Leaderboard

In a week when Trump and his lawyers told New York judges they were unable to obtain $485 million in bonds to appeal a fraud verdict (for exaggerating his wealth)… Trump claims yesterday that he has “almost $500 million in cash!” So he has to come up with the money by Monday, or NY seizes his assets… and while his lawyers are begging the judge for more time, Trump brags that he’s got the money! What a dope! Well, Leticia will be happy to hear this, and if Trump doesn’t post it as bond in a few days, she’ll seize that cash and save herself the trouble of putting Mar-a-Lago up for sale. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/03/22/trump-500-million-civil-fraud/

A. Trump has a TON of failed businesses. Just because he does something doesn't mean it was smart or profitable. B. He didn't buy Mar-a-lago as a business. He bought it as a residence and then couldn't afford the upkeep because his businesses were failing (see point A), so he converted it to a business and brought the resale limitations on himself.

You're talking to someone who can't accept evolution FFS. After all, the Book says the meek shall inherit what's left of the Earth.

With this speech, I reckon that Biden won his re-election in November 2024. ===== To win in 2024, Biden needs certain critical counties in certain critical states He just did that. He motivated his base.

Take the 2 minutes and watch this then ask yourself...con you refute any of it?

https://winnipeg.citynews.ca/2024/03/22/carbon-tax-going-up-housing-affordability-going-down-building-experts/ Carbon tax hike is going to affect the entire industry of building and housing, industry leaders say. “Our industry deals with a lot of big and heavy stuff where trucking is key to that. So raw goods getting moved to the manufacturer, manufacturer to the distributor, distributor to me and then me to the job sites of our customers. It just gets passed along because trucking is such a big portion of our business,” he explained. She says the brunt of the costs of the carbon tax hike will be left with consumers, builders, potential homeowners, and people trying to rent. “Every time there’s a material, so if you think of a lumber producer … they’re gonna be shipping material to a distributor. There’s going to be a carbon tax that’s embedded in there, which the distributor is going to pay. Then they’re gonna be shipping that material, which the next person is going to pay. So if you start taking that ‘nesting doll’, the end user is the homeowner, they’re gonna have a really tough time finding some affordable housing,” explained Kovach. This is the concept that i was trying to drill into Moonbox's teeny tiny little mind the other day (and failed). Unlike the GST - the Carbon tax gets passed on again and again as markup. It becomes a 'cost' and business people mark up their costs. So as they put it here it's like a 'nesting doll' Where every step on the supply chain the next guy takes all the carbon tax paid to date, adds some to it, and passes it along. The cumulative amount is very substantial. And with rising population fighting over fewer homes which will now cost more money - no wonder the RCMP are concerned that things could get violent in the near future.

I predict the noise will get a lot loader (and broader in spectrum) assuming we stay the course on JT's plan to achieve emissions below 40% of 2005 values in less than 6 years. I don't think Canadians are tuned into the enormity of the effort here. The discussions around the carbon tax seem to be occurring in isolation, as if that's the only thing required from us when it actually appears to be the tip of a looming iceberg. The government itself is unsure of the total carbon mitigation this tax will have by 2030. Their best guess is that it will account for about 30% of the total, I'd call that pretty optimistic based on our current performance; independent estimates put it closer to 10%. But lets assume for the moment that they're right. If true, we better brace for incoming because it means that 66% of the total reductions will be coming from other sources. I'm not sure what those are but I'm pretty sure that the cost to consumers and disruption to the economy will be huge. I'm wondering how the economic effects of that won't make the current pain seem like the "good old days" when viewed through the lens of tomorrow. Barring a breakthrough in technology, how will this work? Were will the real meat in the carbon mitigation sandwich come from. People tend to talk about this euphemistically and in terms of "sectors." If we isolate but one of them for the sake of brevity, It seems (to me) that each and every raid on our energy sector is going to be nothing more than a gift to foreign producers. The real issue here is the pain for gain ratio. If Canada only produces 1.8% of world's carbon and our land mass scrubs all of that and more, how much pain are you, we and us collectively willing to endure in an effort to lower it further? Personally, I think we have only begone to whine... wait until we start shivering.

