All_Pro_Bills

You should ask Victoria Nuland over at the State department to explain. She was on point with Ukraine under Obama and now Biden. And although the media and government here force feed the public with the narrative of Ukraine as a fledgling democracy consistent with our ideals and customs in reality its been a system ruled by corruption and oligarchy control since the break-up of the Soviet Union.

You're one sick mofo..

You're crossing the line here inferring some comparison with a woman that was murdered by the police. Get help. You've got some serious issues.

I believe this is the mission statement of the board: Censor, block, dismiss, and discredit, any facts or opinions that disagree with or conflict with the official narratives the board was established to protect.

20 to 1 they'll be making an appearance on The View to a standing ovation and gushing from the show hosts and then a tour of the talk show circuit to be hailed as a "hero" for destroying confidence in one of the few institutions that Americans held in regard. With this "15 minutes of fame" to be followed up by several job offers at some activist think-tank. And as sure as the Sun rises and sets, in classic neo-liberal form, you can expect to hear about constant death threats and harrassment from fringe extremists which will instantaneously turn the perp into the victim.

Write down today's date. As another poster pointed out on the board here earlier today with abortion now front-and-center the left has suddenly become aware and capable of annunciating the definition of a "women". A biologically defined human being capable of becoming pregnant and childbirth. We're making progress!

SCOTUS has stated: Yesterday, a news organization published a copy of a draft opinion in a pending case. Justices circulate draft opinions internally as a routine and essential part of the Court’s confidential deliberative work. Although the document described in yesterday’s reports is authentic, it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case. Chief Justice John G. Roberts. Jr., provided the following statement: To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way. We at the Court are blessed to have a workforce - permanent employees and law clerks alike - intensely loyal to the institution and dedicated to the rule of law. Court employees have an exemplary and important tradition of respecting the confidentiality of the judicial process and upholding the trust of the Court. This was a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the Court and the community of public servants who work here. I have directed the Marshal of the Court to launch an investigation into the source of the leak.

All these law clerks and assistants working for the justices are lawyers. The job requirements bound them to a standard of ethics and duty to the court and their profession. One of which is adhering to the rules of order defining the process of legal deliberations between the justices. Another is the process that law clerks do not publish or announce or reveal court rulings. A breach of trust and ethics and a violation of the rules of conduct between the Supreme Court justices and that individual may not result in legal action but will most certainly result in disbarment and firing. As for punishing people, how about Julian Assange? He just printed something too. But lots of people on the left that love Hillary and blame Assange for her loss in 2016 along with other government operatives that got exposed and embarrassed by that act of "printing something" have the desire to lock him up.

Not really an answer but I assume you think those dirty "insurrectionists" got what they deserve.

Funny. Let's remember your position on the use of excessive force by a police officer the next time an unarmed minority person gets shot by a cop during a routine traffic stop. Did they comply? And I can only expect you think the cop that killed George Floyd didn't use excessive force but rather acted within the law. Or is your view on the application of excessive force based on the beliefs of the victim? I'm guessing this.

So ignore 40 years of judicial activism from liberal judges and pretend it somehow just started with the current Supreme Court? Got it.

You want idiocy. How about the pregnant man emoji? The abject height of stupidity and leftist fantasies. Reality check: men cannot get pregnant. But try to get hardcore leftists to say it. They're so committed to their fantasies they can't even admit reality when hard scientific factual evidence is staring them in the face. That's how delusional they've become. Or something used through history by civilization like the Sumerians, Egyptians, Mayans, Greeks, Romans, and modern societies is "racist". Math. How's that work exactly? How about mostly peaceful protests? That's was a good one! Or putting professional disinformation spreaders in charge of identifying and censoring disinformation. Hilarious. They just move from one hustle and con to the next.

As you continue to demonstrate the fundamental problem for neo-liberal ideology is the Left is at war with reality.

All of us here know that Fox is a right leaning news outlet. That's obvious. And almost all of us here are aware that with the exception of Fox, almost every major media outlet leans left. In your opinion, do you think the likes of CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, NBC, ABC, and so on, present a fair and balanced fact centered view of events and opinions unbiased or filtered by political and social ideology or their personal views and beliefs?

