Do right wingers here really believe that Trump's appointees (Gaetz, RFK, & Gabbard) are actually QUALIFIED for those offices?

[robosmith]

Anyone who believes Gaetz will stop lawfare is NOT LISTENING to Trump who is PROMISING LAWFARE.

[gatomontes99]

Just now, robosmith said:

Anyone who believes Gaetz will stop lawfare is NOT LISTENING to Trump who is PROMISING LAWFARE.

No link than it is just your lies.

[WestCanMan]

49 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

The fictional network of U.S.-funded Ukrainian bio-weapon laboratories, the function of a Moscow-orchestrated disinformation project, has been picked up by Gabbard, as well. The day Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Gabbard said it was all NATO’s fault.

There is nothing fictional about joint US-Ukraine Biolabs. 

There is nothing fictional about the claim that the US and Ukraine were doing research on known biological warfare agents in those biolabs. It is true. That is absolutely, positively, undeniably true and not even a matter for debate. It is uncontested by the US gov't, they even admit to spending $200M on it. 

If you look for a fact-check, the first thing that you will see is the debunked claim that "The US and Ukraine are developing bioweapons in bioweapons labs in Ukraine", but that's a red herring. There may be some people of accusing them of that, but it's not the claim that serious people are making about the US/Ukraine biolabs. 

Put these exact words into a Google search: "The US and Ukraine worked on cures for biological warfare agents in biolabs in Ukraine", and the first thing that comes up will be links debunking the claim that they were "developing" biological warfare agents, which is a completely different accusation. 

This is not false, it's not inaccurate, it's not even disputed:

The 46 US labs in Ukraine and the $200 Pentagon program that sparked a propaganda war:

• How ex-Soviet facilities housing pathogens prompted Kremlin claims America is building bioweapons in Putin's back yard

 

1. Pentagon provides funds for research across 46 Ukraine labs as part of a program meant to 'dismantle weapons of mass destruction' 
2. Funds through Biological Threat Reduction Program are meant to study pathogens and prevent outbreaks 
3. Russia has repeatedly referenced the research – as part of what the administration calls a disinformation campaign
4. There was a spike in online commentary on the labs just before and after Russia invaded Ukraine 
5. The World Health Organization (WHO) said it had advised Ukraine to destroy high-threat pathogens housed in the country's public health laboratories 
6. Tulsi Gabbard, former congresswoman for Hawaii, on Sunday asked whether the biolabs in Ukraine were safe amid the invasion
7. The Pentagon and UN have insisted there are no bioweapons in any of the facilities and the labs have been known about for years  

Now don't get this wrong Groot. There are two COMPLETELY different accusations:

1. The US and Ukraine were developing biological warfare agents, and
2. The US and Ukraine were doing research on existing biological warfare agents to "reduce the threat". Their words are in the quotation marks.

Regarding number 1, that is a straw man argument, thrown out there to be debunked and then lay the issue to rest. Now, it's probably true, just like Russia, China, NoKo, Iran, France, Germany, etc are probably doing it, but no one is making that accusation as a statement of fact because no one 'knows', or at least has proof. It is purely a matter of speculation for you and I debate whether they all are, some are, or they all aren't. 

Regarding number 2, Funds through Biological Threat Reduction Program are meant to study pathogens and prevent outbreaks, that's actually a thing, 100%. What do they have there? Well, there absolutely were Russian biological warfare agents there, which the US gained control of along with their Ukrainian counterparts, but they were supposed to be disposed of, but the US and Ukrainians were studying them. 

Interpret this for yourself:

• Russia already illegally took possession of two such labs in 2014 and 'continues to deny Ukrainian access to these facilities,' according to the Defense Department.

  'After Russia launched its unlawful invasion of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Ministry of Health responsibly ordered the safe and secure disposal of samples,' according to the fact sheet. 'These actions limit the danger of an accidental release of pathogens should Russia's military attack laboratories, a real concern since they have attacked Ukraine's nuclear power plants and research facilities.'  

That's from the US DoD. So what samples was the Ukrainian Ministry of Health disposing of? 

Quote

In Moscow, Gabbard is known as “Russia’s girlfriend.”

That's smut, Groot.

