All_Pro_Bills

My suspicion from the beginning was the events of 1/6 were allowed to happen. And perhaps provided some facilitation and help from government agents and assets in the crowd. The entire spectacle had the odor of a lack of authenticity. The reasoning to support this conclusion is sound, although not indisputable. Yet as usual, officials that know the entire story when questioned are less than forthcoming with answers that might fill in the blanks. Heaven forbid the American people know the whole truth. The greatest threat to our democracy since the Civil War and we get the snow job from the government. Given that its hard to take their assessment seriously. But they peddle it relentlessly and lots of morons have bought the story. But the knowledge that a large crowd would gather that day at the Capitol was well known. Many participants were already categorized as "extremists" by the government. Some degree of trouble should have been expected. Yet, rather than augment the Capitol Police contingent on duty that day with a force sufficient to handle whatever actions a 100K crowd could present as requested by the Chief, those requests were denied. By Pelosi according to Sund as the chain of command for security leads to the House Speaker's office. Which begs the question, why no more security given the circumstances? Those types of "failure of leadership" questions are always asked when some disaster happens but they've been avoided to the greatest extent possible here. You'd expect that to be a hot topic but it gets the silent treatment all around.

Britain is a nation in constant economic, moral, and social decline that clings to the U.S. in order to maintain the fantasy they're still a world power. So absent any real strength or purpose, they're left to deploy security forces to push around 16 year old autistic children while the cops ignore and fear having to enforce actual crimes committed by real criminals. I expect the UK Ministry of Truth will present commendations to each of the officers for apprehending this dangerous person.

Zelensky has the goods on Biden's Ukraine payoff scheme so Joe needs to keep sending loot.

If anyone is curious about where future production numbers are headed or the health of the oil service sector these rig count stats are a good source of information. https://rigcount.bakerhughes.com/na-rig-count

You're really at the end of your rope here and obviously willing to jump through hoops and bend light to avoid admitting Biden is involved in influence racketeering. Your false comparison of what Trump's kids did or didn't do and the legal and ethical implications vs. the influence peddling racket the Biden's have created in no way absolves Joe and Hunter Biden of running an extortion operation while he was VP and the legal consequences of their payoff operation. The two have nothing to do with each other. If Kushner's deal stinks then DOJ under the control of Democrats led by AG Garland are free to investigate. I suggest you ask Merrick why he hasn't. One reason might be that while throwing up some red flags concerning conflict of interest none of what transpired was hidden or secret.

Wisdom from people buying Jack Smith's what you said isn't what you really believe indictment.

Point to proof it wasn't permeated by fraud.

Men are masquerading as a woman to participate in women's sports because they're not good enough to win or show up in the top 50 against other men physically their equal. A malicious act of self-interest. What happened to fighting the patriarchy?

It's not okay that an elected government official, in this case the VP of the United States, was consciously aware that his son was extracting bribes and extortion payments from various foreigners in exchange for access to the VP and the powers of that office for favors, whether he did them favors or not or whether or not the access was an "illusion" or real. Money changed hands. Beyond a doubt, Joe Biden must have been aware of this arrangement and participated in meetings with those foreign persons. To suggest he didn't know what he was there for or what role he played is preposterous. Joe knew what he was there for. To prove to the chumps that Hunter could produce his dad when needed. What was discussed or whether or not he directly received payments is irrelevant. He participated in and was a conspirator to an illegal influence peddling operation. Along with having an obvious and clear conflict of interest here. I mean, my God, can it get any clearer what was going on here? If you want to continue arguing evidence and proof than have at it. But why would anyone want a President that has clearly demonstrated such bad judgment by getting involved in this scheme making critical decisions as leader of our nation?

What else is the DNC going to base their 2024 campaign strategy on other than protecting abortion rights and the dangers of white supremacist MAGA extremists and systemic racism? Other than that, what else they got?

No hoax dude. What we witnessed in 2022 from Joe Biden's Philadelphia MAGA extremist rant speech was pure evil and fascism in the making. The Marine guards with the background bathed in red light. Very sinister. The man that ran in 2020 on a platform as the great unifier of the country two years later demonizing half of its citizens. The unifier. Now that's a hoax.

