daz28

You'd think a justice on the SCOTUS would know there's no legal interpretation/definition of insurrection in the US code. It simply states that it's a crime, and who would have to decide how to interpret that? The SCOTUS of course. Lay off the booze Brett.

You're confusing censorship with just not doing what has been historically proven to be a really bad idea. A good example of this is that one could go to an all black ghetto, and shout racist remarks just to see what happens, but it's a terrible idea. Giving an audience to your enemies and known naked aggressors is a bad idea. Suppose Kim Jong Un nukes America. Should we interview him to find out why? To me this is all COMPLETELY ABSURD. Mr. Hitler, why did you exterminate the Jews, the American people need to know if and why that was justified. Oh vey. Campaigning for stopping dictators from naked aggression, but you call it whatever you like.

The man said what he said, and was very clear. Because you guys want his jock, you choose to willfully misinterpret what is clearly being said. Maybe next time we kill one terrorist, you'll be ok with 100 US casualties as a proper "retaliation" by a terrorist nation. Hope it's no one in my family that has to die in your required retaliation by the terrorist country.

It was 109, and the number has been revised many times. Trump literally said in his interview, that Iran called him, and said they were going to hit back, and that they told him where they were going to do it, so there would be no casualties. You're willfully ignoring the facts. Where did I say there were zero casualties, there were 109 OFFICIAL casualties, and ZERO American response after them. You're going from willful ignorance, to simple ignoring facts.

What's the difference between barring an opponent, and creating fake electors to keep yourself in office after you lost? Really none, because the result is the same. I can't believe you thought Putin was running free and fair elections in the first place. Maybe watch your Putin interview tonight, and he can explain how and why his elections are so free and fair. LOLOL

While this is true, it's extremely common for it to happen in Congress, because that's how you get compromise. If a rep is completely against aid to Ukraine, but for aid for Israel, the compromise is what keeps both sides from just negating each others bills every single time. That's how politics works.

So you do need the list of dictators who were given the spotlight, which turned out to be a complete disaster causing literally hundreds of millions of deaths and suffering? No one is saying it's illegal, they're saying it's immoral, and just a really bad idea. Should we have an Isis tv channel, so people can make up their own minds about beheadings, too? The GQP has made what a short time ago was preposterous now the norm, but somehow they still claim to have common sense. Conservative Judge Royce Lamberth NAILED it: Judge Royce Lamberth, a Reagan appointee to the bench, said the “destructive” misinformation, spread by political leaders who have downplayed and misrepresented the attack, had become pervasive. “In my thirty-seven years on the bench, I cannot recall a time when such meritless justifications of criminal activity have gone mainstream,” Lamberth lamented in a seven-page public court filing. Though he did not mention Trump by name, Lamberth specifically called out language used by Trump and, more recently, Trump allies like Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), describing Jan. 6 defendants as “hostages.” “I have been shocked to watch some public figures try to rewrite history, claiming rioters behaved ‘in an orderly fashion’ like ordinary tourists, or martyrizing convicted January 6 defendants as ‘political prisoners’ or even, incredibly, ‘hostages,’” he wrote. “That is all preposterous. But the Court fears that such destructive, misguided rhetoric could presage further danger to our country.”

Your screen name, on a football site no less, LITERALLY has TDS in it, but me stating facts about him on a political page is laughable???? Sounds like you're the one with the obsession.

Not the decision to close the border. That's automatic. Also, the bill is only for 3 years. The president's actions are already limited to executive decisions, ie DOJ. The complaints about the DC court provision have to do with the states, not the executive branch.

My memory is fine. The updated number was actually 109. Maybe it's YOUR job to verify YOUR denials of my claims: The Defense Department says 45 more U.S. service members have been diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries after Iran's attack on the Ain al-Asad airbase in Iraq last month — raising the total number of troops injured in the ballistic missile strike to 109. Of those who were injured, 76 have returned to duty. A Pentagon statement about the injuries did not include details about the service members, such as their age, rank or military unit. Monday's update is at least the fifth time the U.S. has revised the number of personnel injured during the Iranian attack. President Trump initially reported no U.S. troops were injured. "No Americans were harmed in last night's attack by the Iranian regime," Trump said shortly after the strike. He added, "We suffered no casualties." -Lies to cover up his massive blunder, that SHOULD be all over the airwaves. As for your proof: How could Iran tell Trump where not to move troops to if the intention was to miss them? Are you even trying to use your brain???

