placeholder

You still trying that one on about Biden? Someone in an audience asked him if he thought Trump was an illegitimate President. Biden replied yes. But first of all, Biden didn't raise the issue. Second, it was never defined what was meant by "illegitimate". It could mean that Trump was behaving in ways that were illegitimate. Like twisting the arm of President Zelensky to announce an investigation of Biden. And of course, this was basically a one off. Frequency counts. And I don't think there's an integer high enough to tally all the times Trump and company have claimed that the elections were fraudulent. And no one has to ask Trump to comment, either. He's his own trigger.

But clarity does or should help. And if you don't accept the existence of a major source of the problem, then you're living in denial. Not a good approach to rectifying the situation.

Okay. But, if anything, having Liz Cheney on your side, would be, for me, a reason to doubt its correctness. For what its worth, I think she misjudged the strength of MAGA and if she had to do it all over again, would have done very differently. But that's just speculation.

Liz Cheney is still an unapologetic backer of the Iraq War. And just about every other nasty right wing political plank. No need to shed tears over her electoral fate or to rejoice in her opposition to the Trump wing of the party. She is hardly a model of probity.

But the point was that leaving the EU would allow the UK to make a deal with the USA. Of course, even if a deal had been concluded, it would have made virtually no difference to the UK's economy. The conservative government evaluated the effect of such a deal, and concluded that it would have added a tiny fraction of a percentage point to UK GDP.

I don't see that what she did was illegal except maybe in perjuring herself by claiming that she and her husband don't discuss issues before the Supreme Court. But there's no way disproving that. Thompson is obviously a partisan low life. He has actually been featured as attending fund raising events in support of right wing candidates. But while that may be unethical, it's not a crime.

Do you know that this commentator, Peter Meijer, might have some skin in this game? He lost in a Republican primary to a die-hard Trump supporter. Who then went on to lose what should have been a safe seat. MAGA! There really was no significant difference in most of the candidates. Just a matter of optics.

Let's not whitewash Roberts. His reasoning for gutting the Voting Rights Act was disgraceful and hypocritical. And of course, his rulings on abortion rights previous to Dobbs virtually neutered Roe, anyway. It's just that, unlike Alito and Thomas, he's better at disguising his animus.

The reason that the same people who support conspiracy theories about the 2020 election are now calling this a mess is to promote distrust in the electoral system. And it's funny because these are also the same people who pushed for multiple recounts in the 2020 election. What a mess!

Actually, Lake's chief opponent was fundamentally no better. Just a matter of optics. "During her campaign for the Republican primary nomination, Taylor Robson refused to say whether, if she had been governor, she would have certified the results of the 2020 presidential election in Arizona, in which Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump.[24][25] She questioned the legitimacy of the election,[25] asserting that "the elections weren't fair"[24] and that "our election was absolutely not fair."[25] During her campaign, Taylor Robson said that she would enforce Arizona's pre-Roe abortion ban, which would criminalize the action in most circumstances.[19]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karrin_Taylor_Robson Who is Karrin Taylor Robson lying to when she says the 2020 election wasn't fair? Karrin Taylor Robson told CNN this week that the 2020 presidential election wasn’t fair – to Donald Trump – and that the wrong guy is in the White House. No hoax here, folks. Just another Arizona Republican governor wannabe throwing red meat to conspiracy theorists who have the state’s GOP by the jugular. https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/elviadiaz/2022/07/26/karrin-taylor-robson-lying-2020-election-trump-voters/10156621002/ So the Democrats aided the one who was easier to beat.

This is the kind of gratuitious cheap shot that belongs in a cesspool. Certainly not one that Dolly Parton would endorse. Dolly Parton: 'Of course black lives matter!' This is not the first time the 74 year old, who is seen as both an LGBT and feminist icon, has supported progressive causes. She came out in favour of gay marriage in 2014, a year before it was legalised nationwide, spoke against anti-transgender "bathroom bills", and supported the Me Too movement. But her support for left-leaning issues is usually carefully crafted to be as inoffensive as possible, often urging people to "judge not lest ye be judged". https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53783257

It wasn't just his character. It was that he pumped sewage into that swamp.

The same people who suspected the attack on Paul Pelosi was staged. I hope they loudly protest. Their accusations did the Democrats a world of good in the midterms.

