The 118th Republican House
As expected, the Republicans came up empty handed in their first telecast of their faux impeachment inquiry.
The forensic accountant said there is no there, there to warrant articles of impeachment. Republicans have yet to link any money Hunter Biden (probably legitimately) received from many others to Joe Biden.
Their constitutional expert also said there is no evidence to impeach Joe Biden on. Unlike the accountant, he did say he thought there were grounds to open the inquiry - a position a lot of Republicans disagree with.
I am not sure why the Biden-hating former DOJ person was even there.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/28/politics … index.htmlCan somebody tell me why Republicans insist on telling whoppers? Not just the little white lies Biden is guilty of, but BIG lies on the order of what Trump routinely tells?
On a similar note, can someone tell me why the Trump supporters on this site believe those lies?
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/202 … pt-vpx.cnnRep. Matt Gaetz, who was investigated for sex with a minor by DOJ, is, in some Republican minds, solely responsible for the upcoming gov't shutdown. While the DOJ, for whatever reason, chose not to prosecute Gaetz, the House Ethics Committee are as constrained. The committee reopened their investigation in July to "look into allegations that Gaetz violated sex trafficking laws, shared inappropriate images or videos on the House floor, converted campaign funds to personal use and accepted a bribe, among other claims."
Some say he is going to run for governor in Florida. Based on how MAGA loves Trump's sexual proclivities, he ought to be a shoe-in among Florida Republicans.
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ … index.htmlAnother sign of MAGA good governance - NOT. Worse, they are proud of it!!
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/30/politics … own-latestMcCarty finds his backbone!!!
Uncharacteristically, he took a bullet for the nation. Breaking his own rule about not putting anything on the floor until five days have past for review, he jammed a bill that provides a 45-day extension of current funding with only one rider, money for disaster aid. Gone was the MAGA's prized border laws. Gone was the Democrats aid to Ukraine.
It passed 335 - 91 (90 were MAGA and 1 suspected progressive).
What happens next? It passes the Senate and is sent to Biden AND McCarthy loses his job. Well, at least Gaetz and his cronies are going to probably try. One has to wonder if McCarty cut a deal with the Dems to save his job. It would make sense for Dems to do that to prevent even someone worse being picked or have the House shut down as the Republicans try to find someone else.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/30/politics … own-latestYes, McCarthy caved by actually believing that he could not succeed short of compromise with the Democrats. The goof balls on the far right will try to threaten McCarthy's gavel, but who is going to replace him? Who would want the job?
In the face of the rightwing executioners ,he can say that he just had 1 life to give for his country.
Isn't it pathetic and sad that the ONLY reason we aren't in a gov't shutdown right now is what it would do to Conservatives? This proves they only care about themselves and not the America.
[i]Republican argued, the worse conservatives’ options will be.
Then, one by one, vulnerable New York Republicans – Reps. Mike Lawler, Marc Molinaro and Nick LaLota – spoke in support of a short-term funding bill, warning of the political blowback of a shutdown and calling on their colleagues to keep the government open.[/b]
What is the word some people here use? Oh yes, despicable
https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/01/politics … index.htmlWell MAGA voted and got what it wanted - a dysfunctional government. Thank you so much MAGA.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/02/politics … index.htmlRepublicans continue their persecution of Hunter Biden solely because he is President Biden's son and for no other reason! He is now facing charges for which federal prosecutors refuse to bring against anybody else given the same set of circumstances.
Nobody, including Hunter, is saying that Hunter didn't do the things they are charging him for. But can someone tell me why the Republicans are so insistent on singling out this person from all other average Joes not named Biden who do the same thing and pay back their taxes and give up their gun?
It is sick, if you ask me.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/07/politics … index.html"Republicans continue their persecution of Hunter Biden solely because he is President Biden's son and for no other reason! He is now facing charges for which federal prosecutors refuse to bring against anybody else given the same set of circumstances." So let's have a quick look at stats for 2022 ---
"Of the 1,388 tax crimes investigated, 789 were referred for prosecution, and 699 people were sentenced as a result. This area of investigation includes employment fraud like payroll tax issues, abusive tax schemes, refund fraud, and general tax fraud" https://www.fedortax.com/blog/just-out- … x%20fraud.
"WASHINGTON — In fiscal year 2022, IRS Criminal Investigation initiated more than 2,550 criminal investigations, identified over $31 billion from tax and financial crimes, and obtained a 90.6% conviction rate on cases accepted for prosecution.Nov 3, 2022"
Maybe they indicted him due to ---- The new charges filed Thursday — three felonies and six misdemeanors — are in addition to federal firearms charges in Delaware alleging Hunter Biden broke laws against drug users having guns in 2018. They come after the implosion of a plea deal over the summer that would have spared him jail time, putting the case on track to a possible trial as his father campaigns for reelection.
Hunter Biden “spent millions of dollars on an extravagant lifestyle rather RATHER THAN PAYING HIS TAX BILLS ” special counsel David Weiss said in a statement. The charges are centered on at least $1.4 MILLION in taxes Hunter Biden OWED during between 2016 and 2019.
If convicted, Hunter Biden, 53, could a maximum of 17 years in prison. The special counsel probe remains open, Weiss said.
Maybe they charged him due to the amount he attempted not to pay.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67656575
"They say the president's son "individually received more than $7 million in total gross income" between 2016 and 2020, but "willfully failed to pay his 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 taxes on time, despite having access to funds to pay some or all of these taxes". Prosecutors note that he "had sufficient funds available… to pay some or all of his outstanding taxes when they were due", but chose not to do so.
Important to note -- Hunter Biden eventually paid all his taxes and fines back in 2020 - with the help of a loan from his personal attorney.
Would you feel differently if it were one of Trump's children being charged with tax evasion and lying on a gun form?Someone has to before the great dance begins to create a frenzy in the minds of some. I mean I think facts in this case facts need to be front and center.
I mean media are spinning if his name was not Biden he would not have been indicted. The IRS has a good record of going after tax crimes, and a high percentage are prosecuted, and go to prison.I agree, facts should be out front. One fact you can present is what is the rate of IRS Criminal prosecutions of people who paid back their taxes? It isn't helpful, I don't think, to just say the IRS prosecutes tax crimes. Isn't leaving that statement without context highly prejudicial? I think it is.
Not if it were the same set of circumstances I wouldn't.
Can you tell me how many of those 789 were people, like Hunter is, and not companies or paid their taxes back, like Hunter did? It helps to compare apples to apples. Otherwise, presenting such statistics is misleading and inflammatory, wouldn't you think?
What Hunter spent his money on is neither here nor there. Everyone knows that this is reported just to inflame and prejudice; it has ZERO to do with whether he paid his taxes on time.
We all know he did not which makes what he spent the money on instead superfluous and meaningless. We all ALSO know Hunter ended up paying the taxes plus penalties plus interest back.
And what difference is it, other than to bias the discussion, where Hunter got his money from to repay the loan. Was there something illegal in getting the money from his attorney?
Hunter Biden is being investigated because there is mounting evidence that he is guilty of illegal & unethical behavior.
Plus, like all of Trump's co-defendants, it gives them an angle to flip him if they actually had any substantial proof against his father. An angle I see failing on multiple fronts, including a lack of that proof.
Do you notice the hypocrisy? "Mounting Evidence" only applies to Hunter but not to Trump.
Hunter Biden is being investigated ONLY because his last name is Biden. It is very, very rare Federal prosecutors indict regular people like you or I for the gun crimes Biden was willing to plea guilty to.
Likewise, Federal prosecutors vary rarely bring Criminal charges against people like you are I who didn't pay their taxes and finally did, like Biden did. They rarely even bring civil charges if the taxes are paid with penalties and interest.
So, if Federal prosecutors rarely do that to normal people, then why are they doing it to Hunter Biden? Oh yeah, because they hate his father.
It looks like Putin's strategy is working to defeat Ukraine; he knew Republicans didn't have the will to protect democracy (he saw they are trying to kill it in America, after all). So now Putin and Russia have joined forces to bring Ukraine down and enslave it to Russia.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/12/politics … index.htmlThere is nothing Democratic about Ukraine.
Elections have been suspended, Zelensky is a warmongering dictator sending his people to be slaughtered while he embezzles hundreds of millions of American tax dollars sent to "aid" Ukraine.
There was never a chance that Ukraine was going to win a war against Russia, it was arrogance, hubris, greed, and corruption that had the Biden Administration pursue this effort.
In order to avoid this war the only thing America had to do is show Russia some respect and honor the Minsk Agreement that the UN signed off on.
Instead Biden wanted to give Russia and Putin the big FU... not only were they going to pis on the Minsk Agreement, they were willing to escalate into all out war to take Crimea from Russia... 8 years AFTER it became part of the Russian Republic of its own free will... without a shot fired... after a vote that showed the Russian speaking, Russian society of Crimea wanted to be part of Russia.
The Ukraine war is an excellent example of how corrupt and unfit the Biden Administration is. Unfortunately it is but one of many examples.
Half a million Ukrainians dead and counting... now Zelensky may be hoping Biden will create some "event" that requires America to enter the war. Total... complete... incompetence and insanity.That is your and Putin's opinion. Ukrainians think otherwise.
Siding with Russia over one's own government is something we have all come to expect from those in the Trump cult.
Yes we should support an effort to bring war against Russia, in the guise of helping defend Democracy, sending hundreds of billions to Ukraine.
Even as we give hundreds of billions to Iran so they can fund Hezbollah and Hamas and help Russia against Ukraine.