Turns out Trump never paid Rudy for the election fraud he didn't find. LOL

Vald is extremely good at it, too. Trump DREAMS that he could interview like Putin. Tucker may as well be throwing bon-bons in his mouth. There's always an endgame, and I'm still struggling with what this one might be. Maybe to soften the blow if Trump wins the election, and loses Ukraine to Vlad. get Fox people thinking Vlad's not too bad a guy. he just mean tweets a lil too much.

Why is the absurd now up for discussion? Do you guys need a list of dictators that should never have been given a megaphone? Seriously!

Yes. They are on the mat may be the best way to phrase it. The thing is Biden hasn't lost a single troop.

The oil is the only thing keeping him in it. Send them more missiles ffs. My fav part of a bad situation is Putin is getting a face full of American power. He was crying about Patriots the other day. Be very scared, Vlad.

Just for giggles, what would you guys have done if you were president, and Russia attacks Ukraine? There's pretty much only 2 options: 1) Beg Congress for money; 2) Go full Chamberlain, and say, "I'm sure he'll stop after Ukraine". I know what Trump's answer would be: "He said he'd stop after Ukraine, and I believed him. I could tell he was telling the truth. We get along".

That literally means on the mat. If I meant we were winning big, I'd have said on the canvas. You know how we can win faster? Send them weapons like the ones your insisting we sent to Israel, who could without our support. We're just making the resolution faster, because of the optics there. Ukraine though, where we've already committed $100B, lets drag our feet, and let Russia regroup. MJ is an idiot playing political games over lives. Another rare case of Trump doing something right. Personally, I'm glad Isis is now weak AF now. Terorism can't stand, so as long as you don't ree-elect idiots like GW, everything will be fine.

So we kill Bin Laden, and you're saying we're supposed turn our chin up, and let them have a free shot at our troops? I'm not the one who's over tired acting like Jimmy Carter here.

How's that economy doing? How's that navy doing? How's the latest offensive doing, comrade? Tell Mike Johnson to stop sending alerts to his son about him logging into Hawt Hunter Biden Photos.com, and get busy arming Ukrainian troops, so we can WIN. Is war and lives the new depth of politics the GQP is wading into? Wouldn't surprise me, unless it's a fetus. What's your theory, because he's strong? Well, I gave you data to show that's not true. See how this is in a circle? Uh no. We kill a terrorist, you don't get to harm our troops. That's weak AF, and Iran is on the LIST. Shouldn't have missed your miss. Is that you Jimmy Carter?

Yes, we hit Soleimani, and then they struck back causing 34 casualties, many of them are still suffering. He did not strike back. For all I know the guy made the whole Iran calling him thing up. He is a pathological liar who loves to talk.

I don't like him if that's what you mean, but I'm not slandering the guy. You're arguing in circles now. Maybe we just agree to disagree.

No I said it's putting SOME of that money back into the economy, so the price tag is very deceiving. Massive difference. Russia's Centre for Macroeconomic Analysis and Short-term Forecasting (CAMAC) attributes around 60-65% of increased industrial output in the last two years to the Ukraine conflict. All of that is industry that could have been committed to economic growth, but isn't.

That his weak ass let Iran hit us, and didn't retaliate, because they were supposed to miss.

You're asking me to answer a question you don't know the answer to. That's absurd. You want me to throw around ideas or correlations, and call them facts like you're trying to do? Maybe he was restocking after Crimea?? Those 34 casualties are proof Trump is weak AF, so it's extremely relevant to whether he is or not, which is the basis of this whole discussion, not explain why it rained Friday and Sunday, but not Saturday.

Yes, they told him where, and told Trump not to move any troops to the area where they were going to "miss". Again, I have no idea why it's not plastered everywhere, because it should be. I just read an article the other day, and it did say 100 were actually affected, but I can't find it. Many still are. I mean maybe you should listen to the interview again.