A High Stakes Gamble
Link to Quote: Supreme Court: Trump must respond to special counsel’s presidential immunity petition before Christmas (foxnews.com)
As any honest person can see, Jack Smith seeks to put Donald Trump on trial and get a conviction and a sentence before the 2024 election. It is clearly all about the election. Legal matters seldom keep to a rapid schedule and the former President is entitled to an appeals process that likely would slow that process down. Therefore, Jack Smith is ready to roll the dice on Trump's claim to Presidential immunity and leap right over 2 Court of Appeals straight to the SCOTUS. Smith has requested that the highest Court in the land take the case because he claims it must be decided quickly, though he never tells us why. Obviously, the need for a quick SCOTUS ruling is that Joe Biden is losing to Trump in 5 of the 6 key swing states. This is what it appears to be: election interference. In other words, a DC jury could decide the 2024 election.
The Supreme Court has responded to the request. It will expedite consideration of a petition by Smith on whether former President Donald Trump can be prosecuted on charges he plotted to overturn the 2020 election results.
This move is not without risk. There are a few ways the Supreme Court could rule and one of them is that Donald Trump is right, and he did have Presidential immunity. That would be the end of Jack Smith's case. Let us all hope for that.
In other news:
Sheila Jackson Lee will seek reelection to Congress after losing Houston mayoral race. Let us hope she gets beat there too.
Harvard University president Claudine Gay plagiarized numerous academics over the course of her academic career, at times airlifting entire paragraphs and claiming them as her own work, according to reviews by several scholars.
'This is Definitely Plagiarism': Harvard University President Claudine Gay Copied Entire Paragraphs From Others’ Academic Work and Claimed Them as Her Own (freebeacon.com)
US and coalition forces have come under attack at least four more times since the US struck a weapons storage facility in eastern Syria on Wednesday evening, according to a US official.
On Wednesday evening, there were two multi-rocket attacks on US and coalition forces at Omar Oil Fields near Mission Support Site Green Village, Syria, and a one-way drone attack on forces at Mission Support Site Euphrates, Syria. One of the rocket attacks on Green Village resulted in three US troops suffering minor injuries, the official said.
Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh said Thursday that two of those three received traumatic brain injuries (TBI), and the third was a “non-serious, non-critical injury.” All three have since returned to duty. There were no other reported casualties or infrastructure damage from the three attacks
Israel has rejected suggestions it is trying to force Palestinians out of Gaza as Arab leaders and aid officials warn its intensifying ground offensive could leave civilians with few other options.
Some of the heaviest close-quarters fighting in more than two months of conflict took place over the weekend, as the Israel Defense Forces tried to consolidate control of urban centres in northern Gaza and pursued Hamas leaders in the heart of the biggest city in the south, Khan Younis.
Israel rejects claims it is trying to force Palestinians out of Gaza | Israel-Gaza war | The Guardian
And last but not least: Zelensky is coming to America to personally demand more American taxpayer money on Tuesday.
Tags
Who is online
584 visitors
Good morning.
Crossings at the southern border continue to break records:
And Joe Biden is facing an impeachment inquiry.... while his son is facing a subpoena... Another busy week ahead
it's funny when a defendant employs endless delay tactics and then his supporters alternate whining about the process taking too long, and not long enough...
Funny when Democrats and leftists refuse to grant basic rights to a political opponent.
The rule of law only applies when Democrats/leftists says it does.
The Supreme Court should have kicked the decision back to the lower courts to go through the normal process. The same as it would have done for anyone else.
Now we either get a kangaroo court trial; or Democrats/leftists rioting because the Supreme Court told Smith to fuck off.
They could catch Trump with a smoking gun in his hand and you would call it a kangaroo court when he was brought to justice.
After what the DOJ/FBI has done to him, nobody gets to say a word.
Switch Trump for Clinton or Biden and you would say the exact same thing. Ignoring all evidence- no matter how damning.
Either the law applies to everyone or no one.
Congrats Democrats/leftists the day is quickly coming when it will be no one. You (collectively) will be screaming the loudest when the time comes.
You know absolutely nothing about the case against Trump. You have demonstrated that in this forum time after time after time.
I know that it is bogus and coordinated just like the Russia hoax, the two faux impeachments, the faux Hillary investigation and a DOJ that should have recused itself from all things Biden and Trump.
