Cameroni

Okay, thanks.

Don't worry, these things happen. I respect your honesty for telling the truth.

Lol, post evidence for your lies, why don't you? I have not once in my life posted "sleazy allegations about alleged sex acts" by Kamala Harris. You're obviously prone to mistake posters' identity. I am intrigued now though, what did she do?

No, it only applies to women, whatever body count they tell you, you have to multiply it by 3. It's a well known and sensible rule. Whatever body count a man tells you, you have to divide by 3. Exactly the opposite rule applies.

Yes, another very sensible plan that went about as well as his golf course outing. To think someone like this almost put a bullet into a man like Trump and could have changed history. Imagine.

New research published in The Journal of Sex Research suggests that while people are willing to engage in a relationship with someone who has had two or three sexual partners, when their number is higher (or less) than that, an individual begins losing appeal. https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/the-mating-game/201612/do-you-have-the-right-number-of-ex-partners Swift has had 12 exes that we know of, which means her real body count is probably 36. So, poor Travis is really scraping the barrel here.

I'm wiping my keyboard as we speak...

Yes, she pulled the pocket money out of 12 year old girls' innocent hands very well. Quite a feat for a country singer, though she's not just a singer, she trades off her looks like a good lady of the night. Of course now she's a billionaire she'll fit right in with the Democratic party who have forsaken their fight for the deplorables, the poor and the working man and now instead try to bribe voters with tax cuts and try to get billionaires to fund their campaigns. Swift would fit right in, since she also lost her way, has focused on sleeping around and traded her sexuality for money, fame and power. A bit like Kamala Harris, who used to support Gaza, abolishing private health care, banning fracking and defunding the police.

I did! It's about qualifying properly. That's why Swift is off my list. Poor girl really missed out.

Come on man, this was no consipracy. This was a lone whacko trying to give his life meaning by supporting Ukraine and then trying to kill the guy who said he'd end the war in Ukraine. A total nutjob to ruin his life over a country he's not even a citizen of. He's American. Now he can support Ukraine from his jail cell for 20 years.

That sounds very plausible. He seemed obsessed by Ukraine. And everyone knows Trump would try to end the Ukraine war and withdraw funding. What a whackjob to ruin his life over the Ukraine war when he's American.

I'm not sure she did enjoy it, listening to her whining about it after the fact. It's just very unattractive, a big turn off to know that a woman sleeps around. Don't like it much. When I found out it put me right off her.

I'm not shaming her for sleeping around, not calling her a "slut" either. It's just very unatracttive in a woman. Quite a turn off. And looks like most voters are turned off by her.

Not at all, I haven't liked Swift for a long time due to her disgrac eful promiscuity. Not a good woman. I would have been embarassed if she'd been associated with Trump in anyway. Looks like most voters agree.

So this guy wanted to fight for Ukraine, then sits in the bushes for 12 hours, foolishly shows his rifle, gets shot at, runs away and is made a prisoner. Ukraine really missed out on a top recruit here.

It's probably Taylor Swift's promiscuity, she's been in bed with so many men people are just turned off by her. Then used her exes to flog records and talk about the dirty linen to everyone. Not exactly someone who makes good choices. Not really someone sensible people would listen to when it comes to political decisions. Good to see the American public reject her foray into places she shouildn't be in the first place.

It's not necessary, you just need to look at what the USSR produced, what Germany produced and Lend Lease provided. The answer is very clear. With or without Lend Lease Russia would have won in the end.

The 5000 British tanks are not lend lease, but you can count them if you want. It makes no difference whatsoever. Russia produced 119,769 tanks and SPGs . Germany 67000. Very clearly the 13000 tanks were not a causative factor in Russia's victory. Stalin's musings in all honour, but we have cold hard figures for Soviet tank and aircraft production and Lend Lease deliveries. We also have the German figures, see above. It's very clear Lend Lease or no Lend Lease, Russia would have won, they easily outproduced Germany in tanks, and were able to produce almost double the amount of tanks Germany produced. 7000 or 13000 tanks made no difference.

Well, since we know that the Russians received 7000 tanks via Lend Lease, or let's take your 13000 if you wish, but Russia herself built 119,769 tanks and SPGs we should probably first look at what the Germans managed to produce. The answer is 67,249 tanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_industry_in_World_War_II Given this constellation, with Russia producing 119,769 tanks and SPGs, and Germany producing 67249 tanks, we should ask, did 7000 or 13000 make a decisive difference. The answer of course is no, there is no evidence for that. Very clearly Russia outnumbered Germany in tanks by almost double. So whether 7000 or 13000 tanks, it made no differce to victory.

So true, all these keyboard activists have a big mouth online and in real life they play the SIMs.

You should really start reading your own link more thoroughly. From the Lend Lease link you quoted: "....about 7,000 Lend-Lease tanks (plus more than 5,000 British tanks) were used by the Red Army," https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease Of course even if it had been 13000 it would not have mattered. The Soviet Union produced 119,769 tanks and SPGs herself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_industry_in_World_War_II Stalin's cigar musings are not required, because we have actual figures for Soviet production and Lend Lease shipments. Russia received 18200 aircraft through Lend Lease, but herself built 136,223 aircraft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_industry_in_World_War_II

I was amazed the assassination attempt was not asked about by the ABC moderators

I read it 3 times before you came along, you should read it to learn that Russia received 7000 tanks from Lend Lease, but itself produced 100,000 armoured vehicles. So the figures do not bear out your argument.

Total garbage. Russia produced 100,000 armoured vehicles during the war years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_combat_vehicle_production_during_World_War_II

Not looking at the judgements in the cases you mentioned, not a single judge called him a "thief".