Comments by "B Bodziak" (@B_Bodziak) on "Forbes Breaking News" channel.

  1. 993
  2. 33
  3. 28
  4. 27
  5. 24
  6. 21
  7. 20
  8. 19
  9. 18
  10. 17
  11. 16
  12. 15
  13. 14
  14. 14
  15. 14
  16. 13
  17. 13
  18. 13
  19. 13
  20. 12
  21. 11
  22. 11
  23. 11
  24. 11
  25. 10
  26. 10
  27. 9
  28. 9
  29. 9
  30. 9
  31. 9
  32. 8
  33. 8
  34. 8
  35. 8
  36. 7
  37. 7
  38. 7
  39. 7
  40. 7
  41. 7
  42. 7
  43. 7
  44. 7
  45. 7
  46. 7
  47. 7
  48. 7
  49. 7
  50. 7
  51. 6
  52. 6
  53. 6
  54. 6
  55. 6
  56. 6
  57. 6
  58. 6
  59. 6
  60. 6
  61. 6
  62. 6
  63. 5
  64. 5
  65. Did you watch the video? Maybe you meant to comment on a different video?? Out of 21 mins of this video, Cruz speaks for 18:30 of it. He sits there and gives speeches but complains and stops a nominee after 6-8 words. Cruz loves getting these videos posted and apparently, he likes the sound of his own voice. It's apparent that Cruz is just angry because he was over an hour late showing up. He even says he was late on this video- the first time he talks about it, he makes it sound like he was a few minutes late, but near the end of the video, we learn just how late he was and it's not just a few minutes. Because he was so late, and the nominee had already answered everyone's questions, Cruz didn't get to ask any questions because he wasn't there before the questioning ended. Durbin waited and waited for Cruz. Durbin asked Cruz's own personal staffer where he was and if he was coming, and she said she had no idea where he was, but thought he was coming. She also Ed but got no answer. So, Durbin waited even longer after that. ALL of tne Senators there had finished asking questions when the above exchange happened, but durbin kept them sitting there waiting in Cruz. He finally held the vote just like they are SUPPOSED to do. Now, Cruz is upset. This isn't the first time Cruz has failed to show up -- he even admits this in the video. Edit: Just like the comment after mine, I'm sure Cruz fans are going to read the headline and listen to the first 3-4 minutes and assume he was only a couple of minutes late. They need to watch the entire video before replying to my ccomments. I've added additional information to my comment for the next Cruz fan to watch the entire video, first.
    5
  66. 5
  67. 5
  68. 5
  69. 5
  70. 5
  71.  @deceptor99  What do your homebound citizen's and students studying abroad do to vote? My state, Georgia HAD secure ballot drop boxes at local libraries & fire stations where people, mostly the disabled, could leave their ballots. My county had one drop box per 20,000 residents. That's changed to one box per 100,000 residents. Thus, making boxes inaccessible to many. Previously, those SECURE, locked boxes were available during the early voting period 24 hrs/day so those working shifts longer than 9a-5p could insert their ballots before or after work. Now, the 10 ballot boxes has been reduced to 2 boxes AND the hours are limited (9-5), as well as the days (M-F). The boxes can no longer be at post offices and local libraries;. instead, they must be in the same location as the county elector's office -- an available only while this office is open for early voting. Well, if people could take their absentee ballots to their county's office of elections on a weekday during biz hours, they wouldn't need an absentee ballot. They would simply vote during early voting. The entire point of these secured boxes is to allow folks to turn their ballots in outside of normal biz operating hours. Just another way the current GOP is making it more difficult for Georgians to vote. ***You still haven't answered my question of what, if anything, Scotland does to ensure its disabled, elderly and nontraditional working hours workers'vare able to vote? From what you've stated, you're saying those who cannot physically get to a polling location are just shite out of luck. Also, are you allowed to vote at any open polling place in the country or are you limited to/assigned to vote at only one place?
