Comments by "gary K" (@garyK.45ACP) on "Fox Business"
channel.
-
1000
-
885
-
417
-
288
-
232
-
226
-
196
-
🤣 I live in Florida. Here's some clues for Newsom:
1. Our great Governor, and future President, Ron DeSantis doesn't need to encourage people to move here with ads on TV.
2. I haven't heard of anyone moving from Florida to California. 🤷🏼♀️
3. We have thousands of U-Haul/Ryder and Penske moving trucks parked at lots in Florida and people are being paid to return them to NY, NJ, CA, IL, MA, PA
4. California, for the first time since it became a state, LOST representation in the US House of Representatives. Florida GAINED representation.
That said...anyone in Florida who wants the "freedom" of California, I'll help you load your truck. Buh, bye!
166
-
163
-
160
-
160
-
148
-
143
-
142
-
129
-
113
-
110
-
97
-
94
-
87
-
87
-
82
-
80
-
78
-
77
-
72
-
71
-
68
-
65
-
65
-
65
-
64
-
63
-
62
-
62
-
61
-
60
-
57
-
53
-
53
-
52
-
52
-
50
-
50
-
49
-
49
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
The AR 15 is the unquestioned TOP CHOICE for competition shooting. There is virtually NO OTHER rifle used in many types of target competition. That said, I agree that they will not be banned. There WILL BE no bans of firearms. We MAY see the age raised to 21 to buy any gun (I oppose that, but it may happen) and we MAY, I hope, see the end of "gun free zones" in schools. ALL military rifles throughout our history have been popular for hunting and target shooting. The AR rifle has been our service rifle longer than any other rifle and it is more popular because of that. ALL military rifles are designed to kill, but from the Civil War on, military rifles have been the premier sporting rifles in the USA (and other countries, Canadians, Australians and the British love their Enfields. Austrians love their Mannlichers). Military grade weapons...like M1903 Springfields, 1898 Mausers, which form the basis of what this guy calls "sporting rifles".
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
Hillary is not "beyond reproach" but she IS "beyond statute". The statute of limitations for these federal crimes is 5 years. "This guy", as a former Federal Prosecutor, knows that. You don't.
In fact, Michael Sussman and Oleg Derapaska were charged on the LAST DAY before the statute tolled on their crimes.
There will be no criminal prosecution of Hillary because there can not be. Unless a prosecutor could prove, in court, beyond reasonable doubt, that her crimes were of the very few with longer statutes of limitations, there can be no prosecution. She can not even be charged.
Coincidence? Not likely. But that doesn't matter.
The penalty for Clinton, in this case, will be political, not criminal. Just as this informed and knowledgeable man said.
Your lack of knowledge does not change the law. It only assures you will be disappointed because of unreasonable expectations.
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
Most people who work as full time employees in a serious job get paid time off. I recall my son, working as a part time clerk in a grocery store, years ago, got paid sick time and vacation time (he got half the amount full time workers got, but still got something)
Throughout my career, I had paid sick days, paid vacation days, I could accumulate unused sick pay up to 30 days (company short term disability took over after 30 days). 2 floating holidays, day off for birthday. After 25 years, I got 8 weeks vacation a year! I was there for 36 years.
Why shouldn't a railroad worker get the same sort of benefits? These aren't "contractors", these are employees with responsible, full time jobs.
I can't imagine teachers, nurses, police officers, firefighters, bus drivers or any number of corporate office staff NOT having these benefits.
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
The Senate is half of Congress. The other half of Congress is the House of Representatives.
That requires a Constitutional Amendment. A Constitutional Amendment requires that 2/3 of the Legislators that would be term limited, in BOTH chambers of Congress, VOTE to limit their own terms and THEN the Amendment has to be ratified by 3/4 of the State Legislatures. And many of those legislators WANT to be Federal Legislators.
(and PLEASE...spare me the Congress of states route, that has happened exactly ONCE in our nations history, in 1787 and STILL requires 3/4 of the states to ratify an amendment introduced by 2/3 of the states)
Bottom line, spoiler alert: Ain't gonna happen.
On the other hand, YOU have the opportunity to limit their terms every two years. But the vast majority of people can't even tell you WHO their representatives and Senators ARE. Can't name them, wouldn't know them if they bumped into them. Don't check their voting records, which is all public info., have no idea what their positions are. Are you kidding? They don't even know their names! YOU don't even know the names of the two chambers of Congress!!!!!!
