placeholder

If the speaker of the house was truly interested in getting the truth out, then he would make these videos available to several different media sources so that one party's version wouldn't be accepted as final. As you clearly don't know, project veritas, has been sued successfully several times for cutting innocent comments in such a way as to make them isound like confessions to midseeds. Your understanding of how this works is extraordinarily naive. And finally, how many times have we heard from the extreme right that there's going to be an expose to expose some scandal or other and it never happens? How election fraud was going to be busted wide open? Or how the Durham investigation was going to expose a cabal in the justice department that was out to destroy Trump? I have no doubt that the extreme right ring is salivating over an imminent expose of how the deep state was actually behind the invasion of the capitol building.. and how once again it will ultimately come to nothing.

I wonder if people in 1910 were saying" Will ever be a time when I don't have to hand crank my car to get it started?"

Here's a link to the same story on the BBC but it uses something called written words. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64669987

Given that we have ironclad proof that he supported claims about the election that he knew were false, why would any rational person believe that he would honestly present the evidence?

But the point is that these practices were widespread in the pre-Christian Classical world.

His way of wriggling off that petard.

Actually, if you go back to the world of the Ancient Greeks and Romans, you'll find sexual relationships between men were actually celebrated in verse. Of course, these were pre-Christian societies. So it may be that as Christianity continues to lose its pull over people's, sexual practices, or at least in individuals openly acknowledging that they are engaging in them, western societies are simply returning to the ancient status quo.

An article from Dec 1, 2021 US warns Russia has plans for ‘large scale’ attack on Ukraine The US says it has evidence Russia has made plans for a “large scale” attack on Ukraine and that Nato allies are “prepared to impose severe costs” on Moscow if it attempts an invasion. Speaking at a Nato ministers meeting in Latvia, the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, said it was unclear whether Vladimir Putin had made a decision to invade but added: “He’s putting in place the capacity to do so in short order, should he so decide. “So despite uncertainty about intention and timing, we must prepare for all contingencies while working to see to it that Russia reverses course.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/01/us-warns-russia-plans-large-scale-attack-on-ukraine

Not only did Trump not withdraw from the deal, but he accelerated the withdrawal of American troops after it was revealed that the Taliban was still associating with Al Qaeda. That's how bad his performance was.

Are you experiencing a flashback?

So are unchosen ones. Got another irrelevant reply?

How naive can you be? "the video evidence". There are 41000 hours of video evidence. Given Carlson's past record, why would anyone believe that he will edit those videos in an honest way?

So you're the Chosen One who can really see what's happening? It is to laugh.

Some should send nauseus a petard to hoist himself by.

They did what?

If that's the case, then the Taliban broke its word during the Trump administration. So it was OK for Trump to ignore that but not Biden?

Just because what you linked to doesn't mention that, doesn't mean that you didn't leave it out. Particularly as you have tried this Minsk ploy over and over again and have been called on it repeatedly. The fact is Russia denied that Minsk 2 applied to it. This is a huge, overwhelming fact and unless you want to claim utter ignorance of their claim, it's clear what you are up to.

More like "evasiveness".

Occasionally Godwin's law doesn't apply. For example when someone believes that appeasing Hitler was a good idea. What makes that particularly ludicrous is that appeasing Hitler led to millions of deaths. Unless of course, you believe that a Nazi Europe was a good idea. I wouldn't put that past you.

Such nonsense. Whatever I called it doesn't matter. And it has nothing to do with the fact that legal clearly stated that grounds for calling the detention illegal was that the child or fetus was not being given proper care. Your claim was that they were objecting to detention per se. That is clearly not the case. It was about care.

You should take your complaints to the moderators if you believe that those sources are only "credible". Otherwise, yours is just a cheap and easy to dodge facts.

Well, there was an agreement in place for Nato Nations to increase defense spending to 2% by 2025. You think it's OK for Trump to unilaterally demand and expect an agreement to be revised? This is the clown you think would be able to get other nations to agree to a unified response?

How did the Taliban break the agreement?

What don't you understand about the fact the the grounds for the claim that the fetus is being unlawfully detained is that the fetus is not being given proper care. "The filing was made on behalf of the unborn child and calls for Harrell to be discharged from jail until the child is born so she can receive proper care."

From that article: "An early peace deal could have ended the bloody war in Ukraine. But NATO opposition and revelations about the Russian massacre of civilians at Bucha, along with US media that all but ignored potential routes to peace, dashed those hopes." So even it it was true that negotiations could have succeeded, massive Russian war crimes put an end to that.