The climate warrior
A small town in southern MA was treated to a brief 18 minute speech by the tool of the radical left yesterday. He stood before a small crowd of reporters on a vacant lot in Somerset MA and reminded all of us of how determined he is to repeat every energy policy error of the last half century. Joe Biden minced no words (the ones written for him, at least) that the war on the domestic oil and gas industry would continue, even as gasoline and diesel prices rose to new record highs.
"As president, I have a responsibility to act with urgency and resolve when our nation faces clear and present danger, and that's what climate change is about. It is literally, not figuratively, a clear and present danger," Biden said at Brayton Point. "The health of our citizens and our communities is literally at stake."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/07/20/joe-biden-somerset-massachusetts-wind-energy-brayton-power-plant-updates/10099186002/
Despite the reality that a shortage of refining capacity is a cause of the high diesel prices:
https://www.ttnews.com/articles/diesels-high-cost-due-refining-capacity-shortage-exports-experts-say#:~:text=%E2%80%9CWe%20are%20exporting%20fuel%20just,gasoline%2C%20diesel%20and%20jet%20fuel.
It was Biden's EPA that went after the industry:
"The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Friday issued biofuel blending mandates for 2022 and the prior two years - with this year's number below one proposed in December - while denying oil refiners waivers to be exempt from the requirements."
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/exclusive-us-epa-expected-issue-biofuel-blending-volumes-2022-below-proposed-2022-06-03/
And still they try and gaslight us about high gas prices not being Biden's fault. This is the result of the radical left coming to power via Biden. Obama was right about elections. They do have consequences. Never more so than the election of 2020. I'll spare you all the part about Biden babbling about having cancer and the US strategic reserve oil being sold to China and other countries. I realize that some have had a tough 18 months.
The Week:
More violence in NY:
Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y. , was attacked during a gubernatorial campaign stop in Perinton, New York on Thursday night where an individual allegedly pulled out a sharp object.
Zeldin was at the Veterans of Foreign Wars post event giving a speech about bail reform when a man allegedly got on stage and "wrestled with him a bit, and pulled a blade out," according to a witness who spoke with Rochester First .
The individual who allegedly tried to attack Zeldin was taken down by AMVETS national Director Joe Chenelly, according to the report.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/lee-zeldin-new-york-gop-gubernatorial-candidate-attacked-campaign-stop
And get this:
"The suspect was identified as 43-year-old David Jakubonis of Fairport, NY.
Jakubonis was charged with attempted assault in the second degree and released on his own recognizance."
https://nypost.com/2022/07/21/lee-zeldin-attacked-during-campaign-stop-near-rochester-report/
China in distress:
"China’s economic rebound may face a greater uphill battle than Beijing would otherwise like the world to believe thanks to pressure within the real estate sector and "frustrations" in the banking industry.
"China's economy has been slowing for quite some time," Craig Singleton, a fellow at the nonpartisan Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Fox News Digital. "What we're witnessing now is a rapid economic slowdown."
Economists can’t seem to make heads or tails of China’s current economic situation : GDP data indicated a sharp slowdown in Q2, but just weeks ago the Hang Seng hit a 3-month high in what some analysts hailed as signs of recovery."
https://www.foxnews.com/world/chinas-economy-suffering-rapid-slowdown-systemic-problems-surface
Maybe they've invested in too much American farmland. Why are we allowing that?
Court rules against Biden again:
"WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court denied an emergency request from the Biden administration to reinstate its immigration enforcement guidelines after a lower court in Texas temporarily blocked them .
In a 5-4 decision with Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson in the minority, the court ruled that the administration can’t use the guidelines for now—and agreed to hear a case on their legality in December.
The guidelines, issued in September by the Department of Homeland Security, instructed officers with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to place a priority on arresting those immigrants in the country illegally who pose a public-safety threat, such as a prior felony conviction.