Its very un-American to bring up facts that show how completely ignorant these efforts are, how close they are bringing us to WWIII.Ukraine was a completely avoidable war.
Who's telling the truth on the Ukraine conflict?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX3vKcAayk0
Guests:
Lada Roslycky - Founder, Black Trident Defense and Security Consulting Group.
Richard Sakwa - Professor of Russian and European Politics, University of Kent.
Peter Zalmayev - Executive Director, Eurasia Democracy Initiative.
This is an excellent discussion of the unfolding situation days before the Russians invaded Ukraine, it is key to understanding how it escalated, if you'll notice they will discuss and confirm that Ukraine had increased shelling of the Donbas break-away regions and that also the emphasis was on Ukraine to act on the Minsk Agreement.
If Ukraine had met out its obligations in the Minsk Agreement not only would there have been peace, rather than escalation, but the sanctions on Russia were supposed to ease.
If Russia had really wanted war, if Russia had really wanted to invade Ukraine and into Europe, why did they complete Nordstream 1 & 2?
Why did they not gear up their industrial base to churn out ammo and weapons long before the invasion began?
They did these things because they thought they could reason with and find common ground, mutual respect, with the West... it is the West, specifically the Biden Administration that wanted no part of that, they wanted war, and they got it.
The only thing the Biden Administration didn't count on, was Russia standing up for itself and not caving to its machinations like so many other nations in recent decades have done.
The Biden Administration has pitted a growing portion of the world Against America, and with every week that passes, it seems more nations are aligning against us, rather than with us.I agree in regard that the war was avoidable. If we had a president that showed the strength of the US. With crippling sanctions. Instead very lightweight sanctions were brought against Russia --- I mean they have made cash from selling oil to heat the EU nations... Go figure. Is this a way to fight a war?
The EU and the Biden administration did not think Russia would cave, and Zelinski never wanted peace talks or to have anything to do with the Minsk Agreement, which could have led to peace.
I think we will see the EU start cutting funding, many EU nations are kicking their feet, and have been for many months. The EU nations could be starting to see a no-win situation.
https://www.voanews.com/a/eu-expresses- … 50682.html
I wonder what Americans would feel about the US footing the entire bill for the war. Biden is on very thin ice regarding Americans who are pleased with supporting wars, due to all the growing problems we are seeing here in America.We are just over 60 years removed from one of the greatest Presidents, and perhaps the last true President we had, that was not beholden to 'the Establishment'.
Of course, he fought the establishment, fired two CIA Directors if my memory serves me correctly and worked diligently to make the world a better place.
A good look back to 60 years ago, the brilliance of that man, stands in stark contrast to the President we have today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wqm9Yl1gGEY
We have gone from having a President that inspired other leaders around the world and found a way to peace... to what we have today, a President that inspires no one and seems to find a way to war when the road to peace is right in front of him.I feel in the late 60s we saw the first sprouts of what has become a dangerous root today. It would seem Americans have become so complacent that many can be sold just about anything.
Yes, the road to peace was there, and now we have Zelinski admitting he wants no peace talks. It would seem he does not understand when the US becomes weary of giving aid, we have a long history of just turning away, pulling out, and letting the pieces fall.
A decent man would work to stop the war, so many are being killed, and the land is being ravaged.Yes, the road to peace was there
Where? How is peace reached with the irrational?
Vladimir Putin said Thursday there would be no peace until Russia achieves its goals, which he says remain unchanged after nearly two years of fighting.
He reiterated that Moscow’s goals in Ukraine — “de-Nazification, de-militarization and a neutral status” of Ukraine — remain unchanged.
What do you do with this? Yes many Republicans want us to cut and run, let the pieces fall where they may.
Also noted from his recent news conference was the fact Russians don't seem too happy.
Although the event is tightly controlled, some online questions that Putin ignored appeared on screens in the hall...
"Mr. President, when will the real Russia be the same as the one on TV?” one text message said, referring to the Kremlin’s control over the media that portrays Putin positively and glosses over the country’s problems.
Another read: “I’d like to know, when will our president pay attention to his own country? We’ve got no education, no health care. The abyss lies ahead.”
All wars end at the negotiation table. This one will also but Putin needs to recognize reality also. Much of what he says is not grounded in reality.One word harsh sanctions... However, the current president shows no strength on the world stage, and In my view, world leaders have taken note of that.
Biden reads what he is told to read, he is not really responsible (in my view) for many of the lies and promises he has made. He is a tool.
This war will end when Congress cuts aid, and we abruptly pull away. This is not my prediction, it's what history predicts.
The EU is on the verge right now of pulling some aid back--- Americans will start being more vociferous with the displeasure of how Biden is paying for someone else's war --- that would be NATO's war. And NATO countries are just on the verge of pulling away.
Hey, Congress will be put between a rock and a hard place, you realize these Representatives answer to the people.
The people are already making noise.
Trump claims he will have them in peace talks or he will put heavy sanctions on whoever won't come to the table. Just a problem solver...We along with the EU have placed many heavy sanctions.
https://www.spglobal.com/marketintellig … e-69602559
We seem to be adding new sanctions all the time
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1731
Many economists believe the sanctions are working.
Sanctions and export controls are damaging Russia’s economy and limiting its access to the financing and material goods .
Russia’s Economy is Falling Behind. The war and associated multilateral sanctions are putting Russia’s economy under considerable economic strain, contributing to rapidly growing expenditures, a depreciating ruble, increasing inflation, and a tight labor market reflecting a loss of workers.
The economic outlook for Russian households has soured. An uptick in emigration predated Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, but the war mobilization effort in 2022 accelerated the trend in young and educated people leaving for opportunities abroad. Emigration has reached historic highs; around 668,000 people left Russia in 2022 — a 71 percent increase over the prior five-year average.
The Russian economy has also experienced volatility in its exchange rate, with the ruble falling then rising then falling again, now down roughly 20 percent against the dollar from early February 2022 to December 2023 .
In 2023, growth in the Russian economy has been largely driven by an increase in government spending on the war in Ukraine. As spending has grown, energy revenues have declined sharply—by almost 40 percent from January through October 2023 relative to 2022.
https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured … pabilities
https://fortune.com/europe/2023/12/14/v … -treasury/
The EU is adding additional sanctions..
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/mo … 023-12-14/
Yes sanctions are working..
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/yes-san … working_en
If you're dealing with a person who is not tethered to reality and is on a stated mission of the denazification of Ukraine, do you expect him to respond logically? Or just take down his entire country with his delusions?You're asking people who willingly support someone who creates alternate realities to live in, if they care about dealing with someone who doesn't respond logically?
And then you've got some of the usual fearmongering going on. A few years ago, it was how the economy was going to collapse under Democratic leadership. Well, how's that working out? Now it's how Democratic leadership will lead to WWIII.Please check out the inflation chart from when Biden became president until today. We have ensured inflation from the day he was sworn in until today. For two full years, inflation was at crippling highs.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/273 … in-the-us/
The chart is very telling and shows we have lived under high inflation for much of Biden's term. No one can't say it collapsed. However, Is this economy anything for the Demacrats to be proud of?The entire planet has been affected by inflation since world economies reopened when the vaccines arrived, which the far-right always seems to conveniently forget happened right when Biden took office. Now, supply chains were damaged long before Biden took office, and when demand came back thanks to economies reopening, inflation is what the entire planet got. I find it really the usual delusion from the right to ignore the supply chain side of things, the global nature of the issue, to try and put the issue solely on Biden.
Thanks to Biden leadership, the US is one of the leaders in low inflation now. Job growth has been above average for many months. The stock market is near all-time highs. So yes, people who aren't being brainwashed by Fox News talking points and alternate realities that convince them to hate their own government can be proud of the Biden economy."I find it really the usual delusion from the right to ignore the supply chain side of things, the global nature of the issue, to try and put the issue solely on Biden."
Solely? No one does that. But I find the left really delusional as they ignore the supply chain (massively exacerbated by Biden) while at the same time ignoring the demand end (created by Biden with trillion dollar giveaways).Thank you for proving my point completely by ignoring the two giveaways done when the GOP held the Oval Office to only point out the one by Biden. That would be a great example of solely that I refer to. Case closed.
Yep; closed. Because we know from experience that if one giveaway doesn't cause runaway inflation then 2 more in rapid succession won't either. Well thought out!
Yup, still cannot even mention the name Trump and his two stimulus packages. It's just got to be all Biden's fault. And Biden caused the global inflation for every country on the planet. And Biden stole the 2020 election from his basement, with the help of GOP Attorney Generals, and with dementia. Like I said, alternate realities that really aren't worth arguing about with the MAGA crowd that is programmed to believe the most outlandish things and trained to not criticize the cult leader in any way.
Federal Spending - Fiscal Data
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/america … -spending/
United States - Government Expenditures - Economic Indicators
https://www.economy.com/united-states/g … penditures
Federal Revenue, Spending, Deficit, and the National Debt
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/
It is fairly easy to see what the Biden Administration is doing. No need to take anyone's word for it or allow them to shift blame.
For example, America has taken in $678 Billion for fiscal year 2024 so far but has spent $1.1 Trillion on 2024.
In 2023 they took in about 4.4 Trillion but spent about 6.8 Trillion.
As interest rates rise, the amount America has to spend on its debt goes up, in 2024 it could be upwards of a Trillion dollars wasted just on paying the interest on our debt.