    5
  72. 5
  73. 5
  74. 5
  75. 5
  76. 5
  77. 5
  78. 5
  79. 5
  80. 5
  81. 5
  82. 4
  83. 4
  84. 4
  85. 4
  86. 4
  87. 4
  88. 4
  89. 4
  90. 4
  91. 4
  92. 4
  93. 4
  94. 4
  95. 4
  96. 4
  97. 4
  98. 4
  99. 4
  100. 4
  101. 4
  102. 4
  103. 4
  104. 4
  105. 3
  106. 3
  107. 3
  108. 3
  109. 3
  110. 3
  111. 3
  112. 3
  113. 3
  114. 3
  115. 3
  116. 3
  117. 3
  118. 3
  119. 3
  120. 3
  121. 3
  122. 3
  123. 3
  124. 3
  125. 3
  126. 3
  127. 3
  128. 3
  129. 3
  130. 3
  131. 3
  132. 3
  133. 3
  134. 3
  135. 3
  136. 3
  137. 3
  138. 3
  139. 3
  140. 3
  141. 3
  142. 2
  143. 2
  144. 2
  145. 2
  146. 2
  147. 2
  148. 2
  149. 2
  150. 2
  151. 2
  152. 2
  153. 2
  154. 2
  155. 2
  156. 2
  157. 2
  158. 2
  159. 2
  160. 2
  161. 2
  162. 2
  163. 2
  164. 2
  165. 2
  166. 2
  167. 2
  168. 2
  169. 2
  170. 2
  171. 2
  172. 2
  173. 2
  174. 2
  175. 2
  176. 2
  177. 2
  178. 2
  179. 2
  180. 2
  181. 2
  182. 2
  183. 2
  184. 2
  185. If it's an incitement of violence it is not protected. Perhaps, doxxing should be made illegal. Or how about this -- If someone doxxed another in an online post and that post prompted others to threaten or especially harm the doxxed person, then, the person who doxxed the victim should be held as criminally liable as the person(s) who threatened and/or harmed the victim. Would it be okay if I told someone I knew was having a rage-filled schizophrenic episode and knew the person had weapons, to go and "Straighten someone out and here's their name and address," should I be held accountable because I knowingly encouraged someone with a mental disorder and access to weapons if they ended up harming the person? Well, when you post something similar on social media for the world to see, you have to know that if 10k people see it, one of them is almost certainly having a mental episode and could harm another. What if in the social media post, I said this person w/address was responsible for doing horrendous things that are likely to affect whoever is reading the post and the schizophrenic believes it and harms the stranger? Charles Manson didn't kill anyone himself. Did he not belong in prison for encouraging others to kill and even telling them who h house to go to? Imagine if Manson had simply posted the address and desires of harm in an online post, he could have relied on Free Speech to get him off being criminally liable. Think about that. Manson told his followers to harm the people in that house -- people NONE of them actually even knew, but he never went into the house himself.
    2
  186. 2
  187. 2
  188. 2
  189. 2
  190. 2
  191. 2
  192. 2
  193. 2
  194. 2
  195. 2
  196. 2
  197. 2
  198. 2
  199. 2
  200. 2
  201. 2
  202. 2
  203. 2
  204. 2
  205. 2
  206. 2
  207. 2
  208. 2
  209. 2
  210. 2
  211. 2
  212. 2
  213. 2
  214. 2
  215. 2
  216. 1
  217. 1
  218. 1
  219. 1
  220. 1
  221. 1
  222. 1
  223. 1
  224. 1
  225. 1
  226. 1
  227. 1
  228. 1
  229. 1
  230. 1
  231. 1
  232. 1
  233. 1
  234. 1
  235. 1
  236. 1
  237. 1
  238. 1
  239. 1
  240. 1
  241. 1
  242. 1
  243. 1
  244. 1
  245. 1
  246. 1
  247. 1
  248. 1
  249. 1
  250. 1
  251. 1
  252. 1
  253. 1
  254. 1
  255. 1
  256. 1
  257. 1
  258. 1
  259. 1
  260. 1
  261. 1
  262. 1
  263. 1
  264. 1
  265. 1
  266. 1
  267. 1
  268. 1
  269. 1
  270. 1
  271. 1
  272. 1
  273. 1
  274. 1
  275. 1
  276. 1
  277. 1
  278. 1
  279. 1
  280. 1
  281. 1
  282. 1
  283. 1
  284. 1
  285. 1
  286. 1
  287. 1
  288. 1
  289. 1
  290. 1
  291. 1
  292. 1
  293. 1
  294. 1
  295. 1
  296. 1
  297. 1
  298. 1
  299. 1
  300. 1
  301. 1
  302. 1
  303. 1
  304. 1
  305. 1
  306.  Tiguar Jagger  Hi Tiguar, My rep is Lucy McBath (D). Her only child, a17 yr old son, was murdered in the parking lot of a gas station by a man who was upset that an SUV w/4 teenagers had their car radio on too loud. So, he decided to unload his gun into their SUV. Then, he claimed self-defense, but security footage said otherwise. A handful of years later in 2018, she decided to run for Congress against a two decades long serving Republican, Rep. Karen Handel. It was a huge unexpected upset. I and many of my county's (district) residents couldn't be more pleased with her performance thus far. My condolences to you and your neighbors. I'm a bit familiar with some areas of your district, mainly the Rome and Dalton areas (got my vaccine in Rome