Hodad

Suuuuuuure it was. All those murdered protestors are just "crisis actors" too? Ukrainians wanted to be free. They rejected Putin's proxy. So other democratic people cheer for such change? Absolutely. But that doesn't mean they caused it.

That is some top-notch Russian propaganda you've got there. Very fresh.

NOTHING has befouled "our cherished Oval Office" like the presence of the man who currently occupies it. Zelensky could have spat on the floor and still lost that race. The embarrassment is only beginning.

There's no spin. What I described is exactly what happened. A democratic country asked the international community for aid as they fell under the attack of a acquisitive dictator. And the democratic world responded. Nobody asked Ukraine to fight a war. They could have --and can still -- quit any time they've decided it's not worth it. But a people who have living memory of what it's like to live under an oppressive regime don't take freedom for granted in the way that's now very trendy in conservative circles. The Republicans haven't suddenly become pacifists holding every life dear. They simply aren't invested in democracy anymore.

It should be bizarre. We used to have values, like actual ideological values to which the parties aligned. Now the republicans are realigned not by value, but by style of government. They've simply come to believe that autocrats and oligarchs are the best way to get what they want and that pesky democracy can be dispensed with.

I wholly reject the entire farking premise that these disingenuous asshats want to make an analogue between the Iraq war and the Ukraine war. 1. Dictator Putin invaded a democratic Ukraine and the democratic countries of the world offered aid to a people fighting to retain their freedom. 2. The Bush administration used (at its most generous interpretation) "questionable" intelligence to invade a sovereign nation for the sake of regime change and resource grab.

Bullies will bully--and side with other bullies. And the sniveling subs will be at half mast for it.

Bullshit. You're just a shameless liar. You'll pretend Trump didn't say EXACTLY what he said, just because it feels convenient in the moment. You said yourself that the Palestinians wouldn't be able to live there. You know full well that if that insane plan were to come to pass the Palestinians would not be allowed move into the remodeled Gaza. And you're STILL trying to peddle your lies. Jeebus. The "loyal opposition" of decent people died a decade ago. Now all we have is a Republican cult of personality and there is no degree to which you people will not debase yourselves in service of that demonstrably awful person.

What a massive pile of bullshit. You can't invent a whole new conversation to cover up his intent or your dishonesty. He answered the direct question directly. "No, they wouldn't." Trump's cockamamie plan is NOT to rebuild Gaza so that the Palestinians can move back in. Peddle your prevarication elsewhere.

You are a bald faced liar--and utterly farking shameless about it. Baier: "Would Palestinians have the right to return?" Trump: "No, they wouldn't." It's on video for the entire world to see, you gaslighting mofo.

Prove the world is round and the sky is blue too? This has been covered heavily by every news outfit in the country. Open wide. Here comes the airplane! Baier asked Trump directly if the Palestinians have the right to return. Trump says "No, they wouldn't."

There is no "he" in this situation. The person censored was Navalni's widow. Widowed, of course, because, as a brutal dictator, Putin does not tolerate political dissent.

Nobody aside from the President, who has said on multiple occasions that the Palestinians would not be allowed to return to Gaza.

It's because Canadians vaccinated. 💡

The implied "so far" hangs heavy at the end of your sentence. Unfortunately, this administration is just a month old and the shameful behavior is only getting warmed up.

You want to try reading that post again and asking me about something I actually said? Acosta let Epstein slide. I know you don't let any real news into your conspiracy binging, but it's even been discussed heavily in this forum. Vanity Fair After the Miami Herald’s Julie Brown published her extensive investigation of Epstein, “Perversion of Justice,” in November 2018, though, attitudes toward his crimes changed substantially. A federal judge ruled that Acosta and Epstein’s nonprosecution agreement was illegal, and the Southern District decided to pursue Epstein after all. Acosta resigned as Donald Trump’s labor secretary last year over criticism of the kid-glove treatment he gave Epstein, but the fallout from his 2007 decision may still be unraveling

B. You made up C. Why would they need to charge federally a man already in jail and being prosecuted? This is a very dumb conspiracy theory. You think your made up shit is really going to make people forget that Trump's people have already coddled Epstein?

A. Neither Obama nor Biden have Epstein the sweetheart deal of the century, which no one can justify. Nice try at deflection though. B. Epstein was arrested and was being prosecuted while Biden was in office, so WTF are you even talking about? C. Both were state and local cases, not federal. So again, WTF?

Well, except Trump's last labor secretary and his current AG, who let Epstein slide. They should all be released, but I absolutely do not trust the pathological liar and his toadies.

"The left" didn't say that Trump was buddies with Epstein. Trump did.

That's not a big boy table. It's a milking table, and Trump is thirsty.

Squirm? You're a certified dolt. No, Joe Biden is not responsible for Putin's aggression. And he was a staunch ally of the democratic underdogs in this fight. The super sub narrative that Putin was "forced" to invade a sovereign neighbor because that neighbor was taking steps to avoid being invaded is just asinine. I'm the product of a country whose entire identity is (or was) based on the virtue of self determination by a free people--freedom hard won in fire and blood to throw off an oppressor. Of course we understand why Ukraine was fighting. The fact that the struggle to be free is beyond your comprehension is honestly just sad. You fundamentally can't understand someone like Patrick Henry. You must be a hoot on movie night. "I don't understand why Andy fought the Sisters. He should have saved himself the trouble and taken it--or maybe negotiated for just the tip!" "Remember in Braveheart how the villain Wallace forced poor King Edward to attack? Why are they even fighting." The people of Ukraine know what it is to live without freedom, and now that they have it, they aren't going back without a flight. You may be a sniveling farking worm, but the world will make more sense if you accept that other people have values so dearly held that they will fight to preserve them.

About half of suicides are committed using firearms. Pretty clear that gun ownership causes depression.

I couldn't pick two, but policy is definitely the project 2025 playbook (behind the scenes operatives) while Musk is serving his own interests. Trump does not read or understand policy in the slightest. He couldn't even tell you what these agencies and actions do.

What did Ukraine gain from defending itself from being annexed by Putin? Well, they still exist as a free people. If they could go back in time and somehow Putin didn't invade in sure they'd be all for it. And yes, Trump is trying to "end" the war in Ukraine exactly how he ended the war in Afghanistan: by simply abandoning the Democratic governments to be devoured by oppressive authoritarian regimes. Watching you struggle to understand why a free people would fight for their freedom is almost pitiable. Having values and principles--believing that some things are worth fighting for--is as foreign to you as a the concept of color to a blind person.