AND...
Only a little over half the people in the country are registered to vote, and maybe 65% of them actually vote.
Our representatives are being elected by 35% of people who could vote, most of them couldn't name the people they voted for and YOU think the solution is to ask the politicians to limit their own terms?!?!?!?! 🤡🤪
A representative Republic requires the attention of the electorate. Putting it on auto pilot and just flushing out everyone every few years...just because "time's up!"...would not only NOT be a representative Republic, it's ASININE!!!!!!! You can't fix STUPID with a policy of just replacing everyone on a timeclock!
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Actually, the Supreme Court does NOT have that power. The Federal District Court can remove the judge FROM THIS CASE and assign another Judge TO THIS CASE, but only an impeachment can remove a sitting judge.
The Supreme Court WILL NOT, and should not, interfere at this point.
If the Appeals court refuses to hear his case "en banc" and Sullivan does not dismiss the case...as he has been ORDERED to do, then it is likely the Appeals Court WOULD assign another Judge to the case. All of that will take TIME.
How will it play out?
1. Most likely the Circuit Court will deny Sullivan's petition. They have already ruled in similar cases, there is no need to reinvent the wheel. The court will deny the petition, citing precedent.
2. Sullivan will ignore the order to dismiss. Just ignore it. Do nothing.
3. Then, after a reasonable period (probably 30 days), Flynn's attorney will file a request to have Sullivan removed and a new judge assigned. In another 30-60 days the Circuit Court will rule on that motion.
OR
4. The Circuit court COULD, on their own or by a cross filing by Flynn's attorney, deny Sullivan's motion AND assign another judge in one ruling, and they MAY if they consider his actions to be slow walking justice for an innocent man. That would be the best case.
The law is NOT "self enforcing". No one "has to do" anything just because the law says that is what they are supposed to do. Each and every court order is subject to "due process" by specific court action. Each action requires a motion, or petition, by an interested party and then takes time to be ruled upon. It is ALWAYS like this, in every court case. This is why cases can take YEARS to be resolved.
Please try to remember, it is the INTENT of Judge Emmet Sullivan to FORCE President Trump to pardon Flynn. Why? Because it would spare the DOJ and FBI the embarrassment of having the case dismissed. Have you read the dismissal order? It sounds like an indictment of James Comey! If the Judge is FORCED to sign it, it will damage the FBI and DOJ.
IF Flynn is pardoned, Sullivan is "off the hook" and so is the DOJ and FBI in the case. NO! We WANT the DOJ and FBI to be embarrassed and pounded into the ground and THEN pardon Flynn so no one can dream up new charges against him
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@ExtraordinaryLiving They may be lazy, but they are not stupid. I live in Florida. The state unemployment maxes out at $275/week. But the Federal PEUC pays the maximum state benefit PLUS $300/week for not working. Add to that all the other benefits a person can get if unemployment is their only income...food stamps are maxed out until September, for example.
IF they work, even a little, their earnings are deducted, dollar for dollar, from their UI benefits. If they earn even $1 more than $275 for a week (before tax!), they also lose the $300 Federal benefit for that week.
Add it all up and retail workers that get $10-13/hour before tax, $400-520/week are getting, minimum, $575/week to go fishing. Imagine what they get in other states!
AND the government just exempted $10,200 of their unemployment benefits for 2020 from income tax, waived the need to repay excess tax credits for Obamacare, AND they do not even have to do a work search (Gov. DeSantis says they will have to start doing that in June)
The government does everything they possibly can to disincentivize work. UNLESS a person is making...wait for it...$15/hr. or more.
Hmmm...what was that minimum wage the Democrats wanted? 🤔
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@trombone79 No one will prosecute. But that is NOT the question before the Court at this time. Sullivan has not ruled on the case.
This case regards Flynn's Writ of Mandamus which requested the DC Circuit Court (Sullivan's "Boss") to FORCE Sullivan to rule in Flynn's favor. The three judge panel GRANTED the Writ and ORDERED Sullivan to dismiss the case, citing precedent in both the DC Circuit and the Supreme Court.
Sullivan then asked for the case to be reheard by the full DC Appeals Court, "en Banc". The Court could have denied his request and ordered him to dismiss OR remove him from the case and assign it to another judge...but they didn't.
