024 - 18:15
        
        +2
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows: As long as they breathalyse crazy kamala before the debate, it should be fine.
        
        McFly on 30/07/2024 - 18:25
        
        +1
        
        @pharcyde: The thing is she's naturally like that.
        
        Maloo on 30/07/2024 - 19:46
        
        +3
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows: Why is it that lefties all ways think that to win an argument they have to refer to name calling. School yard behavior.
    - WasBargain on 30/07/2024 - 17:36
      
      +2
      
      Is she? I remember her cackling away when locking up people for weed, then cackling again when admitting to smoking weed.. 😅 "COHERENT THOUGHTS". 🤣
      - JohnHowardsEyebrows on 30/07/2024 - 17:41
        
        +2
        
        @WasBargain: You presumably think Trump's sexual assault victims must have appreciated he wasn't laughing.
        
        WasBargain on 30/07/2024 - 17:53
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows: I don't think they think much at all.. 🤣
        
        1st-Amendment on 30/07/2024 - 18:16
        
        +2
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        Trump's sexual assault victims
        
        Which ones? I know of know criminal cases that show such a thing. Sounds like another sucker for fake news…
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 30/07/2024 - 18:51
        
        +2
        
        @1st-Amendment: Doesn't need a criminal case to be proven - was proven in court. He's also boasted of sexually assaulting women on a hot mic.
        
        vash5 on 31/07/2024 - 01:04
        
        +1
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        Doesn't need a criminal case to be proven - was proven in court.
        
        Ahh what?? If thats the case why is he not charged? This doesn't make any sense.
        
        He's also boasted of sexually assaulting women on a hot mic.
        
        Go on
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 31/07/2024 - 07:01
        
        +1
        
        @vash5:
        
        Ahh what?? If thats the case why is he not charged? This doesn't make any sense.
        
        Yeah, you clearly don't know much about how anglo justice systems work. I suggest a 10 minute convo with ChatGPT on the difference between criminal and civil burden of proof. 👍
        
        Go on
        
        https://youtu.be/VKMGRPVXdT0?si=RRNej_pIZF8h4HjR
        
        1st-Amendment on 31/07/2024 - 07:47
        
        +1
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        Yeah, you clearly don't know much about how anglo justice systems work
        
        Someone here doesn't…
        
        the difference between criminal and civil burden of proof.
        
        You might want to do the same thing, because you've quite clearly confused the two…
        
        vash5 on 31/07/2024 - 10:27
        
        +1
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        Yeah, you clearly don't know much about how anglo justice systems work. I suggest a 10 minute convo with ChatGPT on the difference between criminal and civil burden of proof.
        
        You still have failed to produce an answer. Show me what was proven in court.. should be pretty simple for you as it would have been documented.
        
        He's also boasted of sexually assaulting women on a hot mic.
        
        Go on
        
        https://youtu.be/VKMGRPVXdT0?si=RRNej_pIZF8h4HjR
        
        A private convo caught that you wouldn't bat a eye lid had it been Clinton or your mate or a coworker.
        
        C'mon man you got to do better than that.
        
        1st-Amendment on 31/07/2024 - 07:44
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        Doesn't need a criminal case to be proven
        
        Lol, That's exactly what it means… But who needs proof when you have the media to tell you what to believe…
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 31/07/2024 - 08:04
        
        +2
        
        @1st-Amendment: Again, your ignorance is both astounding and par for the course for Trump fanbois.
        
        Criminal standard is only applied because sending people to jail is a serious matter.
        
        Hence I can say Bruce Lehrmann is a r**ist, Ben Roberts Smith is a murderer, because they were found to be so on the balance of probabilities.
        
        Move on from your argument - you're embarrassing yourself (even more) by trying to extend beyond your bogan capabilities.
        
        1st-Amendment on 31/07/2024 - 08:41
        
        +2
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        Criminal standard is only applied because sending people to jail is a serious matter.
        
        That's right, and if you cannot get a conviction then you are not a criminal. See how that works now?
        The clue is literally in the title…
        
        because they were found to be so on the balance of probabilities.
        