Specifically, the guidelines also urged officers to weigh any mitigating factors, such as how long ago any crime occurred, whether the immigrant is of “advanced or tender age,” and what effect deporting the immigrant would have on his or her family members."
https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-denies-biden-administration-request-to-reinstate-immigration-enforcement-guidelines-11658440436?mod=politics_lead_pos10
Jan 6th Hearings fail to prove criminality:
Last and certainly least has been the political theatre that the Jan 6th hearings have become. Last night we again heard that Donald Trump ignored pleas from staff, supporters and family to call off the rioters for about 190 minutes before telling them to go home. Biden's AG, Merrick Garland is afraid to frame a criminal charge out of that trivia, not because a DC jury wouldn't convict Trump of just about anything, but because the decision would probably be reversed and Garland would go down in history as a biased AG who tried to convict a former President of the opposition party for what he might have been thinking.
What have we learned?
We have learned that despite all that this country is suffering through, some of our colleagues are entirely focused on the Jan 6th hearings as if that's going to be an election issue. They really must think that the population is detached from real life misery or maybe that everyone thinks like they do. Let me reassure them that they are facing a huge red wave in November, reflected in the poll available right here on NT.
The other unspoken issue is what are the democrats going to do with Biden? He is clearly toxic now and they are never going to make him the nominee in 2024. But will they let him go on as president right up until the midterms? How can they get rid of him with Harris in the wings?
There was a woke extremism hunt going on in the military that has led to a scarcity of volunteers. It may have also cost us a valuable member here.
Cartoon of the week:
Honorable Mention
Tulsi Gabbard
For calling out House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her husband for their stock purchases in semiconductor company NVIDIA ahead of a congressional vote on related chips subsidy legislation.
Tags
Who is online
418 visitors
I try to touch all the bases, but it was a busy week.
good riddance...
Good read as always Vic.
And who is surprised by this? But then again, the purpose of the committee wasn't to prove criminality of anything. It's purpose (according to House Resolution 503) is to
Something that many can see, they've failed to do. It's turned into yet another train wreck similar to what we've seen going back to 2016.
Evidently, approximately 8 individuals. They feel it's (whatever that is) obvious. He is guilty of attempting to overthrow the government because he waited 187 minutes to say go home. Garland is afraid to take it court.
Because he knows it's not a criminal offense. He knows he would be destroyed by a first semester law student.
Garland wants to save his ass from being impeached should the Republicans retake the House and Senate. Even if the Republicans can't fully impeach him; they can tarnish his name- and call into question the entire DOJ. Just what the Biden administration needs heading into 2024.
He is already on thin ice with Republicans for his two tier justice for BLM/Antifa and Jan 6th rioters.
Yup, that would explain the sick look on his face as Andrew Weissmann pressures him to do something.
And what he did to American parents.
Neither he nor Dr Fauci will escape next years committee investigations.
No, Vic, the 187 minutes suggest that Trump is guilty of dereliction of duty / violation of his oath of office. If he is guilty of sedition that would be related to his encouragement of the insurrectionists. If he is guilty of abuse of office that would be related to trying to force Raffensperger, etc. to create votes for him and thus disenfranchise GA voters or coercing Bowers to submit false electors from AZ. If he is guilty of suborning an unconstitutional act that would come from his attempts to get Pence to not count votes from select states. His interactions with Eastman could go to criminal conspiracy.
You oversimplify and then match behavior by Trump to the wrong potential allegation. Why? Is it because you made a mistake or because you seek to present a false story?
That might be true, we have to wait and see. Nobody in the general public could possibly know that right now.
None of that has generated an indictment from the AG...WHY?
You oversimplify and then match behavior by Trump to the wrong potential allegation. Why? Is it because you made a mistake or because you seek to present a false story?
The story is quite clear and it looks like most people get it because even with all the obvious theatrics and unethical actions of this bastardized committee, Donald Trump, even after all this, is more popular than Joe Biden and the man who's policies have been imposed on the nation, Bernie Sanders.
That might be true, we have to wait and see.
Um-hum.
Do you never tire of asking the same question? Nobody here can answer why an indictment has not been issued. Personally, I think Garland, et. al. are doing two things:
If Trump is not indicted, my opinion based on the evidence is that it is a failure of jurisprudence due to political pressure.