They decided to hear his arguments en Banc. The dissenting Judge of the three judge panel was of the opinion that Sullivan should be allowed to rule and THEN Flynn could appeal the case IF the ruling was against him. The dissenting judge suggested that the Writ was premature. IF a majority of other judges agree, then the case goes BACK to Sullivan to rule. If Sullivan does not dismiss the case (he still could) THEN Flynn would have to wait for Sullivan's ruling and appeal THAT through the process. And YES, it could take a long time. And YES, that is Sullivans goal, to TAKE a long time and FORCE President Trump to pardon Flynn which would allow Democrats, forever, to say "Flynn is guilty", it would prevent the corruption at the DOJ and FBI from being adjudicated and it would prevent Flynn from having grounds to SUE the government.
He will most likely LOSE that also as there is solid precedent to support the Writ of Mandamus.
DO NOT PARDON FLYNN!!!!!! Be patient, he WILL WIN.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@TheDaadd So...a little education. Start up small businesses are currently skyrocketing, they don't need any incentive. Give people spare time and $600 a week to do nothing and many of them find a way to create a business to make money which does not have to be reported. No surprise. A lot of people took that time to develop something to make themselves less vulnerable.
I agree with some sort of bonus for essential workers. The employees of the stores that were closed got $600 + per week, the cashiers at Walmart, the grocery store and the $12/hr nurses aids should get something. A $10,000 REFUNDABLE tax credit OR a $10,000 tuition credit (which equals the average amount of federal unemployment paid) would be good...AND would continue to stimulate the economy into next year.
Better than tapering off unemployment benefits would be a "return to work bonus" of some amount ($450/week for 8 weeks has been suggested) End the federal unemployment and give people a bonus for taking a job, ANY JOB, PLUS a payroll tax holiday and you are incentivising WORK. By the end of September, everyone will find a job, just to get the extra $450/week! All those available jobs will look a LOT better when they include an extra $450 v. LOSING $600/wk. It doesn't take a genius to see that if I take ANY job I am suddenly $1050/wk better off than if I don't...PLUS whatever the job pays, PLUS a 7% raise for not having to pay payroll tax.
It would be as easy to report and verify as UNemployment is. Use the same system to report EMployment as you use to report UNemployment.
THAT would help those "millions without a job"
Democrats will HATE it.
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Darth Raven. Several reasons. 1) We have a RIGHT to own firearms. It is settled law. It is an individual RIGHT as determined by the Supreme Court in TWO rulings. 2) 18 is the age of majority...ADULT as determined by our laws. There are NO other RIGHTS which one must wait until age 21 to exercise. (drinking alcohol is NOT a RIGHT) 3) There has been exactly ONE mass shooter between the age of 18-21. The others were older than 21 OR in the case of Columbine HS, under age 18. It seems like a solution in search of a problem.
Our laws and authorities FAILED these victims at every level. The FBI failed, the local Sheriff FAILED, even the officers sent to respond FAILED. Inside, there were brave people who sacrificed their lives for others...but they were disarmed by the authorities that FAILED to protect them. We need to allow trained teachers and staff to carry concealed firearms. When all the other laws fail, as we see they do, the last resort has to be a brave person inside is equipped to do more than DIE to protect others. When planes were hijacked we ARMED the pilots...no more hijackings. NONE.
The politicians and media flail around trying to angle this to their agenda, to make ANOTHER law, or laws, that will fail because you are trying to legislate against someone who is willing to KILL STUDENTS by the truckload! Seriously? No, you need to be prepared to KILL someone who is like that. No law will prevent it. The next shooter already has his gun and ammunition, he is out there, what are WE going to do when ALL the safeguards FAIL and he shows up at the door? I say...SHOOT BACK!
Replace the "No guns allowed sign" with a sign that says "Our Staff is armed and trained to KILL anyone who attempts to harm our students. Have a Nice Day"
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@uno1087 Well, none of those people got in their positions without the VOTES of the electorate. The party/parties should not tell people who is not welcome, the people should tell the party/parties who is not welcome.
All of those people, except Trump, have recently (2022) been nominated in the primary process and elected in the general election. Therefore they are, by definition, "welcome" by the voters in their districts. Whether people outside their districts "welcome them", or not, is irrelevant.
