So, with the mute button, this might only be the 2nd worst debate in modern American political history. Yay.
5 ( +6 / -1 )
Good. Trump missed the opportunity to split the Latino vote in Florida by picking Barrett instead of Lagoa.
Focus, focus, focus on the election now - don’t be distracted.
Win the presidency, take back the senate and then can pack the court, strip the federal courts of juridiction... always been constitutional but now also fair return.
The Manchurian candidate presidency can still be undone.
-5 ( +1 / -6 )
Pack the court in 2021. Time has come.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
If they'd wanted him dead, he would be. They want to show they can kill if they want to.
more than that.. It was about making it excruciatingly painful,
3 ( +3 / -0 )
Speaking from the White House South Lawn despite criticism he was using the executive residence as a political prop,
That this is a almost a footnote perfectly illustrates how we grown to accept the egregious behavior of this president and administration. In any other time, Republican or Democrat, the outcry would have been deafening.
This truly is the true drip drip destruction of our norms and institutions. It may not have started with Trump but he sure as heck has put it into high gear.
4 ( +6 / -2 )
Does any serious, honest person doubt that Putin is a murderer?
nope. Not really. They’re not even going through the motions of a fake investigation. Must not have their scapegoat lined up quite yet.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
That’s what’s left of US leadership in the world today. Good job Trump...
3 ( +3 / -0 )
If it happens, this will cost the US the tax payers more.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
One of those figures of whom you can honestly say, he actually helped make America better.
8 ( +9 / -1 )
This shouldn’t be about being anti-police. Shouldn’t be just the concern of groups concerned about it being used to target people based on race.
It should be about recognizing this is a powerful technology that could be used to great harm by whomever against whomever.
Not event the staunchest supporter of the police would want to allow them unrestricted use of any powerful technology - say wiretapping tech for instance.
I’m not sure the potential extra safety is worth the trade off in surrendering more of our privacy, or in running the risk of this technology being abused by tomorrow’s managers of the technology. Certainly not without a real discussion. What happens as these technologies becomes increasingly inteconnected? AI to facial recognition technologies to databases, to your phone’s gps info, to your Internet browsing data, to drone surveillance info ? Are we sure we will always trust those who will own the keys to these systems? You may be in the “safe group” today. Tomorrow?
0 ( +0 / -0 )
No, not at all.
If you don’t want to understand there’s not much any of us can do
Why is it necessary to tear one side down to bring another side
Its not but this another long-winded strawman distraction of yours.
Fact are clear : the American experience is very different for a black man vs for a white man . If you’re black man you’re much more likely to be killed or hurt by the police.
We don’t have time and can’t for these cutesy ALM distractions anymore. You can part of the solution about to help or not
-2 ( +2 / -4 )
All Lives Matter.... where did you not understand the definition of "All".
I’m pretty clear on definition of “All”. But you seem to have had difficulty with a sentence and even paragraph long thought...
Maybe this will help. Let’s say there’s an oppressed Christian minority in a country with a different dominant religion. Let’s say every time these oppressed Christians react to some atrocity saying “we matter too”, the majority respond “we all matter” and then things continue merrily along the way they always have. That help.
6 ( +7 / -1 )
All Lives Matter used to be perfectly fine to say. Now its some type of counter protest
I don’t see why it such a challenge for some to understand. Of course all lives matter. No one said they don’t. What we’re saying is that ALL lives don’t matter until black lives matter to all.
“All Lives Matter” has been and is used as a counter to minimize or dismiss the very real issues specific to, faced by African Americans
8 ( +14 / -6 )
The fact that the SDIG was fired, whether or not he was even investigating Pompeo, reeks.
And, if it pans out that Linick was probing a complaint against Pompeo when he was fired, would you yes or no have an issue with the firing? I’d like to hear at least one Trump partisan stake a position there.
yes or no?
14 ( +14 / -0 )
A Democratic congressional aide, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Linick was probing complaints that Pompeo misused a political appointee to perform personal tasks for himself and his wife.
We all know that Fox News/OAN and their Kool-aid drinkers who will defend Trump for doing this would’ve lost their collective minds and called for impeachment if Obama had. Zero doubt there. I look forward to their demonstrating that rank hypocrisy yet again.
That being said, for the rational among us, while firing the SDIG reeks on its own, the claim that Linick was probing a complaint against Pompeo needs to be verified. Right now it’s “just” a claim from an anonymous source. We wouldn’t to leap to accepting claims by anonymous sources as truth without investigation. Time to investigate another likely instance of how this administration thinks it is above any ethical, legal, moral restraints.
16 ( +16 / -0 )
Didnt her long to break her word. Someone explain to McEnany that stretching, bending, mischaracterizing the facts is in fact lying. We won’t get the truth from this one either.