In other words you know nothing about the evidence against Trump. Thank you.
In other words, I am nullifying malicious prosecutions. You're welcome.
You can't nullify 91 indictments over four jurisdictions!
Image if Biden claimed absolute Presidential immunity.
Nope, Trump will be a convicted felon by Nov 5th 2024...
Every time you answer me like that you are verifying that you know nothing about the evidence against him.
Why not? I'm with my brothers & sisters in the hood!
Image if Biden claimed absolute Presidential immunity.
I can see that coming, so yes, I can vividly imagine it.
Nope, Trump will be a convicted felon by Nov 5th 2024...
That certainly is the plan. Careful what you wish for
I am aware of it, I'm just disregarding it.
Why did Trump hold a rally on Jan 6th? Why did he tell his followers on twitter that "it will be wild " ?
Why was he on the phone to senators and congresspeople during the riot, asking them to help him stop the vote count, instead of on the phone with first responders and the military to try and bring the riot to an end?
Why did he tell Mike Pence , in his Jan 6th speech, that there was "still time" for Pence to do the right thing and follow the Eastman plan, which Trump had been told was illegal ?
Why did he tell Kevin McCarthy, who called him to try and get Trump to stop the riot, that the rioters cared more about the election being "stolen" than McCarthy did?
Why did trump tell the rioters that he loved them and they should "remember this day for the rest of your life" ?
Because he felt he got screwed and he wanted to say farewell to his supporters.
Why did he tell his followers on twitter that "it will be wild " ?
I have no idea. I do know he told them to protest PEACEFULLY.
Why was he on the phone to senators and congresspeople during the riot, asking them to help him stop the vote count, instead of on the phone with first responders and the military to try and bring the riot to an end?
He asked for the Gurad before the speech. The mayor of DC and the Speaker have the final say on Capitol security. Did you ask them?
Why did he tell Mike Pence , in his Jan 6th speech, that there was "still time" for Pence to do the right thing and follow the Eastman plan, which Trump had been told was illegal ?
Maybe for the same reason that e lectors around the country were harassed with a barrage of emails, phone calls and letters — and even death threats — in an effort to block Donald Trump from being voted in as president by the Electoral College in 2016.
Reminder: In 2016 Democrats Threatened and Harassed Members of Electoral College to Stop Trump (legalinsurrection.com)
[Deleted]
You are ignoring the evidence.
[Deleted]
And grift them at the same time, eh?
The only grifter is the guy who took money from China, weaponized the DOJ/FBI and let a good part of the world into the US.
The only grifter???
It is one thing to make grifter accusations about Biden. Proclaiming (in the same breath) that Trump is NOT a grifter (given all the solid evidence on Trump's wrongdoings) illustrates an extreme level of bias.
Presidents say farewell on the day they leave office or a day or two before, not on the same day Congress is voting in their successor. Trump made a speech on Jan 6th BECAUSE he had summoned a mob to Washington to attempt to stop or delay the count.
After a wild Oval Office meeting in mis December, where Trump was eventually told he could not enact martial law or seize voting machines, he sent out a tweet to his millions of followers asking them to come to DC on Jan 6, promising them "it will be wild". It is more than odd that you are unaware of this. His "plea" with them to be peaceful during his Jan 6 speech was little more than a perfunctory throwaway, half the final size of the mob had already gathered on the Capitol grounds.
There is NO official record that Trump asked for the Guard at any point during any of this. There is Donald Trump's word that he made the order.
At no point in 2016 was there a conspiracy among the losing candidate and the close associates of the candidate to subvert the election count and have Hillary Clinton declared president by fiat.
People who compare the minor brouha in 2016, which was almost non existent, with what happened in 2020 and on Jan 6 truly do not know what they are talking about. Of course, their ignorance is their bliss.
You are full of it John. Presidents can say goodby however they want whenever they want. Trump told those who came to DC to go in PEACE. Funny how you keep ignoring that.
We are going to ignore stuff as well.
Of course they can say goodbye however they want. The other 45 did it with some dignity though. Trump did it in hopes of "stopping the steal" aka The Big Lie.
I guess you are not aware of it, but Trump got thousands of people to come to Jan 6 by promising them, and I quote, "it will be wild". The fact that he then spent two seconds telling them to protest peacefully during his J6 speech is meaningless in the overall context.