You're dealing with a child . . . a rather dim child at that.

He's admitting he doesn't' know how us elections work or that the covid protocols from the last election won't be present in this one. Politically he's a complete 1diot who just repeats some talking point he heard somewhere without understanding it. , i've tried to explain how this works to him before. At the moment trump is poling higher than biden in a number of very key states, he would definitely win today if the polls are at all accurate. Biden is attempting to recreate obama's intersectional coalition. He's appealing to muslims in certain states - he's moving further to the left. But he's forgetting the reason people voted for him - he was the "moderate" choice. Now he's trying to run on a woke agenda and thats' just not going to work for him, there's not enough woke people and there's too many moderates who are starting to really dislike him. He's in trouble - and i think we're going to see him lean even harder left talking about racism and other woke issues and ignoring the border and fiscal responsiblity. And that will kill him. Trump needs to be smart and not interrupt him

That is a bold-faced lie. The King James Version is composed of the Old Testament which is based on the Hebrew Scriptures called the Masoretic Text and the New Testament is based on the Received Text. It is supported by over 5,000 Greek manuscripts and parts of manuscripts. It has not been revised by committees with predetermined agendas. That is completely false. If it was, it would be obvious by examining the many Greek manuscripts which still exist. But nobody makes such a wild claim. If you are willing to lie about that, how much credibility do you have on anything else you said there? None. End of story. Yet Michael gave you a thumbs up. Shows where he is coming from as well.

"Canada" is not anti-semetic. It is not policy of the govt, nor is it a practice of the overwhelming majority of it's citizens. The majority of us do not give a shit where you go to church, what day you go to church or what name you call an imaginary man in the sky. And any attempt to blame or relate it to 'the left' is complete bullshit. Bigots come in all shades and political stripes as we can well see within this forum, as demonstrated by all those that incessantly berate any attempt to reverse discrimination as discrimination against them personally.

Revised over the centuries by committees with predetermined agendas. And a social media cite with zero credibility. Why not tack on the 3% of climate scientists that disagreed with climate change 20 years ago as if none have ever considered further evidence. Don't consider in 160 years no one has disproved or provided any evidence against natural selection.

Fixed it for ya 😉

I thought about that, but only a complete liar would wave off evidence at the rate that piece of shit does. He knows what's going on.

"The term anti-Semitism was first popularized by German journalist Wilhelm Marr in 1879 to describe hatred or hostility toward Jews. The history of anti-Semitism, however, goes back much further. Hostility against Jews may date back nearly as far as Jewish history. In the ancient empires of Babylonia, Greece, and Rome, Jews—who originated in the ancient kingdom of Judea—were often criticized and persecuted for their efforts to remain a separate cultural group rather than taking on the religious and social customs of their conquerors. With the rise of Christianity, anti-Semitism spread throughout much of Europe. Early Christians vilified Judaism in a bid to gain more converts. They accused Jews of outlandish acts such as “blood libel”—the kidnapping and murder of Christian children to use their blood to make Passover bread. These religious attitudes were reflected in anti-Jewish economic, social and political policies that pervaded into the European Middle Ages." Anti-Semitism - Definition, Meaning & Reasons For (history.com) The solution for anti-Semites is to turn to God and repent and seek forgiveness. They need to become children of God and love their neighbour, not hate a special group of people. The alternative is hell. If they continue with their anti-Semitism, they need to be weeded out and put in some kind of institution to protect society. Immigrants who bring their anti-Semitism to Canada should be sent back to where they came from. There is no room in Canada for that kind of thing.

No we didn't. You posted that before and i've posted information that says that's not accurate - i asked you then for your source.. Do you have one now?

It's like the premise for a sitcom.

It originated from a Facebook post which you can still see. (1) Facebook (archive.ph) It says climate alarmists do not like people to see that information. If you look at the picture in the post, water vapour is by far the major greenhouse gas in the atmosphere.

I was referring to your 'reply to my topic of antisemitism.

Yeah cheating and making laws so you can't catch anyone cheating.

