placeholder

This is a particularly strange comment given that you believe in the credibility of a certain prominent political figure. Irony much? Anyway, this is the problem with people who try to make things personal. This isn't about a speech or comment from Mayorkas. This is about data coming from the Dept. of Homeland Security. Border crossings down 56% from pre-Title 42 end but 'too early' to draw conclusions: DHS https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/immigration/border-crossings-down-biden-title-42-crisis

So you believe that the UK and the EU can come to terms on some sort of deal which would only include concessions from the UK that don't involve cash? Can you share with us what those concessions might be? Or are you going to revert to your go-to of who knows?

Since you have nothing to challenge the facts with, I guess your only recourse is to launch an evidence-free attack on motives.

This congressperson shall henceforth be known as Marjorie "Karen" Taylor Green.

But the promise of Brexiters was that the UK would find other trading partners that would actually result in a better situation for the UK than what had been the status quo under EU membership. What's more, they contended that payments to the EU were costing more than they were worth. And stil contend the same. Nowhere amongst the prominent Brexit supporters have I ever seen any support at all that the UK would have to offer something to the EU to regain some measure of the privileges it once enjoyed.

Thank you for sharing your well-reasoned and evidence-rich reply.

So back to the future and anything can happen no matter how unlikely? And what would be the incentive for the EU to give the UK for free what it's own members have to pay for? Or will the UK will get for free what non-members like Norway and Switzerland have to pay for? Or are you just sharing fan fiction with us?

So you agree that that gravity is a robust description of how global trade works in relation to distance? And that it augurs badly for UK's attempts to replace what it has lost because of Brexit with trade from more distant nations? Good to know.

Here's another source for you https://oxfordre.com/economics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190625979.001.0001/acrefore-9780190625979-e-327;jsessionid=5A588A34D38D6EF63AF6948E56DD7A24#:~:text=The gravity model of international,for more than 50 years. And another https://www.tse-fr.eu/sites/default/files/medias/doc/by/chaney/distance.pdf Let me know when you've got some actual evidence to counter what I've offered. I think it's going to be a long wait. In other words, you've still got nothing.

In other words, you've got nothing.

Where did I assert or posit that Trump was going to prison. However, that you call it a fantasy, rather than a possibility, tells us where you're coming from.

A 3rd meaning from one source. And just because you are haviing difficulties with someone, that doesn't necessarily make them churlish. Particularly Ray C. who consistently applies reason and evidence to his arguments. As for your assertions, the thing is, there's plenty of good reasons why Brexit is doomed to fail. A big reason is something called gravity. It's a universal economic fact (apart from a few churlish nations like North Korea) that the 2 most important factors that determine how much trade a country will engage in with other countries are size of their respective economies and geographic distance. The latter factor is a crucial factor what economists call gravity. So all the UK's attempts to engage in trade pacts with more distant nations, isn't going to make up for what it has lost by leaving the EU. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_model_of_trade

You really need to get acquainted with the meaning of "churlish" https://www.google.com/search?q=churlish+definition&oq=churlish+definition&aqs=chrome..69i57.5462j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

It's clear that some people have trouble reading a graph The Legacy of the 2001 and 2003 “Bush” Tax Cuts The biggest tax policy changes enacted under President George W. Bush were the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, often referred to as the “Bush tax cuts” but formally named the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA). High-income taxpayers benefitted most from these tax cuts, with the top 1 percent of households receiving an average tax cut of over $570,000 between 2004-2012 (increasing their after-tax income by more than 5 percent each year). Despite promises from proponents of the tax cuts, evidence suggests that they did not improve economic growth or pay for themselves, but instead ballooned deficits and debt and contributed to a rise in income inequality. https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/the-legacy-of-the-2001-and-2003-bush-tax-cuts

Actually what it shows is that some people suffer from amnesia. It's clear you don't recollect what happened in late 2008 just before Obama took office?

To be accurate, even if a friend did invite them, the friend wasn't there. And it's a property that's offered for vacation rental. It's fair to criticize Biden for this.

Here in fact is the linik to that document. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/DCPD-202100044/pdf/DCPD-202100044.pdf As you'll note, it refers only to Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI Russia-Trump investigation. What's more, it's not even absolute but recognizes that certain documents could be exempt due to national security considerations. But what makes riclag's citing of this document especially bizarre is that it is, in fact, a document. In other words, it's written. Apparently, Trump didn't believe that a mere verbal authorization was sufficient. And once again, keep in mind that even if Trump's claims to declassifying were strong, as the 3 judge panel that undid the appointment of a special master noted, that claim was a red herring.

Always convincing when an anonymous party cites glowing reviews by other anonymous parties of what they've done.

Yes, that Biden and his fiscal ineptitude. Federal budget deficit hits 6-year-high in Donald Trump's first fiscal year as president The federal budget deficit has surged to $779 billion in fiscal 2018, its highest level in six years, as President Donald Trump's tax cuts caused the government to borrow more heavily in order to cover its expanded spending. The Treasury Department said Monday the deficit climbed $113 billion from fiscal 2017. Debt will likely worsen in the coming years with the Trump administration expecting the deficit to top $1 trillion in 2019, nearly matching the $1.1 trillion imbalance from 2012. The deficit worsened because tax revenues are not keeping pace with government spending. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/federal-budget-deficit-hits-6-year-high-in-donald-trumps-first-fiscal-year-as-president/

If the timing of this is in fact perfect for the Democrats, Trump has only himself to thank. His lawyers have done everything they could to delay the investigations.

Actually, it's you who are wrong again. The declassification memo referred to references the FBI's crossfire hurricane investigation and even then is only partial. No reference in there to a general declassification.

Anyway, even if they were declassified, they would still be considered sensitive and trump would have no right to keep them. What's more there's very strong evidence that he lied to the justice department about being possession of them. That would be called obstruction of justice.

The arrangement you are referring to here are hardly routine. I'm sure some appropriate secluded space in some federal prison somewhere can be found and secret service agents can continue to protect the president. It actually should be a lot simpler to provide security for him in a prison with separate quarters than at Mar a Lago with guest s and workers constantly coming and going. And let's not get too carried away about the power of the secret service. It's not the pretorian guard.

More nonsense. As even Durham acknowledged the investigation was not predicated on the Steele report. Durham has also violated prosecutorial norms by continuing to maintain that the 2 people he unsuccessfully prosecuted made false statement. He didn't even qualify that by writing "alleged" before "false statements". Durham fails to find fault with the 2 parties who most disgraced themselves in the course of this investigation: William Barr and himself.

Well, even though the research isn't from an unbiased left wing University, as those of us capable of reading past the headlines know, but rather from a study published in PNAS from a researcher at Wood Hole Oceanographic Institution, it still provides undeniable evidence that the rapid rate of warming the earth's atmosphere is now experiencing is human caused. The fact that the upper atmosphere is cooling while the lower atmosphere is warming is proof of that. Of course, if you can offer a rational hypothesis in opposition to that, and not one raoted in accusations of bias and dishonesty, please share your ideas with us. To help you formulate your alternative, you might want to start by actually reading the article rather than continuing to offer nothing but Pavlovian reactions to headlines and publishing venues.