You are in way over your head when you try to discuss these things.
As soon as you and others here are ready to admit that Trump said protest peacefully and later told them to go home in peace, we will be able to have a discussion. Otherwise, I am going to ban Trump from discussion in future articles.
I tell you the facts, and you come back with Fox News bs.
Yes he said "Protest peacefully" during his ellipse speech on J6. He also told them to "fight like hell" in another part of the speech. On the same stage , a little earlier, Giuilani told the same crowd that what was needed was "trial by combat". According to sworn testimony to the J6 committee, Trump was aware that some people wanted to bring weapons into his rally crowd. Trump approved of that because he assumed , probably correctly, that they would never hurt him. But the same people were going to go to the Capitol.
As far as him telling the rioters to go home peacefully, that was after the riot was in full bloom for a couple hours. He also told them that their cause was justified, saying that the election had been stolen from them and they should remember this day for the rest of their lives. Again, that was after Trump knew his supporters had committed violence at the Capitol.
Admit the truth.
I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard," Trump said in his speech.
Fact Check: Did Trump Say to 'Peacefully and Patriotically' March to the Capitol? (newsweek.com)
You focus on the few good words among a plethora of incitement and pretend that this erases all his emotive language and calls for action.
That is extreme cherry-picking and a pathetic argument.
Also, as a case in point, did you forget that in the middle of the insurrection , Trump threw Pence under the bus with a tweet? Real peaceful, calming, presidential behavior.
You know absolutely nothing about it either- just what TDS driver left wing talking heads spout.
Is Trump as a US citizen allowed due process or not? It is a simple damn question.
One that you repeatedly answer with "he's guilty" when there hasn't even been a damn trial yet. So you obviously don't believe in our legal system- just like Smith who is trying his best to circumvent it to get what he hopes is his preordained outcome in leftist land DC. Why is Smith in such a rush- could it be he is hoping to influence the 2024 elections?
It is called freedom of peaceful assembly- yet another right under Constitution you and the left don't understand.
Should we call every commercial advertising an event using "it will be wild" a call for sedition?
Sorry, that isn't against the law. No matter how you try to make it.
How many times do you need to be told. Trump is not responsible for DC security. That is Pelosi, McConnell (at the time he was still head of the Senate), and Bowser. Why don't you ask them whey there wasn't sufficient security to handle such a large gathering? Why don't you ask them they waited so damn long to call in the national guard? Why don't you ask them why they didn't do their damn jobs!
The Eastman plan failed didn't it? It wasn't carried out. So your point is moot. You still need to prove that Trump knew the Eastman plan was illegal.
Because McCarthy is fucking stupid as those that still think the president controls the security of DC. McCarthy should have been calling Pelosi, McConnell, and Bowser.
Because Trump is a showman, ego maniac, and loves hyperbole.
Smith needs better material than you are providing as evidence- otherwise it really will be a kangaroo court.
I focus on over 6 years of malicious biased practice by the DOJ, FBI and the House under Pelosi.
You and others are through with this un-American crusade. In my future articles Trump will be off topic.
Now you run to a different topic.
It is a dishonest and losing tactic to attempt to counter months of incendiary language with a mere few peaceful words.
Looks like emulating Joe Biden isn't working, then.
If Trump were to be found guilty in the DC case, would that keep him off the ballot? I thought that even if he were convicted and in prison, there was nothing that would legally keep him off the ballot. If it won't keep him off the ballot, then is the only reason to 'dirty' his name before the election? I do question that tactic as his name is already out there and most everybody already has their opinions on him.
This bogus "presidential immunity" issue was going to be taken to the Supreme Court anyway, eventually, by Trump as part of his stalling tactic. Smith is just moving it along. Are you in favor of Trump stalling?
He is interfering in an election. Whoever heard of bypassing two Court of appeals and going right to the Supreme Court.
Quite a few people:
right/ S
Anyone knowledgeable in the law.
It is extremely unusual.
...except for the Trump administration.
Trump officials aggressively bypass appeals process to get issues before conservative Supreme Court
No he isn't. The investigations started long before trump said he was running for president. That's on trump, not Smith.
They are dealing with Trump. You do not recognize that Trump's legal team is doing everything they can to delay his trial? Smith is dealing with their ploys.