As for timing, if Trump is not indicted within a couple of months after the mid-terms then I will take that as a sign that he is not going to be indicted.
Then why did you get it so miserably wrong?
It's the most important question in many ways.
If Trump is not indicted, my opinion based on the evidence is that it is a failure of jurisprudence due to political pressure.
There is one other kind of pressure. In a DC Court, Trump would be easily convicted of anything on your list. The problem comes with an appeal. I have to say it again: If a Trump conviction is ever overturned, Merrick Garland will forever be remembered as the AG who prosecuted a former President from the opposing political party, who was always investigated by Trump haters, impeached twice by Trump haters, and publicly tried by a Stalinist style committee made up entirely of Trump haters. Garland was appointed by the man who once admitted that he ran to oust Trump. Garland is the final instrument to get Trump. Don't you think that is the biggest pressure on Garland right now?
As for timing, if Trump is not indicted within a couple of months after the mid-terms then I will take that as a sign that he is not going to be indicted.
And worse....He will run again!
Trump running again insures Biden will win a second term...
He was the best man to do it last time, and would be again!
That is the democrats hope. I think we can agree if Trump runs again and defeats DeSantis (who is gaining support by the day), he won't be facing Biden. Democrats will not let Biden get the nomination.
I disagree. Trump has zero chances of ever winning again.
Biden may be unpopular but he is beloved next to Trump...
It is pointless. All you are trying to do is imply that Trump is not guilty of a crime simply because an indictment has yet to be issued.
I have stated that if Trump is not indicted that it would be a failure of jurisprudence due to political pressure. There are many ways one can speculate on the nature of the political pressure.
Only because people continue to support him and attempt to defend him. If you, et. al. would stop attempting feeble, indirect defenses of Trump and would instead stand up against him and thus for regaining the integrity of the GoP then there would be no concern of a Trump run.
Biden and the democrats will now be running on THEIR RECORD!
Good luck trying to make it about Trump's personality.
No. If he is guilty of a crime I want him prosecuted. I've asked you before if waiting to act is a crime? My main point is that the democrats have the gun loaded and Garland knows a DC jury won't be good enough this time. He needs a slam-dunk case. His entire legacy and that of the DOJ depends on it.
I have stated that if Trump is not indicted that it would be a failure of jurisprudence due to political pressure.
Then obviously you think that Trump should be charged and the charges are obvious. I doubt that Garland agrees.
Only because people continue to support him and attempt to defend him. If you, et. al. would stop attempting feeble, indirect defenses of Trump and would instead stand up against him and thus for regaining the integrity of the GoP then there would be no concern of a Trump run.
I'll defend him because 1) he has been terribly mistreated by the worst people in this country. 2) He was an excellent President and he was elected because of those same terrible people and their ideology. 3) If I have to I'll vote for him again I will and 4) I don't want him to run because he might be the only Republican the swine can beat and I want to win.
It is not personality that is the main issue, it is character and rationality.
Would you trust Trump with the most powerful office on the planet? A man who become so unstable after his loss that his cabinet was ostensibly considering the 25th?
There is no alternative if he is the nominee. It's either that or keeping the main danger to this country in power.
A man who become so unstable after his loss that his cabinet was ostensibly considering the 25th?
That's the kind of man that frightens Xi, Putin and Kim Jong-un. Remember what he told Kim: "You may have a button, but I have a bigger one!"
his cabinet was ostensibly considering the 25th?
And why hasn't Biden's cabinet been considering the same?
Irresponsible, irrational and unpatriotic.
Thank you sir. I accept the surrender.
Do you really believe that America's Senior Statesman, the grandfatherly long term US Senator, two term Vice President of the United States and our current President is the greatest threat to America today? Get Outta Here! Try to be serious...
Yes, I do.
Joe Biden ... "grandfatherly"? Wow! Neither of my grandfathers ever talked to their grandchildren in the nasty way Biden talks to Americans.
What? You claim (clearly you did not watch these hearings or did not pay attention ... at all) that the committee has not investigated and reported upon the facts, circumstances and causes of Jan 6th??
