Hanaguma

Apologies from this humble colonial regarding my misnomering the phrase. But twisted knackers WOULD be much more painful...

Of course there isn't. It is just the usual hysterics that the former President engenders in his detractors. To be honest, it's quite funny to read. People getting their knackers in a twist (love that phrase, thanks England) over every possible permutation and possibility. The media has been doing their version of Moses wandering in the Sinai for two years now. Trump was the best thing that ever happened to them and they got lazy. When he left office, ratings plummeted. So they (and their friends in Washington) have been constantly on the sniff for anything Trump related. Trying to capture the old magic, so to speak. This situation seems tailor made for them- something to speculate on and rehash for the next month.

The good professor is a civil liberties advocate. He divorces his politics from his legal principles. As he said himself, "I am a liberal Democrat in politics, but a neutral civil libertarian when it comes to the Constitution." and “I’m a strong supporter of Joe Biden. I like Joe Biden. I’ve liked him for a long time, and I could enthusiastically support Joe Biden.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Dershowitz#cite_note-vanityfair-73 He DOES love to get involved in controversial cases, it is true. A definite pot-stirrer. But not a Trump supporter in any meaningful or political sense.

Here is an interesting take from Alan Dershowitz- hardly a supporter of Trump; The decision by the Justice Department to conduct a full-scale morning raid on Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Largo home does not seem justified, based on what we know as of now. If it is true that the basis of the raid was the former president’s alleged removal of classified material from the White House, that would constitute a double standard of justice. There were no raids, for example, on the homes of Hillary Clinton or former Clinton administration national security adviser Sandy Berger for comparable allegations of mishandling official records in the recent past. Previous violations of the Presidential Records Act typically have been punished by administrative fines, not criminal prosecution. Perhaps there are legitimate reasons for applying a different standard to Trump’s conduct, but those are not readily obvious at this stage. The more appropriate action would have been for a grand jury to issue a subpoena for any boxes of material that were seized and for Trump’s private safe that was opened. That would have given Trump’s lawyers the opportunity to challenge the subpoena on various grounds — that some of the material was not classified; that previous classified material was declassified by Trump; that other documents may be covered by various privileges, such as executive or lawyer-client. https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3594412-justice-department-should-have-subpoenaed-documents-not-raided-trumps-home/

Maybe...........this is it! The bombshell! The walls are closing in!! This is the tipping point!! This is the beginning of the end!! Its like deja vu all over again.

And in Nebraska, you can legally get an abortion up tp 20 weeks. Dont know what is going on here. 28 weeks is a viable baby in most cases.

Don't you think that the prenancy being in its 28th week might have something to do with it? Not many places allow abortions at that advanced stage of pregnancy.

Holy <deleted>! Biden is on tv now, talking up the Chip Act. But my God, he is not well. He is hacking up a lung every 15 seconds, constantly adjusting his shades, and really struggling. The man is not well.

So, you want Biden to get credit for the good jobs number (debatably good since it is just people coming back to work after Covid, rather than actual new jobs created). But on the other hand I imagine you want to explain away ruinously high gas prices and inflation as "out of his control" and "caused by global forces". AmIRite?

I think Americans are also leery of possibly re-electing a man who shakes hands with ghosts and lets the Easter Bunny dictate who he talks to. Not to mention that he is the least accessable president in recent memory. Compared to his predecessors, he is virtually invisible. This from Slate, hardly a right wing mouthpiece: The 46th president (Biden) carried out only 22 media interviews through the end of last year, which is fewer than his six most recent predecessors. And during the time, he has held a mere nine formal news conferences, three of which were held alongside visiting foreign leaders. In contrast, Donald Trump held 22 news conferences and 92 interviews in his first year. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/01/biden-fewer-news-conferences-interviews-first-year.html

...and people wonder why inflation is spiking...

