candide

It's not about the bragging, it's about the right-wing claim he did that to protect Burisma.

Sory, I replied too fast. I thought you were claiming he did that to protect Busrisma from being investigated.

A debunked B.S.

Well, there is a certainty that nearly half of GOP voters are morons, as they believe the pizzagate conspiracy theory. https://dcist.com/story/16/12/28/poll/

A bit like they think there is racism against white people because it is not tolerated any more to be racist against black people.

If more UK residents work in care homes, it may well be that less will work in other activities. Unemployment rate in UK has always been low, and is still currently around 4%, despite the post-pandemic consequences, Brexit, war in Ukraine, etc... The main problem of the UK economy is not unemployment, it's low growth (and temporarily: inflation).

And they are ready to believe anything... “They’re not indicting me, they’re indicting you. I just happen to be standing in the way,” he told the arena crowd in Erie, adding that, “Every time the radical left Democrats, Marxists, communists and fascists indict me, I consider it actually a great badge of honor.... Because I’m being indicted for you.” ???? https://news.yahoo.com/trump-amid-legal-perils-calls-031346413.html

Ridiculous comment again.

Then why doesn't the GOP release the testimony?

That's a ridiculous comment. It's a copy/paste from the original document.

It's a pity there has been no real investigation and trial on responsibilities for this tragedy! I wonder why the army and the Dems quickly buried the case as deep as possible after starting an investigation? (Sarcasm alert)

Only if Trump begs pardon on his knees! ????

Of course, the GOP is releasing only the testimonies it likes...... Democrats claim the GOP is withholding evidence contradicting claims in Hunter Biden probe https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-claim-gop-withholding-evidence-145946236.html "House Democrats are demanding the release of a transcript from a new FBI witness that they say contradicts Republicans' claims in the expanding congressional inquiry into President Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden. Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on House Oversight Committee, sent a letter Friday to Rep. James Comer, the Republican chair of the committee, asking him to produce the transcribed interview this month with an FBI agent who worked on the investigation into the younger Biden’s taxes and foreign business dealings. The witness was interviewed on July 17."

As usual, a misleading truncated quote.... Here's the full reply in the linked text. "THE COURT: All right. So if there were a 3 failure in the investigation or the charges brought were 4 inappropriate, how would that get addressed in our form of 5 government? 6 MR. WISE: Through the political process, Your 7 Honor. 8 MR. CLARK: In particular, Your Honor, the 9 Executive Branch is charged fully with investigating, making 10 prosecutorial discretion decisions, and indeed that's where 11 the term prosecutorial discretion comes from, it is vested 12 in the Executive Branch."

It seems the GOP has a big problem with evidence, in both cases of presence and absence of evidence.

They wanted elections before the nomination of the army chief, not after. History has shown it was a legitimate concern. "But both sides want to be in control when a key reshuffle of top military posts occurs in September." https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2010/5/6/thai-pm-sets-poll-timeframe Abhisit was a puppet at that time and was doing what he was being told to do.

It is known how the Eastern Tigers made money. That was long time ago, at the time of the Red Khmers..... For more recent information, all the cases involving the military have been buried. It could also be mentioned that Thailand is at the bottom range for transparency of procurement in rankings.

Abhisit should have done the same as Yingluck: dissolve the parliament and quickly organise elections. That's how democratic governments do. However, as he was a puppet, he had to wait for the nomination of Prayut as army chief before organising new elections.

They were protesting to get elections. Of course, the army went against them for this reason. Unlike when the yellow shirts (or equivalent: PDRC) protest in order to oust an elected government or to block elections. In this latter case the army does nothing or even helps the protesters. The difference between Abhisit and Yingluck is eloquent! . Both had their legitimacy strongly contested. Yingluck quickly dissolved the parliament in order to let the people make a decision about it via elections. Abhisit sent the troops!

"Alleged", "apparently"....

They were protesting to get elections. As far as I know the fire in the picture you posted was started after the killings.

I am not claiming that they are perfect, but they are in no way comparable to the yellow shirts, the Juntas and their puppets (including. Abhisit at the time).

Ok, they don't seem to bother much, for now. However, it doesn't cancel the fact that they always fought for elections and elected government. So they are not equivalent to the Junta and the yellow shirts.

Maybe they were a bit angry after being massacred by the army?

When did the red-shirt protest against Pita?