[deleted]
The author lives in an alternate reality. The hearings are true pop culture buzz and verified as the right choice (making it a television show). Since the start of the hearings new polling has shown the Democrats going ahead in generic congressional ballots.
The amount of embarrassment MAGAS on Newstalkers now heap on themselves on a daily basis is headed off the charts.
And that is exactly what it is. Buzz. Just as scripted as Judge Judy, The Peoples Court, and Jersey Shore. And here you are lapping it up as if it's actually a real trial or hearing where they are looking for the truth.
Your commentary is worthless. Got that?
“lapping it up as if it's actually a real trial or hearing“
to be fair a lot of fools are.
It's all they want to talk about.
Can we blame them? Look at the news every day.
Your Honor, I object...Counsel is badgering the witness!
It's seems I've garnered the attention of the trolls who can't deal with reality.
Tell the truth and you earn a target on your back.
Always wear it proudly.
Six years of this BS and they still have nothing on Trump!
Kinda sad when your best lawyer is a fictional character.
Pathetic
Not as sad as pretending the Jan 6th committee has produced anything of value.
Anything of value will come by way of their recommendations and whether or not (probably not) congress implements them in some recognizable form (probably not).
This mess needs to be investigated....and will be
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/miacathell/2022/07/20/hunter-biden-icloud-leak-n2610057?utm_campaign=rightrailsticky1
Another burden for Garland.
LINK PLEASE
We both know as soon as you ask for a link, JR cut sling and ran.
It's not a good time to search for one.
You have proof of these polls predicting a Democrat victory correct?
We all know that polls are extremely unreliable as they can be aimed thru wording to get the results they want. And the American public is notorious for being unreliable in answering questions in a political poll. There are some polls that currently show the Democrats having a very small advantage in polling, but that doesn't mean by any stretch of the imagination that the Democrats will maintain either House or Senate in November.
As we all know, any attempt at polling this far out from the election is akin reading tea leaves with regards to any sort of accuracy, there's too much time for things to change. IMO that's why the Jan 6th Committee has ended their 'made for television' hearings now and will resume in September. The Democrat Party has made the decision to make the 2022 elections about Trump because they cannot defend their record on kitchen table issues like crime and the economy.
Not for inflation or a possible recession. That won't change before November.
I will stick with "It's the economy stupid!"
The majority of US citizens know it is a train wreck and can feel it's affects. The Democrats are running the show so they get the blame. I trust people to vote with their wallets; and it just doesn't make sense to double down for more of the same that got us here.
We have to pray that Trump doesn't make an announcement before the midterms. The leftwing media will try and make even the midterms about Trump.
My only concern.
I fully agree with you & Vic, the economy is going to be a driving issue in November. Most people will vote with their wallets and the cost of fuel and food is running so high that too many people are hurting. The Democrats know they are going to catch it in November and by making the issue of the election about Trump is about the only tool they have to use.
The inescapable fact is that working people are getting hammered and the inner-city poor are in actual physical danger.
Abstract principles and social issues will not obscure that fact.
and abortion
Correct. Even left wing polls show that Americans care far more about the economy, inflation, baby formula shortages, high food and gas prices, and DEI in their K-12 children's classrooms than Democrats pandering identity politics (tacos, Miami blossoms), preferred pronouns, 27 genders, J6, climate change etc.
Trump is the wild card in this.
Hopefully he realizes that it is better for Republicans to have power in the House and Senate heading into 2024; than two more years of this shit.
I kind of knew you were going to say that.
why wouldn't I ?
Your defenses of trump have gotten increasingly bizarre.
This Just in John:
BREAKING:
"Mr. Miller and GEN Milley met with the President at the White House at 5:30 p.m.," the IG reported. "The primary topic they discussed was unrelated to the scheduled rally. GEN Milley told us that at the end of the meeting, the President told Mr. Miller that there would be a large number of protestors on January 6, 2021, and Mr. Miller should ensure sufficient National Guard or Soldiers would be there to make sure it was a safe event. Gen Milley told us that Mr. Miller responded, 'We've got a plan and we've got it covered.'"