Just amazing. I am confident you recognize that Trump is partly if not primarily running for PotUS as a method to deal with his legal issues. He is running so that people like you would argue that his indictments are just partisan acts and without legal merit.
Do you recognize that the Jan 6, GA and classified docs indictments are ALL with merit? That they are based on wrongdoing by Trump and that there is a real possibility that he will be found guilty FOR CAUSE?
I do believe that every thinking adult in America knows that if indicted, there is always a possibility of conviction.
Well, everyone who has the barest minimum of understanding how the justice system works.
I stated "possibility that he will be found guilty FOR CAUSE". The "FOR CAUSE" prepositional phrase was the point.
You quote my questions but, of course, do not answer them. Do you think the Jan 6, GA, and documents indictments are without legal merit ... that Trump did nothing wrong?
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
Let's not and say you did.
Jack Smith knows Trump is a serial staller. You have a lot of indignities over things like this. Other people's potential indignation is reserved for the chance that Trump will win the election and order the DOJ to end the prosecutions against him, which would in essence render all Smith's work a waste of time. He doesnt want the thousands of hours he and his team have spent on prosecuting a traitor to go to waste just because Donald Trump thinks he is above the law.
Vic, are presidents immune to criminal prosecution for acts they commit while in office? If so, why did Gerald Ford pardon Nixon? If Trump cannot be prosecuted he will soon start telling us the Eastman memo was "perfect" and it was his prerogative to sit with his thumb up his ass while the Capitol was under siege.
So, expecting the same basic appeals process as anyone else is being a "serial staller".
You are one to talk. You found Trump guilty a long time ago. Now you don't even want to grant him basic rights that are guaranteed under the law.
So your two tier justice system gets shut down. I am sure Smith, Garland, Wray, Brandon, and a host of others are shitting bricks and want nothing more than Trump to be removed from the ballot by any means necessary. They would gladly take any Establishment Republican that will sweep what they have done under the rug over Trump.
Smith hasn't spent thousands of hours on anything. He has violated numerous laws by forcing Trump's legal team to testify; withholding evidence from defense; and conducting a grand jury outside of it's jurisdiction (DC instead of Florida). He has brought charges in record time- literally overcharging- something he has been very guilty of in the past.
Ask Brandon, Weiss, and Garland.
He shouldn't have, next question.
If the Clintons and Bidens can't be prosecuted neither can Trump. Who was in charge of DC security again? It wasn't Trump. Ask the Queen Bitch Pelosi, Bowser, and the Turtle what happened- because the Jan 6th committee sure as hell didn't. As more tapes get released; and more information comes out; the Democrat/leftist narrative on Jan 6th turns to shit. It was a riot; laws were broken; the rioters are paying the price (in many cases over and above what they actually did); but the three in charge didn't do their damn jobs when it comes to security. The DC police/FBI did everything in their power to provoke the riot.
Yeah, I read and watched the evidence against him. What was I thinking ?
I can say, with almost no fear of contradiction, that the great majority of MAGA's dont have the slightest idea of what the evidence is against Trump. He , of course, is happy to keep them in that condition.
Donald Trump is the most unfit person to ever hold the office of the presidency, or seek it. Excuse me for thinking that matters for something.
Complete, irrelevant nonsense.
I can say, without almost no fear of contradiction that the fucking democrats will do anything and have done everything to defeat Donald Trump.
Donald Trump is the most unfit person to ever hold the office of the presidency, or seek it.
The leftist tool Joe Biden has destroyed the country. End of story.
Donald Trump has four prosecutions pending against him, and thats not counting the E Jean Carroll case, which Trump lost, and the hush money case (Stormy Daniels) in NYC. So, in the last couple years he has been the focus of SIX legal procedures, all of which have some level of gravity.
Yet according to you, he is only a picked on soul who did nothing wrong but is being persecuted by the left. Your "argument" is ludicrous.
All brought by people with the "GET TRUMP" mindset.
Don't you get it John: HIS SUPPORT IS GROWING!
Heard this morning he has a 50 point lead over the rest of the GOP candidates.
I read a lot , just about every day. Articles that actually defend Trump on the facts are few and far between. All his defenders either make technical arguments or wail that Trump is being persecuted. Virtually none of them claim Trump is innocent in the sense that he did not do the things he is accused of. They want a get out of jail free card for him because - MAGA.
