leh-nerd skin-erd

It’s crazy talk like this that lands people like you on a Red Flag list, Skip. Congrats on finding the bold font thingy though.

It's not a matter of ignoring this sort of thing, Logic, at least to me. I'm willing to listen to just about anything brought to the table, but I'm not willing to trust a political committee blindly. That would be dumb af, though that suits some folks. At the same time, recent history suggests that political figures make wide-ranging, unfounded and spurious claims against political opponents virtually every single day. It's a national pastime, and very few people bat an eye at it so long as their preferred party is leading the charge. Bannon sounds a bit like Joe Biden did back in the day, blustering, impressed with his own importance, holding court in front of admirers. What he suggests is unseemly and ugly, but is the allegation that he was acting as an adviser to the president and directing him to conduct illegal operations? Going back just a short time ago, democrat leadership was all over the place claiming treason, treasonous behavior, collusion, a coup, and that the 2016 election was illegitimate. That's not a fantasy created by a Trumpkin, as you derisively call folks who point it out, that's a matter of historical fact, inconvenient though it might be to your point of view. This theory was widely reported and disseminated by major news outlets, with perpetual 'oh, it's coming' circular reporting that effectively died the day Mueller embarrassed himself in front of a national audience is spite of exceptionally broad powers to kick in doors and knock some heads. Move to 2020. Suddenly, not a year removed from grave concerns about election security expressed by leading Democrat presidential candidates Warren and Klobuchar, such claims of illegitimacy, and integrity of elections were an alleged to be an assault on our very way of life. Never mind proving it, the outrage started at suggesting it was an issue, as if 2015-2019 never occurred. The way I see it, some of the loudest lamenters of civility were 100% comfortable with claims of illegitimate elections, treason and the like until the spotlight shone their way. It's ugly and unfortunate that politics plays out like this, but you probably should have had the sense to look into the future when you bought into Russiagate that it was not an if, just a when it would happen. At this point, Trump's claims of a stolen election are no more, no less of an issue than Russiagate was to me. That you lack the ability to understand why some of us view things that way is really of no consequence, especially since I can't for the life of me understand how people could be dumb enough to buy into the entire Russia premise to begin with. Personally, I wish Trump had not held the rally on 1/6. I think the people who acted criminally should be charged appropriately. I understand why the officer shot and killed an unarmed woman, and bet he feels horrible that he killed her. I support the police officers assaulted (I feel that way generally, even when they're out in America with liberals trashing them). I wish Stop the Steal wasn't a thing. I wish the dems had not launched an all-out assault on the legitimacy of the 2016 election and it's impact on my vote. I wish we were all smart enough to know that if political party A found success with a concept, Political Party B was soon to follow, and probably supersize it. But, here we are. Come November, if there's a red wave, we can most def look forward to impeachment, unfounded and usually unproven allegations against a Dem, and more than a few eggs cracked along the way. Look for an attempt to destroy Biden for his China connections, Hunter as collateral damage, and Merrick Garland. All will ultimately probably be ok. By the way, when serious claims of criminal behavior against DJT are brought through the appropriate channels, I'm happy to revisit this with you in detail.

That's what you pulled out of the post? Delightful. Dude, I had to find a word that rhymed with 'cried'.

https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/liz-warren-we-need-to-shut-down-pregnancy-crisis-centers/ Zealot, Andy?

You have an inclination toward hyperbole, I'll say that. Still, you've really said nothing at all here of substance beyond the indication you know exactly how future...uh...history books will be written. In that regard, you would be excellent on a political committee of this nature. Now, since you know, don't keep us in the dark: What criminal charges will be filed against Trump tying him directly to rioters, and/or criminal organizations on 1/6? What will the outcome of his trial(s) look like? Will he serve jail time, and if so, for how long? For what it's worth, if I'm blessed with grandchildren one day, I would simply advise them that the following, common sense guideline to understanding the political element of the US goes like this: Consider the agenda of the person/people asking you to believe in them; Consider your own agenda, what's in your best interest, and start out with a heavy dose of cynicism; Remember there are typically three sides to every story, and the truth can be the hardest side to find; Consider the history of those telling their story, and their relative trustworthiness and credibility; Remember that throughout history, many people have believed many things that turned out to be completely false or grossly misrepresented; Finally, my favorite: Everyone with more than a passing interest in politics knows that blind and absolute faith in what politicians say or do is a recipe for disaster. The number of times officials in government have lied to the people is impossible to know, but it's substantial. However, when a new shiny penny catches the eye of the general public, many people forget what they always knew, rush in foolishly, certain that 'their guy' is beyond reproach, and end up looking foolish. Don't be foolish. I feel like that was covered when Mueller lied and people cried.