But, like you, I support DeSantis for President, 2024!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mannypistolas92 "Highness." Not "hyness". Altesse. Высочество.
Ownership of refineries in any country is completely irrelevant to the topic of opening our (United States) oil resources to production and export sale of crude oil. I have no clue how you could imagine I could possibly care about who owns an oil refinery in any country.
You asked, so...
I read, write and speak three languages, with two alphabets. Russian French and English. With an MA in Applied Languages, in Russian, from Kathryn Wasserman Davis School of Russian at Middlebury College, Middlebury, VT. Including one year of study at Moscow State University in Moscow, Russia.
Speaking of geopolitics, I lived and worked in an official capacity in the US government in 3 countries (Russia, Ukraine and Canada). Would you like to discuss geopolitics?
My wife, a naturalized US citizen, was born and raised in Kharkiv, Ukraine. Our children are dual citizens. We own property in two states in the USA where we are now retired, and in Kharkiv which, so far, has not been destroyed. 🤞🏼
My wife speaks three languages, Russian, Ukrainian and English and our children speak those plus one speaks German and another speaks French.
Any other questions?
Хорошего дня! Passe une bonne journée!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Who appointed Wray, Larry? TRUMP!!!!!!
Who else did TRUMP appoint, Larry? Wray, Rosenstein, Tillerson, Barr, Fauci, Birx, Chao, Mattis, Milley. Drain the swamp? Build the wall? End DACA? End Obamacare? Lock her up?
TRUMP did NONE of that.
DeSantis, 2024.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@keithmazzapica5188 I send money regularly. My mother in law, youngest son, daughter in law, grandson, brother in law, sister in law and nephews are in Kharkiv, Ukraine. My wife is a naturalized US citizen born in Kharkiv. Our sons are dual citizens. Don't make assumptions about people you don't know. My family is doing more than it's share.
YES, "we", the United States, should be a leader in the world and help Ukraine fight Russians in Ukraine, so WE don't have to fight them in NATO countries.
Go reply to someone else's comment if you want to bury your head in Putin's zhopa like it's a face ring on a massage table.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Blah, blah, blah.
Republicans will agree to raise the debt limit and get nothing for it.
Congress has NEVER failed to raise the debt limit. Republicans will not cut funding for ANYTHING. Nothing. Not the DOJ, IRS, FBI. Nothing. This is theater. There will be NO impeachments of anyone. Not Myorkas, Garland, Haaland, Yellen, Buttigieg, Wray...no one. Republicans will DO nothing.
McCarthy should never have been chosen as leader. But, after more theater, everyone caved in and chose him.
Until Republicans stand up and say NO!!!!!!!!!, and YES, that means "shutting down the government" and keeping it shut down for as long as it takes to change things. They won't, and everyone KNEW McCarthy would never do that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The statute of limitations for these federal crimes is 5 years. "This guy", as a former Federal Prosecutor, knows that.
In fact, Michael Sussman and Oleg Derapaska were charged on the LAST DAY before the statute tolled on their crimes.
There will be no criminal prosecution of Hillary because there can not be. Unless a prosecutor could prove, in court, beyond reasonable doubt, that her crimes were of the very few with longer statutes of limitations, there can be no prosecution. She can not even be charged.
Coincidence? Not likely. But that doesn't matter.
The penalty for Clinton, in this case, will be political, not criminal. Just as this informed and knowledgeable man said.
A lack of knowledge of the law does not change the law. It only assures disappointment because of unreasonable expectations caused by ignorance.
I am sure more will come out. I am sure Hillary won't like it. But expecting her to go to prison for crimes beyond the statute of limitations is unreasonable
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When Governor DeSantis becomes President in January, 2025 after the 2024 election...Anna Paulina Luna is one of the really good candidates we would have for Governor in the future.
We also have Byron Donalds, Greg Steube, Webster Barnaby, Jennette Nunez, Ashley Moody. A very deep bench of young, solid conservatives.
Initially, he will be replaced by Lt. Governor Jennette Nunez, who is a great conservative herself, to finish his term. In 2026 there would be a primary and another election.
We have so many great choices to keep Florida FREE for decades.
...and a great place for Donald Trump to be retired.
