placeholder

This is the second of your Pavlovian responses. Your comment here has nothing at all to do with your "tax and spend" claim about inflation. Rather, it's just an empty talking point reflexively offered by you.

More nonsense. In the case of the Democrats produced actual evidence of criminal or impeachable acts. In the Republican case, no such criminal or impeachable acts are cited.

Thanks for the misinformation. While it's true that currently CO2 is about .041 %f the atmosphere, before the Industrial Revolution it was about 2.8%. So not the 11% contribution claimed by whoever that clown is in the video you shared. It's more like 30%. We know that the human contribution amounts to that because of the fact that fossil fuels are virtually entirely depleted of their Carbon 14 content. So by comparing the ratio of CO2 that contains C14 to that which doesn't, it's easy to compute what the human generated contribution amounts to.

Not just IMO but in reality, your comment about Trump is clueless. Reality Check: What Donald Trump Has Said About Taxes And The Wealthy At a news conference at Trump Tower, Trump unveiled a series of proposals to dramatically simplify and cut business and personal taxes. The proposals would have reduced the top marginal tax rate from 39.6 to 25 percent for couples with annual income above $300,000, which would have meant big cuts for high-income people. Trump maintained that the cuts would benefit middle-class families and that the rich would actually end up paying more in taxes, because he would eliminate unspecified deductions and loopholes. https://www.npr.org/2016/05/13/477930933/reality-check-what-donald-trump-has-said-about-taxes-and-the-wealthy As for what Biden feels, thanks for sharing with us your mind reading ability. As a senator and now President, it's what bills he proposed and supported that count. Got anything factual to share with us about that? IMO you don't.

If Trump was able to control himself and trust in the professional judgement of lawyers, you'd have a better point. But the ridiculous appeals repeatedly made by attorneys are pretty convincing proof that they are trying to please an ignorant client.

BAsically, this appeal challenges all of Engoron's judgements about fraud having been committed. Given that the evidence is so overwhelming to show fraud, this is just another Hail Mary Pass from Trump's lawyers.

Netanyahu is saying what he's saying to regain popularity. Stoking Israeli anger is his way of going about it. As the headline of the Times article says: ‘Erase Gaza’: War Unleashes Incendiary Rhetoric in Israel Experts say that inflammatory statements by prominent Israelis are normalizing once-taboo ideas such as the killing of civilians and mass deportations. It's living in denial to maintain that such language is about outraging Israeli public opinion. As the article goes on to note: "The cumulative effect, experts say, has been to normalize public discussion of ideas that would have been considered off limits before Oct. 7: talk of “erasing” the people of Gaza, ethnic cleansing, and the nuclear annihilation of the territory." https://archive.ph/Dd9El https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-war-rhetoric.html

But the fact is that Netanyahu is not a minor player. And what he says matters. What about the effect it's going to have on already enraged Israelis? And particularly on Israeli soldiers now fighting in Gaza?

Thanks for sharing with us the proof that your grasp of inflation in imperfect, to say the least. First off, taxation is a way to fight inflation. As for blaming spending in the current situation...how do you explain that fact that inflation is pretty much worldwide with the one exception of China which is having its own serious woes? How do you account for the fact that the USA is actually doing better both in its fight against inflation and economically than other major developed nations and most of the others, too?

Some people have dismissed certain incindiary calls by Israeli ministers as being unimportant because the people were relatively minor characters. I don't think it's so easy to dismiss when it's Netanyahu engaged in making the calls" "Among other things that Netanyahu says is this: “You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible — we do remember,” said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, referring to the ancient enemy of the Israelites, in scripture interpreted by scholars as a call to exterminate their “men and women, children and infants.” https://archive.ph/Dd9El https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-war-rhetoric.html Lest anybody think the NY Times is unfairly spinning that comment: To Remember and Destroy The Torah lists two mitzvahs regarding Amalek: To obliterate the nation of Amalek (timcheh et zecher Amalek). To never forget the evil deeds Amalek did (zechor al tishkach).9 https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/3942715/jewish/Who-Were-Amalek-and-the-Amalekites.htm

What nonsense are you on about now? The issue isn't the meaning of investigation It's whether the House is justified in staging an impeachment inquiry when there is no evidence of criminal activity to prompt such an investigation. As their own witnesses confirmed. An impeachment inquiry is only appropriate if there is evidence to support it.