And he is beating Joe Biden in the key swing states. That is no longer an outlier, poll after poll has Trump beating "Genocide Joe" in the important swing states.
You see John, the DOJ can't do a lot of dirty things and then all of sudden say "hey, did Trump commit a crime?"
They can't be dishonest on everything and then say look at just this case.
I'm with the O.J. Simpson jury: I am going to nullify all the evidence!
The OJ Simpson jury ended up being almost universally ridiculed. The same fate awaits you.
Not by our lefties here. When I did a little article on it, one of them told me that not all the jurors admitted to voting to disregard the evidence. That individual currently has an article lamenting the Texas abortion law that Texans voted on.
And what's funny is they have spent 7 years trying to do that and have failed at every attempt.
Completely unhinged garbage
We are about to find out, aren't we?
If so, why did Gerald Ford pardon Nixon?
When he assumed office on August 9, 1974, Ford, referring to the Watergate scandal, announced that America’s “long national nightmare” was over. There were no historical or legal precedents to guide Ford in the matter of Nixon’s pending indictment, but after much thought, he decided to give Nixon a full pardon for all offenses against the United States in order to put the tragic and disruptive scandal behind all concerned. Ford justified this decision by claiming that a long, drawn-out trial would only have further polarized the public. Ford’s decision to pardon Nixon was condemned by many and is thought to have contributed to Ford’s failure to win the presidential election of 1976.
President Ford explains his pardon of Nixon to Congress | October 17, 1974 | HISTORY
In other words, unlike today's modern left, those who cared about America sought to end division.
If Trump cannot be prosecuted
If Trump cannot be prosecuted the voters will get to decide who they want for President. Something the deep state has worked so hard at avoiding. It is called democracy.
You actually believe that Trump pardoning himself or ordering the DOJ to stop prosecuting him would end division? Lol x 1000.
Thats about as funny as Vivek Ramaswamy saying he would unite the country behind him.
Nothing can stop the division the left has created in this country. That ideology must be destroyed.
LOL, lotsa luck with that army of geriatric maga volunteers ...
Luck won't be needed in every case.
Two relevant quotations:
"No man is above the law"
"The quote "No man is above the law" is attributed to Theodore Roosevelt 1 2 3 . It appears in his Third Annual Message to Congress on December 7, 1903 1 . The quote also appears in the U.S. Supreme Court case Mississippi v. Johnson (1867) 1 . The quote means that everyone is subject to the law, regardless of their status or position in society 1"
"Justice delayed is justice denied"
Nice maxims that belong to an earlier time. Those who languished in prison after Jan 6th would be amused by the latter.
Justice, as we knew it, no longer exists in America.
And still are. My thoughts exactly when I read it.
pffft, some of those insurrectionists are lucky they're still breathing...
From a peaceful protest?
Several hundred Harvard faculty members signed a petition in support of school President Claudine Gay amid calls for her resignation over comments about Jewish genocide at a House hearing last week.
The two-sentence petition toward Harvard Corporation, a committee with the authority to fire Gay, advocated for free inquiry on campus and said political influences should not lead to Gay’s ouster and hurt academic freedom.
The letter has been signed by more than 630 faculty, with one organizer telling The Hill that more have reached out Monday morning asking how to add their name.
Several hundred faculty members voice support for Harvard president | The Hill
Good grief, how big is the Harvard faculty?
So Harvard has approx 19,000 employees including administration, professors & teachers, staff, custodians, etc. With an average salary of $95,114 the annual salary output is very large. As an example, Arizona State University (74,800 students compared to 23,000 at Harvard) has a staff of 18,500 with an average salary of $45,700 is much less than the salary at Harvard. Comprisable number of staff between the two yet Harvard only teaches less than a third of the students at ASU.
And as that link states, Harvard was paying a salary total of $242 million just to the people who manage the endowment.
Amazing.
I think if the government started taxing their endowment, we just bring them back to planet earth.
Thank you for the info.
It's nice to know that the folks who majored in DEI, Gender Studies, or any of the alphabet-promoting groups will have some good paying jobs to go to.
Where else can they get hired?
All three of these incompetents are diversity hires.
Question of the day:
What shall we do with malicious political prosecutors?
Whatever it is, double it for Rudy.
What a laughingstock Rudy is along with anyone defending that monumental turd, the former 'president'.