Is there a job description or posting of something out there for DHS Division for Spreading Disinformation? Something like the ability to spread establishment disinformation and protect false narratives by suppressing and censoring inconvenient facts and opinions that invalidate those establishment narratives. And counter those sources by labeling them as disinformation. In other words, lie your ass off and deceive everyone. Censor free speech to protect freedom of speech. And most importantly... keep everyone safe! Remember tyranny is freedom!

Russian sympathizers on the board? You're out of your fringin mind. Get help.

I'm sure all the draft experts will be giving the Jets an "A" for last night's first round. The problem is winning the draft and the off season is not the same as winning football games on the field starting in September. So maybe hold off on the Super Bowl reservations and big talk for now?

Hey.. I don't make policy. I just try to interpret what's going on the best I can. I'm sticking to my basic premise this war could have been avoided with a genuine effort and desire from all parties to reach some mutually agreeable compromise. Its a shameful waste of life and a cause of much unnecessary suffering. But all the involved parties only see conditions and circumstances through the lens of their interests and views, dig in their heels, and fail to understand or assess the interests and positions from the other guys viewpoint. Like it or not, Russia views NATO as an extension of the US government and the Pentagon. And sees the European countries that belong to the alliance as vassal States doing the bidding of America while putting the interests of their countries on the back burner. That's not my view. That's just me comprehending their view. I don't see another $33B as leading to any type of resolution other than prolonging the war. Why not just take that $33B and offer each Russian soldier that defects or surrenders $100K each? If my math is correct that would cover 330K soldiers, essentially the entire Russian force. That might end the war and get nobody killed? Shamefully, that unconventional approach won't feather the nests of the defense industry and retiring Pentagon Generals that join their BOD's when they "retire".

There are no spending limits given the primary US policy objective to weaken Russia through a proxy war strategy of fighting them down to the last Ukrainian.

I believe they're also referring to conventional and nuclear hyper-sonic weapons which fly at speeds of about 3,600 MPH. I'd deffer to the expertise of others but from what I understand there is no reliable defense against those types of offensive missiles.

To bankers and analysts whose salaries and $300K+ compensation packages & million dollar bonuses depend on peddling the "growth" story nothing ever looks bad. Don't expect negative opinions to ever come out of their mouths or get typed into their keyboards. The economy would need to grow at a 10% nominal clip to account for 8% inflation plus 2% real growth. Just remember whatever bad happens is Putin's fault and whatever good happens is due to Biden's adept handling of the economy.

I'd say that almost all of Musk's business ventures depend on taxpayer subsidies, credits, or direct government payments in one way or another. But I do think his purchase is good for the free and fair exchange or ideas and opinions on the platform. I'm just wondering how the authoritarian establishment and their supporters are going to address the threat to their monopoly on thinking? The potential that Twitter users will likely be able to exchange ideas without every idea and opinion being measured and judged against some official narrative or group preference of thought must be frightening to them all. One thing for certain they'll be generating lots of panic over the dangers that free speech poses to society. Which is comical and a complete misrepresentation of their real concern. What they want to say is anyone that disagrees with me should continue to be silenced,

Stating the obvious, its okay for the "correct" type of billionaires that will impose censorship to protect official narratives and block challenges and contradicting facts and opinions to the left's sacred beliefs and all sorts of woke myths to own and control media. To the left Musk is just the "wrong" billionaire as he doesn't appear to share their ideology or belief system. For the left, the possibility that Musk is committed to imposing what is viewed as traditional free speech protections aligned with some definition held by libertarians is a danger. They can rationalize and generate all kinds of excuses but that's it. Fear of losing control.

If I understand it correctly the rationale is the relationship between the campaign and national committee with the lawyers was officially categorized as "legal" when in fact the work was "political". Including what Durham alleges was obfuscating the paper trail by transferring payments through the law firm to various 3rd parties connected with the production of the Russia dossier. After examination, the FEC invalidated the classification of the contact as legal services and representation which null and voids client/attorney privilege. As is customary with dealing with the Clinton's and legal issues, watch for lawyers to suddenly get depressed and start committing suicide.

Its all out there. You should catch up on events and diplomatic conversations that occurred prior to the invasion.