Quote

While she was a serving congresswoman, Gabbard paid a courtesy visit to Syrian dictator Bashar Assad in 2017 and returned to the U.S. encouraging Americans to be “skeptical” about Assad’s thoroughly documented use of poison gas to slaughter Syrian civilians. She described the mass uprising against the hated Assad regime as an American-orchestrated “regime-change war.”

Obama himself said in no uncertain terms that America's goal was regime change:   https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-34385354

• Obama tells UN: Syria's Assad must go

• US President Barack Obama says the United States is willing to work with Russia and Iran to remove Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power.

The US has organized regime change uprisings all over the world. They did it in Cuba, Iran, all over the ME and South America, Ukraine, etc. 

There will always be a segment of the population of every country that wants regime change, and if the US doesn't like the gov't in charge of that place, the US gov't will support them, fund them, arm them, run their propaganda, etc. 

Was the uprising against Bashar Al Assad American led? I don't know. We have a Jordanian friend who says that Assad was always protecting Christians. I trust her, I think that she actually believes it, and it's not hard to find stuff like this:

https://www.christianitytoday.com/2011/07/syria-christians-assad/

Nothing in the ME is easy. There are millions of people there who all believe completely different things, just like there are millions of people in North America who believe all sorts of batshit crazy things about Trump. 

I can tell you for certain that there would be millions of people who'd swear that what Tulsi said about "regime change" is 100% true, and I don't have any reason to disbelieve it. Maybe regime change was necessary. I doubt that a person could ever find the truth right now. But I have absolute faith that regime change would have ended in disaster, just like American-led regime changes always have. Whatever. 

[robosmith]

5 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

There is nothing fictional about joint US-Ukraine Biolabs. 

There is nothing fictional about the claim that the US and Ukraine were doing research on known biological warfare agents in those biolabs. It is true. That is absolutely, positively, undeniably true and not even a matter for debate. It is uncontested by the US gov't, they even admit to spending $200M on it. 

If you look for a fact-check, the first thing that you will see is the debunked claim that "The US and Ukraine are developing bioweapons in bioweapons labs in Ukraine", but that's a red herring. There may be some people of accusing them of that, but it's not the claim that serious people are making about the US/Ukraine biolabs. 

Put these exact words into a Google search: "The US and Ukraine worked on cures for biological warfare agents in biolabs in Ukraine", and the first thing that comes up will be links debunking the claim that they were "developing" biological warfare agents, which is a completely different accusation. 

This is not false, it's not inaccurate, it's not even disputed:

The 46 US labs in Ukraine and the $200 Pentagon program that sparked a propaganda war:

• How ex-Soviet facilities housing pathogens prompted Kremlin claims America is building bioweapons in Putin's back yard

 

1. Pentagon provides funds for research across 46 Ukraine labs as part of a program meant to 'dismantle weapons of mass destruction' 
2. Funds through Biological Threat Reduction Program are meant to study pathogens and prevent outbreaks 
3. Russia has repeatedly referenced the research – as part of what the administration calls a disinformation campaign
4. There was a spike in online commentary on the labs just before and after Russia invaded Ukraine 
5. The World Health Organization (WHO) said it had advised Ukraine to destroy high-threat pathogens housed in the country's public health laboratories 
6. Tulsi Gabbard, former congresswoman for Hawaii, on Sunday asked whether the biolabs in Ukraine were safe amid the invasion
7. The Pentagon and UN have insisted there are no bioweapons in any of the facilities and the labs have been known about for years  

Now don't get this wrong Groot. There are two COMPLETELY different accusations:

1. The US and Ukraine were developing biological warfare agents, and
2. The US and Ukraine were doing research on existing biological warfare agents to "reduce the threat". Their words are in the quotation marks.

Regarding number 1, that is a straw man argument, thrown out there to be debunked and then lay the issue to rest. Now, it's probably true, just like Russia, China, NoKo, Iran, France, Germany, etc are probably doing it, but no one is making that accusation as a statement of fact because no one 'knows', or at least has proof. It is purely a matter of speculation for you and I debate whether they all are, some are, or they all aren't. 

Regarding number 2, Funds through Biological Threat Reduction Program are meant to study pathogens and prevent outbreaks, that's actually a thing, 100%. What do they have there? Well, there absolutely were Russian biological warfare agents there, which the US gained control of along with their Ukrainian counterparts, but they were supposed to be disposed of, but the US and Ukrainians were studying them. 