I hope those suing Rudy take him for all he has left. They're suing the turd for millions.
Disbar them so they never can show their faces in court as either a judge or lawyer.
Then sue them into oblivion.
That would have been the norm only 20 years ago.
In his first act, newly sworn President of Argentina, Javier Milei, signs an executive order reducing the Argentine government from 21 Departments to 9.
Gotta like a guy who trashes existing national laws so as to hire his sister as General Secretary of the Presidency. Exactly what is it you hanker after, right wing Peronism or left wing Peronism?
What national laws are your referring to?
The left wing has pretty much destroyed Argentina
The law against hiring a family member to run a government department.
What tyrannies will Generalissimo Trump commit in his "First Day"?
Probably none that left-wingers have dreamt up.
We know why. And there it is:
Now that the ballyhooed GoP hopefuls are shrivelling one by one, the 'faithful' return to their faker-than-thou maker in droves ... a.k.a. a murmuration of dullards.
The party of the left is fracturing.
... as evidenced by what has happened on the house side of congress during the past year.
Good point.
I would also mention that the GOP is going to nominate a traitor.
trump's election denying cult of wackos rule the party now...
Only because Garland/DOJ/Wray/FBI are protecting Brandon so that he is not slapped with the same label.
He is President- protected by the Democrats in the House and Senate.
Brandon is the Democrat nominee. So stow your faux outrage.
Comments that still (emotionally and childishly) call Biden 'Brandon' are not going to be taken seriously.
According to many of the comments I read on this video, US citizens seem more concerned about feeding and housing our citizens this Christmas instead of giving Zelensky more money. Are they being selfish by demanding the US taxpayer money is used to benefit our citizens who need food and shelter this winter?
Amazing the damage one man (Putin) can bring to the entire planet.
Plenty of nations giving up wealth and resources to help Ukraine fight off this strategic threat to democracy.
.
Amazing how much stupidity there is giving so much aid to a corrupt country; and offers nothing of any value to the US. Other than money flowing to politicians, their family members, and top campaign contributors.
Why leftist care more about Ukraine's borders than our own is beyond me.
I suspect most everyone is a 'leftist' to you.
One should care about this because it is part of a long-term strategic concern. One needs to look more than a year in the future.
“One needs to look more than a year in the future.”
At best…and at least stop the inanity of looking a decade, a generation, or half a century into the past for answers that have demonstrably failed and do not take into consideration the rapidly changing realities of the world we live in today.
And this administration surely isn't doing that. Every few months Zelenski holds out his hand and gives the puppy dog eyes for free shit and the dipshit in the WH gladly pays out. That's not looking toward the future.
Zelenski has become a parasite leeching off the US.
The strategic consideration is the long-term consequences of allowing a rogue like Putin to simply invade neighboring sovereign nations. The civilized world (the USA and allies) are the only counter.
You mean like the pre-Biden administration? Seems they had a handle on the long-term strategic considerations. I wonder what changed.
And it seems the civilized world is OK with supplying just enough to watch Ukraine bleed out. Ukraine lasting as long as they have has become an embarrassment to Biden. NATO won't really do anything substantial until Putsky attacks a NATO nation and who knows if they will even then.
With the speed things change in the World how many years in the future should we be looking at. It seems every time there is a plan the plan has to change. It seems they are talking about a need to change the UN charter.
I was talking strategically. Strategically the civilized world needs to thwart aggressors like Putin.
Plans will adjust because reality is constantly changing. The strategy of not allowing the Putins of the planet to expand their domains aggressively will remain constant (at least one hopes so).
Do you think the worlds strategy is working so far?
The strategy I described is correct. Giving in to the likes of Putin is a bad strategy.
Yes, of course the strategy is working. It is painful and expensive, but it is working. Putin has been forced to give up plenty of resources (including young lives), credibility, etc. to make almost no progress. If he had been allowed to freely waltz in and take over Ukraine, do you think that would encourage or discourage him from exploiting his newfound Ukrainian resource to continue his rebuilding of the USSR?
While I agree he needs to be stopped I don't agree with the strategy. IMO I think countries bought into the belief that Putin would overtake Ukraine in two weeks or a month and gave Ukraine just enough to say they tried to do something about it. I think NATO was willing to let Putin have Ukraine and try to say the line is any NATO country. We always have the specter of Nukes if Putin loses and it seems now we will be talking about Ukraine giving some land which he can claim victory to his people. I have to question if we should not have given all the support Ukraine needed to win up front and not have it drag out two years.