You can think up a host of scenarios such as the one above that any reasonable person, meaning the majority of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, would agree with but defining a specific set of "rules" around abortion for what is and isn't allowed and passing legislation isn't the problem. The problem is an issue resolved is no longer an issue. The political parties get lots of mileage out of pro and anti abortion positions and rhetoric. And eliminating that rallying cry issue from the political landscape by Federally legislating a solution would deprive politicians of valuable political capital. What politicians and many organizations on both sides of the debate that enjoy social influence while making a decent living prefer is an endless debate on pro-life and pro-choice which is what we've got.

Doxing and threats! Because the Left is committed to democracy. As long as they make all the rules.

Want? Under demented Biden and his stormtroopers we already have fascism. So congratulations to you.

Maybe they'll charge Trump with the Jimmy Hoffa disappearance too?

Anyone interested in the State level librarian training programs? Nevada appears to have a particularly grueling set of requirements. https://www.everylibraryinstitute.org/requirements_to_become_a_librarian_by_state?msclkid=6a66fc2a994112d4e60e98f81909230d&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Website Discovery - Every Library Institute&utm_term=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.everylibraryinstitute.org%2F&utm_content=URL contains https%3A%2F%2Fwww.everylibraryinstitute.org%2F It appears none of the States require a certified librarian to demonstration the ability to evaluate pornographic material to determine what is suitable for children under the ages of 6. So the question a women poses on one of the film clips "are you a trained librarian" is irrelevant. Given this common sense might be given some consideration rather than leftist-babble and sloganeering.

Given the 1st Amendment protecting free speech is under assault, if you say something you know is not true then you could face criminal prosecution for mind-crimes by special council Jack Smith. Remember that next time your wife asks you if she looks fat.

The core problem is this front office squanders away a lot of draft capital. Maybe Elam isn't the best choice for CB2 when the camp evaluation and competition is over. If its Jackson then fine. But you can't use a first round pick on a guy that's going to sit on the bench in year 2 and expect you're going to replace the talent you lose through attrition or free agency through the draft. On top of it I recall they traded up a couple spots for Elam in exchange for their 1st and other picks. Previously they spent 3 high picks on the DL and for me Rousseau is the only one that's shows any promise. Not a lot of production from that investment. I see the same problem with the ILB competition. A 3rd round pick used to draft Wiliiams and he might be buried at 3rd string on the depth chart. If the idea was spending a 3rd rounder on a replacement for Edmunds then that plan might be a flop. And if the idea was drafting for a potential high ceiling player and for him to ride the bench in year one then maybe the pick could have been put to better use at another position? This team is in the Super Bowl window and potential turned to production 2 seasons from now is no help. As for the player competition at a couple positions in training camp the coaches are left with what the front office gives them to work with to find the best 11 on both sides of the ball.

I do. And sometimes I find typos and syntactically incorrect sentences which I need to correct. But what's this pysop nonsense you're committed to? In this case are you saying agent Chan didn't conspire with Facebook to suppress the story and told the truth under oath when he said no such arrangement or effort existed? Correspondence and meetings on cooperation between the FBI and Facebook refute that claim indicating he did work with Facebook and he did lie under oath when he said the arrangement didn't exist. That appears to be the truth rather than some attempt at psychological misdirection. So just admit you're wrong.

Well, you didn't refute what I said so I take that as admission you know you're full of crap.

Your side is the party running the psyop. That's why you attempting to defect that onto the other side is so comical.

Who ordered agent Chan to direct Facebook to run the "code red"? And who gave that person that order? And all the way up the line to the originator. Who's really running the show?

All of this disclosure of the relationship between Facebook and the FBI is well and good but what we need to know is which "top dog" inside the government (or outside?) originated and gave the order to the FBI to suppress the laptop story and the investigation? Who is the person at the top of the organization calling the shots and giving the orders? That's what we need to get down to here. Not just focusing on foot soldiers carrying out orders. They're just Pawns in the game. Expose the King. Who's giving the orders to Comey and Wray? Who's giving orders to Barr and Garland?

A number of factors, or maybe one. We need to make up some horseshit story to protect a political figure we support from the truth and the consequences to the agenda we endorse.

What I can't understand is how, according to US government and Ukrainian government media outlet reports the Russians can't seem to hit anything but shopping centers, apartment buildings, schools, and hospitals with any of their missiles.