last month). I know the attitudes of your area, and while I'm not surprised Marjorie TRAITOR Greene was elected (esp after running the opposition out of town), I am surprised that she has retained much of her early support. I would have thought the clips of her calling Q a patriot & her rants regarding Pelosi & other Democrats & how they needed to be killed, would have been a bit too much even for her average constituent (no offense). I hope the current admin has actively assigned a team to track down who is responsible for starting Q-Anon. I don't understand why it wasn't done 2-3 yrs ago! Because of MTG's continued support, I can only assume that you must be surrounded by Q-ers. I'm sorry (However, you have my pity if you, yourself, are wrapped up in that Q nonsense) I have a couple of trump supporters in my life, and while those relationships had a rocky time while he was in office, I don't know how I'd even approach trying to continue, even salvage, a relationship w/someone who believes that Q craziness. Out of curiosity, are people in your are who are Q-anon-ers open about it? Wear the t-shirt, car is bumper stickered-up, Q flags in their yards? I have always been an independent. I am more of a Democrat on social/societal issues but more fiscally conservative. Although, since 2017/18, I have realized I will likely never vote for another Republican. Since just prior to the 2020 election, I realized that a vote for any candidate other than the Democrat running, is, indirectly a vote for the Republican. So, I've accepted that I'll be voting straight Democrat for the next 20 years, likely longer. I believe strongly in the 2nd Amendment, but not enough to have people like trump, Gaetz, Boebert and MTG in office to keep it (2A). I'll gladly swap my guns in it means no more crazy candidates.
    1
  307. 1
  308. 1
  309. 1
  310. 1
  311. 1
  312. 1
  313.  @LayDeeTee1  I did not use racism as an argument for how Scotland votes. I really wish Republicans would stop accusing any & every one who isn't a republican from using racism as an argument for every argument. I reserve pegging anything as racist unless I believe it truly fits the definition of racism/racist. Try to open your mind up to the idea that every non-republican is a liberal and every liberal fits into your idea of what a liberal is and does. Just because I heard a Republican lie on a TV segment does not mean that I believe every Republican lies. Prior to anyone becoming a republican or a democrat or a liberal or a centrist or a progressive or an evangelical, he or she was & is first a human being, and that is the ONLY thing that can be said about every member of any political party. We may as well stop calling each other "liars and cheats" in regards to voting, because at this moment in time, EVERYONE accuses and believes it of the other side. I am an independent, who, until 2018, never cared much about a candidates party affiliation. However, I saw a huge shift in people when Trump came on the scene. I think I and 99% of other non-republicans have a hard time grasping Republicans' blinding faith in trump. I see so many talk about & treat him as if he parted the red sea or rose from the dead. We don't understand your unconditional loyalty to a candidate. I never hear a republican admit that Trump did something they didn't agree with unless they also excused him at the same time. It's as though your infatuation of him makes you blind to his mistakes. The countless lies he's told -- you don't even seem to notice; You excuse his "grab 'em by the ___" is merely locker room talk -- does that make it okay to do then? The one that REALLY puzzles me are the folks who are very strong in their Faith but didn't even pause when Trump said he's never asked God or Jesus for forgiveness because he's never done anything wrong that needed forgiving. It's confusing because I have always been if the understanding that Jesus was the only man to walk the Earth without sin. So, as quick as a non-republican is to point out one of Trump's flaws, there's a group of Republicans ready to justify why it's not a flaw -- always with the justification -- never an agreement that the action is unacceptable. I'm guessing it any other man talked about grabbing your mom or your daughter, your sister by the p***y, you'd be ready knick his lights out. Unless that man is trump and then you'd tell him to come back tomorrow for another handful.
