ewsieg

Agreed. I always planned on voting for Haley, but now I'm thinking of voting for Biden because of this.

So the only condition on that money is a directive pointing out what we could already do. Quite some constraints there.

John Sununu is the one I've been waiting for. He's still on his kick that Trump won't be the nominee, thus allowing him to say he'll support the GOP nominee, but isn't supporting Trump.

I certainly wish Hamas would be taking the path of some of those you noted. I also wish Netanyahu was taking the path of those same people as well. There are only several possibilities 1) You have peace between both, but that would mean you can't have Hamas or Netanyahu 2) You have peace because there are no Palestinians left. 3) You don't have peace. I'm not trying to compare Hamas to Netanyahu, but screw Netanyahu too. What conditions? Netanyahu has been publicly flipping Biden off for months and saying he doesn't care what we say. I get that our native language is English, but even Google translate can be used to easily see what Netanyahu is saying within his country. I will argue with every Palestinian sympathizer about how the vast majority of the problems have been caused by Palestinians, but at this point going forward, you can't claim you want peace in that region and continue to support Netanyahu.

Drudge has been pushing that for awhile now. I know many on the left hated the 'free campaign ads' of him doing his stump speech last time around, but there definitely is a decline with him as well. I don't see how he can run on Biden being too old and then speak gibberish and independents will just go along with it and vote for him anyway.

Unrelated to above, I feel like I'm moving towards a lot of you folks in regards to how I handle Trump in my head. I find myself not posting as much as frankly, even if I disagree with something, I don't care enough to address it. Like did Fani Willis do something corrupt and illegal - I mean, obviously, but who really cares right now. Let's get back to the Trump case, GA can deal with her after, if at all, I don't care. Or Ukraine, it's a disaster and the Ukrainian forces aren't getting enough artillery or other bull**** lines we're hearing in MSM because we haven't given them more money is bull****, but again, i'm apathetic now. Give them some more, let them deplete Russia some more. Trump truly is making me apathetic to everything. I feel like even if we win (by not electing Trump next term), the damage is still too much on the global stage....ugh, just hate this/him.

Well, to a point. Some of the poorest of the poor, both urban and rural, don't have easy access to another store in the area/region. My mother in law has a lake house in Farwell, about 25 minutes north of Mt. Pleasant. We try and bring all of our food whenever we go because the local mom and pop stores in Clare or the Dollar Generals aren't cheap. Look at Detroit and how many folks get food out of gas stations. But yeah, if I see that on Facebook, it's probably my mom who goes to a specific meat market for her meat, gets most of her stuff at Aldi, and hits Meijer for a few items she consistently finds cheaper there.

For the Trump supporters now, you're absolutely correct. He's getting 30% of the vote regardless. Each party had about 10 % that doesn't pay attention but still usually votes for that party. I hope to pull as many of those folks away from Trump as possible.

I'm not sure either, but it does worry me a bit that this Trump Org case and now the Bragg case looks like it's next.... I just think it'll be easy for Trump supporters to ignore it with simple but legitimate arguments like "of course he'll lose a fraud case when no one has been defrauded in a NYC court" and "really, Stormy Daniels still?" My concern is by the time GA comes around some on the fence GOP'ers might just ignore it. Hope not, but even as a never Trumper that thinks he's crooked as hell, I see that 300m+ fine and think it's a bit crazy.

Maybe Trump will become a pastor and find ways to hide money like Kwame. Without reading that article due to some time constraints, I suspect the E Jean Carrol and Trump org cases are different. (personal vs corporate responsibility) I would expect NY would be able to garnish profit from Trump org if they had to. Plus they put a court appointed monitor to oversee all financial transactions. I'm not sleeping on the idea that Trump and his family will try and stall or find a way to hide money away from the monitor, but I just don't think they'll be successful.

I didn't ask you to do anything. I am not arguing about the numbers at all. My point that I choose your post as a catalyst was because you claim that as a military organization they are only expected to report military deaths. I'm fine with that. But wanted to point out there are high level members of Netanyahu's government that claims there are no civilians, it's only Hamas fighters and Hamas supporters. I see no reason why Netanyahu can't give the world an answer on if that means he's planning on ridding all Palestinians/Hamas from Gaza. If that answer is yes, then I do have an issue with the numbers, because he should be including the 'Hamas supporters' aka civilians, in those numbers. If so, he should also be informed the US has stopped all aid to Israel.