You can read that memo here:
But...but...but we were told by the left there was no plan for the NG in Washington DC and they weren't there!!!!!!
"The Pentagon memo also yields insight into the mindset of the Democrat-led Congress, top military officials and the local police before Jan. 6. Key players, it reveals, repeatedly raised concerns about accepting the offer of National Guard help, fearing it would create the perception of a military coup or martial law as the election results were certified."
I guess the committees credibility just suffered another staggering loss.
The committee had no credibility to begin with. It is now running at a huge deficit.
We all know how much Democrats love deficits; and deficit spending.
Just The News is not a reliable source. But anyway, the story goes that Trump offered 20,000 National Guard to Nancy Pelosi.
Where is your evidence of that?
It gets worse.
Did Trump , after seeing a violent riot at the capitol, do ANYTHING that would result in sending the National Guard to the riot? It takes 5 minutes to request a Guard deployment, not 3 or 4 hours.
All they had to do was seat McCarthy's picks. Then they would have a true hearing for posterity.
Don't they have to have credibility before it can suffer a loss?
But you did get the PDF Report from the inspector General. I hope you are up to accepting him.
Where is your evidence of that?
It has to be how many? You got the proof he asked. Let's fess up and admit it.
You have a point. Pelosi left them without an iota of credibility. It's just like yesterday when she stormed off after a reporter asked her about all the insider trading that her and her husband have been doing. I think we might see her be subpoenaed next year as well.
I wonder if NBC will be a good source?
Not if it goes against the narrative...
Then you'll have no problem proving that and the link wrong. I'd say I would wait but I don't have that kind of time.
Your opinions are worthless.
So, here we are again. You can't back up your claims (again) and resort to personal insults (again). Not that I'm surprised.
And I received the expected result. He couldn't back up his claim or disprove the article and in true liberal fashion, went with personal insults.
They go with what they know best!
It is not Trump's job to call in the National Guard at that time.
Have you read and learned nothing?! It is Pelosi, Schumer, and Bowser's decisions- they are the ones responsible for for security. Why don't you fucking ask them; since Pelosi already forbade the Jan 6th committee from doing so.
Are personal putdowns all you've got? How weaken and pathetic
Don't expect more and you won't be disappointed!
lol
It's more productive/satisfying to bang your head against a brick wall than to 'debate' the trumpturd supporters/enablers.
Just The News
QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence ( Learn More ). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis.
So, what facts in the article are you actually disputing?
And here you could have avoided embarrassing yourself by just doing the check. Still haven't disproven the article.
So you think it hilarious that Pelosi refuses to answer questions concerning her lack of action on Jan 6th as well?
Maybe she will like being arrested for failing to answer summons from the new Jan 6th committee after midterms once Republicans control the House. She has set the standard for failing to comply.
Time for the Democrats to answer questions about their roles in the complete security breakdown that occurred on Jan 6th.
So how about showing a link that Just the News has been wrong about anything.
That's the knife at the throat of the democratic party.
The question is, who runs the democratic party right now? Did we elect Bernie Sanders? That's why they nominated Joe - because they knew Sanders was unelectable.
Yet another attempted politically motivated assault from a loony left winger, and since it’s a loony left wing state, the domestic terrorist gets released with no bail.
I think NY has a carve out for would-be assassins.
Trying to assassinate dissenters from progressivism seems to be the new normal.
Not that it would be a shock to anyone who participates on this board and is subjected to posters fetishizing violence against conservatives.
I think NT has gotten a bit tougher on that I'm happy to say.
Even though Zeldin's attacker was released without bail, this case isn't finished yet. Since Zeldin is a sitting congressman, there's still the option of federal charges.
You think Garland gives a rats ass about it?
Garland's indifference regarding many cases proves that he doesn't care about this one either.
Biden declares another emergency to assume more autocratic power. Unfortunately effectively using autocratic power requires planning which the Biden administration obviously cannot do. Biden is only employing a political calculus which completely ignores the real world.