So things aren't going well... a problem compounded immensely by the Biden Administration's out of control spending, literally, spiraling out of control.Federal Spending - Fiscal Data
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/america … -spending/
United States - Government Expenditures - Economic Indicators
https://www.economy.com/united-states/g … penditures
Federal Revenue, Spending, Deficit, and the National Debt
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/
It is fairly easy to see what the Biden Administration is doing. No need to take anyone's word for it or allow them to shift blame.
For example, America has taken in $678 Billion for fiscal year 2024 so far but has spent $1.1 Trillion on 2024.
In 2023 they took in about 4.4 Trillion but spent about 6.8 Trillion.
As interest rates rise, the amount America has to spend on its debt goes up, in 2024 it could be upwards of a Trillion dollars wasted just on paying the interest on our debt.
So things aren't going well... a problem compounded immensely by the Biden Administration's out of control spending, literally, spirally out of control.
Thanks, I needed a laugh.
No, sanctions are not working. Sanctions have weakened American and EU interests around the globe while strengthening Russia and China.
The West, NATO, the Biden Administration have been busy committing international relations and economical suicide the last couple of years.
The UAE no longer trades oil in the dollar and has allied to BRICS.
Saudi Arabia, once America's strongest OPEC supporters is following suit.
Iran of course has cozied up to Russia and has long been under the protection of China. India is shifting into their sphere of influence, however India is wise enough to play the fools we have running things in DC to their advantage.
The ignorance of our leadership in DC/Pentagon today is trumped only by their hubris. Not since Kennedy have we had such a warmongering and incalculably idiotic group in control of our International Affairs.
This group today makes the likes that were in charge during Bush II's reign look like common day Julius Ceaser in comparison.
The likes of Karen Donfried, Victoria Nuland, Lloyd Austin and of course Joe Biden and Kamala Harris... my g@d if you wanted to pick a more incompetent group to lead our nation into disaster you would be hard pressed to do so.
Russia is doing amazingly well, its put itself on military footing, geared up its industries, has the world's top technologies flowing into it through secondary nations... Russia at the end of 2023 is in better shape than it was in 2021.
That's reality... CNN won't be letting you in on it, but it is.The sanctions have little to no teeth. The EU is still one of the biggest users of natural gas and oil from Russia... That's where the teeth could have had a bite. The sanctions are almost laughable. Lots of nothing. Oil and natural gas are what support their war... And will, be mighty cold in Europe in the winter.
Each sanction listed can be shredded to yes making some oligarchs unhappy, but Russia relies heavily on revenues from oil and natural gas, which make up 45% of Russia's federal budget. Russia is the world's second-largest producer of natural gas, behind the United States, and has the world's largest gas reserves.
What is factual is the cheap shell game the US, and well as other nations are using.
Who’s Still Buying Russian Fossil Fuels in 2023?
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/whos-s … 0so%20far.
"How Russian oil is reaching the U.S. market through a loophole in the embargo" https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-r … he-embargo
Russian oil finds ‘wide open’ back door to Europe, critics say
https://www.politico.eu/article/russia- … itics-say/
Sanctions could have stopped the transport of oil and gas and stopped Russia's cold. But in reality, factually Biden did this ---- "President Joe Biden is facing bipartisan backlash to his administration's agreement with Germany that allows a controversial Russian natural-gas pipeline to be completed, arguing that the deal is a boon to Moscow at the expense of Ukraine.
Biden and his deputies have long been at odds with members of Congress on the pipeline, known as Nord Stream 2, with lawmakers overwhelmingly approving a slate of mandatory sanctions aimed at crippling the pipeline over geopolitical and environmental concerns."
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/2 … 20Ukraine.
So bottom line How is Russia doing at this point, with current sanctions
"How is Russia's economy doing now?
Following its invasion of Ukraine and the imposition of U.S. and partners' sanctions and other economic measures, Russia's economy in 2022 contracted by 2.1 percent (Figure 1),[ii] with record-high energy exports cushioning what would have been a far deeper contraction. Russia’s economy is over 5 percent smaller than had been predicted prior to the escalation, and it is far underperforming other energy exporters (including the United States). The war and associated multilateral sanctions are putting Russia’s economy under considerable economic strain, contributing to rapidly growing expenditures, a depreciating ruble, increasing inflation, and a tight labor market reflecting a loss of workers."
https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured … ntraction.
Guess if stronger sanctions stopped them from selling energy exports... The war might have been a thing of the past. Can't conduct a war without cash.The only thing the Sanctions, and our funding of Ukraine has done, is cost half a million Ukrainian's their lives, displaced and crippled millions more... caused economic hardships for all Europeans and Americans and pushed other nation's into alliance with Russia and China.
The "Sanctions" on Russian Oil?
The Russians bought up a fleet of tankers, load up those tankers, and then transfer the oil to "registered" tankers on the seas, bypassing the sanctions.
The "Sanctions" placed on hi-tech items being sold to Russia?
Those items are sold to companies in places like Uzbekistan instead, who in turn ship them to Russia.
The end result?
Inflation for the people in the EU and North America... don't worry though, chances are good our great NATO leaders will find a way of making things worse for all of us than they already are.Yes, agree, hopefully, they work quickly to make it all worse... Maybe then more Americans will see that a bag was pulled over their heads.
The sanctions are a joke, they were from the first set to the current set. This war was unnecessary, hopefully, it will work to rid the White House of a simpleton and his administration.It really is hard to project where we are going as a nation at this point.
Heck, its tough to project if they will even allow an election in 2024 to happen.
I see stuff like this, and I realize I am very out of touch with today's younger generations that see this country very differently than I did coming up:
Majority of Americans 18-24 think Israel should ‘be ended and given to Hamas’
https://nypost.com/2023/12/16/news/majo … -to-hamas/
A majority of young Americans said they believe Israel should “be ended and given to Hamas,” according to a shocking poll.
The survey, conducted THIS WEEK by Harvard-Harris polling, found 51% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 said they believed the long-term answer to the Israel-Palestinian conflict was for “Israel to be ended and given to Hamas and the Palestinians.”
Only 32% said they believed in a two-state solution.
A full 60% of the same demographic said Hamas’ Oct 7 terrorist attack could be “justified by the grievance of Palestinians”
A full 67% of 18-24 year olds said they believed Jews “should be treated as oppressors”
Yep... some fun times ahead for America... for the world... coming up.Ken, its kinda of tough to realize that your perspective on things may be considered "old" by even younger people. Perhaps your viewpoint on things are not set in stone in the way that you believed
I am appalled by the survey. I certainly am not giving Israel the store yet, Hamas needs to be eliminated. But Palestinian rights are not to be ignored and I support a two state solution,It's the mindset shown... the way they perceive.
When we were coming up, the protests we saw were against war, for peace, for acceptance on colleges especially.
This is not the same thing, this is not marching or protesting for peace or a demand for respect and equality.
This sentiment is for the eradication of another, another people, another state, another religion.
This is the difference, the 60s were about equality, about dignity and respect. Today's efforts are about tearing down the other, whether its men and the 'Patriarchy' or Jews and "Israel', its not about equality.
Hamas does not want equal representation or a two state solution, it wants the eradication of the Israeli state and the Jews.
Today's Feminism has taken this trac as well, it does not want equality with men, it wants to usurp men. It wants control without consequence, it wants leadership without the associated hardship.
It is these radical mindsets that support Transmen taking women's positions in sports and intruding in their bathrooms. If anything, today's America is a reflection of Feminism and Identity not of the Patriarchy.
These polls are alarming to say the very least. These young adults did not "bring up" themselves. Just my view, but I think poor parenting is much the blame. What I see is a young society that has little true empathy or values. neither are not innate, they must be learned.
I think you are correct, the world has some fun times ahead. The polls show a true lack of common decency, no true common sense, and offer a view into this form of skewed mindset. It appears some can justify genocide without any conscience. In my view, this form of mindset justified the Holocaust and slavery. The polls you offered are very telling.Let's consider the other aspects that potentially confound this survey and potential influences on responses.
What was the sample size?
It seems like that of the 2034 registered voters surveyed only about 170 were age 18-24 (12% of the population) most likely discounted for lower voter registration levels. That would yield a margin of error approaching 10%., yielding large majorities for these questions. Fewer respondents means a larger margin of sampling error. That’s because the fewer people polled, the less likely the sample of respondents will fully reflect the entire group’s beliefs.
The subdivision of age groups here is tenuous. A sample size this small is not very robust. Which in turn leads to results that are not statistically significant which then leads to unreliable conclusions.
I also believe that this data tends to show divergent answers to poll questions:
The very same poll asks this question "do you think Israel has a right to exist as a homeland of the Jewish people or that Israel has no right to exist"
69% agree that they have a right to exist as a homeland.
This may signal these respondents may not understand the difference between Hamas and the Palestinian national movement. Contradictory views might be related to Gen Z’s youth and relatively unformed views on the conflict. Gen Z respondents typically haven’t long followed the Middle East and its political complexities.
Similarly every other question about anti-semitism has them responding roughly in line with other age groups. 71% believe that protesters calling for the genocide of Jews on University campuses would constitute harassment .
This poll also seems to be an outlier.
Other polls conducted around the same time do not show support for Hamas as high as this one.
The strongest rebuttal comes from a Generation Lab poll taken Oct. 11-16 that surveyed only college students, 833 of whom said they knew of Hamas’ attacks. Of that group, 67% described the attacks as an act of terrorism by Hamas, compared with 12% who saw it as a justified act of resistance. The poll also found that 52% blamed the attack on Hamas, compared with 11% who blamed it on Israel.