Interpret this for yourself:

• Russia already illegally took possession of two such labs in 2014 and 'continues to deny Ukrainian access to these facilities,' according to the Defense Department.

  'After Russia launched its unlawful invasion of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Ministry of Health responsibly ordered the safe and secure disposal of samples,' according to the fact sheet. 'These actions limit the danger of an accidental release of pathogens should Russia's military attack laboratories, a real concern since they have attacked Ukraine's nuclear power plants and research facilities.'  

That's from the US DoD. So what samples was the Ukrainian Ministry of Health disposing of? 

That's smut, Groot.

Obama himself said in no uncertain terms that America's goal was regime change:   https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-34385354

• Obama tells UN: Syria's Assad must go

• US President Barack Obama says the United States is willing to work with Russia and Iran to remove Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power.

The US has organized regime change uprisings all over the world. They did it in Cuba, Iran, all over the ME and South America, Ukraine, etc. 

There will always be a segment of the population of every country that wants regime change, and if the US doesn't like the gov't in charge of that place, the US gov't will support them, fund them, arm them, run their propaganda, etc. 

Was the uprising against Bashar Al Assad American led? I don't know. We have a Jordanian friend who says that Assad was always protecting Christians. I trust her, I think that she actually believes it, and it's not hard to find stuff like this:

https://www.christianitytoday.com/2011/07/syria-christians-assad/

Nothing in the ME is easy. There are millions of people there who all believe completely different things, just like there are millions of people in North America who believe all sorts of batshit crazy things about Trump. 

I can tell you for certain that there would be millions of people who'd swear that what Tulsi said about "regime change" is 100% true, and I don't have any reason to disbelieve it. Maybe regime change was necessary. I doubt that a person could ever find the truth right now. But I have absolute faith that regime change would have ended in disaster, just like American-led regime changes always have. Whatever. 

Ukrainians are researching DEFENSES against Russian BIO WEAPONS. Duh

The 46 US labs in Ukraine and the $200 Pentagon program that sparked a propaganda war: How ex-Soviet facilities housing pathogens prompted Kremlin claims America is building bioweapons in Putin's back yard

• Quote

   

  • Pentagon provides funds for research across 46 Ukraine labs as part of a program meant to 'dismantle weapons of mass destruction' 
  • Funds through Biological Threat Reduction Program are meant to study pathogens and prevent outbreaks 
  • Russia has repeatedly referenced the research – as part of what the administration calls a disinformation campaign
  • There was a spike in online commentary on the labs just before and after Russia invaded Ukraine 
  • The World Health Organization (WHO) said it had advised Ukraine to destroy high-threat pathogens housed in the country's public health laboratories 
  • Tulsi Gabbard, former congresswoman for Hawaii, on Sunday asked whether the biolabs in Ukraine were safe amid the invasion
  • The Pentagon and UN have insisted there are no bioweapons in any of the facilities and the labs have been known about for years  

   

   

 

 

Edited November 16, 2024 by robosmith

[gatomontes99]

Congressman Gaetz has served on the House Judiciary Committee since the 115th Congress

[WestCanMan]

52 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Ukrainians are researching DEFENSES against Russian BIO WEAPONS. Duh

Sort of, but I'll give you full marks on that, due to your lowered standards. 

1. They've told us that they're working on biological warfare harm reduction, yes
2. They were supposed to get rid of the bioweapons and they didn't
3. developing countermeasures for known bioweapons isn't non-aggressive. 

Further to #3:

1. if you can prevent serious harm to your own population form a biological weapon, then you know that you can use it against your enemies without great risk. That's very aggressive.
2. if you can prevent serious harm to your own population form a biological weapon, then you know that you can use it against your own population as a false flag attack and then blame your enemy. That's also very aggressive.

Now think, robo... If some Ukrainians were killed by a biological weapon, who would you blame? You'd instantly blame Russia, of course. And you'd do it with a kill first, ask questions later zeal. So think of this from Zelenski's POV.... He has already lost tens of thousands of people in this war. If 50 more people die in a gas attack, is it a really big deal compared to all the rest? Not at all. And what's it worth to him if he can do something like that and then blame it on the Russians? It would be invaluable. The amount of aid he'd instantly receive, the amount of hate that Russia would receive, the likelihood of him getting NATO's directly involvement, and a permanent spot in NATO... It would all be a slam dunk. 

Could an escalation of that magnitude delay an inauguration?  