DeSantis, 2024!!!!!!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@harryleonard746 You must know your answer makes you irrelevant. If you did not vote for Trump in 2016, he doesn't need you to win in 2020. Fact is, unless you live in one of SIX important "swing states" and change your vote from Trump to Democrat, you really don't matter at all. If you live in a safe "Blue" state or safe "Red" state, your vote is already counted. OR if you live in a swing state but voted for Clinton in 2016, you are completely irrelevant.
Have a nice day.
Just in case, I'll say it Russian also.
Вы должны знать, что ваш ответ делает вас неуместным. Если вы не голосовали за Трампа в 2016 году, ему не нужно, чтобы вы выигрывали в 2020 году. Фактически, если вы не живете в одном из шести важных «колеблющихся штатов» и не измените свой голос с Трампа на Демократа, вы действительно этого не сделаете. имеет значение вообще. Если вы живете в безопасном «синем» или безопасном «красном» штате, ваш голос уже засчитан. ИЛИ если вы живете в состоянии колебания, но проголосовали за Клинтона в 2016 году, вы совершенно не относитесь к делу.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Where's MY $10,000? What a dumbass move! Let's make all the people who worked their @sses off to pay for college for themselves or their kids pay for this. What about the people who got valuable college degrees, the got good jobs and PAID their student loans? Let's make all the people who didn't go to college, or the ones who went to college and got useful degrees pay for this. Doctors, Engineers, attorneys, accountants, IT engineers...they PAID their loans, if any, because they got good jobs making a lot of money. Let's also make the people who went to trade school or tech school or apprenticeships pay for this.
So...all you truck drivers, medical technicians, nurses, HVAC Mechanics, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, factory workers, construction workers, farmers...you GET NOTHING and YOU have to pay for the college degree of the Starbuck's barista's worthless liberal arts degree!!!!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@politicallyincorrect9027 They don't need a party and can think for themselves. They're called "Independents". You can even register to vote as an Independent (if your state has partisan voter registration)
Bernie Sanders, Angus King and Kirsten Sinema are examples of Independents currently in Congress. Joe Lieberman was another.
Lisa Murkowski once lost the Republican primary, ran as an independent, WON, and rejoined the Republican party.
Bill Clinton won the Presidency, TWICE, because an Independent, Ross Perot, drew enough votes away from the Republican to allow Clinton to win with just 43% of the vote.
Teddy Roosevelt had been a Republican President from 1901-1909, left office and came back to run as an Independent in 1912. He drew enough votes to throw the election into the House of Representatives for a decision.
You knew all of that, right?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
He is testing Biden for other purposes. Not sure what those purposes are, but we will find out. I doubt he will invade Ukraine.
In 1979 the USSR (Putin was a Colonel in the KGB) put a reinforced brigade into Cuba.
President Carter, worried the USSR would invade Nicaragua or El Salvador, where communists were fighting the governments, demanded the USSR withdraw their troops. Brezhnev told Carter to go f*ck himself. Carter did nothing. Finally, as was released after 25 years of classification, the US negotiators asked the Soviets what would they do if the US announced that the Soviets would withdraw because of Carter's demands? The Soviets told them "We don't care if you lie to your country"
Carter announced that the Soviets would be withdrawing their troops and claimed "victory" in his negotiations. In 1979 there was no internet, no "connected" independent reports to counter what the government lied about.
A few months later the Iranians, who had intel from the USSR, staged a revolution and seized our embassy and Americans in Iran and held them hostage until the day President Reagan was inaugurated.
A month after that, the Soviets having satisfied themselves that Carter would do nothing, even right in his own backyard, the troops showed up again. In Afghanistan.
Our enemies are watching and testing us.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Congress doesn't "enforce" anything. They aren't law enforcement, they aren't the judiciary. That's an Article II, Executive, responsibility. There are no Republicans in the executive branch.
As for Congress, Republicans do not control the AGENDA of either the House or the Senate. It means they can propose all the legislation they want, (submit bills) and Nancy Pelosi can throw it in the trash can. In the Senate, Chuck Schumer can throw it in the trash can.
EVEN if a Republican piece of legislation were to pass with the help of a few Democrats, Biden would VETO it and they do not have enough votes to override.
IF we give control of Congress back to the Republicans, by VOTING for them, they will be able to SHUT DOWN the democrat agenda and, while Biden could still veto legislation, Congress controls the "purse" and CAN defund any of Biden's executive orders...IF they have the balls to do it.