Quinnipiac poll, taken Oct. 12 to Oct. 16, found that 19% of 18- to 34-year-olds said Israel is more responsible for the outbreak of violence, while 55% said Hamas is. Again, the levels of support are not equal, as they were in the Harvard-Harris poll.
I think we need to be a bit more careful before we improperly, negatively characterize an entire generation.
Really, from the perspective of what it meant to be conservative in 1963, you would taken issue with JFK as well....
I haven't changed much, politically, the world around me has changed significantly. Or to be fair, my understanding has changed, my naivety lost.
The agendas and priorities of political parties has changed. The size of government, the growth in population, much has changed.
But no one has come along since Kennedy that was a better orator, as well versed and upstanding, as forthright and wanting to do right by Americans as he.
What we have in the oval office today is a pale caricature, a man a fraction as decent and competent as Kennedy had been ...and by extension, his advisors... as if replacing the world's most brilliant physicists with people who cannot perform basic math.We are in agreement on much of our views regarding this.
From the moment as a 4th grade student at a Denver elementary school lunchroom at around 11.45 local time, being told that "the President had been shot", everything went to hell. I was to celebrate a birthday that weekend, but no one was in a festive mood.
Kennedy is a mythical figure that could not exist in modern times. A certain cynicism reared its head regarding the presidency and government in general, that corresponded with the time of his passing. What President since has enjoyed the adulation and support that he received from every side?
An example of a wealthy man who committed himself to public service rather than just furthering the interests of his class and lining his own pockets.
An administration that highlighted the best of America and American life rather than the worse
An administration that reached out to the world, "the Peace Corps", rather than hide behind fearful xenophobia.
A President who presented a challenge to American technology and can do, with the goal to land a man on the moon by the end of that decade. A far reaching goal, considering that our launch vehicles were still exploding on th pad. The moon? He must have been nuts. Meanwhile, it has taken decades for NASA to plan for a return...
A President learning on the job recognized that the matter of Civil Rights was a defining issue of our time, for which he was determined to take the lead. So much different than conservatives today that seek to undermine those gains.
A President who was hardly was a war monger but still invested in the Cold War, who through thoughtful insight averted an impending disaster during the Cuban Missile crisis. I remember that as well.
Yes, Kennedy suggested, the administration’s views might clash with those of its inquisitors. But, he added, “I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers — I welcome it. This administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: ‘An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it.’ We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.”
The very opposite of the Trumpism attitude of intimidation and threats against a free press.
Yes, indeed, we were all graced to have been in the presence of a truly great man. And on the 60th anniversary of his passing, he is still missed.Is it free?
Or is it just propaganda for a Oligarch State, and Media Corporations that are controlled by their advertisers (IE - Big Pharma) to silence some messages and messengers while propagating others?
Why is it so important to denigrate and silence RFK Jr?
Why was it so important to denigrate and sideline Tulsi Gabbard?
Because they wanted to tell inconvenient truths?
Because they wanted to challenge the narrative?
Isn't the value of free speech and a free press the ability to air out diverse ideas and opinions and find the truth, or the common ground we all can share?
"An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it. We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.”
Does the 'News Media' do this today?
Do they challenge our involvement in promoting war with Russia rather than peace?
Do they question the narrative about the Nord Stream Pipeline?
Do they question why this Administration released hundreds of billions of dollars to Iran, knowing Iran was and is funding, arming, aiding terrorist organizations throughout the world?
I honestly do not know how they are covering much of anything, as the closest thing I get to MSM news these days is snippets off of youtube. So perhaps they are digging deep with investigation after investigation into the bio-labs in Ukraine, where all those hundreds of billions go to, and why it is so critical to America that we rip Ukraine out of Russia's sphere of influence.
Its nice to know we both agree on something though... Kennedy was a good President that tried to avoid war... even though it meant his generals and the CIA considered him enemy #1 for his firmly held beliefs.
Where as today, we have a President sleep walking us into WWIII... as plainly obvious as anything I have ever seen on the horizon.
Need I quote JFKs very famous line? He was a president that kept a middle ground and was for all the people. Today, the liberals would not have given him the time of day.
We have the Dixie Chicks of the forum. They could tell something was off about the Iraq War and criticized Bush for it. But, by that time, the US had picked a side and they were lambasted for a lack of patriotism and not being on the side of the country. The case has been laid out in previous posts - but siding with Putin, who definitely attacked our 2016 elections, is still worth lambasting as unpatriotic.
Putin wants the world to think he is winning.
Clearly, he has convinced many Republicans of that and now they are helping him do just that.
https://www.cnn.com/travel/2023-worst-d … index.htmlAs we usher in a new year, let's say adios to the 118th Congress..they have the distinction of being the most unproductive in decades The House has voted 749 times this year, but passed just 27 bills that have become law.
And some of you would hand over the keys to MAGA completely? No, this bunch has proven themselves incapable of governing.True to form, House Republicans and Trump supporters show just how two-faced they are, how they apply double-standards, and are absolute hypocrites (proudly so, it seems).
On the one hand they try to put Hunter Biden in jail for his business dealings with Chinese entrepreneurs (sort of like Ivanka, right) but won't say a word about the Chinese GOV'T funneling over $5 million to Trump [u]while he was in the White House[/u
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/04/us/homic … index.htmlOh my...
Minority staff on the House Oversight Committee released a 156-page report on Thursday detailing claims that "the former president repeatedly violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution, which states that federal officials may not accept gifts or cash from foreign state actors without Congressional approval."
The bulk of payments came from China. Still wondering about Jared Kushner's 2 billion from Saudi. Really though, does this not bother anyone?!Your link was about crime --- Homicides dropped by over 10% in America’s biggest cities in 2023
Damn it!! Thanks.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/04/politics … index.html
This says it all. This is what Trump is all about.
“Saudi Arabia, I get along great with all of them. They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million.” He continued, “Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much!” Trump said at the time.
"The documents obtained from former President Trump's accounting firm demonstrate that four Trump-owned properties together collected, at the least, millions of dollars in payments from foreign governments and officials that violated the Constitution's prohibition on emoluments 'of any kind whatever' from foreign governments."
A violation of the Constitution...does MAGA care? They profess to love the Constitution but seem to be willing to sweep it under the rug each time Trump tramples on it.
What is shocking is the fact that this current information only scratches the surface because Comer conveniently shut down the investigation.
Trump clearly refused to divest from his businesses when he became president, creating an opportunity for anyone hoping to win his favor to put money straight into his pocket by staying at his hotels.
The foreign payments that went directly to businesses controlled by Trump himself are certainly better examples of the kind of corruption Republicans are talking about in their clown show Biden inquiry.
Constitution be damned, as long as we get the maga agenda right?That is Trump and MAGA's Motto - The Constitution Be Damned!
Yet he has now asked the top constitutionalist in the world, our Supreme Court, to overrule the Colorado Supreme Court.
And my response is that he is using the Supreme Court only because he thinks they will rule in his favor. If he thought he would lose, he would stay far, far away.
One of his lawyers told lying Fox that she/Trump expect him to win because he appointed three of the Justices and they owe him. Yep, really believes in the Constitution alright.
In any case, if those Conservative Justices truly believe in the Constitution, they will HAVE to rule in Colorado's favor UNLESS they find that 1) the Presidency is not an office of the United States government, 2) Trump did not engage in or help in the takeover of our Capitol, and/or 3) they create a rational that running the Colorado election process is none of a state's business.Is there anyone in our history that has appealed a legal case to a higher court, thinking that they would lose by doing so?
Go back and read what generated that comment.
I think looking at the Michigan Appeals Court order gives another court opinion other than Colorado's rulings. Michigan combed over the Constitution, which in my view --- so will the Supreme Court.
Colorado truely violated many of Trump's rights. I think Trump will win this one.
https://www.courts.michigan.gov/4b0d7a/ … -27-or.pdfI guess you will need to show me where the Michigan Appeals Court "combed over the U.S. Constitution". Your link seems to be silent on that.
I couldn't find a transcript of the Appeals Court order but did find the summary from
The court said in a 3-0 opinion that the plaintiff's challenge was not "ripe" on procedural grounds and did not specifically rule on whether Trump fell under the disqualification clause.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/michiga … =105675899
So, Trump was kept on the ballot for "procedural" reasons, not Constitutional ones.
I agree he is using due process as we all have the right to do. Regarding what the court must do. Michigan appeals court found in his favor using the Constitution, they used several amendments to come to the ruling to keep Trump on the ballot. (1st as well as 15th was considered)
https://www.courts.michigan.gov/4b0d7a/ … -27-or.pdf
I feel the US Supreme Court will do the same, it would be hard to overlook both the 1st,5th, and the 15th in Trump's case. As well as the entire 14th Amendment. Trump will find shade under all three.As I read your link, I do not draw the conclusion that neither the Michigan Supreme Court (the link) or the Michigan Appeals Court found in Trump's favor "using the Constitution".
Your link provided the MI SC didn't think it had the authority to rule on the Appeals Court's decision - nothing more. They didn't state why, at least in the link.
Most of that link was one Justices descent and he believed the Appeals Court correctly ruled that as it pertains to the Primary ballot, the Secretory of State does not have the right to remove Trump from the ballot. That decision was based, not on the Constitution, but on Michigan law.
Unlike Colorado and Maine, Michigan law allows anybody (with a certain exception) to appear on a primary ballot regardless of whether they can legally take office.
The Appeals Court seemed to invite the plaintiffs back for the General election.
