Leaderboard

Given the current security classification of the investigation and source documents, if you are trying to get to the bottom of this and hold individuals (and the government) accountable, then there's a simple choice to be made. Either you attempt to reverse engineer known facts already in the public domain and thus are essentially Or you know exactly what happened and exactly what they did but not only can't you hold them accountable, you can't even say a word about it. If you see knowing the unreacted details as a simple function of leadership within a national party then you probably want PP read in. If you want him silenced you do too. if you want the opposition party to hold the governing liberals to account in a public manner then you don't. There's no other available options here. Personally, I want the opposition party to hold the liberals accountable and to ask the questions I would ask if I had the venue to ask them. That's especially true now that we have little in the way of media types actually doing that. Parroting things widely circulated in open source reports isn't a breach, but since you seem to be asserting that it is, are you also suggesting that Jag be charged? If you aren't, how do you square that circle?

Oooh!!! You’ve got us all so fooled!! So clever! Hows this: If Biden commits a crime in, I dunno… Delaware or Rhode Island, then he can Stand trial there, as he should. The disgusting fat slob you’re cheering for is a convicted felon who’s going to be criminally tried in Georgia and probably Arizona. Because he is a criminal. This stupid law won’t pass, it won’t get thru the House much less the Senate and Biden certainly wouldn’t sign it and the courts would rule it unconstitutional because the Federal government has no such right. This is obviously all grandstanding for attention among the MAGA crowd and the only purpose is to let Trump circumvent all the laws he’s broken by dismissing all of these criminal charges if he’s elected

Right, so citizens elect their representatives to make decisions like we are talking about here with passing a law to move criminal actions against the President to Federal Courts. So, what is your problem with this? Um... no. The Constitution says no such thing. So, what is your point here? Saying Biden broke the law less than Trump did still means Biden broke the law. Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/national/ Have a warm and fuzzy day...

WHOMEVER CONTROLS THE TELEPROMPTER IS THE REAL PRESIDENT

You just contradicted yourself. You claim they can't be beaten on the ground and then congratulate Ukraine for beating them on the ground. And then you push a lie as if all 300,000+ of their military they have committed to this, plus the 25K more a month in replacements for the casualties were just poorly trained convicts. That is absurd on its face. The bulk of the forces they have committed are not poorly trained convicts. They have sent a good chunk of convicts, but that just shows the Russians can't feed this war machine as relentlessly as you and others keep trying to pretend they can forever.

Actually, they are all disputed. Disputed does not mean disproven. Even if it did, your unwillingness to accept that they are disproven does not negate the fact that they have been disproven. Just one example. Trump never said or implied, that if he wasn't elected there would be a literal blood bath (as in a violent revolution). He said there would be a bloodbath for the automotive industry. Aka jobs. How about two; Trump never said he'd be a dictator from day one. He said he would not be a dictator, except on day one when he signed several EOs. His comment was a stinging attack on EOs as unconstitutional and then he highlighted several agenda items he wanted to pass. But, you refuse to accept the obvious.

You're holding the government to account by not even knowing what you're holding them to account for? It's like you're auditioning to be Pierre Poilievre's fluffer or something. 🤣

You really should be embarrassed by your inability to grasp this simple concept. Just don't buckle your seatbelt, Dummy. Automotive fatalities have gone up every single year since the shoulder belt became mandatory.

Well religious schools actually exist but I'd be open to turning all of those into gay schools.

If you were wondering where the monkeypox scare went, here's the scoop: New report dropped June 11, 2024: MPVX_Interim_Staff_Report_and_Appendices_final_844c87e06f.pdf (d1dth6e84htgma.cloudfront.net) US congressional investigators found the NIAID (Fauci, again) tried to hide plans to conduct gain-of-function (GOF) research on a lethal strain of the monkey pox virus. The proposed experiments from 2015 sought to insert genes into the virus to retain a moderate fatality rate of approximately 10-15%, but also to make the virus more transmissible, giving it ‘pandemic potential.’ Investigators with the House Committee on Energy and Commerce first learned about the desire to conduct such research after Bernard Moss of the NIAID revealed it to a journalist during an interview with Science Magazine in 2022, prompting an investigation. Will the monkeypox virus become more dangerous? | Science | AAAS But over the course of 17 months, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the NIH, and NIAID repeatedly misled the Committee in written and oral communications, denying that the potentially dangerous experiment was proposed and approved. During the investigation, HHS and the NIH refused to answer questions about the research or provide documents requested by the Committee unless they had already been made public. Often it was under threat of a subpoena that information was handed over. The interim report accuses the NIAID of stonewalling and obfuscating congressional investigations into the potentially lethal monkey pox research, describing the NIAID's deceptive behaviour as "unacceptable and potentially criminal." The report states:

You claimed: "Johnson wants to codify making former POTUS above the law. 🤮" You keep dishonestly trying to change the subject to "seeking special privileges" now. My understanding of your dishonest here is just fine.

I'm a delight. Yeah at least i'm not joylessly pumping away on someone I'm not interested in because I'm a sexual deviant 😘

Ditto. It's for the parents. This will be likely a non issue in the near future. Gay parents will do it maybe... but its relevancy is tied to its status as a political flashpoint IMO. In the city, these things are offered as a side event to large gatherings that need content. I've never seen anyone object...

So then why are these men wanting to read for the kids in drag? What's the point? Do you believe in parents rights? We could just as well say that you're trying to manipulate people into thinking there's nothing to be outraged about. Based on what people wear at Pride parades, I think it's also not age- appropriate to bring kids there. You said when you went there were naked gay men dancing. Parents have a right to expose their kids to certain things and I have a right to have an opinion on it.

Isn't there ANYONE on this board who likes you or respects you? Geez.

The Prep Act set the bar at "intent to harm" for the purposes of suing vax-pimps for promoting the jab, but they seem to clear that bar easily.

I am not twisting anything. I understand that pushing Russia further back is no walk in the park, but it certainly is not hopeless, impossible, where negotiation is the only way out as you keep saying. You keep trying to argue that Russia has the numbers... but those numbers didn't get them a win on their invasion. You keep bringing this up, but you fail to note how much of that territory they had already captured in their proxy war before their invasion. In total, they have not gained all that much as part of this invasion at all.

No you don't. This is important to you. It's important to you that there is no accountability for anyone, ever. You'll never stop pretending that "It's time to move on, and forget about the crimes of the past."

A bill making its way through Parliament would impose draconian criminal penalties on hate speech and curtail people’s liberty in order to stop future crimes they haven’t yet committed. That's a pretty broad stroke if/when the accused is the one trying to prove the negative, as in the Russian collusion case. The FBI had all the time in the world to run a public smear campaign and there was literally no way for Trump to prove that he never had a single inappropriate conversation over a 2-yr period. The Online Harms Act states that any person who advocates for or promotes genocide is “liable to imprisonment for life.” But a cutesy dog-whistle for genocide, such as "river to the sea" will no doubt be categorized as 'harmless'. It defines lesser “hate crimes” as including online speech that is “likely to foment detestation or vilification” on the basis of race, religion, gender, or other protected categories. And if someone “fears” they may become a victim of a hate crime, they can go before a judge, who may summon the preemptively accused for a sort of precrime trial. If the judge finds “reasonable grounds” for the fear, the defendant must enter into “a recognizance.” Telling the truth about mohamed & islam will still be illegal.

to be a shill.. I have to care about one side or the other.. When someone would say, "I am not getting the vax".. my response was "sounds good".. That is the hallmark of someone who cares passionately about the pro-vax or anti-vax... says no one ever. Much like most Americans.. I just wanted it over with. Mask Mandates were silly and at work.. the pandemic-era policies were making the job more difficult than need be.

He knows he's chosen the side of the liars. He lashes out now because the chips are falling and he's clearly landed on the side of evil.

A. I did not exclude combat roles for women? WTF do you get that? B. Thank goodness you're here to armchair quarterback the DoD. You should send them a letter with your counterpoints: "Nuh-uh!"

You didn't even hit it out of the crib. Black Votes Matter! Vote dem or you're not black.

LOL Yeah, sure. Nucance thinking for you: Protestors you like and agree with = you will ignore and/or play down excuse/justify their lawlessness. Protestors you don't agree with = hammer them with the full might and fury of the law and more. Screw em.