Violence has become the new normal in American politics. Who knew that phony outrage could drive political violence? Biden has tried to recreate the Creel Committee on Public Information. But it appears liberal Democrats are really following the playbook of Joseph Goebbels.
Climate alarmists are still focusing attention on oil while totally ignoring how that oil is used. Oil is not causing climate change. The scientific consensus is that human activities are causing climate change. The idea that we can give up oil and keep the human activities represents the epitome of delusion.
China is discovering that a shift toward a services economy slows economic growth and destabilizes an economy just as has happened in the United States. The supply-side measures of economic health look great but the real economy sucks. China is falling into the same money pit the United States has fallen into and can't get out of.
The Jan. 6th committee is a political body engaged in a political activity conducted by politicians. Everything presented by the committee was reported by the news media shortly after the event. There hasn't been any new revelations; the committee has only put faces and names onto the news media's anonymous sources. The Jan. 6th investigation will accomplish just as much as did the Benghazi investigation. The Jan. 6th committee is only providing political red meat to people whose minds are already made up.
You get the A + today.
If that is all the committee did then they have corroborated anonymous news with under-oath testimony from mostly high-ranking, connected Republicans whose testimonies compromise their political careers. That bit of credibility alone is a good thing to provide the American people. Unless you hold that information should be withheld from the public.
And of course it is OBVIOUSLY not true that all the testimony in these hearings was already in the news. For example, per the most recent hearing, we did not know that Trump had been advised, repeatedly, by top aides, family and 'friends' to call off his supporters. We knew that he called them off after 187 minutes but now we have confirmation that the reason for the delay was because Trump, fully informed, refused to call them off. And why is that important? Because it means that Trump would be derelict of duty as CiC and yet again violate his oath of office. If this goes to trial, I would be huge that Trump's refusal to act will be one of the major points in the trial.
The news media reported, shortly after the event, that Trump had incited the riot at the Capitol and that Trump did nothing to protect the Capitol (or Senate). The Jan. 6th testimony did not change what the news media had reported. If anything, the Jan. 6th committee only validated what the news media reported shortly after the event.
Here's why that argument totally ignores reality and drifts into political lunacy.
Trump fired up a crowd of supporters at a rally to engage in protests at the Capitol. Yet Trump was not allowed to go the Capitol to exert any sort of control over that crowd to prevent violence. Trump couldn't do anything to control events because the Secret Service prevented Trump from doing that. The argument is that Trump's charisma gave him control over the crowd but ignores that Trump was prevented from using that charisma to control the crowd at the Capitol.
Trump sending the military to the Capitol during an 'insurrection' intended to keep Trump in office would have caused governments around the world to shit their pants. Trump was challenging the legitimacy of the election so Trump sending the military to the Capitol would have raised all sorts of alarms. Trump gave warnings in advance of the rally but Trump taking that action following the rally would have been stupid.
They substantially validated the news writ large with details.
What utter bullshit Nerm. Trump could have tweeted at any moment. He could have walked to the press room in less than a minute and be live on national TV. He could have his message broadcast over loud speaker at the Capitol site. And note that when he did make his announcement, we have video showing supporters on their phones reading tweets and watching his broadcast.
That is not the argument. Again, how do you convince yourself that the only way for Trump to communicate with the insurrectionists was for him to physically be at the Capitol? Utterly ridiculous.
So, Nerm, here is the simple solution. Instead of waiting 187 minutes to send his 'go home' message, he does that as soon as he is made aware that his people have violently entered the Capitol building.
See?
And that's the only tangible thing the committee has accomplished. The Jan. 6th committee is a political body engaged in a political activity conducted by politicians. Claiming that professional liars are guardians of truth requires suspending disbelief.
How does anyone know that Trump tweeting anything would have controlled the crowd at the Capitol? How long would it take to deploy loud speakers at the Capitol? How would the crowd know it was Trump sending the message?
You know, Trump could have arrived at the Capitol before the crowd got there. That would have moved the rally (which was peaceful) to the Capitol. Trump's presence at the Capitol could have had a calming effect. The crowd wasn't there to attack Trump, after all.
