The Frankish Reich

Somewhere William of Ockham is crying.

I read earlier in the thread that there is proof that Joe wasn't at his Delaware home on July 30, 2017. So unless that's wrong, it does seem that Hunter was lying to his Chinese contacts when he texted (from the Delaware home) that he has Joe right here with him.

Pay attention. Did I ever say they shouldn't be charged? Because yes, they should've been charged for breaking windows, looting, blocking access to public buildings in Portland, etc. So who was the pipe bomber? Why don't you spend your time tracking down all the footage, etc., just like the "sedition hunters" did with those who stormed the Capitol.

Simple explanation, not juiced up with all kind of conspiracy theories: they identified the "journalist." Or he identified himself.

This is also true. Part of being a serious person is the ability to hold that both sides here speak important truths. An old Jesuit teacher put it this way: think about whether you should be saying "and" instead of "but." The instinct is to say something like, "Israel is exacting extreme death and destruction on Gaza, but that is only because Hamas has not unilaterally surrendered." To the Jesuit, the proper formulation was more like this: "Hamas needs to surrender for the good of the people it supposedly represents, and Israel's campaign of total war on Gaza is morally repugnant."

A good question. I have no idea, because no report has told us what kind of journalism he was doing (if any) BEFORE he entered the Capitol. All I know is the current Trump-o-sphere reports misleadingly call him "a Blaze journalist," without stating that he became such after the fact. Got it. A blogger is allowed to follow a home invader into your house without consequences.

What if a Black Lives Matter protester stormed into your place of business, was charged with a crime, and then started blogging about and claimed that he should be exempt from prosecution because he is, after all, a "journalist" who stormed in in his journalistic capacity?

On the narrow issue before the Supreme Court: I do believe the criminal defendants will win before this Supreme Court. That doesn't mean the prosecutions were improper, since the statute has been used in this way many times before without any appeals court ruling to the contrary. That says more about the composition of the current Supreme Court than it does about anything else. And for that, all the January 6 invaders should be thanking Mitch McConnell.

I do agree with your last point. Quite some time ago this clearly shifted from "elimination of Hamas weapons/tunnels" to full-on vengeance.

You folks in the America Sucks echo chamber would never dare to read anything other than the tweets from your favorite closet insurrectionists. And it took me some digging to find this out, but ... did you know that this guy only became a "Blaze journalist" AFTER he invaded the Capitol? That his apparent defense is that on January 6 he claimed that he was an "independent journalist?" That at least 8 other January 6 defendants have claimed that they were they as journalists? That one of them was a lefty "journalist" who has also been convicted?

Another one of Trump's "low class" invaders bites the dust. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/defiant-jan-6-rioter-spars-with-judge-at-sentencing-hearing/ar-BB1j8a9s?cvid=b446563ac18b492db677874c88f1c8df&ei=39 A tree cutter who smoked marijuana in a senator’s office during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol was sentenced to 3½ years in prison Thursday after his strategy of interrupting and challenging the sentencing judge seemed to blow up in his face. Fellows, from Upstate New York, chose to represent himself through most of his legal proceedings and was found in contempt at his trial after calling U.S. District Judge Trevor N. McFadden a “modern-day Nazi” running a “kangaroo court.” “In all my years as a judge, and before that as a litigator, I have never seen such contemptuous conduct,” McFadden said at Thursday’s sentencing, recalling that Fellows also made “lewd comments” to his probation officer, “outlandish accusations” against prosecutors and heckling remarks to the jury as the verdicts were being read.

And they're all worked up about who was looped in on the August 2017 call. What was Joe Biden's official role in August 2017? Well, pretty much what Trump's role was on May 8, 2022, when Jared Kushner signed that $2 billion deal with the Saudi royal family: private citizen, not yet an announced candidate for President. The key here is, and always has been, whether Joe used his official position (VP) for profit or to further Hunter's "business." What evidence do they have for that?

I just told you. I was FOR the Congressional investigation before I was against it. When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?

I always thought the marriage of Viggo to Exene of X was one of the most improbable celebrity matches. It apparently lasted a whole decade, pretty good by Hollywood standards.

Nikki Haley, from what I hear.

No doubt Hunter is a sleazeball, whether high or sober. But I read the article (poorly written as it is), and I glean that: - Joe Biden was actually NOT present at the time the relevant phone call was made. The article says that photo evidence shows Joe was elsewhere. - The article fails to mention the date the phone call occurred. That's kind of important, isn't it? If it's when Joe was VP, well, then, this is even sleazier (but not illegal). If it happened while Trump was President, well, then it's just ordinarily sleazy, in the manner of Kushner's Saudi deal. This is why the Smirnov testimony was critical to the entire case. And that has gone bye-bye. I was in favor of a Congressional investigation here, since that CI report directly implicated Joe. Now there is no basis for this to continue. It's become a farce, more about keeping the "The President's son is a sleazeball" in the public eye than actually finding something even close to an impeachable offense.

After reading all of these leaks/hot takes not substantiated by an actual transcript, I can only conclude that Hunter was right about one thing: this testimony should have been public testimony.

Predictable response. One trick pony.

Who needs George Santos when we still have The Boeberts (coming soon to a reality show near you) https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13142259/amp/lauren-boebert-son-tyler-sex-tape-defendant.html

Could anything be more on brand for Boebert than this? https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lauren-boebert-son-arrested-tyler/ Boebert's 18 year old son facing charges for breaking into cars and stealing credit cards, which he and his friends used at "McDonald's and gas stations." Felony charges for a Big Mac. Apparently inherited his mom's intelligence and judgement.

I haven't looked into it, but this makes sense too. Note that to LEGALLY immigrate to the United States you must provide proof of up-to-date vaccinations. Illegally? Anything goes.

What an opportune time to bump my thread, just as measles makes a comeback. Yes, vaccine mandates. I lived with one as a kid in Buffalo, and measles essentially disappeared. Smallpox did disappear. Idiotic anti-vaxxers are trying to put the whole band of childhood diseases back together.

More bad hot legal takes from MAGA world. This time from a guy with a profile pic that looks like he's about 14 years old. It is perfectly legal. It is no different than a law firm saying that Clarence Thomas will have a million dollar a year job as soon as he retires. That law firm would have to then avoid taking any cases before the Supreme Court until Thomas retires, just as John Oliver should hope he never personally has a case before the Supreme Court. But there's nothing illegal about it. It's not a bribe because there is no inducement to take any kind of official act. The money would be paid only when Thomas resigns.

Would you prefer "stay at home spouse?"