    1
  314. 1
  315. 1
  316.  @unitedwestand5100  You're 61 and I'm 55. Since I was 18 yrs old, we have had early voting in GA. So, I don't understand how you can say we've only had one day to vote until recently. This is simply NOT true. You stated that until recently, if you wanted an absentee ballot, you had to make the request in person. This is simply NOT true. As you can now, a simple form can be mailed in to request an absentee ballot. The only thing that has changed is a voter can also fill out the same form online. With the exception for 2020 due to the pandemic, you had always been required to have a reason for why you were voting absentee. This has not changed. You're statement is simply not true. You stated that in our last election, 30 million votes were cast by illegals and 150 million were cast by people under age/too young to vote. That's a total of 180 million fraudulent votes. Mr. United, There weren't even that many votes cast in total. So, again, what you have stated is simply not true. Given your inability to add & subtract even very, VERY simple numbers, I can't even bother going through to explain how each if your remaining statemwnts are untrue because you obviously aren't able (able or capable?) of even the most basic type of research. I strongly suggest you stop watching whatever channel or site you think you are getting the news because it's certainly not providing you with factual information. Your statements are so far from reality, you may be watching a "Comedy News" program designed by Liberals to show republican incompetency. I think someone is, as Brits say, "taking the piss at you".
    1
  317. 1
  318. 1
  319. 1
  320. 1
  321. 1
  322. 1
  323. 1
  324. 1
  325. 1
  326. 1
  327. 1
  328. 1
  329. 1
  330. 1
  331. 1
  332. 1
  333. 1
  334. 1
  335. 1
  336. 1
  337. 1
  338. 1
  339. 1
  340. 1
  341. 1
  342. 1
  343. 1
  344. 1
  345. 1
  346. 1
  347. 1
  348. 1
  349. 1
  350. 1
  351. 1
  352. 1
  353. 1
  354. 1
  355. 1
  356. ​ @saltburner2  As opposed the Aileen Cannon, the most inexperienced judge AND attorney practicing in any courtroom. Cannon had only participated in a single case that went to trial before being nominated and becoming a judge, and in that case, she wasn't even the lead counsel. She's had 4 cases since becoming a judge in Jan 2021, and of those 4 cases, she screwed up royally in two of them. In the first case, she completely forgot to even swear-in the jury, and in the second case, she refused to allow the defendant's mom to be present in the gallery, even though there were open seats. Both the defense attorney AND the prosecutor both objexted and "reminded" Cannon of feferal case law requiring courts to allow a defendant's family/friend to be present when the govt presents their cases. Cannon still overruled their objections. The defendant was found "not guilty" by the jury, BUT the conviction was thrown out on appeal BECAUSE Cannon failed to allow the defendant's mother to be in the gallery to watch the trial. She's already had 3 of her rulings in the Trump docs case overturned because she simply has zero experience in a courtroom. Trump is going to lose the in the class docs case, and some of that loss will be shouldered by Aileen Cannon. She doesn't even know what she doesn't know. It took her an entire month to rule on a simple motion that most judges could and would have written in a couple of hours. She took a full month AND this is literally the only case she's had in 2023. I'd say Ms Lee has far more experience than many appointed to the federal bench.
    1
  357. 1
  358. 1
  359. 1
  360. 1
  361. 1
  362. 1
  363. 1
  364. 1
  365. 1
  366. 1
  367. 1
  368. 1
  369. 1
  370. 1
  371. 1
  372. 1
  373. 1
  374. 1
  375. 1
  376. 1
  377. 1
  378. 1
  379. 1
  380. 1
  381. 1
  382. 1
  383. 1
  384. 1
  385. 1
  386. 1
  387. 1
  388. 1
  389. 1
  390. 1
  391. 1
  392. 1
  393. 1
  394. 1
  395. 1
  396. 1
  397. 1
  398. 1
  399. 1
  400. 1
  401. 1
  402. 1
  403. 1
  404. 1
  405. 1
  406. 1
  407. 1
  408. 1
  409. 1
  410. 1
  411. 1
  412. 1
  413. 1
  414. 1
  415. 1
  416. 1
  417. 1
  418. 1
  419. 1
  420. 1
  421. 1
  422. 1
  423. 1
  424. 1
  425. 1
  426. 1
  427. 1
  428. 1
  429. 1
  430. 1
  431. 1
  432. 1
  433. 1
  434. 1
  435. 1
  436. 1
  437. 1
  438. 1
  439. 1
  440. 1
  441. 1
  442. 1
  443. 1
  444. 1
  445. 1
  446. 1
  447. 1
  448. 1
  449. 1
  450. 1
  451. 1
  452. 1
  453. 1
  454. 1
  455. 1
  456. 1
  457. 1
  458. 1