The US/Ukraine joint bioweapons research project is a MASSIVE deal, and by now you must realize that it was smart of Putin to alert the rest of the world to that.

Class dismissed, robodummy. F-off for real now. 

[ironstone]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Anyone who believes Gaetz will stop lawfare is NOT LISTENING to Trump who is PROMISING LAWFARE.

You don't think what Trump has been going through is lawfare?

New York Times columnist David Brooks said the quiet part out loud recently while on left-of-center “PBS Newshour”: “if you look at democracies in decline, then it is a pattern that people in office use their power to indict and criminalize and throw in jail the people who were in office before them of the opposing party. And so we are a nation, democracy in decline.”

While he may have been trying to project such unethical and illegal behavior onto Trump and the Republicans, it perfectly defines what the Democrats are now trying to do to Trump.

[robosmith]

23 minutes ago, ironstone said:

You don't think what Trump has been going through is lawfare?

He is getting prosecuted for his crimes WITH EVIDENCE before judges and juries.

You don't think Trump has committed any crimes despite all the EVIDENCE he's left?

23 minutes ago, ironstone said:

New York Times columnist David Brooks said the quiet part out loud recently while on left-of-center “PBS Newshour”: “if you look at democracies in decline, then it is a pattern that people in office use their power to indict and criminalize and throw in jail the people who were in office before them of the opposing party. And so we are a nation, democracy in decline.”

ONLY when there's NO LAW nor EVIDENCE.

23 minutes ago, ironstone said:

While he may have been trying to project such unethical and illegal behavior onto Trump and the Republicans, it perfectly defines what the Democrats are now trying to do to Trump.

You're just fantasizing about incomplete FACTS presented by entities trying to destroy America and our democracy.

AKA fascists like Putin.

[robosmith]

35 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Sort of, but I'll give you full marks on that, due to your lowered standards. 

1. They've told us that they're working on biological warfare harm reduction, yes
2. They were supposed to get rid of the bioweapons and they didn't
3. developing countermeasures for known bioweapons isn't non-aggressive. 

Further to #3:

1. if you can prevent serious harm to your own population form a biological weapon, then you know that you can use it against your enemies without great risk. That's very aggressive.
2. if you can prevent serious harm to your own population form a biological weapon, then you know that you can use it against your own population as a false flag attack and then blame your enemy. That's also very aggressive.

Now think, robo... If some Ukrainians were killed by a biological weapon, who would you blame? You'd instantly blame Russia, of course. And you'd do it with a kill first, ask questions later zeal. So think of this from Zelenski's POV.... He has already lost tens of thousands of people in this war. If 50 more people die in a gas attack, is it a really big deal compared to all the rest? Not at all. And what's it worth to him if he can do something like that and then blame it on the Russians? It would be invaluable. The amount of aid he'd instantly receive, the amount of hate that Russia would receive, the likelihood of him getting NATO's directly involvement, and a permanent spot in NATO... It would all be a slam dunk. 

Could an escalation of that magnitude delay an inauguration?  

The US/Ukraine joint bioweapons research project is a MASSIVE deal, and by now you must realize that it was smart of Putin to alert the rest of the world to that.

Class dismissed, robodummy. F-off for real now. 

Russia has had bioweapons and programs to develop more FOR DECADES. 

Anyone who lives next to them would be FOOLS to NOT develop DEFENSES.

Now go report to your master Putin that YOU'VE FAILED YOUR MISSION to spread his PROPAGANDA. LMAO

[herbie]

[I am Groot]

19 hours ago, ironstone said:

You don't think what Trump has been going through is lawfare?

Why do you think Trump never released his taxes? 

Trump and his organization have been playing fast and loose with laws for decades. He even admitted it in his book (ghostwritten for him) about how he'd dealt with the mob. He cheated his suppliers, cheated his customers and sued anyone and everyone who said anything he didn't like. And that was while he was still a Democrat. 

His charity was a hoax. His so-called university was a ripoff. He was an incompetent businessman and again sued anyone who pointed out his incompetency - when he was still a Democrat. 

Why was he the subject of so many investigations? Because guys like him count on their activities being largely ignored. The US is, after all, a pretty corrupt society. But the more prominent you get and the more enemies you make the more likely it is that stuff will come out. That's not lawfare.