Did Trump's 'go home' message cause the crowd to go home? The reality is that politicians think in terms of covering their ass. Trump could have sent a message very early which would have covered Trump's ass. But that might not have done anything to change events.
Trump being present at the Capitol would have had a calming effect.
Providing the public with insider details based on under-oath testimony by high-ranking, connected Republicans who compromised their political careers by testifying is quite a substantial accomplishment.
You are still attempting to argue that the only way for Trump to stop the crowd would be for him to be physically at the Capitol site. Have you no shame?
" As if to fulfill the criticism of a show trial, Cheney ended the hearing this week by calling for more officials to come forward and noting that Trump family members and former officials have already come forward with their own public “confessions.”...Jonathan Turley
"Folks, I'm doing great. Thanks for your concern. Just called Senator Casey, Congressman Cartwright, and Mayor Cognetti (and my Scranton cousins!) to send my regrets for missing our event today. Keeping busy!"
President Biden @ POTUS
Yet Biden can't be bothered to condemn yet Another assassination attempt by a left wing zealot.
Does he even know about it?
I wish they'd let him rest instead of putting him in front of cameras and teleprompters when he's sick. I don't think anyone would mind not seeing him for a couple/few days so he can recuperate.
They almost have to, unfortunately, to stop any speculation or theories that he's on his last leg and sick as hell. It's sad but also the way things have to be done.
I suppose so. They also should have thought of that when he was coughing into his hand and then shaking hands in the Middle East last week.
I had forgotten about that.............
I realize this is not part of the initial seed, but holy shit Batman... (Bolding is mine to highlight that statement)
That's a great line ... and so true!
The least his handlers could have done was pick a nicer location.
I learned 3 important things:
What you learned is not true.
Where did you learn that President Biden has cancer?
It certainly is true. I believe everything that Joe and his press secretary say. Karine Jean-Pierre said that contact tracing isn't necessary. And ... here's Joe ...
Do you believe —literally— everything Biden states? I certainly do not. Surely you know Biden is a gaffe machine and often exaggerates and uses imprecise language.
Biden had some cancerous skin cancer cells removed prior to becoming president:
His use of the present tense "have" rather than "had" was a gaffe (or possibly a lie). Because of his sentence structure, I suspect it was just a gaffe.
His point was about our polluted environment being an avoidable cause for cancer.
Another cliche, witless comment from you that shows no comprehension of what was written. Learn what 'spin' is. Spin is not stating the obvious and quoting facts.
Biden was either lying or he made a gaffe. If he was lying then that would be rather counterproductive since the lie would be easily fact-checked and backfire. If he made a gaffe (in this case, poor grammar) that would be consistent with Biden (the gaffe machine).
Either way, this is petty and pointless.
Buy a vowel.
Another excuse monger for the Human Fuck Up Machine.
Hold Brandon to the same standards you did Trump.
That won’t happen with a partisan ,,,,,,,,.
What a surprise that Ronin just presumes without reading.
Identify the excuse in my comment.
The use of 'Brandon' is childish.
So now explain how my comment fails to hold Biden to the same standards I hold Trump.
Spinning is dishonestly twisting meaning. When I stated that Biden either was lying or made a gaffe, by what bizarre interpretation do you find that to be spin?
Specifically state what spin you 'think' I have bought into. Vague accusations are basically bullshit.
Well of course not, dennis. I despise dishonesty so I have little tolerance for lying. Biden's gaffes are well known so there is no surprise there. I doubt anyone finds gaffes to be a good thing but everyone has flaws. It is just that some flaws are minor while others are major. And in this case, some gaffes are minor. Anyone with half a brain can see that Biden did not intend to falsely announce to the planet that the PotUS currently has cancer. He most likely was sloppy in his grammar and did not switch from the present tense to the past tense. Only those really trying hard to find something to complain about would engage in this petty crap. This is the same objection I brought up when people complained that Trump cheats at Golf. My point then and now is that there are plenty of real things to complain about; do not stoop to petty crap as that reduces the significance of the flaws that really matter (it is the Boy Who Cried Wolf phenomenon).