I thought the Lancet was a medical journal, yet the article you quoted is not about Covid. It is a general political hit piece based on leftist tropes and shibboleths. To quote from the article; His appeals to racism, nativism, and religious bigotry have emboldened white nationalists and vigilantes, and encouraged police violence and, at the end of his term in office, insurrection. He chose judges for US courts who are dismissive of affirmative action and reproductive, labour, civil, and voting rights; ordered the mass detention of immigrants in hazardous conditions; and promulgated regulations that reduce access to abortion and contraception in the USA and globally. Does this sound like a scientific article to you?

Gotta say I am puzzled by this too. The economy was cooking along, unemployment down (especially for minorities), low inflation, peace deals in the Middle East, criminal justice reform, booming energy sector.... I get that you didn't like the Bad Orange Man's personality or behavior. I am with you on that. But they were 4 pretty good years for America as a whole.

No misinformation. You are comparing apples and oranges. Politicians would conduct their campaigns differently if the popular vote actually mattered in places like the US and Canada. Voter behavior would also be very different. So using it as any kind of actual important evidence of anything is useless. You could also try to make points by saying that Trump won 2,500 counties in the US election, but Biden won less than 500. It would matter exactly the same because how counties vote is irrelevant and the election is not fought on that basis. It is a cheap and irrelevant way to try and score political points. Oh, and here is the election result from Canada in 2019. Trudeau won while losing the popular vote. Same in 2021. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Canadian_federal_election

I rather think the onus is on those who want to spend the public's hard earned money to prove that it will have a demonstrable impact, not the other way around. All I read is that this would put the US "on the road" to meeting the artificially set political goal of 40% reduction by 2030. How much "road" does $300 billion buy? Pray tell, how will the US potentially crippling its economy get the big emitters (China, India, Brazil) get on board? More likely they will laugh and keep on building themselves.

Ok, so now "the science" is actually "a target"? Now let's assume it comes to pass and the US reduces by 40% in 8 years. This will have next to no impact on the global climate unless the OTHER big emitters get on board. And they aren't. So it amounts to yet another futile gesture. One that costs $300 billion.

Gas is below four bucks in Arizona? Alert the media! Only a little ways to go before........ well, gas was actually $2.25 in January 2021 when Biden took the White House. Never mind.

Interesting. "THE science" has suddenly changed into "SOME science". So "some science" is worth $300 billion?

"The science!?" And what exactly is "the science"? Does it tell him to subsidize rich people so they can buy electric cars? Which use dangerous batteries, lots of rare earth elements, and run on electricity produced by coal/gas? How did "the science" come up with such exact figures like "eliminate 40% of greenhouse gasses by 2030"? Those numbers sound more political than scientific to me.

Actually, yeah I do pretty much. And I never said "no limits" so please quit strqw manning. Paying for community necessities? Great. $300 billion for so-called climate initiatives? No thank you.

I have a problem with "no knock" warrants in general, unless there are dire circumstances at play. For example, hostages whose lives are at risk, or criminal evidence that is being destroyed. Barring those situations, no need for the violence and chaos that they cause.

Down is a good direction for taxes to go. Nothing wrong with letting people keep and spend/invest their own money, is there? If you want to volunteer more of your money to the IRS, you can easily do so by adding it to your filing every year. Same as all the rich boobs who complain that their taxes are too low. They can set a good example by voluntarily paying what they consider to be "their fair share". That would give them some moral standing to lecture others to do the same. Otherwise it is all an exercise in virtue signalling.

Except those taxes will be passed on to the end users, so the revenue generated will be offset. Remember when France had the great idea to add a special tax to millionaires? It added a grand total of 2% to tax revenue, at the expense of 60,000 of the country's wealthiest people leaving the country. And cost the country 0.2% of GDP per year. Ain't no way to tax your way out of trouble.

It you think that hundreds of billions of dollars to fight climate change is important, then how about being honest and call the bill the "Money for Democratic Donors in 'Renewable Energy'" Bill? Government spending, if anything, adds to inflation. As for increased corporate taxes, guess who will wind up paying them? Consumers, in the form of higher prices, which also will add to inflation. And no amount of IRS involvement in the economy will change that.

Parliamentary system. Leaders chosen by parties. No direct vote, only for local representative.