[I am Groot]

22 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Ben Domenech:

I've never heard of Ben Domenech before and I watch Fox News quite a bit. I only watch the other US news outlets to see how much they're lying.

Dude, even tons of Republicans hate his guts. He makes Ted Cruz seem classy and responsible by comparison. 

Trump appointed him because he knows Gaetz has no ethics or principles and will do anything he's told to do, and screw what the law or constitution says. 

 

 

 

[ironstone]

21 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Why do you think Trump never released his taxes? 

Trump and his organization have been playing fast and loose with laws for decades. He even admitted it in his book (ghostwritten for him) about how he'd dealt with the mob. He cheated his suppliers, cheated his customers and sued anyone and everyone who said anything he didn't like. And that was while he was still a Democrat. 

His charity was a hoax. His so-called university was a ripoff. He was an incompetent businessman and again sued anyone who pointed out his incompetency - when he was still a Democrat. 

Why was he the subject of so many investigations? Because guys like him count on their activities being largely ignored. The US is, after all, a pretty corrupt society. But the more prominent you get and the more enemies you make the more likely it is that stuff will come out. That's not lawfare.

When it comes to all of the legal cases against Trump since he entered politics, I defer to Alan Dershowitz. Hard to challenge this man's credentials.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/alan-dershowitz-trump-s-new-york-trial-is-a-stupendous-legal-catastrophe/ar-BB1m3EKX

https://www.foxnews.com/media/dershowitz-slams-trump-conviction-worst-legal-verdict-ive-seen-60-years

How is it not lawfare when people like AG Letitia James literally campaigns on a promise to 'get Trump'? 

 

[WestCanMan]

18 hours ago, herbie said:

You could do a meme like that with Biden standing on a podium behind the presidential seal: "Oh look, he thinks he's running the country 🤣"

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Dude, even tons of Republicans hate his guts.

So why are you quoting a guy that no one ever heard of if no one likes him? 

Quote

He makes Ted Cruz seem classy and responsible by comparison. 

There's nothing wrong with Ted Cruz ffs. Why are you so butthurt about Ted Cruz?

Look at this loser, Groot. How classy was this on a scale of 1-10?

How classy was this on a scale of 1-10?

Buddy, those are vile, repugnant hate-mongers and liars. Ted Cruz is an angel compared to them. 

Quote

Trump appointed him because he knows Gaetz has no ethics or principles and will do anything he's told to do, and screw what the law or constitution says. 

Oh give it a rest, Groot. Matt Gaetz is under attack from the most vile leftist liars & scumbags for the same reason that every other decent person was slandered by them. The truth is simply not tolerated by the left.

Look what happened to the NYPost when they tried to tell Americans the truth about the Hunter Biden laptop. Compare that to the number of Russian collusion lies told by the Dems and their MSM toadies. Even the most respected[?] leftist posters on this forum were coming here to say that "there were [x number of] Trump Associates convicted of Russian collusion". The fact remains that, to this day, no one has ever been convicted of any collusion-related crimes, except for the FBI on behalf of Hillary. The FBI indicted people for collusion, along with other things that they were convicted of (rightly or wrongly: most likely wrongly, all things considered), and then the FBI offered them reduced sentences for false testimony. 

The left LOVES lies and sham trials.

There has been a fake trial epidemic going on in the US for years now, and Matt Gaetz was one of the conservatives that was targeted by judicial criminals. 

I can understand why leftist criminals would hate to see Gaetz become AG, but we've yet to se the GOP run any witch hunts against innocent Demis. You can't deny that what happened to Kavanaugh, Gaetz, Trump, and his associates was a travesty of justice, regardless of the fact that most of them ended up being exonerated.

[robosmith]

On 11/17/2024 at 9:28 AM, ironstone said:

When it comes to all of the legal cases against Trump since he entered politics, I defer to Alan Dershowitz. Hard to challenge this man's credentials.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/alan-dershowitz-trump-s-new-york-trial-is-a-stupendous-legal-catastrophe/ar-BB1m3EKX

https://www.foxnews.com/media/dershowitz-slams-trump-conviction-worst-legal-verdict-ive-seen-60-years

How is it not lawfare when people like AG Letitia James literally campaigns on a promise to 'get Trump'? 

 

You don't know Douchowitz. He is a hired gun who will say ANYTHING he can get away with which serves HIS CLIENTS.

He can get away with saying anything outside a court of law, and is much more circumspect IN COURT.