During the last election I recall there being a surprising (to me) level of support for the carbon tax. Just for fun I looked up a few news articles, depending on who you believe it ran at 65 - 75% support for the policy. The exact percentage doesn't matter really, the point is there was majority support and voters are now getting exactly what they voted for. As an aside here, one of the reasons I joined the forum is that I find myself in a constant state of astonishment and perplexity. On any number of current issues I'm barely able to suppress the urge to scream "what did you think was going to happen?" I foolishly hoped that a broader range of opinion and experience might convince me that I was being overly pessimistic, but alas, if anything my astonishment grows. For me, applying simple soldier logic to most of this stuff always comes back to "what did you think was going to happen?" - defund police, make bail easy, remove mandatory minimums... surprise, crime increases. - Mass withdrawal from Afghanistan leaving behind a treasure trove of equipment... surprise, the ANA collapses in two minutes and ISIS regains a foothold. - support an unhinged level of immigration in the complete absence of the most basic plan to increase critical infrastructure.... well, surprise. I could go on at some length but I won't. Each act of absurdity if looked at individually is, or might be, managed and compensated for on its own. But mixing them all together simultaneously is like mixing household chemicals in the bathtub, closing the door and lighting scented candles to mask the smell of chlorine without a single thought given to grade 9 chemistry. So, are people simply not paying attention or were they honestly expecting a different outcome? If it's the latter, I fear we are doomed. If the former, maybe experiencing some hard times is just what we need to get back on track and 8 years of JT is a valuable lesson for all. Hopefully the sort of lesson that lasts us about two generations as I have no desire to repeat any of it anytime soon.

Have you ever heard of a billionaire who can’t afford to pay property tax, so he turns his home into a country club and lives in it as a guest, while people drive in and out all day and night? Bill Gates, Elon Musk and Oprah don’t rent their mansions out to guests and run their home as a business so they can afford to pay their tax bill.

Hey, Mr. Pathological liar. Read your own damn links. Did MPD training materials direct officers to use that restraint on a person who was not resisting? No it specifically directed officers to move them into a recovery position ASAP so that they don't die! So you can dodge, duck and lie to your heart's content but Chauvin was not using a technique trained or approved by MPD. That's why cops were disgusted by his actions and why he's rotting in prison for murder. And you continue to be completely full of crap with your silly claim that the (damning) body camera footage had any correlation to rioting.

Dude it is seriously werid when you just quote yourself like that, and you do it a fair bit. You're SURE you're not a bot right?

Per the title, when was this "fastest 2-month period"? Your graph in the OP is showing 2022. Do you have a link? Or did you get this from a reddit thread that also only shows the graph you posted? We know that we had record immigration levels in 2023. Are you saying this is still happening? I need details.

That is the biggest lie that is being told. Nobody can control the climate. First off, fossil emissions are only 0.1 to 0.2 % of the global atmospheric greenhouse gases. So it is extremely unlikely man is having any effect on the climate. Canada's emissions are about 1.5% of the world's fossil emissions. China's emissions are around 33% of the world's fossil emissions. How do you propose to make China cut it's emissions? Nothing Canada does will make any difference to climate change. It is all a big scam and power grab. Why punish Canadians for something that most of the rest of the world does nothing for? The carbon tax does affect Canadians. Carbon tax does nothing for the environment or climate change.

That is as far as I had to read to realize you are out of touch with what is gong on. Most Canadians oppose the carbon tax increase and a great number oppose the carbon tax, period. So those 206 MPs you mentioned who voted for the carbon tax increase are out of touch with most Canadians. They will find out in 18 months if not sooner how wrong they are. They do not represent Canadians.

The results of the non-confidence vote should give Mr. Poilievre some pause. The 206 Members who opposed the motion represent the anticipated number of MP's who will be in the governing caucus when Mr. Poilievre is appointed in a year and a half. those 206 MPs were elected by a majority of Canadian voters. The vote says that having a price on carbon has more support than the CPC caucus realizes. My previous post regarding the Byrne scandal was not my finest moment. I feel sorry for Mr. Poilievre. As Leader of his Majesty's Loyal Opposition, he has the best job in Canada. He is the most popular politician in Canada, not only currently, but in recent history. In a few months that will all come to an end. His first order of business is to come to grips with the climate crisis. He has poisoned one policy, the carbon tax, that had the advantage of discouraging the use of fossil fuels but on a quasi-volunteer basis. It is not a major hardship for most Canadians. His problem is, how is he going to get our emissions down to a level that will stop the catastrophe future Canadians will be facing. The obvious choices are rationing or putting a cap on production and importation of fossil fuels. Every alternative to carbon pricing will be more expensive and the cost will keep going up at an accelerating rate, the longer we put it off. This is going to be Mr. Poilievre's main problem. "Future generations will not judge us on what we say, they will judge us on what we do."