I didn't see in reference in your link to other Amendments.In the order I noted the judge made lengthy mention of the 15th Amendment. I have read several articles that add views regarding Trump's rights being violated. https://www.tennessean.com/story/opinio … 049528007/
Unlike in Colorado, the Michigan Supreme Court did not decide the merits of whether Trump engaged in insurrection. The justices upheld lower court rulings concluding that courts should not decide the issue for the primary election.
A lawyer for the voters cast the ruling as procedural, noting that the court allowed them to revive their case for the November 2024 general election. These are the laws in Michigan. They are different than those of Maine or Colorado. States rights in action.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/michig … 023-12-27/Remember, Trump and his supporters are arguing that States do not have the right to run their own elections for federal office as they see fit. He is arguing, ironically, that only Congress may do that.
I assume you meant the 14th Amendment. The judge you are referring to was also writing a dissent from the SC ruling.
Again, the opinion writer in your link totally missed the point and shows a complete lack of understanding of what is going on. Let's be clear, Trump was not on trial for anything. They were simply deciding whether Trump had to be "qualified" to be on the Colorado Republican primary ballot.
All of the gobbledygook in the opinion piece are red herrings, distractions, misdirection away from the real issue - does Colorado election law bar Trump from being listed on the Republican primary ballot. Nothing more than that.
The WEAPONIZATION of CONGRESS by Republicans.
"As Republicans lashed out at Hunter Biden, there he was sitting right before them, while Democrats on the committee said they should proceed to let him testify.
But Republicans failed to take Democrats up on the offer, underscoring the fact that the hearing was a political spectacle from the beginning as the GOP moves forward with its impeachment inquiry at a key moment in the presidential election."
"President Biden, battling low approval ratings, has tried to bolster his reelection campaign by delivering two recent speeches — one focusing on the threat that former President Donald Trump poses to democracy and another on the administration’s commitment to racial justice.
But the GOP is trying to derail those messages by attempting to smear Biden and his family — despite not being able to find any proof thus far that the president has engaged in wrongdoing. The point is to get the impeachment story into the news and, in turn, into the public discourse — and discredit the prosecutions of Trump by alleging that Biden could also be accused of corruption. Hunter Biden‘s surprise appearance on Wednesday suggests he is attempting to disrupt that plan and fight back."
THAT is what House Republicans REALLY care about. It is NOT TRUTH, JUSTICE, or the AMERICAN WAY (nor is it governing).
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/11/opinions … index.html"But Republicans failed to take Democrats up on the offer"
In my view, the Republicans don't want to give Hunter a three-ring circus to perhaps give a show of lies on Cable TV. I think they feel they know who they are dealing with. It's clear Hunter is a "loose canon". I think it is very smart to keep him trapped behind closed doors.
"GOP moves forward with its impeachment inquiry at a key moment in the presidential election."
Very political move, and they learned well from what the Dems did to Trump. I like to see them giving back what they have received.
"President Biden, battling low approval ratings, has tried to bolster his reelection campaign by delivering two recent speeches — one focusing on the threat that former President Donald Trump poses to democracy and another on the administration’s commitment to racial justice."
I believe Biden's speech and the direction he is taking may have negative consequences. Americans are eager to hear his plans for addressing current issues, but the speech lacked any mention of concrete solutions. Instead, it seemed to be filled with passionate gestures (shaking his little fists) and expressions of frustration, appearing somewhat foolish without a clear agenda.
Many feel that focusing on blame rather than addressing problems is counterproductive. Some argue that the impeachment process is necessary due to concerns and controversies surrounding Joe and his family. The sentiment is that if he is innocent, there should be no fear of being found guilty.Keep him behind closed doors so that they can spin whatever lies they want. All Hunter wants is for the public to see and hear how desperate these MAGA-types want to smear the name of good man - Joe Biden.
Why are you only concerned that you perceive, wrongly, that Biden has no plans when it is clear old, poor me, Trump clearly has none other than to his STATED desire to become a dictator.
Why isn't the MAGA House Republicans investigating Donald Trump Jr. for ties to China? Or Steve Bannon? Or one time Trump trade guru, Peter Navarro. Because they are not a fair tribunal, that's why!
Donald Trump Jr. and Steve Bannon have strong ties to Chinese billionaire who is filing bankruptcy. Donald Trump Jr. may be named as a defendent.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … b&ei=9I imagine the Demacrats have done that. I am proud to see the House doing its job regarding getting to the bottom of the Biden family accusations. My accusations have piled up.
Trump being a long-time business man has done business with China for many years as do the businesses that provide us with just about everything... I am very sure Trump's sons have been well scrutinized by the Demacrats. Trump's businesses offer services, Did any of Hunters? Thus far it's reported Hunter offered no services at all.
It will be very interesting to see how the impeachment of Biden plays out.
MAGA Comer is ready to call his faux investigation into the Bidens quits, issue a report full of lies and innuendo, maybe refer the president to the DOJ with no evidence of wrong doing.
One member on his committee tells the TRUTH when he says:
[/i]Democrats believe it’s been a success because they have used the probe to continue to tarnish Biden’s standing in the run-up to November – but lack the evidence to prove the president did anything illegal.
“His goal is to impeach the president,” said Rep. Jared Moskowitz, a Democrat from Florida who has sparred with Comer. “What he’s admitting is what a lot of other Republicans have said, which is, well, so long as they see that this charade, what they’re doing up here is hurting the President’s poll numbers, they’re going to continue to do that.”[/i]
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/14/politics … index.html"MAGA Comer is ready to call his faux investigation into the Bidens quits, issue a report full of lies and innuendo,"
I don't feel that is completely true. The committee has produced testimony from reputable IRS agents, who have added their professional views that Joe Biden was involved with his son's businesses. Plus they have thousands of bank records and records that prove the Biden family had shell companies in which no service were involved.
"Evidence of Joe Biden’s Involvement in His Family’s Influence Peddling Schemes
Joe Biden Lied At Least 16 Times About His Family’s Business Schemes
The Biden family set up over 20 shell companies and made a concerted effort to hide payments from foreign adversaries."
https://oversight.house.gov/release/com … s-schemes/
I suggest you listen to the interviews that the two ABs gave CBS after their second closed-door interviews with Congress. They are very much pointing out information that is relevant to prove Joe Biden's involvement with his son's businesses. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oWAdMvgpHc
"Records released by House Republicans show that Joe Biden repeatedly emailed Hunter Biden’s business associate in 2014
Democrats say the emails were routine and that Hunter Biden’s business associate worked as Joe Biden’s financial adviser and helped the then-vice president file his tax returns." https://www.nbcnews.com/news/records-re … rcna130682
It would seem there is enough evidence to require a congressional investigation into Joe Biden and his family. If he is innocent he has nothing to worry about. Although Hunter did leave a trail of emails, back records, and his laptop, as well as the IRS whistleblower investigation into following the cash.
I think they got him... and Joe is most likely waiting for the ball to drop. He is a man with little intelligence, and the apple did not fall far from the tree. The Biden family was overly sloppy in their business dealings. And there is nothing worse than hard-copy documentation to sink a crook.
I feel Biden will be impeached and escorted from the White House. Too much evidence, no Dem will stand behind him. They will need to protect their skin.
"WASHINGTON—House Committee on Oversight and Reform Ranking Member James Comer (R-Ky.) today wrote the Biden Administration and several banks and financial institutions about Hunter Biden and Biden family and associates’ suspicious foreign business transactions flagged by U.S. banks. According to recent media reports, more than 150 of Hunter Biden and the Biden network’s international business transactions have generated suspicious activity reports by U.S. banks for further review by the Treasury Department to determine if there is illegal activity or a threat to national security. The Treasury Department used to provide these reports to Congress, but the Biden Administration has restricted access to them, raising questions about a possible effort to hide the Biden network’s suspicious business dealings." https://oversight.house.gov/release/com … u-s-banks/
I would assume you have not had a look at the hundreds of flagged bank transactions. Like I said, sloppy. I feel Congress has been meticulous in building the case Joe was using his name to make cash, for himself as well as his family.
Hey, if I am wrong you can be the first to toss an egg my way. LOL"The committee has produced testimony from reputable IRS agents, who have added their professional views that Joe Biden was involved with his son's businesses. " - I READ their testimony and saw no such claim. Maybe you can point it out to me.
"I would assume you have not had a look at the hundreds of flagged bank transactions." - ISN'T THAT called guilt by innuendo, or something like that. Hunter (NOT JOE) deals in large amounts of dollars from foreign sources (like Trump and his kids do) so it only makes sense that
"Flagged Bank Accounts" - Is this lie by Comer what you are referring to?
“Hunter Biden’s committed serious crimes, as you mentioned, 150 suspicious activity reports. Those are the most severe bank violations. This is when the bank notifies the federal government that we’re pretty confident our client has committed a crime. He’s had multiple banks file 150 suspicious activity reports, saying that we believe each instance was another act of a crime. But yet the FBI did nothing about it.”
Well, if so, you were conned.
SARs ARE NOT an indication of criminal activity as you and Comer claim.
FACT: A SAR is supposed to be triggered by a minimum amount of a transfer (generally at least $5,000, or $2,000 for money services businesses) and a suspicion the transfer involved funds derived from an illegal activity.
Note the bolded word "suspicion". That means "it is possible it might be related to an illegal activity OR it is possible that it is not". Unfortunately, Comer understands the word "suspicion" to mean actual guilt when it doesn't.
Also note that the thresholds are very low. That means even you may have a SAR and don't know it.
FACT: The Treasury also requires all cash transfers that exceed $10,000 to be separately reported. That means I certainly have SARs reported on me since I and my company have made cash transfers through a bank above that amount. Am I or my company criminals as a result?
