Hawaiian

Previously, Duterte was the problem. His kissing up to China didn't work.

Agree. Of course, there are risks involved in sending China a strong message about their aggressive moves in the South China Sea. It is even riskier to sit back and do nothing.

You must have missed my reply to Presto. There is no easy and simple solution to this problem that needs to be addressed by a sorry to say, dysfunctional Congress.

Why are you defending these illegals? Who invited them here to pick berries and break our laws? They broke the law coming here and broke another law by providing a fake SSN.

This is JB's latest label for illegal immigrants. https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-refers-illegal-immigrants-191002125.html?fr=sycrp_catchall Speak for yourself. I don't think using "cheap illegal labor" to keep prices down is the American way. Personally, I think it is very wrong and employers caught knowingly hiring illegals should be dealt with very harshly. Not just fines, but jail time.

What is now taking place is a result of not securing our borders and not enforcing the laws already in place. More legislation will not do much to solve the problem if the rules are not applied.

Tell that to those being laid off and being replaced by Biden's "newcomers."

A similar perspective about the chances of civil war. https://www.aol.com/news/opinion-us-brink-another-civil-war-174055045.html

Those participating in the January 6 event were a diverse group of Americans who were venting their frustration about everything that is wrong about the nation. I believe most were there not to overturn the election, but to voice their concerns about Joe Biden's agenda. Now that Biden has done what they feared he would do his reelection may well trigger anarchy. And yes, Trump may very well be the catalyst.

Trump makes a lot of ridiculous and confusing statements. I have no idea what it means and have no interest in figuring it out.

I wouldn't get your hopes up too much. The likelihood gets slimmer every day.

He needed something to read while doing his business and planned to flush them down when he finished.

A much better question is, it wise to refuse a request from the attorney general, especially one like Merrick Garland? This is the same Merrick Garland that went after parents for questioning what was going on in our educational system. Incidentally, this was also one of complaints voiced in the emails sent to the Ombudsman.

Bloomberg News has just published an article about dissension in the ranks of the FBI, which by their own admission is fairly widespread. This is documented by emails from FBI employees to their own Office of the Ombudsman. Among the complaints are why "the FBI served a Search Warrant on a former president." One email suggests this could have been done more discreetly and this action was most likely politically motivated. It goes on to complain how this has generated threats and security concerns for agents and their families. The article goes on further on how Director Christopher has attempted to do damage control.

Anyone proposing a ridiculous law such as the Online Harms Act is definitely a moron.

You were the one who mentioned unsubstantiated claims of what was on those deleted messages. Go play your silly games with someone else.

You still have not mentioned the claims you were referring to.

I have no idea what was on those messages and would not even venture to guess. And exactly what claims are you referring to?

Correction: Bennie Thompson vice Bernie Thompson. I was unable to provide a workable link, hence the Google search. The letter is to the Department of Homeland Security's General Counsel, Jonathan Meyers, from the chair of the Jan. 6th investigation committee, Bennie Thompson, in which he mentions, "We were very disappointed to learn that text messages on many Secret Service phones had been deleted in the weeks after January 6th." This is not an idiotic claim. It is an official record. Unfortunately, you like to dismiss anything you disagree with.

Try googling "Bernie Thompson letter 2022-12-30." Look for "Dear Mr. Meyer" letter.

Why are you repeating my question if you don't have any evidence?

I would say it is old evidence that has been resurrected because it's validity has been challenged. Is it true text messages were scrubbed from SS agents' phones? If so, were any rules or laws broken?

As if name calling is going to stop Donald Trump. "Small minority of Americans even a large percentage of republicans." You sound very confused, like your main man.

Why does a challenge mean a court case?

Many challenges for both sides.