For every religious zealot, there is an abortion zealot—-taxpayer-funded, on demand, up through birth and in some cases beyond. We have to recognize this reality, and it’s nothing new. The opportunity exists to deal with the issue on a national level at this time. Of course, it’s existed since R v W was decided. The common narrative is that the concept of option to abort is very popular societally, and I believe that to be true. The only question for non-zealots is “to what point”. There will never be a solution to suit all situations, and in the case of “abortion until ———— except in cases of ——-“ people will still seek out services in violation of the rules. It’s the nature of people. As for borders and underground railroads, perhaps you should turn the lights on. We have between 12,000,000 and 22,000,000 people in the country that have crossed borders in violation of laws and regulation. You and I could agree to meet at the Applebees in Des Moines a week from Tuesday, start at our respective locations and have no issues in travel between here and there. Is it true that some extreme politician might author legislation that would impact that freedom? Yes, of course. Power corrupts. People are crazy. Time will tell, but handwringing about a country that resembles the United States pre-1861 seems quite extreme and frankly, disrespectful to the memories of the people who lived through that madness. In the meantime, my suggestion about those willing to bring time, effort and money to assist those in need seems the best alternative during these turbulent political times.

Your gotcha, everybody cares about the committee, is that Cheney, a member of the committee, is speaking during a committee hearing? Here’s a question. Why all the pussyfooting around here? Cheney The Lesser made a declaration, understanding of course, she has no obligation to be transparent or truthful; That declaration is that Trump tried to call someone; That declaration is that person told them lawyer; That declaration included verbiage that a referral was made to DOJ; At that point, Cheney The Lesser, stops talking about Trump and says quite specifically that the committee takes attempts to influence witnesses seriously. Is that breaking or a blockbuster declaration? Why didn’t she accuse Trump of witness tampering, obstruction etc? For the 15th time, why the cloak and dagger on this issue? Once again, inferences and allegations but when push comes to shove, it’s yet another version of Trump throwing catsup against the wall.

Someone is always suffering, Goose, with govt sitting idly by. There’s no massive movement afoot to arrange travel or provide taxpayer funded support to people with serious illness—breast cancer, heart disease, diabetes— struggling to survive. It seems logical that in a country with considerable wealth, with all the support that the pro-choice folks have, grassroots organizations sponsored by wealthy benefactors and private donations could take a substantial bite out of costs of travel and treatment.

I agree that Rudy has gone off the rails. Literally walked the City through one of the darkest episodes in history with grace, courage and leadership.

You know, in spite of the obvious hypocrisy of downplaying the concerns of Hispanics and Dr. Jill's subsequent apology, I can't believe in my heart that Tibsy really supports calling Hispanic voters what amounts to a diverse collection of Egg McMuffins. I think he's just dug in here and sees no way out.

My guess is Tibsy knew full well the consternation that Dr. Jill caused with her painfully inappropriate comments. But, to acknowledge so, he would have to revisit all the comments he and those like him lobbed at the Trumpster, and accusations of hypocrisy surely would follow. Better to pretend it was the Latinx crowd just getting overly emotional over what he sees as a very nice compliment directed their way.

#whiteprivilege☝🏻

It was prepared and scripted speech, and the tone deaf part lasted about 15 seconds. Yet, here you are having to explain what she meant. She said what she said, Tibs. Ah, I forgot you’re a liberal. You’re the arbiter of what might constitute a “serious” organization and how people might feel about being compared to a taco. It must get tough keeping all those people in the right boxes. Btw, you don’t lose your Biden-B#ner card just because you acknowledge the dopey nature of what she said.

