Hodad

They've done the math. Women are more likely to register. Women are more likely to turn out. And women are more likely to vote Democrat. So the more they can disenfranchise women--particularly urban and poor women--the happier Republicans will be.

You're constantly spamming about the unfortunate drone strike that killed 7 children during the Afghanistan withdrawal under Biden. Can we assume that you going to start posting about this 20x as much and with 20x the invective directed at Trump? Of course, I'm sure you'll be consistent, because you have deeply held principles. 🙄

This will be alarming to some, but it's an alarm that has been ringing loudly for the last 5 years. They've been laying this groundwork pretty openly. Trump already has one coup attempt under his belt. The problem is that the plan hinged on one man, Mike Pence, who chose not to betray his country. So to avoid getting blocked in future they have been distributing people at all levels of government and election processes. I think he will try it. And I think we'll be pushed to constitutional crisis again. And there's a very real possibility that 2024 was the last free and fair election of the United States era. I wish that were hyperbole, but he's already proven he will end democracy to retain power. We had the dress rehearsal. Republicans voted to give him another shot at it.

You've got your fake orange tan colored glasses on. All we're doing here is airstrikes. Push button. Stuff blows up. That's the only objective so far. With the resources we have, there is no way NOT to succeed at this. The first gulf war put boots on the ground and expelled Iraqi army from Kuwait in about 100 hours--literally re-captured a country--a much bigger task against a much larger military. W's invasion of Iraq (again, a much more complex operation) took the country in about 3 weeks. Remember "shock and awe"? The "blowing stuff up" phase is always easy for us. It's whatever comes next that is difficult, costly and dangerous. For the hundredth time, Trump signed the "surrender" and withdrew literally 90% of US forces from Afghanistan and let the Taliban run wild. The only thing Biden did in Afghanistan was to bring home the last 10% of stragglers. They didn't fight the Taliban. That was not the mission anymore. It was just to clean up the mess as gracefully as possible. You're welcome to criticize the execution of that final 10% withdrawal, but you don't get to make up your own mission and then pretend that it failed.

This is the sort of unhinged, rambling screed that a deranged homeless person pounds out before the librarians kick him out for shitting on the floor. If your point was that the US is winning decisively, sure, but that was a foregone conclusion. Our defense budget is twice the entire GDP of Iran. We have 25x to 50x more of everything. It's Mike Tyson fighting a toddler. And the only defined mission is destruction. Not sure why you find this so impressive.

Republicans would very much like to reduce the number of women and minorities voting and this is a way to do it. It is not a trivial thing to get paper copies of old documentation.

Geologists overwhelmingly agree with the scientific consensus, but deniers do seem most likely to come from those looking down more than up. I don't think that it's a coincidence that this is the discipline most closely tied to mining and fossil fuel industries.

It's accurate. You present a false dilemma. Iran is not and was not a significant threat to the US. Militarily, one could argue that Iran was a concern for some parts of the world, but not here. We didn't have to fight them at all, regardless of their strength. I think there's an argument to be made for the international community to intervene in a humanitarian crisis, perhaps with a side of forced non-proliferation, but that's exactly how such policing should be done: by the international community. We are a part of that community--or used to be before Trump alienated our allies and undermined our global standing. We could participate in--or even lead--such community policing, but it's the community aspect that gives such things legitimacy. Trump ran on a non-interventionist (nearly isolationist) foreign policy platform: America first, avoiding new wars, critical of the Iraq war and even the modest Lybia intervention. -- If MAGA were smart enough to notice that the bait and switch, they'd have whiplash right now. Instead, they don't seem to notice that they've done a 180 and simply cheer for whatever he says. I suspect that as an aggressive interventionist and expansionist, you're at least consistent in your position here. In this worst-of-both-worlds scenario, Trump will get his distraction, Hegseth will get to "war" something and the defense contractors will get more of our tax dollars. But the rest of America will be poorer for the effort: more isolated, less respected, less trusted and less safe. Maybe the Iranian people can salvage something positive from it. Maybe.

Maybe if you had "wasted" some money on an education you'd be better prepared to discuss statistics--COVID, demographic, or otherwise. Pew

For anybody keeping score, 4 years under Biden and zero months with net jobs loses. 1 year under Tariff Trump and he just clocked his 4th month of net job losses. Maybe unilaterally starting another war of choice in the ME instead of focusing on the economy isn't the right idea. But then again, with economic policies like his, we're better off if his attention is elsewhere.