FACT: A SAR can also result from cash transfers that appear structured to avoid triggering such a report, such as repeated payments to the same person or entity of $9,500.
So, 'As a result, FinCEN expects to receive nearly 3.7 million SARs in fiscal 2023, according to a Treasury report submitted to Congress.
Under Comer’s logic, that would suggest banks will report 3.7 million crimes. But that’s not correct."
Now Hunter accounted for 150 of those 3.7 million crimes. Don't you see how absurd Comer is??
The House MAGA Republicans (not Congress) have been meticulous. That may be true, but NOT ONE piece of hard evidence that Hunter or Joe committed a crime has resulted from that "meticulousness".
Here, read the TRUTH and ignore the LIES that Comer is feeding you.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … us-crimes/"I READ their testimony and saw no such claim. Maybe you can point it out to me."
Curious, my link was a live interview where one could listen to both IRS agents that took place after their closed-door testimony. Both stipulating their view (due to their investigation) said Joe was involved in Hunter's business dealings. I think a first-hand open interview is more factual than any media OP.
"Flagged Bank Accounts" - Is this lie by Comer what you are referring to?"
No, I am referring to the documents from several banks that flagged Hunter Biden's, as well as Jim Biden's banking transactions with foreign banks.
I think It wise to wait and see all these accusations outed in Biden's impeachment trial, where Biden will have some form of defense. I think they will connect Joe, and members of the Biden family involved in this money-making scheme.
As I said his grift was so very sloppy.Still no source for the IRS testimony or quotes from them saying Joe Biden is guilty of something.
I am guessing you missed the point that 99% of SARs involve no criminal activity. Yet it appears you think there was simply because a SAR was issued. On what factual basis leads you to that conclusion?
Yes, Comer's grift is very sloppy, I agree.
Perhaps... Moving on --- https://apnews.com/article/houthis-us-y … ac1b772610
Laughing as I write. No need to ask what's next... Just can't keep up any longer.
"Let’s be clear,” Biden said in a statement Friday. “What’s been negotiated would — if passed into law — be the toughest and fairest set of reforms to secure the border we’ve ever had in our country. It would give me, as President, a new emergency authority to shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed. And if given that authority, I would use it the day I sign the bill into law.”
What are Republicans saying?
Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said as the Senate adjourned Thursday. “President Donald J. Trump in 2017 asked for laws like this".
“I didn’t come here to have the president as a boss or a candidate as a boss. I came here to pass good, solid policy," Tillis said. “It is immoral for me to think you looked the other way because you think this is the linchpin for President Trump to win.”
Bill Cassidy, R-La., told USA TODAY. “Is it really better to have 10,000 people crossing a day illegally or 5,000? Clearly it’s 5,000. So somebody who is trying to defeat legislation, all in the name of running for office? That is irresponsible.”
Murkowski of Alaska: I’m not giving up. This is not about Trump and this is not about me. This is about our country. This is about democracy around the world. This is about security for our own country and so let’s keep pushing to get this border deal,” she said.
GOP Sen. Todd Young of Indiana called any efforts to disrupt the ongoing negotiations “tragic” and said: “I hope no one is trying to take this away for campaign purposes.”
Romney: "the reality is that, that we have a crisis at the border, the American people are suffering as a result of what’s happening at the border. And someone running for president not to try and get the problem solved. as opposed to saying, ‘hey, save that problem. Don’t solve it. Let me take credit for solving it later.’”
"To those who think that if President Trump wins, which I hope he does, that we can get a better deal — you won’t,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.,
McConnell: "One of the things that I keep reminding my members is if we had a 100% Republican government — president, House, Senate — we probably would not be able to get a single Democratic vote to pass what Sen. Lankford and the administration are trying to get together,” he told reporters. “So this is a unique opportunity to accomplish something in divided government.”
What is MAGA'S response? Essentially that the House would accept nothing short of its own Republican-passed H.R. immigration package . This is not how government works.
Mike Johnson summed up the southern border as an “unmitigated disaster” yet he wants to maintain the chaos. He has repeatedly made statements that the bill would be dead on arrival in the house. Even as Sen. James Lankford, the lead GOP negotiator in the border talks, has repeatedly urged lawmakers to refrain from passing final judgment on the bill until they receive legislative text and said some of the reports of its contents in conservative media are not accurate depictions of the bill. Shocker huh?
Please, someone make it makes sense. Why does MAGA fail to understand that the razor thin margins in Congress make bipartisan negotiation absolutely essential to getting anything done?
The most ridiculous thing going on as they're trying to tank this bill? Getting ready to launch an impeachment of Mayorkas... yeah that's the ticket!They dont care.
“Senator, is this deal dead, effectively?” Fox News’s Laura Ingraham asked Hawley Thursday evening.
“I hope so,” Hawley said. “It should be. If it’s not dead yet it should be dead. There is absolutely no reason to agree to policies that would further enable Joe Biden.”I'm curious about the Republican perspective on this matter. It appears they believe these actions are overdue and may be seen as a strategic move to gain votes, especially considering the prolonged neglect of border issues over the past three years. Critics argue that President Biden could have implemented these proposals much earlier, treating the border as a genuine national crisis and potentially closing it temporarily. Many now view this as a belated and insufficient maneuver, with concerns about the significant problems caused by admitting a large number of illegal migrants, anticipating long-term consequences for Americans. This is my viewpoint on the matter.
Gosh, this political stunt is very obvious Willow, I am somewhat surprised at your thoughts on this one... In my view, This is not problem-solving, this is a very old well used political ploy. One that hopefully ends up well pointed out, and acknowledged for what it is.
No Joe will not ride in on a white horse. Most Americans are well over this form of worn-out politicking.Critics argue that President Biden could have implemented these proposals much earlier"
A president alone is unable to alter existing legislation. The executive branch is 1 of 3 co-equal branches. He began his term in office with an immigration bill proposal. It should have been a starting point for negotiation. He obviously never intended to have the legislation passed as written. Republicans and certainly not maga were interested in actually doing their job as elected Representatives. It is the job of the Congress to sit down and negotiate in good faith. That has not been approached up until this point.
As Biden stated, this bill offers tools that were previously unavailable to the president, a new emergency authority to shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed.
The White House has agreed to new limits on asylum at the border, including the creation of an expulsion power that would allow migrants who cross the U.S.-Mexico border illegally to be rapidly returned to Mexico if migrant encounters surpassed 4,000 per day, If encounters passed 5,000 per day, the use of the expulsion authority would become mandatory, according to the sources who requested anonymity to discuss details of the private negotiations. This according to Reuters.
In my view this IS bipartisan problem solving. What is happening now is actually how things are supposed to work and should have happened a long time ago. But MAGA seems to be saying that it's their way or nothing. They seem to be bending to the will of trump who wants this as a political issue.
We have a bipartisan group working on this bill that many have called the most substantial effort at immigration reform in decades and you think it's a ploy? I find it unconscionable that MAGA, after complaining nonstop about the border that they would try and blow up efforts to repair the system. That's the real ploy in my view .
This compromise gives the GOP most of what it wants but MAGA wants to kill it. How does that make sense?
What it tells me is that they aren't really interested in fixing anything.
"In my view, This is not problem-solving,"
I appreciate your perspectives and if you are so inclined, would you like to elaborate on what you feel problem solving would look like in this situation currently? How can the maga caucus be justified in potentially killing this deal?I acknowledge that the media is presenting the proposal as having solutions, but everything seems quite vague to me. What I've heard so far doesn't convince me that it's anything more than an extended invitation. I'll remain somewhat open-minded, hoping that more details will emerge next week.
In my opinion, the president has the authority to protect the nation from foreign threats, including terrorists. Making a case that the open border has evolved into a crisis, endangering citizens, should be sufficient. If presented with such a case, I believe Congress would be willing to collaborate on temporarily closing the border to asylum seekers. This could act as a substantial but temporary solution to a worsening problem, demonstrating a commitment from both sides to halt and address the issue on a more permanent basis. It's important to clarify that I'm not suggesting closing our borders to commerce or travel, but rather to asylum seekers for a specified period. In this vast world, it's time to send a message that we are temporarily closed.
Moreover, there are existing laws, like enforcing the cap on the number of asylum seekers, which haven't been implemented for many years. We have some laws that, for various reasons, we neglect to follow."Moreover, there are existing laws, like enforcing the cap on the number of asylum seekers, which haven't been implemented for many years. "
U.S. immigration law doesn't set a limit on the number of people granted asylum each year, but the president does set a limit on refugees. A limited number of people are be awarded refugee status each year. For 2024, the ceiling was set at 125,000, as it was each of the two prior years.
U.S. immigration laws place no limit on the number of people who can be awarded asylum in the United States each year. The number of actual asylum grants varies, depending on how many people apply (of their own volition or as a defense to deportation), and how many are successful with their asylum claims.
If the Biden administration was breaking any of our ancient immigration laws he would be dragged into court immediately.Appreciate the correction to my comment. Considering the overwhelming influx, perhaps he should have labeled it a true crisis and temporarily closed the border. The magnitude of the problem required a substantial solution well before it escalated to its current state.
"he should have labeled it a true crisis and temporarily closed the border."
Reportedly, the bill being negotiated has a new emergency power granted to the president to close the border when it becomes overwhelmed. He currently does not have this power.
