placeholder

First off, you don't know that. The current era of Ice Ages has lasted about 3 million years. It may come back a lot sooner if it turns out that would be the consequence of a severe disruption of major ocean current systems. Or it might not happen if the atmosphere gets too warm because of excess greenhouse gases. But even if it does happen, you, like so many other denialists, don't seem to understand the issue of rate of change.

From the CNN article CONCLUSION Shokin was not prosecuting Burisma. Even if, contrary to fact, he was investigating Burisma. the fact is that Biden was acting as the messenger, not the instigator. The State Dept recommended that Shokin be fired and the EU was behind it. And there's this: "On the same day, his office carried out a raid against one of Ukraine's leading anti-corruption groups, the Anti-Corruption Action Center (AntAC), claiming that it had misappropriated aid money.[21] AntAC was a frequent critic of the Prosecutor General's Office under Shokin.[34] In one notorious case, two of Shokin's prosecutors were caught with stashes of diamonds, cash and valuables in their homes, likely indicating bribery. Prosecutors from another department of Shokin's office were fired or reassigned when they attempted to bring a prosecution against the so-called "diamond prosecutors".[35]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Shokin

On legal questions, absolutely.

What don't you understand about the fact that Victor Shokin was not investigating Burisma. In fact he wasn't investigating any of the oligarchs. He was investigating anti-corruption activists and prosecutors who actually were investigating prosecution. He was removed at the behest of the State epartment and Barack Obama and the EU thoroughly approved.

It's a sure sign of emptiness when someone asks a question and then answers it themselves. Actually, the climatological community regard this as a settled question. As for proving it to you, do you have the expertise to understand highly technical arguments?

If those two guys who have consistently supported Trump in his legal predicaments think there's a problem, then they'll be very few others who think otherwise.

Right, You didn't know. So how does that justify this conclusion: So you don't know, that's what I thought.:

He predicted that the pandemic would be over by Easter of 2020. Among other things.

Even strong supporters from the legal profession like Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz think Trump is in deep legal trouble. Maybe you should advise them on exactly what they've got wrong.

How can you tell it doesn't? On what rational basis did you come up with this nasty piece of baiting "So you don't know, that's what I thought.:

My standard for a good president is how much he gets accomplished on issues I support. And a lot got accomplished.in that regard. Who cares how many hours they put in if stuff gets done?

Actually, in the latest inflation reports for June, the USA came in lowest of the G7. It looks like this inflation was primarily due to a mismatch between supply and demand of goods thanks to covid. Now that that is going away, inflation seems to be reverting to its normal levels. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/inflation-cpi

Except that my reply was to this and not to subsequent posts: In other words, someone offered a link and you accused them of not knowing based on that. Hmmm...where have I seen that done before?

More of the same BS from you. This is from the landing page of the World News Forum "Any alleged factual claims must be supported by a valid link to an approved credible source." In other words nobody owes you a personally composed explanation. Just a link to an approved credible source. As an act of pure kindness on my part, I've PM'd you a legitimate way to bypass most paywalls.

I don't know what you mean by the chart was not necessary. sunnyinbangrak made a claim crediting Trump with an incredible economy but unsupported by evidence. The evidence I provided shows that the economy under Trump just looked like a continuation of the trends of the economy under Obama.

But not anyone can write clearly. What you ought to have written is anyone can follow a political line or party. "Politics" encompasses anything that happens in the political sphere. So if you're following that, you're following an entire field, not a partisan part of it.

You don't follow politics? So, you're confessing to an uninformed opinion?

"fellow' used as an adjective to describe in this case, sharing a belief.

Lots of your fellow gigglers were claiming the same thing about Trump being indicted.

More nonsense from the 2 of you. Why shouldn't Biden be open about getting Victor Shokin fired? He was carrying out the policy of the US government. What's more, the EU also approved. Shokin was reckoned by the State Dept and the EU to be deeply corrupt. Despite Shokin's claim that he was going after Burisma when he was fired, his staff testified that was a lie. In fact, the problem with Shokin was that he wasn't going after any corrupt oligarchs. However, I'll say this for him: he didn't lack for zealotry in going after anti-corruption organizations in the Ukraine.

What my chart pointed out is that contrary to what sunnyinbangrak claimed, there was nothing incredible about the performance of the economy under Trump. It looks like a continuation of the path the economy was on under Obama. Had I wanted to be deceptive, I would have started with 2020.

From 2019: Survey: 8 of 10 Americans live paycheck to paycheck https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/breaking-the-news/survey-8-of-10-americans-live-paycheck-to-paycheck/89-69e2a73f-c177-453d-9e97-c73a7cafc014 And Trump didn't inherit a pandemic, did he? But wait there're more: Wages surged for lowest-paid Americans after the pandemic https://www.cbsnews.com/news/wages-surged-lowest-paid-americans-pandemic-covid-19/ Does the following look like good news to you? Black Unemployment Reaches All-Time Low https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/behavioral-competencies/global-and-cultural-effectiveness/pages/black-unemployment-reaches-all-time-low.aspx I guess what's left for Bidenomics to say to your thanks except, "You're welcome."

If China does attack Taiwan most likely the motive will be to distract from the fact that Xi has badly screwed the Chinese economy. As long as he and the CCP are in power, China will remain a middle income nation.

They're only external affair because China claims them to be. By your logic, country A could occupy territory widely recognized as belonging to country B and deny that they are interfering in country B's internal affairs.. Given that all the nations that border on the South China Sea, apart from China, disagree with the Chinese claim, which is patently ridiculous as a glance at a map show, it's clear who has the better claims.

And from you, the expected distaste for facts.