7 months from today...VOTE
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I don't blame them. Under current procedures, and the current political situation, Republicans have nothing to gain.
The best way to do Presidential candidate debates would be to have a series of debates on particular issues, ONE issue per debate and allow each candidate 30-45 minutes to discuss their plans on that issue. Then each candidate can have a 15 minute rebuttal period. No "moderator" per se.
OR
If we continue with the current format, then each candidate gets to pick a "questioner" to ask questions of his opponent and the candidates have NO SAY on who the other candidate picks to ask questions. The questioner could be ANYONE, not just a media talking head. In fact, it would be better to have knowledgeable questioners, rather than media talking heads. For example, the Republican candidate could choose former Congressman Trey Gowdy, or Senator Ted Cruz.
Again, the debates should focus on ONE issue per debate. An aggregated average of 4 surveys (2 pollsters chosen by each candidate) could determine the top 5 issues voters are concerned with and have 5 debates.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Russ Gallagher Not really a "disgrace". It is called "due process"
Everyone does it, in every case, civil and criminal, from "small claims" to the Supreme Court, at least as much as they can afford to do so. Everyone seems to be OK with "due process" when it works in their favor, but it is a "disgrace" when it doesn't.
FWIW Trump has done the same thing and the SCOTUS rulings this week on his taxes are perfect examples.
Bearing in mind that the Dems GOAL was to obtain his taxes prior to the election hoping to "mine them" for "political dirt" , they LOST. Both rulings did not deliver his taxes and essentially thres the cases back for more litigation that has -0- chance of being settled before the election. Trump WINS!
Congress does not have his taxes and NOW has 4 new "legal tests" they have to meet in order to subpoena anything from any President! How is that a win for Pelosi? (she said it was) 🤪. Always remember "The Presidency" is NOT the same as "the President". SCOTUS made it more difficult for Congress to ever get ANY information from ANY President. As they SHOULD. It was a HUGE LOSS for Congress, thanks to Pelosi. Congress and the Presidency are "equal" branches of government. The President does NOT report to Congress. Congress is NOT his "boss".
As far as the SDNY case, while the court did say that Trump's reasons for opposing the subpoena were not valid, they did state other reasons that would be valid. (SCOTUS almost never does that!) In other words, they gave Trump a "roadmap" to follow to challenge the subpoenas. He will.
NO ONE got his taxes, all they got was more litigation, none of which will be concluded before the election. Trump wins!
Due process.
Another example...Roger Stone. Roger Stone is seeking to get a new trial, and he has legitimate reasons to ask for one. It is normal to allow a convicted person to remain free on bail while he goes through "due process" as long as that person is not a flight risk or a risk to the community. Stone is neither. He doesn't have a passport and "lying to congress" is hardly something you worry about when walking into a dark parking garage late at night. But the judge denied his request, which was clearly political. Trump fixed that by commuting the prison sentence but allowing Stone to continue seeking a new trial. A pardon would deny Stone the opportunity to prove his innocence in a trial and forever allow Democrats to say he was "guilty". Due process.
On another note...what is Trump hiding in his taxes? Simple. Congress, in writing tax code, has given huge breaks to the hospitality industry because if they didn't no one would ever open a Hotel or Resort. Without going into exhaustive detail (I could) Trump used those exemptions to maximize his profits...as ANY BUSINESS SHOULD! It is perfectly legal, and even the INTENDED result of the tax code. Trump was a businessman, NOT a politician. He had a fiduciary duty to his investors to maximize profits.
There were probably many years that Trump entities (NOT the same as Donald Trump) did not pay tax at all. Similar to Amazon, etc. The tax code allows them to "write off" their income in one LEGAL WAY or another. Thus protecting the industry and the millions of jobs it provides. Thank you, Congress!
Democrats would LOVE to be able to say "Look, he is a billionaire and you pay more taxes than he does!" (conflating business with personal taxes, no problem for Dems) It has been said that "Jeff Bezos pays no tax" Amazon and Jeff Bezos are two different things.
Democrats are searching for ANY WAY to separate Trump from his supporters and they think that showing "how little he pays in taxes" would help. They are MAD that Trump did not "release his taxes" like most politicians do and that he got elected anyway! HOW DARE YOU vote for a man that doesn't do what politicians want him to do.
