placeholder

Juicing Biden up? Trying this one on again? Shameless much? Any alleged factual claims must be supported by a valid link to an approved credible source. https://aseannow.com/forum/158-world-news/

What don't you understand about the fact that case had nothing to do with the Survivors Act? The second one,, coupled with the defamation lawsuit did. And guess what? That lawsuit failed. So the survivors act didn't help her at all.

There's one other problem with your belief. Carroll filed her defamation lawsuit in 2019. She did refile it in 2022, With it she also filed also another on the basis of the Survivors act.. So, no, her defamation charge would not have been dismissed under the statute of limitations. In the defamation lawsuit she was not suing Trump for sexual assault. But rather for how he responded to her claim of sexual assault and rape.

It's one thing not to believe her story, it's quite another to impute the desire to attack Trump being behind the passage of that law. You've got nothing.

You're right, It isn't.At least, I could find absolutely no mention of Donald Trump in articles about the support for passing the proposed bill Harvey Weinstein Survivors Push New York Governor to Support Adult Survivors Act A group of women who stood up against Harvey Weinstein and other sexual abusers are pushing New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo to support the Adult Survivors Act, which would give survivors more time to hold their abusers accountable to get justice. Jessica Mann and Dawn Dunning, who testified against Weinstein, historically changing the system of sexual abuse and unbalanced power dynamics in Hollywood, are among the women who wrote a letter to Cuomo, along with Weinstein survivors Ambra Gutierrez and Dominique Huett. Evelyn Yang, former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang’s wife, who shared that she was sexually assaulted by her OB-GYN while pregnant, is also part of the group of advocates pushing for the legislation. https://variety.com/2020/biz/news/weinstein-survivors-adult-survivors-act-1234733068/ ‘I Want to Be Heard’: Adult Sex-Abuse Victims Demand New Rights https://archive.ph/JG1T8#selection-285.0-285.63 Glad I could clear that up for you.

His lies about the stolen election are fibs? Really? As for how the voters view Biden...Let's see how they judge him a couple of months from now if the economic news continues to be good.

Wow! The guy running against Biden for the nomination has unkind things to say about his prospects. Who ever would have thought it?

Well, even if that were true, she's one person. (You got any evidence that she's still crying) Trump is leading a whining chorus of most of his supporters.

But unlike so many Trump supporters, they still wouldn't be crying 3 years after the election.

The part about cheap tech (and it's enhancement of asymmetric warfare) rings true. The gratuitous comments about the Welfare State and such, not so much. As for the West talking about conscription, really? Maybe if you equate the comments of a few people in the UK with the West. Otherwise, again, not so much.

Actually, I don't watch TV to get my news. Unlike you, apparently, I have no problem with reading long stretches of text. Far more data absorbed in much less time. And far more susceptible to critical analysis.

Empty allegations much. Evidence none. Mostly irrelevant As for Biden's classified documents. As you clearly don't know, this all began when Biden's people discovered some classified documents in his office at the University of Pennsylvania. They immediately reported it to the FBI. Subsequently, there were other searches at Biden's properties. None of which he attempted to impede in any way. What you don't seem to understand is that it wasn't a crime to possess these documents. But willful possession is. Lying about possessing them is also. That's what there's overwhelming evidence showing that's what Trump did.

Got any actual evidence to back that up?

Post the proof on video? Are you one of the many right wingers here who are allergic to the written word? Why is it you people seem to have such a problem with text? Could it be because it's a lot easier to catch falsehoods that are written rather than spoken? And those of us who are reasonably literate know that it takes a lot less time read something than to watch something. Share with us some text, and then I'll dissect it for you.

Been hiding under a rock much? During his first 2 years as President, Biden had huge achievements. You may not approve of them but here they are: "The first two years of the Biden administration have included huge legislative victories: a major bipartisan infrastructure deal, a technology bill, a veterans’ health bill, a gun safety bill, and a package of new investments in climate and health care." https://archive.ph/v0hA7

Just to be clear, he killed the real estate empire his father had built. New York banks stopped lending to him.

We have another amateur gerontologist as a member of aseannow.com. As for lying, most politicians will do that from time to time. So by that standard, most politicians are confirmed liars. But no politician I know of on the American scene, well, maybe with the exception of George Santos, lies as massively and repeatedly as Trump. Quantity counts.

Where did I accuse you of being a conspiracy theorist? Anyway, I'm glad to know that you don't believe that the 2020 election was stolen. Not all Trump supporters do. Just most of them.

But for the Krazed and the Konspiracy addicts, not.

We both know that the fate of the world depends on the outcome of this struggle.

The only Republicans in office who are hoping the impeachment goes nowhere are those in swing states whose seats will be jeopardized should they vote for impeachment. And those Republicans who understand what it would mean for their those representatives' electoral prospects.

As bad as Kamala Harris is, it could be worse. Donald Trump.

Actually, from reading this opinion piece in USA Today, you'd think Durham was a competent investigator. It's useful to recall that both his major prosecutions failed miserably. To make it worse, the people he prosecuted were not members of the Justice Dept but rather were accused of lying to the Justice Dept. Most legal commentators concurred that the only reason they were pursued was bias on Durham's part. As you probably don't recall, the Inspector General of the Justice Dept previously did an investigation of the FBI investigation. He concluded that bias played no role in the investigation. That there was no conspiracy. When that report was released - even though Durham asked for it not to be - Durham released a commentary in which he expressed doubts about the results of the I.G.s investigation. As did William Barr. Durham and William Barr, the Attorney General, went to extraordinary lengths to find evidence of a conspiracy in the Justice Dept. They even went to Italy together to try to get information out of the Italian intelligence service. That failed. But they were given allegations that Trump was involved with organized crime. Even though it wasn't in his remit, Barr authorized Durham to investigate instead of a different investigator. When Durham's final report was released, essentially he agreed with the Inspector General's report. There was no deep state conspiracy or any kind of conspiracy behind the FBI investigation. I see that this author of the article has repeated the falsehood that the investigation was launched the FBI was launched on the basis of the Steele Dossier. Not true. . In addition, this piece doesn't address the results of the Mueller investigation. Mueller said that if Trump weren't President he would indict him on 10 counts of obstructing justice. Much of that obstruction had to do with the Russia investigation and Trump signaling that he would pardon those whom the Justice Dept investigated, prosecuted and got convicted. And that's exactly what Trump did. William Barr, who decided not to follow up on the results of the Mueller investigation was soundly castigated by the Federal Judge overseeing the matter. Basically, he called Barr a liar for misrepresenting the results of the investigation. Keep in mind that this is an opinion column from a right wing journalist.

You forgot to include evidence with a link to prove your point. Here's what evidence with a link looks like: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSLDL#0 The problem is, the evidence show that layoffs and discharges are actually actually a bit lower during the Biden Administration than they were during the Trump administration.

Here's a link to a video from Steve Schwartzman, the head of Blackrock which is the largest asset manager in the world. He is also a prominent supporter of the Republican party, so he wouldn't have any political incentive to skew his observations about the economy. Basically, he says that inflation already is at 2 percent. https://www.barrons.com/video/ceo-steve-schwarzman-makes-the-case-for-buying-blackstone-stock/2D010246-E91F-459F-91C8-85577D9CF47B.html