That is part of the problem here. The objective we hear is to completely rid out Hamas. History should point out how unrealistic that is. I mean 20 years of war and maybe Hamas will be gone and there will be a new name to deal with so I guess you got that. The bigger issue with the objective is who defines Hamas. Many folks in Netanyahu's part have publicly said Palestinians voted in Hamas, hence they are all Hamas. If you don't really care about civilian casualties because you feel they are kind of just like Hamas, then report their deaths as well. You can't have it both ways.

There is nothing illegal with the GOP spending all their cash on the POTUS election. There is part of me that wants to see it, to drain the rest of the GOP and keep them completely high and dry after Trump dies. But there is part of me that doesn't want Trump have any more cash/ability to run his own campaign.

I suspect the thought was let's hide him far away. Hope folks ignore him and if so, he's free to rot forever. If folks keep bringing him up, then we just bite the bullet and deal with the fallout and hope it blows over quick.

Disappointing, but probably the correct thing to say at this time.

Damned if you don't, damned if you do. Ukraine was pissed that Starlink wasn't allowing it's use in occupied Ukraine. They apparently open it up and now it's painted like it's Starlink's fault because Russia has taken advantage of it.

I'm disappointed in a lot more folks than just Kraft, but if they are willing to come out now against Trump, i'll gladly accept them for this fight. After Trump loses, then kick him back out.

In Trumps view, you're probably right, but if the plan is to try and get Trump to win, I'd think the very last thing you'd want to bring up is age and mental ability and get people thinking about that as he's not going to fair too well either.

So you're saying he should have left that out, which means if he was ethical and not a MAGA he would have simply said "President Biden illegally possessed and shared classified information with an unauthorized source, no charges can be filed as he's a sitting president, the end."

If Hur really is an ultra MAGA, and he believes Biden broke the law, why wouldn't he just recommend charges and force Garland to cover it up, take the political heat that he will not follow through on the recommendation, or say you think he should be charged (but can't as a sitting president)? Instead he's not going to charge him, which allows all of his followers to say he's exonerated and for independents it allows the reinforcement that you can choose between a man with multiple indictments against him or zero. Instead, Hur's big mastermind plot it to say he doesn't recommend charges and goes further saying that would hold up even if he was allowed to charge him (sitting president), but figures a "slanderous" line like 'sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory' will be all that is needed to destroy his presidency?

You initially claimed that Hur should STFU. Once presented with evidence that it was released at the direction of the DOJ it switched to "well, I meant how it was presented by Hur was wrong". You can argue the wording all you want, but giving the reasons not to recommend indicting someone, after showing that you know they broke the law, is absolutely a requirement by a prosecutor in this type of report.

In response to everyone else that I argued were defense of Biden, none of you are wrong, well, except Pfife of course. Trump did do it worse on the documents, Trump is a worse human being, and a much worse president than Biden. But I do want standards to apply to everyone. If Trump having classified documents risked clandestine sources and put lives at risk, why not speak about Biden in the same light and with the same gravity of the situation?

I said that there is no evidence that he has sold these documents. Due to the fact he's a horrible boss, people flip on him all the time and thus why we know so many unethical and illegal things he does. Yet there have been no rumors that he's ever sold them, simply that if he could, he would. What we also know is he likes to keep "trophies" from what he thinks shows him in good light as well. As for Biden, it's clear he wanted these documents to help him craft how he was going to defend his Afghanistan position in a book he was looking to sell. In this lone variable, all I'm saying is there appear to be facts that Biden did something that most of you accuse Trump of doing without facts.

This thread has been defending him and is so quick to compare to Trump in order compare it against something worse. Several seem to believe it's a complete exoneration. The report indicates that he knowingly had classified information outside of a secure location and didn't turn it in until someone realized they needed to come clean and turn it in after he was president again. That is illegal. Based on this forum, it potentially put American lives at risk, both here and abroad. If you notice, it looks like the weekend democratic talking heads are looking to spin it that he wanted to carefully and correctly document his *correct* stance on Afghanistan so it would be properly documented. Not that he wanted to make money on a book. Some defenders below..... .....Call the report into question .....Redirect to Trump ....well he had a lot going on that day This may be a legitimate defense, that said I don't have any problem with any republican that feels he blames things on this too much. I don't remember him having trouble talking with he was VP and he does have a history of lying about his past (he was at ground zero, he was at that philly synogue the day of the shooting, he got arrested trying to meet Nelson Mandela, he graduated top half of his class (what a weird flex). All that said, a stutter can get worse with age. ....claim that reports aren't supposed to be public without any knowledge on the subject in order to throw the evidence out of the case. ....again....but Trump ....again...but Trump

Step 1 - Deflection