Who is "They"? in " They literally have people monitoring the news for anything that is remotely critical and then label it antisemitism 🤢🤮"

You compared that MP to Truss. One is a backbencher, the other held a series of important posts before becoming PM. The success of Truss tells us a lot more about the sorry state of the Tories than do the vile comments of a solitary back bencher.

No, that makes it foolish to compare a backbencher's popularity with and support by members of their party to that of a person who actually became a Prime Minister.

Actually, the usual standard is to offer actual evidence before the House launches an official investigation. As their first 3 witnesses testified, there is currently no evidence to support charges of criminal activity on the part of Biden.

The difference is that Member of the Labour Party was never voted into the office of PM by members of the Labour Party.

I'll assume you're feigning ignorance of who the onat person is. That this person is who they are aiming to please would explain why their appeals have such a poor record of success.

Even if your comparison was valid, they aren't going to vote for a candidate who much such hateful statements a constant practice.

You mean like Laos did? Laos is spiraling toward a debt crisis as China looms large Laos borrowed billions from President Xi Jinping’s administration to finance railways, highways and hydroelectric dams, which has ballooned public debt to over 100% of GDP. Combined with a currency crisis and soaring inflation, Laos is on the brink of economic collapse. Without a clear-cut debt reduction deal with China, Laos’ financial hardships are unlikely to ease, analysts warn. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/09/laos-is-spiraling-toward-a-debt-crisis-as-china-looms-large.html Or Sri Lanka? Sri Lanka hands over port to China to pay off debt Hambantota port was signed over to Beijing on a 99-year lease because Sri Lanka cannot repay Chinese loans it took out to build the port in the first place https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/asia/sri-lanka-hands-over-port-to-china-to-pay-off-debt-1.684606 Lots of other examples out there, too. Other countries and lending institutions look at the feasibility of a project before lending money. China lends money to corrupt governments regardless of the feasibility of projects. When the loans can't be repaid, China demands harsh concessions. It's called a debt trap.

Just a note. elsewhere tonbridgebrit has praised the foresight of the Chinese government for its pouring massive resources into real estate and infrastructure development. The result is huge empty cities and roads that see no traffic and airports that no planes land at.

"disputed islands" That's China making a claim to pretty much everything in the South China Sea and getting into disputes with the Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Taiwan. You call China's sending troops and ships to occupy island and reefs or in some cases creating them mere disputes? A more accurate term would be military aggression. Disputes are the kind of issue that get settled in courts. Like the case the the Chinese lost to the Philippines.

I did preface my comment with this: "If it turns out to be the case that the resistance from Hamas ends up being far less than expected..."

You got me there.

Well, were the polls rigged in 2016? "Rigging" implies intent. The polls can be wrong based on mistaken assumptions. Lately, in special elections, Democrats have repeatedly outperformed what the polls show. It may be, and it's only my guess, that millennials and Generation Z voters are turning out in higher numbers than was postulated by pollsters.

First off, they didn't just undervalue. They lied. Trump's apartment was claimed to encompass 30,000 square feet when the real number was more like 11,000. A high price was also assigned to the development potential of an upstate property. it turns out that the development rights had already been signed away. And on the one hand you ask if Trump undervalued or overvalued his properties, and then you follow with a clause, claiming falsely, that it doesn't matter. Then why ask at all? You think that a case could have gone this far if legally speaking a disclaimer frees a borrower of the obligation to be truthful? In fact, it's one thing to be mistaken in estimates of an asset's worth, but when there are multiple "mistakes" and they all favor the would-be borrower, then that's enough to establish fraud.