Yes, stamp your little feet because video evidence contradicts the narrative of your orange god. Have a nice little tantrum, and another drink.

"Jimmies some pictures"? -- It's just synchronized multi-angle video. There's nothing manufactured about it. The same way the NFL shows replays from multiple angles to see details that were missed about who touched what and where.

Sounds pretty similar indeed. The opposition party in Venezuela won 73% of the vote. Maduro retained power and the opposition candidate still lives in exile--just as he did before Trump's actions. I think it more likely that he stick within the established power structure, but who knows what he can squeeze from someone else. Good luck though, sincerely. As much as I don't approve of how this was executed, it would lt would be great if he did something decent on the other side of it.

Don't believe your lying eyes. Again, some real cult shit there.

It doesn't, actually. Again, go look at the video with the angles synced. Plain as the daylight between body and car, he didn't get hit.

That's for shrinking that down to the size of a postage stamp, but no, it's not. That's why syncing up the other angle is so important. This is the exact same moment. Look at the bottom image. His left hand is pushing off (in line with the other officer's arm) and his right has the gun extended. Look at all that daylight between body and car.

True. There's no statute of limitations on murder. Like all lizard people masquerading as humans, Stephen Miller speaks with forked tongue.

Nah, none of them have balls. Seriously, that lapdog sycophancy was a HUGE part of the selection process. Trump HATED it his first terms when he appointed some competent people who then responsibly resisted or blocked his whims. And who, after they left, told public how useless he is.

It may not be relevant to whatever point you're trying to make, but the fact that he wasn't even hit, let alone "run over" is certainly relevant to the fact of Noem's lying. And it's certainly relevant to Gato, who insists that he was hit, even when the video shows otherwise.

That's ridiculous. They've been "come up with" many times. here. He was not supposed to stand in front of the car or try to block the car with his body, because it puts officers at risk and can create a deadly encounter. He was not supposed to shoot the driver of the car unless in defense of someone's life, because doing so actually creates danger for others. He broke the rules and by virtue of breaking the rules broke the law in shooting her. Again, I skeptical that they could get a conviction due to the tight timing and reasonable expectations for processing the situation, but with time to examine the circumstances, he was clearly not justified. Like a close call overturned on instant replay. Should or shouldn't isn't really at issue. But she probably could have been ticketed or charged for what she was doing. And no, even if one is committing a minor offense, one can still complain about an extreme overreaction to that offense. Speeding is begging for trouble. Double parking is begging for trouble. But a proportional response is expected, not lethal force. I'm sure it was annoying to the officers to have people honking and yelling, but they need to be better trained and met with high expectations to respond properly. Not to create a bad situation that ends in a shooting.

Lol. No, he's not. In the top picture you can see how far aw his left leg is. In the bottom you can see how far away his right leg is--as she's driving by. And as the video plays you can see the gap between car and body. He had his phone is his left hand and his gun in the right. He reaches out and leans into the car. then pushes off. That's the only contact. No body, no legs. Give these a try.

If the officers aren't following rules and laws, it seems like anything can get you shot. Not sure that's a viable lesson. They should have let her leave, taken down her plate number and arrested her later. That's all that should have happened. No need for that escalation.

Why isn't the lesson "Don't try to block a car with your body (like training an policy tell you to not to do)." I have been skeptical from the beginning that they can make a criminal charge against Ross (though the video is pretty compelling), but I definitely think the family will win a civil case against the government and, depending on qualified immunity, against Ross. She may have been breaking the law, but he was in the wrong to shoot her for it. Nothing there rose to justification of deadly force.

It's definitely AI slop. 8 is pretty round.

Hm... Is that how it went in Venezuela? Did he hand the government over to the opposition party that actually won the last election? Or did he keep the same corrupt government in place and squeeze them for oil? Trump did something that benefitted you. Don't confuse that with thinking that Trump did it to benefit you. He acts out of self interest. He will happily leave some version of the current government in place if he feels he can benefit from it. He simply wants to be involved in picking the next leader so that he can extract concessions and $ from them.