Pierre Poilievre got the intended result . . . . to show Canadians that Jughead & Justin don't give a rat's azz about Canada or its citizens. A winning strategy, done well.

You're welcome. The rest of your reply is a mor0n doubling down and repeating the very oxymorons mentioned again. Never mind brainwash, you need a pressure wash between the ears.

Lying s*** of s*** Gaza and the West Bank are not Israel.

How could Socrates have been poisoned? His bloodstream was only 0.1% hemlock!

01011001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01010100 01101111 01101111 00100001

I dunno Mike the argument that "I'm not a Nazi, but I'm not sure we can rule out the existence of a global conspiracy of Jews to destroy the white race" is pretty convincing.

The one thing you don't deny: Donald Trump broke the law. He didn't break the fraud law once, he broke it continually, many dozens of times, for over a decade. He didn't break the law by an arguable or defendable amount. The judge wrote that a 20% discrepancy in valuation was defensible. But the valuations were inflated by over 300%, after accounting for the premium value of the Trump name and all the other factors. I don't accept your argument that lying to banks is a necessity of doing business in New York and "all real estate moguls do that." The State of New York passed a law called Adult Survivors Act, which was modeled on their prior law, the Child Victims Act. Over 3,000 lawsuits were filed under the Adult Survivors Act, so, no, it was not "just so E. Jean Carroll could sue Donald Trump." What's more, of the $88.5 million verdicts awarded to E. Jean Carroll, just $2 million was related to the fact that Donald Trump raped her. The lion's share of that verdict, by far, stemmed from the fact that, after Trump lost $5 million to Carroll, he continued to defame her. So the jury said to themselves, "Huh, I guess a $5 million verdict isn't big enough punishment to make him stop defaming this woman, so we need to award a much larger verdict." Now, Trump continues to defame E. Jean Carroll, and if she sues him a third time, the jury will most likely say to themselves, "Huh, I guess $88.3 million isn't enough punishment to make him stop defaming this woman, so we need to award a much larger verdict." This is what happens to repeat criminals. The second punishment is far harsher than the first, and the third is harsher still. Your problem is this: You aren't asking yourself the simple question of "What the F*CK is wrong with Donald Trump that he would defame a woman the day after he loses a defamation lawsuit?", and instead and instead of blaming the criminal, you're blaming the legislature, judge, jury, and the victim.

The problem isn't leftists/rightists - it's chuds of both flavours - spelling intentional. Stop making enemies of half of the nation and instead bring back politics.

Leftists made you stupid? That's your excuse?

You don't even know if trump made a penny on tick tock from his 'investor buddy' but you were quite happy to say that disqualifies him from presidency. Sounding a bit hypcritical there big guy.

You're thinking of criminal fraud. This is 'civil fraud' which isn't really fraud at all. ITs a fineable offense with a very low burden of 'proof'. The reason they don't need an 'affected party' is that when the law was crafted it was to allow the state to go after people who were genuinely lying to get money even if they paid the money back when they got caught in order to prevent scumbags from using that as a defense. Or if they TRIED to trick the bank they could be pursued even if the bank caught on before they completed the deal. They've twisted that out of shape here. The banks were always satisfied that the loans were sufficently covered. They still are. The loans were paid back as per the agreement. The banks were given every right to verify the info - they really didn't care. The nature of the misinformation was not really relevant as it's such a unique property it's value can't really be estimated like that The banks have made it clear that had they know the true numbers nothing would have changed and they'd have leant the same money at the same rates. SO to claim that trump made his fortune based on these lies is ridiculous. But that is the basis for this fine. It's a witch hunt.

Too bad you Democrats are swaying opinion in Trumps favor for him. Without the political indictments Trump may not of won in the primaries.

