Political insider says Obama and Michelle divorcing.

It's topics like these that prove humanity is doomed.

It almost feels like the Right craves disaster. Obviously this is fake news.

Spreading it to keep 'the good fight' going? That's priceless.

To the OP, and his lackeys who do this everyday, great job.

a reply to: schuyler

that doesnt matter to those this news was targeted for. obviously, by the comments.
it works every time.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: anonentity

Maybe the first honest thing they've ever done.

If it's a joke and not to be taken literally, OK. Obviously, people found it to be true, funny, or both given your star count (and you don't come across as someone who gives two f$#ks about star count - quick equivocation) but I am not sure it was a joke.

Do you sincerely believe Michelle Obama is a dishonest woman (I can't say you said without a doubt you believe it was "the first honest thing they've ever done" because you hedged with that "maybe")? Because for all intents-and-purposes it is what you have said. She's dishonest because this is the first thing they've ever done that was honest - the remaining had to be dishonest. Beyond even cynicism, that's nowhere near the truth. Beyond because you can, why say such a thing? Unless of course you truly believe she is a dishonest woman, well then, I have my answer.

Barry was the president. For 8 years. Can you name a single president that didn't lie or was dishonest? He obviously made myriad mistakes and found himself as lame duck the last 2 years; if he were a dishonest man in your mind, where does he stand in Pantheon of dishonest presidents? Was he so dishonest that it bled into his wife's behaviour and they were so consumed with dishonesty that they would be doing the first honest thing in getting divorced?

Thanks for taking the time to read because I expect a coherent, logical reply from you - all based on your past behaviour (you may play an asshole on the internet, but from what I've gathered you're engaged and a person of principles and consistent) - and hope you can clear this up if it wasn't to be taken as a joke with no rhyme or reason (again seems circumspect).

PS And not that it should matter, but I am believer in the process (this year's election) and completely embrace him as MY PRESIDENT. Also, I'm a Rush Limbaugh nut-hugger and use ATS as my go-to for news of any kind. This isn't some special snowflake prodding you, it's someone with equal civic vigor and a passion to understand the whole spectrum of political leanings and their accompanying ideas (ideologies/ideologues have too negative of a connotation).

a reply to: BeefNoMeat

True or not, I wanted to comment. I have no love for Obama. Thought he was a dishonest president. A dishonest person.

I know "all politicians lie" but Obama took it to the next level.

In my opinion.

i think that one thing we can all do to help determine what is real and what is fake is first, to follow whatever link is provided to the source. What happened this time is that OP found a link that was fairly new, but THAT poster was discussing an OLD "Political Insider" article. That wasn't readily or easily apparent at first, but the clue is that it is a secondary source. When you go to today's "Political Insider" the story isn't anywhere, and it's only when you discover the date that you realize this is (in terms of a news cycle) ancient. So what you have here is four levels of cluelessness. The OP is clueless because he took this YouTube posting as gospel, posting it quickly without checking. The YouTube poster is clueless, because he didn't check his own source and posted it as "new" material. Political Insider is clueless for having posted such drivel in the first place. And anyone here who took this at face value, well, maybe you shouldn't have. Now I know we all are quick to judge the "false nature" of the "other side" that we are against, but the key here is to also question the side that you would normally agree on. Outrageous claims about your opponents are just as outrageous as outrageous claims about your friends. You can't pretend to be objective if you are in lock step with one, but not question the other.

a reply to: DBCowboy

no offensive but it' so odd to me you see that in Obama, and not trump, considering his past.

remember "john barron". lol

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: DBCowboy

no offensive but it' so odd to me you see that in Obama, and not trump considering his past.

Let's give Trump more than 6 days.

Obama had 8 years to solidify my opinion of him.

How about we give him a month before we start a Go-Fund-Me for a junta?

a reply to: DBCowboy


Thanks. We're all entitled to our opinions right, wrong, or indifferent.

Unfortunately, as it stands, it seems we're experiencing a true "next level" of dishonesty in today's political landscape. That's sad for all Americans.

a reply to: DBCowboy


can you imagine, picking up a phone, to call the media... to BRAG about YOURSELF??

OUR PRESIDENT HAS!





you think he understands your concerns?

really?

This is a personal problem if it even exits, who cares, we have our own lives. Personally I don't care if Barack and Michael are having marital problems......am I wrong or did Barack not refer to Michelle as Michael several times?

a reply to: anonentity

Bull

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: DBCowboy


can you imagine, picking up a phone, to call the media... to BRAG about YOURSELF??

OUR PRESIDENT HAS!





you think he understands your concerns?

really?

Trump doesn't think about me?

a reply to: chrismarco


Now we have an anomaly, one of two married couples in the USA will experience a divorce. So by those figures the President and the first lady are some how immune? I say bull even after they are no longer in the Whitehouse the deal is to project the "Family meme" So even if they wanted to live separate lives they cant..vvdivorcepad.com...

Anyway Michelle stayed two days at Palm Springs with the Gay friends of Barrack, then jeted of to the Caribbean, on Branson's plane followed by journos.Barracks press release said he was on the plane as well, when no body saw him get on board. She's pissed.

a reply to: CHONGO

Which one is the beard, and which one is the neckbeard?

a reply to: anonentity

There's no official links to claim they're divorcing. You people will believe any batsh*t stories!

a reply to: CHONGO


LOL... that dog was long gone years ago .... poor thing.

a reply to: anonentity

I don't buy this worth a damn.

Put another way, I will believe it when it happens, and not before. There was NO overt or subtle behaviour in public, even down to micro-expression, that even REMOTELY suggested disunity between those two over the last few years. They appear for all the world like the tightest couple imaginable.

originally posted by: xuenchen
I bet the divorce papers will be sealed.

Like Ivana Trumps gagging order?

a reply to: uncommitted

You mean the gagging order which banned her from any further discussion or statements regarding the allegation that Trump raping her was why she filed for divorce?

originally posted by: Painterz
a reply to: uncommitted

You mean the gagging order which banned her from any further discussion or statements regarding the allegation that Trump raping her was why she filed for divorce?

That would be the one, I thought actually it wasn't just about specific allegations but more the marriage and divorce in general?