I think it has become clear to all of us that our immigration laws were made so long ago and situations at the border so different, that they do not address the reality of today's challenges. We need reform and at this point in time it will absolutely require bipartisanship. That seems to be the hardest pill for MAGA to swallow
I don't think simply blaming Biden is a solution to anything. In fact, it undermines solution and progress. If MAGA somehow throttles this bill, what is their plan? If this bill is defeated, what does the day after look like? Or does immigration cease to be an issue at that point? MAGA seems to be more interested in obstruction or tearing things down rather than cooperatively building things that benefit all of us.
Even if Trump became president again, he has absolutely no pathway to crafting anything more substantial and many are telling him so. . The numbers simply won't be there."Reportedly, the bill being negotiated has a new emergency power granted to the president to close the border when it becomes overwhelmed. He currently does not have this power. "
The President Of The United States has the right, and lawfully can shut the border due to a National Emergency.
"Can the President declare a national emergency under what conditions?
(a) With respect to Acts of Congress authorizing the exercise, during the period of a national emergency, of any special or extraordinary power, the President is authorized to declare such national emergency. Such proclamation shall immediately be transmitted to the Congress and published in the Federal Register."
I can't imagine how many terrorists might be in America due to the open border. I can't imagine the carnage that just a few could inflict. Oh yes, I can 9/11.
Why the delay? This appears to be a strategic move... I am disappointed in your stance on this one, Willow.
Why haven't Republicans highlighted the current border crisis sooner, a result of Biden's delayed actions? Many of us are eager for a potential shift to a new Republican administration in the White House. I personally wish to see Biden's lack of leadership emphasized, particularly in the context of the border issue, which I consider one of his failures. If these proposals had been presented three years ago, my perspective would have been different, but now they seem politically motivated and lacking sincerity.
I hold out hope for a future Republican President who will prioritize practical immigration solutions. Will this come to fruition --- I do not know. But, once again time to seek a change. I don't feel comfortable giving Demacrats 4 more years. I mean, I do not think Biden has what it takes to lead the Country.
I don't know what Trump can do, but I like what he did when I compare job performance. No, I can't see the future, but I must borrow from what I knew of the past. I was pleased with Trump's job performance, and I have been overly disappointed with Biden's job performance.Why the delay? This appears to be a strategic move... Disappointed in your stance on this one, Willow.
I am not sure of what you mean in terms of the delay. I don't know what action Biden has delayed. The delay of Biden closing the border if it becomes overwhelmed? There is no delay, he doesn't have that power currently and never has. but the bill that they are negotiating supposedly will give him that emergency power.
If these proposals had been presented three years ago, my perspective would have been different,
That is completely due to the inaction of Congress to come together to negotiate a bipartisan solution. Has absolutely nothing to do with Biden. And if Trump were land in the White House again, he would need the same cooperation of a congress. A president is not a king. MAGA has made it extremely clear that they do not want anything to do with bipartisanship.
I clearly do not understand. People believe immigration is a top issue but only want reform if it's on their exact terms? Makes no sense to me.
How will a MAGA president secure something better? Or are folks just willing to risk that? Common sense tells me 'A Bird in the Hand is Worth Two in the Bush'
Again, what the Republicans are saying..
“So to my Republican colleagues, this is a historic moment to reform the border.” ( Graham)
“We have a unique opportunity here. And the timing is right to do this.” ( Thune)
The only ploy or politicking here is being done by MAGA. They don't want to give Biden a victory on an issue like immigration. Country be damned.I have been keenly interested in recent developments, and I've reached a point where I find myself somewhat disillusioned with the strategies emerging from the Democratic Party. In my perspective, it's crucial to move beyond such ill-planned approaches. I believe the mindset being embraced by some, appears to be lacking in common sense, and I sincerely hope for a shift towards more thoughtful and pragmatic approaches. However, that will take change, a new administration that l will hopefully listen more closely to the people.
Will this fight to regain the White House be dirty -- yes, it always is. Not sure why anyone would feel the Republicans won't take advantage of fighting fire with fire. They seem to be with the border issue.
I have sat for over 3 years watching this mess occur --
a few more months at this point means little. I feel the time is long overdue to say -- we are done with very predictable political ploys.
I strive for transparency, and I understand that my candidness might surprise some. However, I've come to realize the importance of being unapologetically honest and not letting the opinions of others dictate my truth. It's essential for me to be at peace with my own truth.
So, I think it is clear we are pretty far off in our views. I consider this issue to have many sides, and ultimately this border mess, in my view, should not be excused, forgotten, or used as a bandaid to cover an administration that has ignored it, and now realize it has come to finally bite them in the butt.
I will say, that I think your input offers good debate, and yes, food for thought.
Will someone explain to me why Republicans congressmen are even listening to Trump who threatens a bipartisan solution to the border crisis solely because it is disadvantageous to him politically? Are they really this much of a spineless and captive audience? Is Trump really so brazen and crass to admit his intent to the entire nation?
So much for the idea of "country first"
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/25/poli … index.htmlWhere have you been in the last 3.5 years? No really. Come on Cred. Is that all there is... Trump. Very much disappointed. This goes no deeper than Trump. OMG -- whatever
It goes deeper than Trump, but he is not helping in these negotiations. We all want solutions, not crass partisanship.
He said that those in Congress that went against his recommendation would suffer his displeasure and look how fast so many get into line....Again 3.5 years. Maybe you should have wanted solutions before we had millions pour in. We will be dealing with this Biden blunder for literally decades. And thank at this point all that will help is a hard partisanship.
We need solutions not business as usual from Washington.
Maybe, just maybe this old man Biden is smarter than we give him credit for.
On this immigration issue, he is telling the GOP before a national audience to put up or shut up. Mr Peepers, House Majority Leader Johnson says that Biden can through Executive Order make the needed changes. But is that really a cop out for Republicans who as a group have no real solution except to criticize Biden and the Democrats?
Let's put them on the spot. Just as Biden did in an earlier State of the Union address where he chided Republicans about cutting Social Security, putting them all on the defensive.
We did it before and we will do it again.Again, are democrats trying to shove through a bill opening a path to citizenship for anyone that can get here, or is it an honest attempt to put a stop to such actions?
It has long been the liberal stance that anyone that can get here (minus a few criminals) are welcome to feed at the American trough. Is the current effort to change that or just more of the same, that Republicans (rightly) oppose?
American Politics; the world's window into how to ignore the needs of the country as long as it maintains power to a few.It is supposed to be a bipartisan compromise, are Republicans really going to accept an "open door" policy as part of any compromise?
I doubt it. The Republicans just want to make hay on the issue, not really solve it leaving it as a bludgeon to use against Biden next fall."I doubt it. The Republicans just want to make hay on the issue, not really solve it leaving it as a bludgeon to use against Biden next fall."
True, straight up true... We certainly are not ready to buy into a very obvious political ploy --- Biden caused a huge crisis, and his feet should fully be held to the fire. I love to see Texas finally starting the fire.
Thank you ! The BS is getting hard to take up in here...
Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford, the lead GOP negotiator says this:
"It will be by far the most conservative border security bill in four decades,"
are democrats trying to shove through a bill opening a path to citizenship for anyone that can get here,
Neither party has the numbers to shove anything through. If we are to accomplish anything in this country, it will require bipartisanship. MAGA'S my way or the highway stance isn't going to work.
Looks like they could vote on the deal as soon as this week. Lankford went on Fox on Sunday to defend the deal, noting that Republicans were the ones to demand border policy changes be tied to the national security supplemental in the first place. They asked for this.
Lankford also sought to dispel the growing belief that the border deal would allow 5,000 migrants into the country a day.
“It’s definitely not going to let a bunch of people in. It’s focused on actually turning people around,” Lankford said.
If they don't do a deal now then when? I know we have not seen the final text yet but from everything that has been leaked, how does anyone think a better deal is down the road? If Trump for some reason wins the election, he will enter office with the same immigration laws we currently have and the same limited ability as president to make any effective change without legislation from Congress.
Biden can't put anyone on the spot --- he can't find his way off a stage.
"On this immigration issue, he is telling the GOP before a national audience to put up or shut up. Mr Peepers, House Majority Leader Johnson says that Biden can through Executive Order make the needed changes. But is that really a cop out for Republicans who as a group have no real solution except to criticize Biden and the Democrats?"
Wow seems to have taken Biden a very, very long time to come up with those proposals --- Wonder why? Could it be he has just realized he has failed at the border, and has many states in an uproar, not to mention the majority of Americans --- Must really scratch my head at your view on this.
I must ask, straight up --- do you think this is an obvious political ploy on this administration's part?So what was Congress role in all of this to have been? As it has been mentioned by the far more enlightened left wing advocates here, getting legislation for comprehensive immigration reform has been elusive for some time, long before Biden.
With Control of the White House and Congress, Democrats Have 2 Years to Enact Change
"U.S. Democrats secured unified control of the White House and Congress on Wednesday with the inauguration of President Joe Biden followed by Vice President Kamala Harris swearing in three new Democratic senators."
The three new senators bring the U.S. Senate to a 50-50 Democratic-Republican tie, with Harris as the presiding officer representing the tie-breaking vote."
Must I reiterate that the previous presidents, over their respective terms, wielded a solid majority to push through virtually any agenda? So, what's your take on this? Doesn't it raise some suspicions? Come on, let's be real. All three predecessors faced significant issues concerning the border—neither Obama nor Trump encountered what we could genuinely label a national crisis. It's infuriating to see the lack of credibility here.