Anyway, the goal is political, not legal or legislative. Trump has nothing to hide. As with a LOT of big companies, the taxes are under continual IRS audit. If there were any mistakes they would be corrected by the audit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
So, you believe everything Trump says and you think he can never be wrong? As for what Trump said in 2016, yesterday he said "Now I know why innocent people plead the 5th" So now you accept that, right?
As for pleading the fifth, it was a brilliant thing to do! This is a civil case. You know that, right? There is no "guilty" in a civil case. There is no crime alleged. The criminal investigation was closed without charges months ago.
So let's say YOU are going for a deposition with an AG that has sworn to "get you". She ran for office on the pledge to "get" Donald Trump.
And you are going to give testimony, under oath, in a civil case that, at worst, results in a monetary judgement?
Remember, this same person has lost her attempt to charge you with crimes, she is livid, and desperate, because she ran on "getting you" and is now up for reelection but hasn't "gotten you." Are YOU going to risk a perjury trap?
You know what a perjury trap is, right? That's where they get you to say one thing under oath and then get someone else to say the opposite and then charge you with perjury...an actual crime.
What kind of idiot would fall for that? What kind of moron would you have to be to answer ANY questions to that person?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Maxine Waters, Sheila Jackson Lee and that rodeo clown congresswoman from Florida, among many others, are the result of gerrymandering and the deliberate political castration of the black race. They are totally ineffective as legislators and the WHITE legislators around their district need not concern themselves with the needs of African Americans. Example...The NRA, with 5 million members, has FAR MORE POLITICAL POWER than 42,000,000 African Americans because they are NOT gerrymandered into "safe districts". The NRA membership represents enough votes in ANY district to affect the outcome of enough elections to insure THEIR interests are protected in congress! The amount of $$$ they contribute is minuscule compared to, say, labor unions, but they represent VOTES. They represent enough votes in many states to affect the outcome of the Presidential election. Trump won MI, WI, FL, NC, OH and PA by less than the number of NRA members in each state and I can assure you the NRA members WERE NOT voting for Hillary. Absent the NRA, Hillary would have won. Plain and simple.
African Americans have been "helped" by the Democrats (the party of slavery, the party of segregation, the party of George Wallace) right into insignificance. And THAT was the idea all along.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ronschlorff7089 Tell the Republicans that voted for it. Without them, it would not have passed. It would not have even come to a vote in the Senate.
As for NATO, we are never obligated to provide troops to any other NATO which is attacked.
ARTICLE V
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
So, even NATO does not obligate us to do anything more than what we are doing for Ukraine. Would we? Maybe. MUST we? No.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Not to feed your deflection from the subject that you have no answer to, but....
https://www.newyorker.com/news/dispatch/andrew-gillum-and-the-extent-of-the-progressive-revolution
"But Gillum had also recognized that the big money in the Democratic Party—Steyer’s money, George Soros’s money—is now on the left, not the center. Last year, Gillum watched closely as Soros’s cash helped propel progressive candidates to victory in several local elections, including the Philadelphia District Attorney’s race. Gillum was familiar with Soros and his organization, the Open Society Foundation: a few years ago, he helped launch a national network for young progressive elected officials, and the Open Society Foundation was the group’s main donor. He had been in the financier’s New York apartment, addressed his board of directors, and, this spring, dined with him in San Francisco when the two men happened to be in town. Soros committed to back Gillum’s gubernatorial campaign. “If I’m remembering it correctly, it was, ‘We don’t know if you can win, but we would like what it could represent,’ ” Gillum said. “I interpreted it to mean that it would be significant to see a person of color taken seriously in a statewide race.”
Gillum is sucking up every $$$ he can from anywhere he can get it.
That aside...please explain, in detail, why you think corrupt politicians taking money from George Soros and Tom Steyer can provide better health care for YOU than YOU can?
Still waiting.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rapsheets4993 Seriously? Kamala Harris is one of the few people on earth who wasn't "demoted" when she was made VP.
VP is a total waste for someone like DeSantis. Imagine what he could do as AG?!?!? In charge of the FBI/DOJ/ATF 🤣 He'd burn out those rat's nests!
VP is a position to attract votes with diversity. And go to funerals. DeSantis is a younger and less profane version of Trump. Two conservative white guys from Florida. Who does DeSantis add to a Trump ticket?
