Just f*king LOL at the ***** worshippers on here

[The Big Dunn]

Of course they didn't factor in...you support them too!

Where is the link to all of these racist Trump supporters who were banned from CPAC? Context please.

I don’t support either Sharpton or Farrakhan. I am not, nor have I ever been, a member of the Nation of Islam or the National Action network. I didn’t vote for Sharpton when he ran for public office.

Yet another example of your racist mindset.

Now you’re playing dumb. You saw it. You can do your own research.

Someone like you that shares the racist and nationalist mindset of the organizers and guests and support Trump surely knew about these events.

[GhostofDempsey]

I just explained it. Trump didn’t denounce the guests or organizers of that event, even after they were shouting pro ***** things at the event.

No, you listed a minister with a sterling record who got one of his speeches parsed by ********** op research lawyers. You listed Farrakhan and Sharpton, both who supported his candidacy. He didn’t support them.

Yes, they chose to support ***** in 2008. I don’t align myself or support either. But I’m surely not going to factor their opinions into my deciding whether or not I support *****.

You said these were conservative Trump supporters who were banned from CPAC. Where is the link?

So Reverend Wright is not a racist??? LMAO! Okay Dunn, if you insist, it was all just a ********** conspiracy to smear him.

***** didn't support Sharpton? He had Sharpton to the White House over 80 times!

[The Big Dunn]

You said these were conservative Trump supporters who were banned from CPAC. Where is the link?

So Reverend Wright is not a racist??? LMAO! Okay Dunn, if you insist, it was all just a ********** conspiracy to smear him.

***** didn't support Sharpton? He had Sharpton to the White House over 80 times!

Im not posting a link of something we know is true and that had been covered by multiple media outlets.

No he isn’t. He had one of his speeches parsed by Op research. He has a documented history outside of that speech that shows who he truly is. It was op research to stoke the anger of uneducated and low information white voters to not vote for *****. It’s politics. That’s what happens.

Dude please don’t regurgitate a Giuliani point the Washington post proved false.

How ever many times he was there, that doesn’t mean he supported him. Geez dude you can’t be this dumb.

[GhostofDempsey]

No he isn’t. He had one of his speeches parsed by Op research. He has a documented history outside of that speech that shows who he truly is. It was op research to stoke the anger of uneducated and low information white voters to not vote for *****. It’s politics. That’s what happens.

Dude please don’t regurgitate a Giuliani point the Washington post proved false.

How ever many times he was there, that doesn’t mean he supported him. Geez dude you can’t be this dumb.

It's not a Giuliani talking point. White House records show 72 documented visits to the White House as of 2014. Some were undocumented. Several more came after 2014. These are documented facts. Even the ******* Washington Post verified those numbers.

So Sharpton gets to visit the White House 80 times but ***** doesn't support him? Yeah okay. The "community organizer" doesn't support the radical race hustler.

[The Big Dunn]

It's not a Giuliani talking point. White House records show 72 documented visits to the White House as of 2014. Some were undocumented. Several more came after 2014. These are documented facts. Even the ******* Washington Post verified those numbers.

So Sharpton gets to visit the White House 80 times but ***** doesn't support him? Yeah okay. The "community organizer" doesn't support the radical race hustler.

Yes it was a Giuliani point. He said it on an interview. The Washington post fact checked it because Giuliani lies and exaggerates a lot.

Now I know you’re not highly educated but I figured you’d been to school long enough to know 72 isn’t 80. Not even if you round up.

Yes, he went 72 times. No that doesn’t mean ***** supports him.

[GhostofDempsey]

Yes it was a Giuliani point. He said it on an interview. The Washington post fact checked it because Giuliani lies and exaggerates a lot.

Now I know you’re not highly educated but I figured you’d been to school long enough to know 72 isn’t 80. Not even if you round up.

Yes, he went 72 times. No that doesn’t mean ***** supports him.

I just told you the Washington Post fact checked it, and they discovered 72 visits by Sharpton! Are you even paying attention? You're going to split hairs now and say 72 isn't 80? Really Dunn? That's pathetic.

If David Duke visited the White House during Trump's term 72 times, you'd be screaming about racism and white supremacy.

[The Big Dunn]

I just told you the Washington Post fact checked it, and they discovered 72 visits by Sharpton! Are you even paying attention? You're going to split hairs now and say 72 isn't 80? Really Dunn? That's pathetic.

If David Duke visited the White House during Trump's term 72 times, you'd be screaming about racism and white supremacy.

Idiot I pointed to the post on my initial response. Or did you not see that?

I also would have posted the exact number, not the Giuliani talking point that had been proven false. 72 does not equal 80.

[GhostofDempsey]

Idiot I pointed to the post on my initial response. Or did you not see that?

I also would have posted the exact number, not the Giuliani talking point that had been proven false. 72 does not equal 80.

72 was the number in 2014, ***** had two more years after that. There were also undocumented visits to the WH by Sharpton, either way it doesn't matter. The fact that he was in the WH 72 times is a huge concern. You insist on splitting hairs over 72 and 80, you lost.

[The Big Dunn]

72 was the number in 2014, ***** had two more years after that. There were also undocumented visits to the WH by Sharpton, either way it doesn't matter. The fact that he was in the WH 72 times is a huge concern. You insist on splitting hairs over 72 and 80, you lost.

I’m not splitting hairs, I’m trying to help you with accuracy of your point instead of falsely citing a Giuliani number that imbecile got wrong.

My other point is the number of visits doesn’t mean ***** supported him.

You’re babbling desperately to try and take focus away from people who share your political positions and support for Trump cheering for ***** this weekend.

The only conceivable reason why is because you agree with them but are trying to hide it.

Most **********s were disgusted by this. That you weren’t suggests Hype Job was 100% right to label people ***** supporters.

[GhostofDempsey]

I’m not splitting hairs, I’m trying to help you with accuracy of your point instead of falsely citing a Giuliani number that imbecile got wrong.

My other point is the number of visits doesn’t mean ***** supported him.

You’re babbling desperately to try and take focus away from people who share your political positions and support for Trump cheering for ***** this weekend.

The only conceivable reason why is because you agree with them but are trying to hide it.

Most **********s were disgusted by this. That you weren’t suggests Hype Job was 100% right to label people ***** supporters.

You're splitting hairs. Thanks for conceding on this. Take your L like a man and move along.