Trump’s energy level at 74 was remarkable, and that of a person much, much younger. His energy now is incredible, though I would prefer he not run. Biden is sinking into the abyss, somehow appearing years older than his quite advanced age. I agree on the 25th Amendment, but for a different reason. The American people voted for this old codger, he should see it through.

Dude, no, that’s not at all what I got going. That was Dr. Jill. I learned at a very early age not to compare ethnic groups to any member of the hand-held breakfast family, delicious though they might be. I really assumed everyone learned that. Besides, I am not Hispanic. Dr. Jill might describe me as part of a vibrant community of potato chip vendors, as distinct as the freckles on a Celtic face, as beautiful as a well-choreographed step-dance, and as unique as the beverage options at the many pubs in Dublin.

Maybe, but don’t get mad at me. It was Dr. Jill who pitched the analogy. The interesting thing is she actually considered her audience, thought about how to connect, and had those comments put on a teleprompter to be memorialized. Seriously, Tibs, she thought it was a compliment to compare Hispanic voters to a Breakfast Burrito at McDonalds.

Dr Jill calls this “The breakfast taco bump!”.

A note of Parliamentary procedure: What? The subject was Trump and his general demeanor. I responded with a thought regarding the impact of COVID on his re-election, which was significant and not addressed in @JaCrispy comment. But yes, if not for some things, other things might or might not be. Btw, I always loved the colorful Canadian paper currency. I think you call it a guilder, krone, something like that. 🇨🇦

Tough to keep up, but I’m guessing whataboutism is ok again in defense of Old Joe. He’s in sharp decline, it’s as simple as looking at clips from his younger days and comparing them to the old man we see today. And sure, if he was kindly old Lt. Joe from the local volunteer fire department, his penchant for losing his place and making up words would fall under the category of just being sad, but understandable due to his advanced age. The problem is Biden has much, much more on his plate than Lt Joe, and as the economy continues to slump, his lack of any discernible leadership is perhaps the most problematic sign of his decline. Interestingly, I’ve heard Biden supporters suggest that in spite of his decline, part of the appeal was the concept of President by committee.

Conventional wisdom is that absent COVID, he wins by a mile in spite of the issues you laid out. As it turns out, he was correct on what the focus on COVID would look like post-presidency. While suggesting it would disappear was a stretch, the reality is that there was substantially less focus on death, spread, vax status and when Biden washed his hands of the problem, the national media and Dems barely blinked. the half-a-mill dead under the Biden plan was a non-event. We now have a pattern where what constitutes “vaccinated” has been redefined to substantially less than vax/vac/booster or vax/boost for JNJ. All this, of course, post Operation Warp Speed which based on preliminary numbers and projections, saved millions of Americans in spite of Dems encouraging mass protests and mass spread throughout the pandemic.

Hogwash. Biden had nearly a 50 year track record of exactly the sort of incontinence incompetence and divisiveness on display for the past two years. Good for you for voting other than Biden, but he's exactly who the modern liberal party wanted in the WH.

I may not have said this in a while, or maybe ever, but I enjoy reading your posts. Well done here.

As Chi indicated, the committee members want to “…limit was is included in public testimony….”. I’m all for transparency and I’m completely behind the Free the Nipple campaign!

If one was running a serious investigation, there would be discipline with respect to what was said, who said it, and casual allegations would be discouraged pending the completion of the investigation. If one was running a serious investigation, one would not run trailers on breaking testimony purportedly showing causal connections between a subject and a coordinated assault on the Capitol that includes preposterous allegations quickly refuted by of all parties, the Secret Service. If one was running a serious investigation of this nature, with declarations of guilt preceding the conclusion of the investigation, one should have no concerns whatsoever about testimony being coordinated moving forward, any more than one would worry about the subject revealing questions posed and answers provided after a secret deposition. The reality is congress is widely viewed as less than truthful, less than reliable, less than honorable, and as you have suggested multiplied times, less than competent. By leaving criminal investigations of wrongdoing to the pros guided by specific sets of discipline, the 1/6 junior cop clan can afford to be transparent in a matter of this magnitude. I do agree the committee is desirous of protecting the narrative and completing such inquires in carefully choreographed settings of their choosing.

Not this time. I’m no fan of the 1/6 miscreants who tried to smash barriers, assault officers, and engaged in other than peaceful protest. Let’s go with transparency and clarity here.