"Projection" is synonymous with "democrat" so it's a waste of time for you degenerates to keep your fingers pointed.

See @User? Its "nuance". For instance... If Trump has classified documents in his home...packed by others and sent to his home...he deserves a swat team to raid his home and snif Melania's panties. But "nuance" dictates that Brandon can have all the classified documents he wants. It doesn't matter that he was not POTUS when he took them...on his own. He's not all there and can't be prosecuted. Or if Roger Stone is accused of purgery and obstruction, again...call CNN...and send an armed team to get the old man out of bed and put him in jail in his PJs. But "nuance" dictates that we can see Brandon is not a cognitive mess, that he has profited from selling out America, that Garland can lie to the American people and create a bunch of political prisoners...and nothing can be done. See how that works?

And the excuses start flowing. Thanks for proving my point.

Yes Dear... 🙄

Russia targeted the children. Israel is not targeting the children, Hamas is just hiding behind them

I think his name was Goredon. So you're like 4 years old at least then

There's lots of things women can do in the military besides fighting on the front lines.

People with low intelligence believe whatever confirms their biases regardless of evidence. People with high intelligence believe the evidence regardless of their biases.

It was already reported long before jaggers opened his mouth and i said it was bad then. The newspapers were reporting it before Jaggers said a word. Canada’s Parliament rocked by allegations of treason - POLITICO He hasn't said anything we didn't already know. So repeating something that's in the public domain is fair - but Polievre ALSO ALREADY knew that. And he knows it without signing anything Now - how about you explain why Jaggers didn't tell us the name of the people involved? Why didn't ask questions about them in the house? Why is he not pushing the libs on details? I mean - he knows what happened right? This is about good governance right? Why couldn't you answer my simple question? Utter fail on your part kiddo. All you've done yet again is prove my point. Sigh, I suspect we're about at your hissy fit stage where you will try to twist the defintion of something to side track the conversation from your obvious failure, and then eventually you'll claim your error was my fault because i post too much and follow me around yapping like a puppy on other subjects. IF we could avoid that for once that'd be great but history doesn't give me much hope

Like code breaking, analyzing aerial photographs, delivering new aircraft from the factory to squadrons. Some female British pilots were checked out on dozens of types from fighters to heavy bombers. All kinds of jobs if you bother to look it up instead of making stupid sexist comments

🤔. Because.... Gay men don't have fathers? Because they don't have kids,? Sounds like this guy you made up in your mind is really getting you angry, even though he's NEVER GOING TO EVEN EXIST! What an a5s hole he is!

Who came up with that idea first? I'm old enough to remember when democrats called tarrifs against China, racist.

Are you ignorant that it's 2024 and expecting women to be exempted is as abhorrent as segregated units used to be? You provided a source that imagined the scenario, one who also thinks like it's 1953. You fell for the BS, not me. And even posted it with an inflammatory headline as if it was news.

Neither do you. If you want to act like you are, I will keep calling you out for it.

Any crime against anyone with skin darker than a paper bag or of a non-Christian religion is automatically considered a hate crime until it is conclusively proven otherwise. You can literally say "I hate white people" before attacking a random white person and it's not a hate crime.

Again doesn't care about the truth or the deaths, cares about his echo chamber talking points. You're not going to get anything else out of him

I just do not care to carry on this conversation with you. I am indifferent about it LOL It is a dead horse now.

You're weak roboshill, and nobody buys what you're peddling. Find a spot where you feel climate change is the most intense and have a good cry. You know, like these ldiots.

democrats are the ones who think they're above the law. Johnson knows it, I know it, and so do all you braindead heathens.

That's not above the law. Lots of people have special privileges when it comes to venue. All they're talking about is moving it away from partisan courts and into a federal court which is inevitably going to be slightly less partisan as a rule. I mean let's face it, if trump had been tried anywhere else in the entire country he would have been innocent. Considering that now political opponents are fair game targets for democrats having the ability to force a change of venue helps disrupt their anti-democratic methods of coming up with fake charges to throw at political opponents by rigging where the trial is heard