Dan O

Killing isnt ever right no matter the race or country but I guess White South Africans dont like being treated like they treated Black South Africans just a few short decades ago do they?

i think its a bs story just for kicks but I'll throw out some comments. She maybe makes 9 to 10k salary a month selling bubble tea. If she has family in the country they most likely already own the land and house so have no house payment or heavy expenses. Food is basically it and maybe gas for the car and electric. They've been living off something in the past and made it this far in life without your help. It doesnt cost more than about 10k to15k all in for food, gas and electric and thats generous so your 30k is a major upgrade and thats just to start. at some point you'll be giving her money too. Your most likey being played which is pretty normal in this scenario and this is just the beginning. if your not seeing her every day then she probably has someone else on the hook too or will soon. If its a true story tell her you cant right now but maybe in the future can help. she how she reacts and if things stay the same or slow down for some "reason". Then go hang out with her and her friends and also meet the family and see for yourself their situation and how they live. By that time you'll know how serious and honest she is. I will add that its not uncommon for many Thai's to happily trade future financial security in place of love. its your money in the end so do what you want.

Looks like you agree finally, good boy! Admission is the first step to recovery. We're discussing Trump in this thread not anyone else. You can start a new thread if you like on those issues.

You arent smart enough to comprehend the topic isn't about Obama its about trump. I think you can find the explanation about trumps admin ignoring and denying due process in the multiple cases he's lost in court already and currently in violation of the judges orders. Research it yourself there's plenty of sites available to you or are you scared to see how inaccurate your claims are and how you've been duped by a conman ?

I know enough to understand you have to uphold the whole constitution and existing laws of the USA as president and you cant pick and choose the ones you like and ignore the rest. You also don't get to cherry pick the parts out of context. You don't seem to be able to comprehend that fact. Come back when you brush up on facts and request a refund from your Trump uni law degree as you fall short

What are you rambling about guns for. I've never raised that issue. The president is tasked with upholding all the constitution and the laws of the USA, not cherry picking singular sentences taken out of the context. Thats why he's losing all his cases in court. Learn to comprehend what you read before you claim to know. Your Trump uni law degree isn't valid so ask for your money back

It's a waste of time explaining to you as you dont seem to have the capacity to understand facts, laws or the role of the president to uphold them. There are laws available to deport people after due process and he ignores them, thats breaking the law right their so stop being ignorant about facts. Thats the tip of the iceberg. Hes lost most all his court cases on illegal and unconstitutional exec orders. Do some research. You time is done on this topic so send yourself away

Like to try to explain your claim i don't think you can and doubt you even try to answer

Thats beyond stupid but expected.

No but explains why you seem to be clueless

That's a nonsense moronic answer and you know it

no idea what your talking about but its not surprising as you are coherent in your postings.

Seems you cant answer the question asked can you? I knew you couldnt so its no surprise. Where is he granted the authority to ignore the constitution, existing laws or judges rulings in legal cases? He cant and he doesnt have that authority does he? Just sit quietly hiding behind your keyboard being duped by a conman. He was elected to be the President and serve the people by upholding the constitution and laws of America correct? Its in he sworn oath and he isnt doing the duties he was elected to do by ignoring laws, judges orders and the constitution is he? No answer will be forthcoming Im sure, If he wants to deport people for valid reason the courts have been crystal clear, give them due process first. He's too stupid to follow the rules because he thinks they dont apply and I guess you are in his same camp.

Interestingly there are no public records available of many of these convictions available other than the claims presented by trumps minions. They also forget to included key information like the sentences were overturned or vacated or sentencing was completed. Perhaps you can fill in the blanks of where and when these convictions occurred and the other details for us?

Yeah it is gonna be a long 3.5 years for you and your buddies to see how many loses he has in court and eventually shut down by congress if he doesnt get impeached first. hang in there and we'll keep you updated when he F's up, in case you miss it.

He is the president and took an oath to uphold the constitution of the United States correct? He spoke those words in his oath at his swearing in. He is not doing that by breaking the law and ignoring direct rulings by the courts is he? Electing someone to that position does not give them ANY authority to break the law , ignore court rulings or ignore the constitution. you seem to be as ignorant about facts as your buffoon idol now arent you. Show us where is given the authority to ignore the constitution or legal rulings by the courts. it will be good reading. Im thinking your trump univ legal degree expired or you missed class that day.

to mr thumbs down explain why when a law is on the books and the court directs you to give due process first before deporting their is no reason not to as the person can be deported if they fail to present valid evidence on why they should be allowed to stay. To ignore a direct ruling and just deport without due process is breaking the law and thats what trumps cultist appointees are doing. now explain how they are not breaking the law and why they cant provide due process? Im betting you cant and wont give an answer

your explanation is flawed as usual. It's clearly split 50/50 unless you are self employed.

voters wanting something changed or fixed does not equate to allowing the president to break the law. there are legal channels to follow to accomplish that same outcome but trump is a buffoon masquerading as a person. if you think intentionally breaking the law when directed directly not to do what he did rather than using current laws or passing new laws is appropriate you are also part of the problem not part of the solution.

check yourself on that. Employees pay in 6.2 % of income to SS and the employer matches that with 6.2 %. if self employed then you pay all 12.4 %

If no one had been driving the car prior as implied and it was just sitting parked its unlikely it would spontaneously combust. Maybe want to check and see who he owes money to and hasnt paid.

That information does not prove anything except speculation and confirmation bias. Without the data you have no idea the level of research being conducted only that there was funding provided by the US and research of some type was being conducted by the Dr you are implicating. Could it have been a lab leak absolutely, could it have been natural occurrence absolutely. you obviously have decided the direction you are leaning and thats your prerogative. I am reserving judgement.

There's nothing to discuss or debate as neither theory can be proven currently, only speculated at. Lack of facts is not confirmation for either theory of source. Since there is no doubt the virus came from China in either scenario, its no wonder that China is less than forthcoming for all the reasons you listed and probably some you didn't list. The same with the absent data about the complete US involvement with funding and support for work in the labs on viral research. You or I can make a case for either being plausible which is what I said but its just opinion and goes nowhere without concrete information. Speculation gets no true answers, only more unverified questions and assumptions

Currently he is in the losing category on cases, fact.. Yes he's appealing them and the outcomes MAY change but currently he's losing on so many fronts. To try to use your logic is faulty as it hasn't happened. I live in reality and that means where we are now. If he had strong enough positions he wouldnt be losing the cases he has had to appeal.

You love to ramble dont you. I was clear on what I wrote. You can string together snippets of information on either side of this issue and then use it to support your own conclusion. Using that Info like that is what you have done and it's called an opinion nothing more. I stated clear either scenario was possible but currently unproven. I never gaslighted anything. You can go back and check the "intelligence sources" and see clearly the information came from the CIA report in connection with other intelligence agencies. Regardless it doesn't change the conclusion that was given, it was one possibility without significant verifiable supporting facts. No argument from the fence just a rational position that you cant verify either scenario currently and I'm not claiming either is correct at this point.