placeholder

I have yet to see any Trump supporter defend Trump's claim that any act he commits as president is exempt from criminal prosecution unless he is impeached and convicted in a Senate trial. The connection between this belief and his dictatorship mentality are too obvious even for them to defend.

As for Baturina. This issue has repeatedly been addressed. Yelena Baturina has been living in exile in the UK since 2010. She is in no way a friend or supporter of the current Russian government. Quite the contrary. I don't know about Yevtushenko. Are all the Russian oligarchs now being sanctioned by the US?

You are making a case for the impeachment of James Biden and Hunter Biden. Not really offering anything that would constitute an impeachable offence on the part of Joe Biden.

Actually, it would take a caveman to insist that a man would have the final say rather than the woman. You know, the person who's actually pregnant. It's obvious that a woman should have the final say in the matter. Or are claiming that somehow the issue of a split decision would never arise? Or is this a case of you offering more magical thinking, as you did when you claimed that there would be no consequences to women's health in Idaho despite a large exodus of specialist ob-gyns?

I don't know about me being rude but your misleading editing of my comments is certainly dishonest.

Actually, both Obama and Biden did succeed in increasing taxes on the wealthy. As did Bill Clinton. Biden would have done more but a couple of DINOs thwarted his efforts.

Now, someone's claiming that Trump would have sold some of his stocks to pay for his lifestyle. As anyone just mildly conversant with how the rich finance their lifestyle know, they borrow money against their assets. The interest rates they pay on the loans are far, far lower than what they would pay in income taxes.

His latest comment only further confirms your diagnosis. Not that it need confirmation.

After months of speculation and delay, the Federal Trade Commission moved Monday to prevent the proposed $25 billion merger of Kroger and Albertsons, claiming that the largest grocery merger in U.S. history would raise prices and hurt workers. Legal experts say the government’s lawsuit, which contends the merger will reduce the competition that now keeps prices down, could take a year or more to get through various hearings and appeals. The FTC has asked the court to block the deal while the complicated case is being heard. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/seattle-shoppers-cheer-ftc-action-on-kroger-albertson-merger/#:~:text=After months of speculation and,raise prices and hurt workers.

Someone else who clearly doesn't understand the concept of rates. Yes, there are long term climate changes on various cycles that last up to 42000 years. But they move very slowly. Nothing like the relatively rapid gains that have occurred starting in the very recent past.

No need to guess. Clearly, someone who thinks that unrealized capital gains would result in taxes is clearly clueless about finances. On top of which, anyone who knows anything about capital gains taxes in the US knows that they don't approach anywhere near 50%. Long term capital gains taxes top out at 20%. Even short term gains (less than a year) top out at 37%.

You're the one who claimed that the remaining ob-gyn specialists in Idaho would somehow manage to shoulder the additional workload without any additional risk to their patients. Magical thinking much? You've got nothing.

You bet it was over a million? That's how you support your claim? How about if the amount got reduced? Keep in mind that both sides were appealing the ruling. This is just laughable. And you're conveniently forgetting that you blamed the verdict on liberals. Where's your proof of that?

Hunter Biden should definitely be impeached!

I wonder if anyone from the Biden administration has questioned the translator about his recollections of the meeting. Presumably, while a President can keep confidential the substance of his conversations with a foreign official while he's in office, once out of office that authority should vanish.

More anti-Semitic nonsense from you. AIPAC is strongly aligned with the Republican party. White Evangelicals form the core of the Republican party and they are the most uncritical supporters of Israel. They far outnumber Jewish Americans who actually vote mostly Democratic.

And the thing is, that was utterly irrelevant to his comment that questioned the fact of humans having evolved from earlier life forms. As is his blatant misunderstanding of the difference between a scientific theory and a religious belief.

Actually, the oldest fossils are cyanobacteria. Which are not creatures crea·ture /ˈkrēCHər/ noun an animal, as distinct from a human being. "night sounds of birds and other creatures" an animal or person "as fellow creatures on this planet, animals deserve respect"

Nonsense. The theory of evolution is a scientific theory that can be refuted or supported by evidence. The belief that God exists is not a scientific theory. It can't be refuted or supported by evidence. It's such a pity that Dolf put me on ignore. I have so much to teach him.

Except that the interview wasn't about the existence or rise of anti-Semitism in Australia. It opened with a question about Australian ties to UNRWA and then later about anti-Semites being the recipients of government grants. The person being interviews claimed that the government was rewarding people for having anti-Semitic views. Which was an obvious distortion. And of course, the person being interviews is a right wing Australian politician.

I don't know where you got that info from or why you think it's applicable. This issue is Idaho's abortion law. And here are the facts about it: Its "Defense of Life Act" would would make it a crime for "every person who performs or attempts to perform an abortion," even when the woman's health is greatly endangered. Under the Idaho law, the only exception to the abortion ban is when an abortion is "necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman." https://www.npr.org/2024/01/05/1216284896/supreme-court-allows-idaho-abortion-ban-to-be-enacted-first-such-ruling-since-do

To use your own words: "Source please... I cannot find evidence to this statement." And where did you get the million dollar figure from? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants You comment is just another instance of Pavlovian thinking.

In this case, a distinction without a significant difference: "The Australian is published by News Corp Australia, an asset of News Corp, which also owns the sole daily newspapers in Brisbane, Adelaide, Hobart, and Darwin, and the most circulated metropolitan daily newspapers in Sydney and Melbourne. News Corp's Chairman and Founder is Rupert Murdoch." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Australian#:~:text=The Australian is published by,and Founder is Rupert Murdoch.

Whaddya think of the latest game changer?

You could well be right. But for rather alarming reasons: President Trump went to 'extraordinary lengths' to hide details of Putin meetings, report says President Donald Trump went to "extraordinary lengths" to keep details from his conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin secret – even from officials within his own administration, The Washington Post reported this weekend, citing unnamed sources. After meeting with Putin at the 2017 Group of 20summit in Hamburg, Germany, Trump took his interpreter's notes and told him not to discuss the meeting with anyone, including other U.S. officials, the Post reported. The paper said Trump's handling of the Hamburg meeting was "part of a broader pattern by the president of shielding his communications with Putin from public scrutiny and preventing even high-ranking officials in his own administration from fully knowing what he has told one of the United States’ main adversaries." https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/13/trump-putin-meetings-interpreter-notes/2565471002/