It makes no sense to compare underdeveloped economies, or developing economies, to fully developed ones. They are far too different. How do you propose to isolate those factors from EU membership?

So you think it makes sense to compare the performance of a fully developed economy to one that is very undeveloped just because it's in the EU? Why not compare the UK's economy to Peru's instead? The relevance would be about the same. But if the UK's economy was compared to those of France, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, and Belgium, that would make sense.

Why do you think it's rational to compare the UK's economy to say Bulgaria's? What is rational is to compare how it's doing in comparison to other fully developed EU economies.

*Deleted post edited out* The Inspector General of the Dept. of Justice investigated the basis of Justice Dept investigations of Russia and nowhere mentioned Hillary Clinton as being instrumental in creating a basis for the investigation. A committee headed by Republican Senators did find lots of evidence that the Russians collaborated with Trump campaign staff members. Mueller found there was enough evidence to prosecute Trump for witness tampering in the case of Paul Manafort, among others, by hinting at Presidential pardons.

It is the case that all the officials under Trump are required to put their business operations and investments into a blind trust. But no one ever figured that a President could be so venial as to not do the same. And as reported, the Saudis and the UAE booked large numbers of vacant suites at Trump properties while he was President. (On a related note, Qatar bailed out the Kushner family from Jared's disastrous investment in a building in NYC that threatened to bankrupt his family. The terms of the investment guaranteed that Qatar would lose money. Real estate people called it a real head scratcher. As you'll recall, Kushner was the guy Trump put in charge of Mideast affairs.)

You clearly don't have a clue about how most of Trump's business are constructed. They're called pass-through corporations. Chapter S And they're designed to give someone, or a few someones the benefits of being a corporation while also enjoying the benefits of ownership. The funds that are passed through benefit just a few people. So stop with the nonsense about Trump "would have actually seen very little of it, overall!" Do some homework for a change.

What don't you understand about the significance of the fact that the majority of bitcoin trades are fake? That it is, in fact, far more thinly traded than exchanges claim.

It's so easy to be you. You can just throw stuff out there without providing evidence, and leave it for the scrupulous to debunk your claims. And when we've done that, you'll just spew out some more. In 2000 there as an issue with hanging chad ballots. The Supreme Court ruled by 5-4 against the Democrats. In 2004 as I recall there was an issue in Ohio where the Republican Secretary of State, demanded that voter registration requests be submitted on a very specific kind of paper as the law stipulated. Requests not written on that paper were disqualified. The courts overruled him. Bush also fired 9 federal attorneys in charge of various regions because they refused to go after alleged voter fraud when there was no evidence to support that. As for the rest of your voter fraud nonsense.. five states with Republican governors and legislatures investigated possible voter fraud. They came up with virtually nothing. There is virtually no problem with voter fraud. In a state like Texas, where a driver's license counts as ID, some people have to travel very far to get one. However, Texas refuses to extend the hours of their departments meaning a person with not a lot of money would have to forego pay to get a license. Just one example. As for the rest of your stuff. It just gives you away completely. Your rationalization for Trump's veniality is nuts. And given that at one point Trump actually proposed that a G7 (or was it G20) conference be held at Mar A Lago, shows just how foolishyour rationaization are. .Obviously, your goal here is to minimize the transgressions of the people you support by claiming both sides do it.

Nonsense. You treat cryptocurrencies as though they were some kind of creature with certain behavioral characteristics. In fact, cryptocurrencies depended on a rapidly increasing number of investors. Very unlikely that will happen in the future given that people have seen the downside. Not just in its value but in the high level of fraud and incompetence that plague a basically unregulated commodity. Every since their big decline, cryptocurrencies have been very thinly traded. More Than Half Of All Bitcoin Trades Are Fake https://www.forbes.com/sites/javierpaz/2022/08/26/more-than-half-of-all-bitcoin-trades-are-fake/?sh=38695206681f

First off, just because a country runs a trade deficit, that doesn't mean its economy is in decline. And if its currency declines in relation to others, that doesn't mean that the economy isn't still growing. Whereas if a crtypocurrency is in decline, then it's declining. And its loss is absolute. Not cushioned by being backed up by an actual economy. It's just an asset.

As has been pointed out to you numerous times, you can't cite any exit poll that has found this to be a significant reason.

Care to share who these many historians are? I mean, apart from those who were Nazis. I can't find any.