gatomontes99

Kelly was not a reliable source because JK worked with Vindman, the CIA and USAID to promote the Ukraine hoax. House.gov NBC: Kelly found himself in the crosshairs of his former boss in 2020, when Kelly came to the defense of then-Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who had reported his concerns about Trump’s July 2019 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. What you are asking me to do is to prove a negative. Prove Trump did not say what Kelly claims Trump said. What i can prove is that Kelly was part of a failed conspiracy to impeach Trump over a normal, diplomatic phone call. Further, you cannot prove Trump said anything of the sort. Your only evidence is a discredited, disgruntled former staffer. You are making the claim. You have the burden of proof. Go.

NYC to roll out anti-street harassment ad campaign starting Wednesday. Here's what to expect. Ok, I am being a little obtuse with that title. But, here is the thing, they want men to stop cat calling at women. How do we know they are women? How does he know we are men? How do the men know they aren't women? This is just all so confusing. I mean, it is not confusing, really. But notice how they can't come up with a definition for a woman when being confirmed for the Supreme Court, but magically know what a woman is in #metoo and yet suddenly forget again when testifying to Congress but magically remember again when they run a public awareness campaign. I just post this stuff to laugh at them. What a joke.

Right. The career official that was fired by Trump is the perfect, unbiased place for facts. No one other than Kelly has made these claims and Kelly was not present when the supposed statement was made. But you go with that fantasy. Meanwhile, the official reason why the cenetary was not visited was because rain prevented the helicopter ride and the drive was too far, complicated and dangerous. That ks why it was canceled and no amount of left wing fantasies is going to change that.

You sure ranaway when I gave you links the the GC that showed that this was NOT a war crime. Funny how that always seems to happen with you. It is almost like you do no research into what you are saying.

This has to be a parody account.

What happened? Couldn't defend your thesis so you made up a new one?

Where is this evidence? Keep in mind, multiple witnesses say it never happened.

Well, you would know what I am saying better than me. 😒 Jesus teaches in John 8:1-11 that we cannot condemn those that sin and neither does he. The sin os the enemy, not the sinner. The act is the problem, not the person. Celebrating people for their sins is just as wrong. We should do our best to live a life without sin (not possible, but try any way) therefore we should not celebrate and be proud of our sins. End of story. Now it's business goal? It was for disrupting the team..then it was for discrimination and hatred. Now it is business goals? Whatever.

Where do you get these lies? Try going to the source: SCOTUS BLOG FFS

No one said that. That is just the strawman you want to argue against. The sin is not the sinner. Autocorrect Actually, he is protected: Applicants, employees and former employees are protected from employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation, or transgender status), national origin, age (40 or older), disability and genetic information (including family medical history). Applicants, employees and former employees are also protected from retaliation (punishment) for filing a charge or complaint of discrimination, participating in a discrimination investigation or lawsuit, or opposing discrimination (for example, threatening to file a charge or complaint of discrimination). Employees have a right to: Not be harassed or discriminated against (treated less favorably) because of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation, or transgender status), national origin, disability, age (40 or older) or genetic information (including family medical history).

Yes. We are saying no one should be proud of their sin. That is the point. That is his point. That is why what the Bulls are doing is so abhorrent. They fired him for a very basic tenant of Christianity.

The left is complaining about pulling down the dilapidated house and building a new one. The old system did not work. That is the point.

Am I? Or...are you just trying to invalidate my opinion because you recognize you are losing this argument? That is not what he said. He said the act was a sin. Not the existence. Kaepernick was not renewed because he was not very good. He won a Super Bowl, but the only reason he was in it was because his back up got him there. He only averaged 4.5 completions per quarter in his best season.

This completely invalidates your position. Do you want to think about that for a while?

Oh good gawd. You can do better. Skin color is not analogous to actions. Do better. By deleting all of his social media and only posting on one? That is the most that he can? He was talking to his followers about how his faith is troubled by his employers actions. That is federally protected speech. Show me one person that said they should be fired? Fans don't have to like Ivey for his views. But the NBA never fired any player for liberal views. Hell, an office employee celebrated Kirk's death and only got suspended after backlash. Who did he disrespect? We are all sinners. Saying we shouldn't celebrate sin does not call out anyone.

I really quit watching when Jordan retired. He was a must watch. There has not been another Jordan, yet.

Another hate-filed video fueled by blind bigotry. The idìot that made this video seems to believe that the only view that can be held, by viewing the two videos he mentioned, is his view. He lacks the ability to see how others come to varying conclusions using the same information. And, he does not care to have any such ability. This video is a typical, leftist agitprop video. It lacks perspective, relying on strawman assumptions to bolster his views. He claims that the Pretti video shows clear malice, when it actually shows a man resisting arrest, with a gun. The ending was predictable, though not perfect or desirable. He believes the J6 videos show something other than a riot, but I suspect he never watched the videos of the groups being let in and led around the Capitol building. There is always more than one side to every story. To him, there is only one side. Since he cannot comprehend that others might disagree, he must malign and berate them so that he can feel satisfaction in dismissing their opinions without consideration or discussion.

Not if they espoused religious beliefs that the employer uses as the basis of dismissal. You can't fire Abdullah for saying "Allah is great". That is religious discrimination. Ivey just said he did not agree with promoting sin. Ok. So what? He did not say anything homophobic, that was a lie by the article. He just didn't want the sin promoted. Plus, he was not fired for disparaging the league. He was fired for harming team unity, which did not appear to happen. Colbert lost his job because his ratings are trash, his ad revenue is nil and his costs are insanely high. Not for whatever fantasy you have about his dismissal.

Outsports.com "Jaden Ivey has been making a lot of noise on social media as of late for all the wrong reasons. As the Chicago Bulls guard has been struggling to recover from a knee injury suffered before the 2025-2026 NBA season, Ivey has been taking to Instagram to go on religious rants. Fans have noticed his long-winded rambling often leads to him saying some questionable things about the world around him, and this culminated in a homophobic tangent in which the fourth-year guard criticized the NBA for recognizing LGBTQ Pride Month. " The truth is always less radical than the left make it out to be. Here is what he actually said: His point is that it is not righteous. AKA it is against his deeply held religious beliefs. For that, he lost his job. He said nothing derogatory about anyone. He never threatened anyone. All he did was disagree with "holding up" sin. The NBA needs to be fined fined by the US government for their bigotry.

Let's play a game. Find the minority! The Atlantic USAToday AZ Central

Don't pamper to that dipshit. His idea of research is scrolling boomerbook and watching AI reels.

Protocol I allows for military response to civilian attacks. Further, only infrastructure that is necessary for survival is protected. Power and oil are not protected. Maybe desalination plants. However, it could be argued that fresh water supply may be sufficient. Further, your hero only said that his comments "potentially" indicate a possible violation if actually used. The entire premise of the question is based on the journalist's assumptions and not on actual battle plans, targets or actions.

So, what say you? Should this guy have been shot? He had a criminal history. He had new charges for assault. He was trying to flee and put the cop in a perilous situation. Should he be shot? Yes. Hell yes. You see, this is not about race, it is not about immigration status...it is about his actions. It is always about the actions.

Nothing else? Are you fn serious? Deportations Lowest crime in history Lowest murder rate in history New trade deals (and finalizing them) I guess you might be right though. Trump solved all those problems, so what should he run on? Oh yeah, stopping fraud, balancing the budget, and protecting elections.