4 ( +4 / -0 )
Trump on Friday claimed he had been speaking "sarcastically."
Trump’s go to when he says something stupid. It’s pretty clear he doesn’t know what sarcastic means either.
4 ( +6 / -2 )
No matter how incompetent Trump proves himself to be his cult followers will always amazingly gaslight themselves into believing the idiot is being treated unfairly.
Like it or not, Trump’s bungled this. His incompetence, unbelievable.
“Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible.” Donald J. Trump 2013
That didn’t age well at all.
On the lag in testing ““No, I don’t take responsibility at all because...” Donald J. Trump 2020
7 ( +13 / -6 )
We know for a fact that Trump believes wars help incumbents win re-election
Donald J. Trump
@BarackObama will attack Iran in the not too distant future because it will help him win the election. If the…
> “Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate. He's weak and he's ineffective. So the only way he figures that he's going to get reelected — and as sure as you're sitting there — is to start a war with Iran.”
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Bill Taylor and George Kent, like Yovanovitch, are a credit to the Department of State. These are the professionals out there actually serving our country. We can be proud to have them. Shame we can’t have folks of the same caliber in the White House or even in Congress. Trump’s not even fit to hold their water.
The American public is getting really bored with this, they can’t really tell the difference between Russia and the Ukraine
Maybe so but Bill and George explained it pretty well. Our national interest is to support Ukraine against an aggressive, belligerent Russia. All the more reason for Republicans to stop muddying the waters to defend the Orange turd and start putting country before party, or political expediency.
17 ( +21 / -4 )
in view of the source (extremely credible witness), what was layed out, the corroborating evidence this is pretty damning. Not one. but 2 quid pro quo’s pretty well established now.
3 ( +3 / -0 )
U.S. President Donald Trump, whose order to pull back U.S. troops from the border this week effectively triggered the invasion, said Washington would now seek to broker a truce.
what? Either Trump green lit this or he got rolled by Erdogan. Now he wants to mediate? Abysmal incompetence.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
So, when’s Bill Taylor up?
“As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign,”
“Are we now saying that security assistance and [White House] meeting are conditioned on investigations?”
Bill Taylor - top diplomat after Yovanovitch; widely respected, career diplomat
“...Call me”Gordon Sondland (political appointee who donated 1 million dollars to Trump’s inaugural committee)
from everything that’s come out only complete simpleton would believe that Trump was really just trying to fight corruption. I challenge any Trump supporter to state it was not about his political rival it was about corruption.
3 ( +5 / -2 )
So she wasn’t disparaging the president in a foreign country and telling people not to do what they were ordered to do?
wow... If that’s really the best you guys can muster as a comeback argument to what the ambassador has laid out you’re really out of gas.
5 ( +8 / -3 )
It’s a pity that we’re losing someone like McKinley. He has a stellar reputation within the service as a professional, straight arrow and a good person.
Not sure on what basis anyone would call McKinley a “deep swamper”?
Its like amb. Yovanovitch said, the service is being hollowed out. We’re losing good people.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
More than enough evidence to kick off an impeachment inquiry.
isn’t this exactly what Trump and co. were goading Democrats to do?
3 ( +3 / -0 )
Trump firsters are okay to put the lives of American servicemen and women at risk for Trump's vanity project.
Delayed Projects that Trump firsters are okay with:
*" They include potentially hazardous living conditions for troops and their families, as well as unsafe schools that would impede learning. In numerous cases, the Defense Department warned that lives would be put at risk if buildings don’t meet the military’s standards for fire safety or management of explosives."*
"One of the military facilities — a 1957 structure on the Portsmouth, Va., shipyard known as “Building #510” — had been cited for numerous “life safety violations” that threatened the well-being of hundreds of workers if not heavily renovated,"
By saying Congress should backfill these budgets, essentially an end run around congress, Trump firsters are also saying they're okay for Congress abdicating it's constitutional role of controlling the purse. If Congress had meant to fund the wall it would have.
You want the money? Get Congress to vote for it. That's the way it works.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
So I guess if the next Democrat president uses military funds for whatever they is an emergency (climate change related, gun control...) and for which Congress didn’t vote funds for then I’m sure the same people who say it’s okay to divert now won’t object
1 ( +2 / -1 )
Drip, drip, drip, hope they have the courage to impeach the.
So cute the wild-eyed defence of the orange couch potato by the Trump no-matter-whaters. You really have to be so invested in this guy that even just what we know from the summary transcript doesn't strike you has indefensible conduct by a president. It's incredible.
3 ( +4 / -1 )
Doesn’t Russia have a law that imposes 5 year prison sentences for those who “promote” separatism? Russia fans it elsewhere, represses it at home. Got it
1 ( +3 / -2 )
Posted in: Free your smile with this clear mask