The strategy I noted is to work together to resist Putin.
You are talking more about tactics. Hard to say if it would have been better to (essentially) go to war with Russia through proxy upfront rather than string it out. Others have suggested that we should have just let Russia have a little territory and negotiate a peace agreement. There are plenty of tactics one could consider across this spectrum. That is the trouble with second-guessing, we cannot see the effects of the alternative any better than we could have seen the future effects of the chosen approach. One can always imagine that an alternative approach would be net better since the unforeseen conditions are assumed to not exist.
The only strategy, however, that makes sense to me is to thwart conquests by rogue leaders like Putin through collective (multinational) accords.
Whether the US supports Ukraine or not will not have any real effects on any American Christmases this year. Letting Putin win would have lasting negative consequences for all Americans for the long run...
...which is exactly what shit-for-brains right wingers want. Don't believe it? Just read some of the right wing hate America crowd's comments on this pathetic article.
Just our national debt and inflation.
Inflation doesn't affect any American.
How Brandon of you!
There is no doubt we support Ukraine.
And just as soon as Biden gets serious about the border crisis, and can convince Democrats that something must change there, then Ukraine will get the funding.
Look like Joe needs to get to work.
Besides being false, the comment is ignorant.
Your comment is totally fraudulent and extremely ignorant.
[removed]
Not by a long shot. US Taxpayer money should be spent / used for US Taxpayers. It is abhorrent that US citizens are neglected while their money is sent overseas.
They aren't selfish in the least. US taxpayer money should be spent on US citizens FIRST. Then and only then, if there is anything left over, it can be sent overseas.
As I read through the comments here, which I feel is a reflection of the growing political divide, I'm starting to wonder when the red vs blue civil war is going to start. It's bad enough when restaurants turn away customers because they're from the "wrong" political party and family celebrations require that politics not be discussed - that's just a start. Anyway, I'll be turning on the news every morning expecting the worst.
It doesn't help when you have politicians telling people to get in the face of people and tell them they are not welcome here.
Sorry, Jeremy, but I'm unable to access YouTube, and it's now 10:30 p.m. where I am so I'm turning off my computer for the night. You have a good day.
My apologize, you have mentioned that in the past.
Accepted with thanks.
This could really throw a wrench in the left's, Democrat's and Smith's "Get Trump at all Costs" prosecution.
Do you think the Jan 6 indictment is without merit?
And what in my comment even remotely makes you think of that?
same old stuff.
Because you deem it a 'Get Trump at all Costs' move.
Do you think the Jan 6 indictment is without merit?
Of course
So nothing made you think that. Have a good night.
You of course dodge the question because you cannot defend your claim that the indictment is simply to get Trump and not due to the charges having merit.
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
It is entirely possible that both things can be true at the same time.
Do you feel it is impossible ?
[Deleted]
Not in some peoples minds. It's either on or the other. Absolutely NO middle ground.
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
One may dodge the question because they cannot defend their claim, right?
That is one possibility, I give it about a 5% chance. A more likely scenario is they don't want to waste their time. I have a liberal brother in law. Great guy but he is so stuck in his beliefs and twisted logic I decided along time ago that talking to him about anything of substance (especially politics) was just a waste of time. We have a truce of sorts and stay away from politics. Except when I bought a trump hat for 5 dollars and sent him a picture of me wearing it and asked him if he wanted me to buy him one. His response was he felt honored I spent 5 dollars just to tweak him and asked me if I wanted to borrow Hillary's Why she lost book.
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
[removed]
Welcome to America where Trump's SCOTUS could decide that the Constitution that permits Freedom of Speech and Expression allows rioters to smash the windows and doors of the Capitol Building and allow rioters to run through the halls of Congress and interrupt the proceedings of government and break into the offices of the Congress members and steal from them. I watched it happen on TV and I don't think the videos were edited. Am I ever glad I'll never step back into that country again.
Remember the good old days when we used to speculate on Trump as POTUS pardoning himself and using his office to end all criminal investigations against him? Lol. There is no speculation anymore, it’s 100% certain. Any whiny little sycophantic bitch who says there should be no hurry to trial is fully aware of this reality.