placeholder

Someone recently remarked words to the effect that , a person who doesn't understand the meaning of a disclosure form has no business interpreting the Constitution of the United States.

Thank you for your opinion unbacked by reasoning or evidence.

Did anybody bother to add up the numbers here. These murders span a period of 9 years and in countries whose populations totaled up exceeds 500 million. I remember the dire prophecies about what would happen after Merkel let in 1 million refugees from the Mideast. Massive numbers of deaths were prophesized. Germany as a nation would fall apart. Etc...

No. The report that a federal judge castigated Attorney General William Barr for lying about.

No, it wasn't questionable except in the sense that you can ask questions about anything. Trump's election team hired two groups of forensic election specialists to see if they could find any significant voter fraud. They couldn't.

US manufacturing on the mend; rising raw material prices pose obstacle More conspiratorial frothing.

Just a couple of empty insults from you.

Because those ex-colonies and the UK parted on such good terms? And the very fact that those colonies were mostly far from the UK geographically and economically underdeveloped, meant that they wouldn't have been all that useful as trading partners.

Not surprising that you think an empty allegation is some kind of valid argument.

I can show you plenty of polling evidence that a majority or Republicans believe that the 2020 election was stolen. Please share with me some polls that show anything close to a majority of Democrats believe that the 2016 election was stolen. It's also an incontrovertible fact that almost 3/4 of House Republicans voted against certifying the 2020 elections.

I don't think you understand that an impeachment trial belongs to the House. If a President is impeached than the Senate holds a trial. And Comer and company didn't have compelling evidence to get enough Republicans to vote for impeachment. And no, the purpose of an impeachment investigation is to find if there's enough evidence to indict the President on the grounds of having "committed high crimes and misdemeanors". It's not about the conduct of a President's family members. Or do you believe that the President's son or brother are also impeachable? As for the Hur report: "Hur defended his investigation as independent and thorough, saying that while his team found some evidence Biden willfully retained classified information, other evidence favored Biden’s view that he never meant to keep such information, and taken together, it likely didn’t meet the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt prosecutors would have needed to show at trial. “I understood that my explanation about this case had to include rigorous, detailed and thorough analysis,” Hur said. “In other words, I needed to show my work.”" https://www.wsj.com/politics/inside-bidens-special-counsel-interview-riffs-jokes-and-the-occasional-flub-99fc04d0

Irrelevant to your previous disbelief that a majority of his supporters believe he actually won the 2020 election.

Here another poll from those marxists at Fox News: FOX NEWS POLL Fox News Poll: Most Republicans say President Trump was robbed Most Republicans also say GOP lawsuits are helping American democracy https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republicans-president-trump-robbed-poll

If there are any, of course I do. But calling for a sentence of death means there has to have been a trial first. So while an execution is a kind of violence, it's state sanctioned violence. Does your characterization of such a sentence mean you generally oppose the death penalty? Because I do.

Again, a fact-free assertion. This time that the poll is biased.

Virtually all Democrats (93%) say Biden won the election fairly, a view shared by 58% of independents. Just 21% of Republicans believe Biden won his election fair and square, while 68% say he won "due to voter fraud." That's very similar to Monmouth's findings in the weeks after the 2020 election, when 18% of Republicans, 67% of independents and 95% of Democrats said Biden's election victory was fair. https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/almost-third-americans-still-believe-2020-election-result-was-fraudule-rcna90145

Only on one side does a majority believe despite the fact that even 2 Trump forensic election teams couldn't come up with the evidence, that the 2020 election was stolen. Now that's cultism.

more fact-free denialism.

Backed by evidence with a credible link. You provided falsehoods.

I'm not used to members acknowledging some sense of uncertainty about the validity of the evidence they offer. You're not playing fair.

An all-purpose comment unbacked by evidence. You've got nothing.

Stop raising straw men. You can quote whomeover you like on any subject whatsoever. No one's denying your right to do so. Just as it's my right to point out that you made a pretty poor choice in the case of Barr.

Can you please share with us what criminal acts Joe Biden has committed? James Comer and company tried their best and failed to come up with sufficient evidence to get enough of their Republican colleagues to support impeachment. In fact, the allegations all fell apart. And typical of Trumpistas, you emulate your leader in getting facts wrong. Those were intelligence officials. Not all, or even nearly all were from the CIA. What's more, none of them who signed were government employees at the time. All were retired from govt service. Moreover they did not assert that the laptop was Russian disinformation. "While the letter’s signatories presented no new evidence, they said their national security experience had made them “deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case” and cited several elements of the story that suggested the Kremlin’s hand at work. “If we are right,” they added, “this is Russia trying to influence how Americans vote in this election, and we believe strongly that Americans need to be aware of this.” https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276 And keep in mind that even after the Justice Dept Inspector General said there was no evidence of a conspiracy against Trump in the Justice Dept, William Barr went ahead and got himself another special prosecutor, John Durham, to try and prove otherwise. . Durham, despite his best efforts and extremely strong support from Barr, came up with nothing to prove that and had to concede as much.

Really? It was the general opinion that all the trials would be underway? I don't ever recall seeing that. It's not a matter of whether I agree with Barr or not. Clearly, he's extremely biased and not above misrepresenting evidence and rejecting evidence that doesn't support his prejudices.

And Mukasey was wrong. And if there are 2 William Barrs speaking on the subject, one must have been cloned recently.