A gaffe-machine is not desirable but a pathological liar like Trump is far worse. We saw that in spades as a Big Lie was used to cause significant damage to the nation and to the GoP because of one man's petty ego and the stupidity of those who sycophantically went along with his lie.
I rejected your demand that I cannot mention Trump. See?
If you watch the video you can see that Biden stumbled over his words. He stated that he has cancer but, as I noted to you, it is more likely that this was a gaffe where he failed to switch from the present tense (regarding others) to the past tense (regarding himself). (He should have said that he "had" cancer, not that he "has" cancer.)
The admin stating that Biden did not mean to say that he currently has cancer makes great sense. As I asked you before, what purpose would it serve for Biden to intentionally announce to the planet that he currently has cancer when he does not? Why would he do that dennis? Use your brain. The more likely reality is that Biden, known for his gaffes, offered yet another gaffe.
I think you are perfectly illustrating partisan blindness. You seem to desire so much to attack 'the other side' that you ignore common sense and all reasonable explanations and just jump to the truly stupid notion that Biden intentionally announced to the planet that the president of the United States currently has cancer.
Buy a vowel.
In short, I did not buy into anything. Unlike you, I watched the video and objectively analyzed what I saw. I saw Biden yet again stumble over grammar.
Oh, so he really does not gaffe? Everything Biden says he means literally? Good to know. Now how is it that you, dennis, have this profound knowledge of Biden's inner thoughts?
You are confused. When Biden gaffes, his administration should correct that so that his intended meaning is clear. You should not need this to be explained to you.
I stated what I observed. The fact that his administration made a similar statement is corroboration that I am correct. But even so, anyone with half a brain can watch the video and see that he made an error in grammar and that there is no logical reason for him to just lie about having cancer. As I explained to you before (which clearly is a lost cause).
Well, dennis, you then have a real problem with the meaning of common words:
Now if you wish you can argue that Biden is incompetent when it comes to always accurately stating what he means; with that qualification you will be correct. If you deem Biden incompetent because he makes gaffes then did you deem Bush 43 incompetent? Somehow I suspect not.
Here is something else. The most profound liar I know of is Trump. Do you consider Trump incompetent because he lies? Somehow I suspect not here as well.
There is a pattern in all of this. I wonder if you can see it.
I do not know how to make this any clearer.
Biden obviously made a gaffe. He is known for gaffes so this is not surprising. There is no reason for Biden to want to lie to the world and claim that he currently has cancer.
His administration appropriately stated that Biden does not have cancer and did not mean to state that he has cancer.
What on Earth would cause you to think that Biden would lie to the planet that he has cancer when he does not? What value would it be to Biden or anyone for him to be fact checked on something so incredibly obvious to check? What value would it be for Biden to bring into question a medical reason that could compromise his ability to continue in office?
Just think about this Dennis.
I asked you why Biden would lie and your answer is that he lied .
I asked you what value it would be for Biden to lie and your answer is that only Biden knows .
I asked you what value it would be for Biden to bring into question a medical reason that could compromise his ability to continue in office. Your answer is that you think he does not want to admit that he has a medical condition .
This last answer is amazing. Biden, in your bizarro world, lied to the world that he has cancer because he does not want to admit that he has cancer?? He lied that he has cancer because he does not want Harris to take over his job??
Your ' logic ' is beyond confused.
Readers no doubt will be amused by reading your comments.
It's really amazing....
You're confused. He doesn't have cancer.
What you learned is not true.
PRESIDENT Biden doesn't have cancer.
He's had non-melanoma skin cancers removed several times in the past. I guess Joe was just being Joe and lied again this week. Oh, well.
Again, what you have allegedly learned is not true.
So Joe was lying.
Nice that you have finally figured that out.
"...a vacant lot in Somerset MA and reminded all of us of how determined he is to repeat every energy policy error..."
...not far from Nantucket, where leftist nimbys fight offshore wind-farming, tooth and claw.