        In a civil court… which only decides damages claims, not convictions. This is where you seem to be confused…
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 31/07/2024 - 09:02
        
        @1st-Amendment: You must have forgotten Trump's criminal convictions. 34 of them. In addition to a court finding him to have sexually assaulted a woman.
        
        1st-Amendment on 31/07/2024 - 09:31
        
        +3
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        You must have forgotten Trump's criminal convictions. 34 of them.
        
        None of which are related to sexual assault… Which was your claim. Claim = debunked.
        
        In addition to a court finding him to have sexually assaulted a woman.
        
        A civil court found him 'liable' for damages related to a claimed but unproven sexual assault. No criminal case has been proven.
        You should learn how to read the words, it would help a lot…
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 31/07/2024 - 10:25
        
        +1
        
        @1st-Amendment: Again, back to square one. Proven to a civil standard is still proven. Just not to the degree that would allow incarceration. Pretty sad that you can't accept reality about an incontinent, sleazy, corrupt old narcissist.
        
        1st-Amendment on 31/07/2024 - 10:31
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        Again, back to square one.
        
        You haven't reached square one yet… You're still figuring out what words mean…
        
        Proven to a civil standard is still proven. Just not to the degree that would allow incarceration
        
        Correct. So case was so weak that it didn't even make it to a criminal court. We seem to agree now that it is such a weak case with not enough evidence for a conviction. But in TDS land details don't matter. Orange Man Bad!
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 31/07/2024 - 11:07
        
        +1
        
        @1st-Amendment: Weak cases don't win civil trials, champ. Nor do they lead to multi million dollar compensation orders.
        
        1st-Amendment on 31/07/2024 - 12:16
        
        +2
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        Weak cases don't win civil trials, champ
        
        Well clearly they do… you even said so yourself. The case isn't strong enough to go to criminal trial, so by definition it's weak.
        I've won a couple of civil cases myself on nothing more than hearsay. You might surprised how these things work in real life. Maybe if you get outside once in while you'll learn how things work rather than simply regurgitating media headlines about Orange Man Bad all day…
        
        jackspratt on 31/07/2024 - 12:56
        
        +1
        
        @1st-Amendment:
        
        The case isn't strong enough to go to criminal trial, so by definition it's weak.
        
        Nonsense.
        
        There were 2 strongly defended defamation trials before juries, and New York doesn't have a criminal defamation statute.
        
        1st-Amendment on 01/08/2024 - 12:49
        
        +1
        
        @jackspratt:
        
        There were 2 strongly defended…
        
        Civil cases, which have a much weaker standard than criminal trials.
        
        jackspratt on 01/08/2024 - 14:06
        
        +1
        
        @1st-Amendment: That doesn't make them "weak" cases.
        
        In fact, they were so strong that Ms Carroll was awarded a total damages of US$88m, for sexual assault and defamation.
        
        In July, Judge Kaplan clarified that the jury had found that Trump had raped Carroll according to the common definition of the word. In August 2023, Kaplan dismissed a countersuit and wrote that Carroll's accusation of "rape" is "substantially true".
        
        1st-Amendment on 01/08/2024 - 14:46
        
        @jackspratt:
        
        they were so strong that Ms Carroll was awarded a total damages
        
        But not strong enough to get a conviction in criminal court… Let that sink in for a moment…
        
        jackspratt on 01/08/2024 - 15:16
        
        @1st-Amendment:
        
        Let that sink in for a moment
        
        It already has - he has been found by a jury of his peers, and a judge, to have raped E Jean Carroll.
        
        1st-Amendment on 01/08/2024 - 15:44
        
        -1
        
        @jackspratt:
        
        he has been found by a jury of his peers, and a judge, to have raped E Jean Carroll.
        
        You might want to try getting your info from more reliable sources than TDS media:
        "The only point on which Ms. Carroll did not prevail was whether she had proved that Mr. Trump had “raped” her "
        https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/1146…
        
        Amateur hour is over, it's time to go to bed….

This was posted 8 months 9 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Buy 1 Solar Powered Waving USA President $6.95 & Get 1 Dancing Mexican Cactus Free + Shipping (Free MEL C&C) @ Smooth Sales

Related Stores

closed Comments

Top Deals

New Deals