Surprised at you on this one. I think may be time to look at the entire picture, it is ugly and inexcusable. This issue should infuriate anyone with a bit of common sense ---
The problem was ignored until campaign season rolled in, and then the white horse pulled out with Biden coming to the rescue. And some are willing to see this as not being a cheap ploy... That says a lot... A whole lot.Alright, Sharlee, you have made your point. Neutral sources confirm the dissatisfaction with President Biden and the too little, too late position he is taking on the immigration issue. I will step back on this issue for more research.
But rest assured for every Biden failing, I can reference 10 for Trump and the Republicans and consequently, my choice of candidates under those circumstances remain quite clear.I can see you well set in your choice. Just a bit surprised no cracks with all we are witnessing coming out of this administration. I mean it is evening becoming hard to imagine what we will see next. There is just no one at the helm that can handle the many pressing, and problems to come.
As I have been sharing, time to be concerned, and scared.
"Must I reiterate that the previous presidents, over their respective terms, wielded a solid majority to push through virtually any agenda? "
And yet Trump was not able to pass any reform of our immigration laws or policy. You would actually have to go back to 1986 to find any substantial legislation. But again, I don't see it as a ploy especially since it was the Republicans who have linked immigration to current funding. In reality they asked for this, they set this up.
Lankford went on Fox on Sunday to defend the deal, noting that Republicans were the ones to demand border policy changes be tied to the national security supplemental in the first place. Be careful what you ask for I guess?Trump worked around Congress to decrease problems. Very unique solutions to cut the flow... He was and is smart enough to recognize problems and work around a stuck-in-mud Congress. I found his problem-solving refreshing, and intelligent, and showed he was working for the American people to do whatever he could to solve problems.
Under Donald Trump
In February 2017, Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly, pursuant to executive orders by Trump, ordered an end to so-called "catch-and-release" policies.
Remain in Mexico (officially Migrant Protection Protocols) is a United States immigration policy originally implemented in January 2019 under the administration of President Donald Trump, affecting immigration across the border with Mexico. Administered by the Department of Homeland Security, it requires migrants seeking asylum to remain in Mexico until their US immigration court date.
Deportations of unauthorized immigrants
In fiscal 2018 – the most recent year for which complete data is available – CBP and ICE together carried out 337,287 removals of unauthorized immigrants, a 17% increase from the previous year, according to the Department of Homeland Security.
The invitation was much resended under Trump. In my view, his stats show his problem-solving the enormous number that we have seen under Biden. Just my view.
Migrant encounters along the southwest border reach an all-time high of 302,000. It comes as the Justice Dept. is threatening to sue Texas. There were 302,000 encounters along the southwest border in December, marking the highest monthly total ever recorded, sources told ABC News.I don't dispute your numbers. Your posts are always well informed. But I do think what's missing here is the impact that covid had on migration.
a new Migration Policy Institute report, COVID-19's Effects on U.S. Immigration and Immigrant Communities, Two Years On, found that the pandemic led to sharp drops in immigration to the United States, to levels not seen in decades. I think we can also account for some of Trump's numbers on immigration due to the fact he had the tool of title 42 available to him.
Currently we are in a different landscape. A president alone has few tools at his disposal to address immigration without cooperation of our lawmaking body.
" I found his problem-solving refreshing, and intelligent, " How do you feel about his sexual assault then defamation of his victim? Disapproval of those kinds of actions calls for more than "I don't always agree with his behavior."
" I found his problem-solving refreshing, and intelligent, " How do you feel about his sexual assault then defamation of his victim? Disapproval of those kinds of actions calls for more than "I don't always agree with his behavior."
I've been actively sharing my thoughts on Ms. Jean Carroll's case over the past week. I firmly believe in the importance of listening to and believing all women. It requires great courage to open up about such horrific experiences.
Your question delves into a complexity that may not be immediately apparent. In my perspective, individuals typically possess a mix of assets, including positive and negative attributes, influencing their actions. Positive qualities can lead to sensible decisions in various aspects, like effective problem-solving during a crisis or making healthy choices.
However, the same person might lack a strong moral compass, resulting in poor decisions in moral matters—an aspect frowned upon by many in society. In an ideal scenario, a perfect human being would only exhibit positive attributes.
Regarding my view on Trump, I openly acknowledge my perception of him suffering from narcissistic personality disorder. While I cannot personally attest to whether he is a womanizer, my judgment is based on media reports. The numerous allegations of sexual harassment, including one accusation of rape by Ms. Carroll, and her legal victory, lead me to consider these claims credible. I respect the courage of the women who have come forward with their accusations.
I understand your curiosity about my potential support for Trump once again. Choosing a president is a serious undertaking, especially at this juncture. I've carefully evaluated who I believe would better serve the nation, considering their ability to make beneficial decisions during challenging times. While I value good morals, I must also weigh who possesses the intelligence to navigate and solve problems. In my view, Trump has repeatedly demonstrated that ability while he held office.
It's important to note that Joe Biden faced accusations of sexual abuse, and I take those allegations seriously, believing the accuser, much like I do with Ms. Carroll.
At this stage, it's crucial to assess job performance. Given the available candidates, I don't find a more prudent option. I'm not inclined to witness further decline in America under what I perceive as ineffective leadership."Accusations are not equivalent to convictions. And at some point a person's lack of moral integrity reaches a critical mass and a judgement has to be made reflecting your own integrity.
To be straightforward, your comment lacks some context, but I'll respond based on my interpretation.
While it's true that accusations don't automatically lead to convictions, there's a valid point in considering a person's moral integrity when it comes to reporting incidents like rape. Striking a delicate balance between due process and the necessity to form informed judgments about the character of those involved is crucial.
In Ms. Reide's case, she did file a report about her charge, but she claims that legal constraints prevented her from pursuing a lawsuit. On the other hand, Ms. Carroll benefited from the law, granting her the right to bring her very late claim lawsuit. Ms. Reide alleges that her rape occurred while she worked for Biden in Washington DC, and legal limitations dictated a time frame within which she could report the incident.
I would surmise we don't share the same view about believing a woman when she claims she was sexually abused unless her case makes it into a court of law. Am I correct? I note your view.
I don't feel I can share much more on this subject. I have shared two lengthy comments. They are my truth."I would surmise we don't share the same view about believing a woman when she claims she was sexually abused unless her case makes it into a court of law. Am I correct?"
You surmise incorrectly.This comment is what listed my response.
"Accusations are not equivalent to convictions. And at some point a person's lack of moral integrity reaches a critical mass and a judgement has to be made reflecting your own integrity."
I took your first sentence "Accusations are not equivalent to convictions."
It appeared you may have felt accusation just does not meet the mark as would a woman having her day in court, and proving her accusations.
This is where I feel differently, in the case of a woman coming forward to report sexual abuse... Laws can prevent a woman from bringing her claim into court.
Perhaps I read your words out of context? They seemed clear.“It appeared you may have felt accusation just does not meet the mark as would a woman having her day in court, and proving her accusations.”
the point is how do you compare an accusation with a conviction in a court of law? there is a difference that cannot be simply pasted over. One is going to have far more weight over the other. You are always the one that promotes innocent until proven guilty, bending over backward to accommodate Trump and his crimes. Why is that assessment different now?
Isn't it a crying shame that it is such a SIN that the Democrats and Republicans work together in the House to pass urgently needed legislation?
Here, the far-Right wants to take away Speaker Johnson's job for even considering working with the Democrats. To them it is OK that Russia defeat Ukraine with these Republican's help rather than work to save a democratic nation who doesn't want to live under the Russian yoke.
(And YES, I am equally condemning the far-Left who hold the same position vis-a-vis working with Republicans for the greater good.)
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/18/politics … index.htmlI can't disagree.
- 9 consecutive terms for Representatives
- 3 consecutive terms for Senators.
- 20 years for judges and Justices.
Related Discussions
- 18
So All You Republican's We Won A Majority In The House - What Now?
by Sharlee 2 years ago
Now that Republicans are set to take the majority of the House, I think it is safe to say that the Democrats are becoming fearful about all the investigations Republicans have threatened to proceed with if they won the majority. It would appear Republicans could move ahead with revving up all kinds...
- 67
House votes to approve impeachment inquiry into President Biden
by Castlepaloma 17 months ago
1 day ago — House approves impeachment inquiry into President Biden as Republicans rally behind investigation.Sounds too good to be true. Considering Three presidents have been impeached, although none were convicted: Andrew Johnson was in 1868, Bill Clinton was in 1998, and Donald Trump twice, in...
- 105
Biden Impeachment Inquiry - The Logical Next Step
by Sharlee 15 months ago
I'd love to hear your perspective on this current political matter. It's worth noting that the topic doesn't revolve around Trump, but it's intriguing because President Biden is seeking re-election for another four years in office."Fox News Digital has confirmed House Speaker Kevin McCarthy,...
- 115
President Biden is trying to repair America from Trump's damage.
by Scott Belford 4 years ago
To say that Donald Trump did all he could to impede President Biden from accomplishing the tasks America hired him to do is an understatement. He stooped so low that he fired, at 11:30 AM the chief Usher at the White House and sent most, if not all of the staff home. Consequently, there...
- 30
Is it President Biden, or really President McConnell?
by Credence2 4 years ago
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss"?There remains a bitter aftertaste in my drink toasting Biden's victory.When I realize that exchanging Biden for Trump was really not much more than changing the label on a package with fundamentally the same contents. Much like taking the image of...
- 73
The Biden Crime Family
by Readmikenow 22 months ago
Note: This is from a left-wing publication.FBI Document Reveals Biden Family’s International Bribery SchemeIn a stunning turn of events, an unclassified FBI document has been released, implicating President Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, in an alleged international bribery scheme. The document,...