On 11/17/2024 at 11:37 AM, WestCanMan said:

You could do a meme like that with Biden standing on a podium behind the presidential seal: "Oh look, he thinks he's running the country 🤣"

Only lDIOTS like you believe making speeches is a significant part of running the country.

It IS a significant part of CAMPAIGNING. 

[Fluffypants]

On 11/17/2024 at 11:02 AM, I am Groot said:

Dude, even tons of Republicans hate his guts. He makes Ted Cruz seem classy and responsible by comparison. 

Trump appointed him because he knows Gaetz has no ethics or principles and will do anything he's told to do, and screw what the law or constitution says. 

 

 

 

The Ted Cruz hate is so funny every time he comes up for election the liberal media tells us that his opponent is gonna beat him and every time he wins. Who can forget Beto the fake hispanic.

Edited November 20, 2024 by Fluffypants

[impartialobserver]

Had Harris won.. the same exact thread would be up except it would be conservatives criticizing Harris's choices for the Cabinet. For Dems, there is no choice that Trump could make that would not get their fingers buzzing. 

[CouchPotato]

I think Kari Lake should get a job in the administration. Make it happen Trump.

Edited November 20, 2024 by CouchPotato

[ironstone]

Seems to me that when Democrats appoint people, they lean heavily on identity politics and which boxes they check off while the Republicans lean much more towards qualifications.

Not to suggest that every Trump pick will turn out A+, but it's a better process than the Democrats.

[Yakuda]

On 11/14/2024 at 11:39 PM, robosmith said:

They have one thing in common: ZERO experience of management at that level, and ZERO professional knowledge of those complex fields.

Like obama bin laden when he became president? 

[NAME REMOVED]

On 11/16/2024 at 1:55 PM, ironstone said:

You don't think what Trump has been going through is lawfare?

New York Times columnist David Brooks said the quiet part out loud recently while on left-of-center “PBS Newshour”: “if you look at democracies in decline, then it is a pattern that people in office use their power to indict and criminalize and throw in jail the people who were in office before them of the opposing party. And so we are a nation, democracy in decline.”

 

It's well known that Trump wanted to do this to Hilary Clinton in 2016, before he became President.

Edited November 20, 2024 by DUI_Offender

[WestCanMan]

14 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

Had Harris won.. the same exact thread would be up except it would be conservatives criticizing Harris's choices for the Cabinet. For Dems, there is no choice that Trump could make that would not get their fingers buzzing. 

Is Joe Biden really the president of the United States right now?

What has Kamala ever done well since she has been in office? Point to a major success if you could...

1. How's world peace going?
2. How did the economy do?
3. Did Joe and Kamala bring the country together?
4. How's the US border?
5. Are there any more migrant gangs taking over apartment complexes in any new states, or was it merely in Texas and Colorado? 

You're correct to say that conservatives would be criticizing Kamala's picks, but let's be honest, all of Joe's picks sucked. 

He has trannies running the military and his transportation minister - a guy - went on maternity leave during the diesel shortage. His "border tsar" never even went to the border. His VP can't even participate in high-level talks because she breaks into irrational fits of laughter at the most inopportune times.

If you're being honest, Joe's presidency was a -7/10. We're just hoping to make it to Jan 30th without WWIII starting, and I'm not exaggerating. People are checking the news every morning now to see what new countries are being bombed, and what new countries are joining which wars. 

[NAME REMOVED]

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

 People are checking the news every morning now to see what new countries are being bombed, and what new countries are joining which wars. 

No, they are not.

[Yakuda]

On 11/17/2024 at 11:57 AM, I am Groot said:

Why do you think Trump never released his taxes? 

Trump and his organization have been playing fast and loose with laws for decades. He even admitted it in his book (ghostwritten for him) about how he'd dealt with the mob. He cheated his suppliers, cheated his customers and sued anyone and everyone who said anything he didn't like. And that was while he was still a Democrat. 

His charity was a hoax. His so-called university was a ripoff. He was an incompetent businessman and again sued anyone who pointed out his incompetency - when he was still a Democrat. 

Why was he the subject of so many investigations? Because guys like him count on their activities being largely ignored. The US is, after all, a pretty corrupt society. But the more prominent you get and the more enemies you make the more likely it is that stuff will come out. That's not lawfare.

Tell us why he should release his taxes?