The church in Rome did oppose Galileo's claim several centuries ago, but I don't think there was a general attempt to "stamp it out" as you put it. Bear in mind the church of Rome was a false religious system that imposed a totalitarian system over the western world for over a thousand years until several centuries ago. In spite of that some of the world's greatest sciences did pursue science while believing in God and the Bible. The Reformation in northern Europe began 500 years ago and after a long struggle, managed to break away from the control of Rome in many areas. This resulted in the development of Parliamentary systems and far more freedom. There is no conflict between genuine science and the Bible. One must just recognize God had a central part in the creation of the universe and mankind. Genuine science has its place within the realm of God's creation. Atheists or secular humanists just don't accept that and want to deny God his rightful recognition and place in the world. Did you read the article I quoted just above. Prof. Philip Stott said in part: "The great pioneers of science, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Euler, Maxwell, Faraday, Kelvin and many others professed Christianity and accepted the Bible as God's revelation to mankind. Many spent much time studying the Scriptures. Newton claimed the most important aspect of his work was in showing the greatness of God. Maxwell noted that his great pioneering work in field theory was inspired by the Scriptural revelation of the way God himself is and works. But during the twentieth century science was taken over to a very large extent by secular humanists. Such a world-view actually has no rational basis for expecting science to succeed. Yet secular humanists have cultivated the idea that science is essentially an atheistic domain which is at loggerheads with Christianity." -- Prof. Philip Stott So some of the greatest scientists in history were Christians and professed to accept the Bible as God's revelation. It was only in the past 100 years or so that science became dominated by secular humanists. That is why the paradigm changed in the 20th century and it became in vogue to dismiss God or the Bible as being relevant to science, particularly creation or where everything came from. Why is that? Could it be a shift in beliefs to a more pagan or godless world? The Bible prophesied that this would happen in the latter days and that was prophesied almost 2,000 years ago. "1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good. 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith." 2 Timothy 3:1-8 This was written over 1,900 years ago and it appears to have come to pass.

That is beyond weak. Biden and family have huge finacial ties in china. So - how would they be MORE trusted?

Let's all pretend it's some nefarious plot by Democrats rather than one single oaf and his spineless chickenshits destroying their opposition all by himself.

Trump released MORE immigrants into the US than Biden. Can you read? Like I said, more immigrants were flocking TO THE US BORDER due to right wingers shouting "OPEN BORDER." Biden has NO CONTROL over how many immigrants head North and attempt to ENTER. He has control over how many are released pending asylum claims, and how many are deported. MORE were released under Trump. Duh You seem to be having trouble understanding; already drank that six pack tonight?

Well, if Trump said it, it must be true. I think even the most die-hard Trump cultists would think twice before bonding him with their life savings. Trump is and always has been dishonest, and on some level they know it.

Trump stated under oath under penalty of perjury, that he had $400 million “cash on hand.” So the guy who was just found guilty of illegally inflating his wealth… just proved that he’s been inflating his wealth. I hope Bragg tosses his butt in jail for perjury over that, just as he’s jailed Trump’s CFO for perjury in this case.

Hahahahaha...you're talking about approval ratings, in the coming election pageantry that Russia holds, where Putin is guaranteed to win and only approved stooges are allowed to "run" against him. But sure...Navalny is a CIA plant, Zelensky is a Jewish Nazi, Trump won the election and mind control vampire-aliens from Zeta Reticuli are pulling the strings on all of it. 🤡

Communicating with you on this forum is like talking to a primitive AI chat-bot. Your outputted responses have little/nothing to do with whatever inputs I provide, and you repeat variations of the same phrases over and over and over and over again. Why do you keep saying, "You Americans" for example? It's unintelligible nonsense, and you're making a very good case for just going on ignore. Gosh, who else is surprised that Nationalist is criticizing Navalny, top critic of his hero. 🙄

The fact that both Biden and Trump are still alive and running against each other in a free election answers your retarded question for you.

Here is another one. https://natural-resources.canada.ca/simply-science/canadas-record-breaking-wildfires-2023-fiery-wake-call/25303 El Nino cycles are normal. What happened this year is not.