snafu

She’s a lover, not a fighter.

I was posting about due process. Then I was labeled a Trump cultist. Yeah, no thanks.

The way things look to be going, most likely my wife, again. She got my vote in ‘16 and in ‘20. She’s a born-and-raised NYC liberal Democrat, by the way.

You don't read my posts , do you. What's with the name calling? Very juvenile.

He's not my Leader. I'm not a "you folk", whoever that is. My God is God. Go annoy someone else. You don't comprehend very well.

Mine have not. I hate it. But I’m not going to go play who started it. It’s been declining before Trump. He accelerated it.

So your answer is no. He didn’t jail anyone during his four years in office without due process. Thanks — and talk about a word salad. Nice post there.

Did you miss my earlier post where I said that this current case against Trump affords him due process? It’s up on the prior page.

Hoax. It was a campaign slogan that he did nothing to advance once he got into office. He had 4 years to follow up. Do you think he was actually going to throw her in jail without due process? Did locking people up without due process happen to anyone during his term?

This isn’t predetermined justice. It’s an indictment. In this case they didn’t “investigate the man to find a crime”. They investigated things that happened and claim that those efforts broke the law. The Defendants will have their opportunity. RICO cases are pretty easy to prove. That’s not predetermined justice. That was a campaign slogan. And (unless my memory is bad) I don’t know any investigation made by Trump’s justice department that went after Clinton for her emails — even though the FBI Director had said that there were likely laws that she broke.

Can you point me to a news station that’s generally accepted as being neutral? Just like people say that Redsatate.com is right wing propaganda, there’s about half the country who’d claim that NYTimes.com is the opposite. It is a real problem.

Loved Anacones!

Why did the Clinton campaign use Russians and a Brit to use disinformation and propaganda? Durham concluded this clearly occurred. Both sides clearly pay dirty games. I said he overcame accusations of being a a Russian stooge. I didn't say he isn't or wasn't a Russian stooge. It really does appear that he wasn't a Russian stooge. My point, however, is that Biden never was forced to overcome accusations that he was taking money on the side while VP, and that's what gets people upset.

I think what gets people upset is that in 2016 there was a push to get the Russiagate investigations into the news whereas in 2020 there was a push to keep the laptop and any investigation of it out of the news. Trump didn't steal the 2016 election and he overcame accusations of being a Russian stooge. Biden didn't steal the 2020 election but he probably benefitted from other people suppressing some news that could have hurt his chances. I agree that the Hunter thing is far from over, and it could easily affect the 2024 election. I doubt Biden will run because of this, or because of his health. Or they'll use his health as the excuse while the Hunter thing is the real reason.

Did you find out the garage stink today, or yesterday?

Chicken Wire?

Comes from an Ingrid Bergman movie called "Gaslight".

Which cult?

For Christ sake, could you drive that piece of crap any slower!?

Just my two cents... Ukraine would be smart to seek peace if their planned counteroffensive is successful and they cut off the "land bridge" to Crimea that the Russians have built. Then Ukraine has leverage. If they fail, then Ukraine should look for some sort of cease-fire agreement because they will be overextended, and Russia will likely be able to take advantage of a Ukrainian failure. But anyway, here's hoping that the US and anyone else who cares makes a push to end the fighting. There's no reason why the US would want anyone to keep fighting -- other than to divert resources which should be conserved for the impending conflict with China that this administration (and the previous administration) and the press have been ginning up support for (with a big assist from China). Another issue is that the harder this administration pushes, the more likely that Russia and China will form some sort of indispensable alliance. As it is presently, their friendship looks fairly shaky. What's the US "to gain" from ending a struggle that nominally affects our interests? Even if Ukraine fails to takes back and hold land touching the Black Sea, the US and NATO should consider the result a success. Western Europe has cut its energy dependence from Russia, NATO has presumably been made stronger, the Eastern European countries in NATO are now extra vigilant and a strong bloc, Russia has been shown to be a less than formidable fighting force. Add the possibility that Putin may have some domestic troubles of his own. Seems like the US has gained a lot already. Our country hasn't indicated that they have seriously considered what the "end" of this conflict will look like. If they haven't, then that's a colossal mistake. If they have, then they should make it look like they've got some level of competence regarding this matter --other than throwing war material and excessive amounts of cash at their proxy. Maybe that would quiet down their critics -- who at this point have an argument to make in the absence of any coherent policy.

Set the leaves on fire and blow them back into his yard.

The Yankees have 5 more years of Giancarlo Stanton. I guess they wanted two Giancarlo Stantons. Because that’s their future, IMO.

When I read the thread title, I honestly thought this was about football. Yankees should let him walk.

I think the rule used to be that the player had to be completely past the defender for offside. And I think the rule was changed to "any part" of the player needs to be past the defender. That's why we're seeing so many more close offside calls. Iran looks to be MLS quality. US has to keep up the pressure, like they're still tied. At this point, if US ties or loses it will be a serious disappointment.