Trump would be better off to choose any number of very qualified women to be VP. Kristi Noem, Kim Klacik, Kim Reynolds, Candace Owens, etc. Another one, a sleeper no one ever mentions, is the woman that Trump was considering, along with Amy Coney Barrett for SCOTUS Justice...Cheif Judge of the 3rd District Court of Appeals, Barbara Lagoa. Appointed by DeSantis to the Florida Supreme Court and then by Trump to the Appeals Court. Though she mat not be interested in a 4 year gig when she has a lifetime appointment. And...she is also from Florida.
I do not think DeSantis will run in 2024 and he will NOT run if Trump does.
Best for DeSantis...remain Governor until 2026 when he is term limited, and then be appointed Trump's AG for 2 years. OR remain Governor and the serve in some advisory role for Trump...NSA or DNI for instance , for 2 years
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Remember how horrible everything was when he was running for President? He was going to "fix" it, remember?
I wonder why the shipping companies, oil companies, car manufacturers, grocery stores, meat producers, dairy farmers, trucking companies, utilities, lumber suppliers, appliance manufacturers, Putin, Russia, covid...why didn't they do all this inflation when TRUMP was President?
Coincidence?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
She is right about oil! Drill, baby drill! We need to be more like China. Capitalize on this! Sell oil, flood the market, drive down Putin's source of income, and be the "arsenal of freedom". Those are good, high paying jobs, for US citizens building those weapons.
When Russia is OUT of Ukraine...to the 1991 borders...they can discuss what the reparations from Russia will be, how big the unilateral DMZ should be, and where the war crimes trials will be held.
The way to win the war is to give Ukraine what they need to win!
And, as a side benefit, Ukraine has managed to demonstrate that the Patriot missile version we developed to defeat Russian hypersonic missiles WORKS! We are helping them to defeat OUR enemy and to field test the new weapons we have developed to defeat Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@richietattersall2122 Oh, sorry, I thought you were relevant. My bad.
If you didn't vote for him in 2016, and you live in New York then you, and your state, are irrelevant. He won without you and your state in 2016 and will do it again in 2020. Whether you vote or not, we can just toss NY's 20 electoral votes in the blue column and be done with you.
I, on the other hand, live in Florida and I WILL vote for Trump again, and he WILL get Florida's 29 electoral votes (9 more than NY) And after this year, your state will lose at least one more electoral vote. Hopefully AOC's seat.
In the future, I will give you all the attention you deserve.
There is always 2024. Good luck.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chrisbarbera9680 All that would be well and good if Flynn were being tried for a crime. he isn't. There is no question of evidence of guilt or innocence before the court.
Like many, (most) you misunderstand the proceeding.
Flynn withdrew his guilty plea. There IS NO GUILTY PLEA. The government has declined to prosecute him. There IS NO PROSECUTION. There IS NO NEED for him to prove innocence. He is not even charged with a crime!
Upon his withdrawal of the plea and the gov't declining to prosecute, the case should have been dismissed. The Judge (part of the cabal, you are correct) did not dismiss the case. The Judge did nothing and even suggested that he, the Judge, would prosecute Flynn!
Flynn then filed a "Writ of Mandamus" to ask a superior court (DC Court of Appeals) to ORDER Sullivan to dismiss the case. Flynn "went over the head" of Sullivan to his "boss".
The 3 judge panel of the DC Circuit granted the Writ and ORDERED Sullivan to dismiss the case. He did not. Instead he filed a motion for the Writ to be heard by the full DC Circuit. His motion was granted.
There IS NO QUESTION if Flynn is innocent. That is not the purpose of the argument. He is not even being prosecuted or charged with a crime. Flynn has NEVER BEEN CHARGED with a crime. He plead guilty to a crime, the withdrew the plea before the plea was accepted by the court. THERE IS NO GUILTY PLEA! (guilty pleas are never "confessions" in any case).
The question before the court is whether the Judge, ON HIS OWN, can proceed with a prosecution...without a prosecutor! He cannot. The role of prosecution lies in the Executive branch, the DOJ, not in the Judicial branch. Prosecution is an Article II power, NOT an Article III power, and the Constitution is clear on separation of powers.
Both the DC Circuit and the Supreme Court have ruled that Judges CAN NOT do that.
Again, this is a MOVE, a delaying tactic, by Sullivan. Nothing more.
Regardless of the DC Circuit's political bent, it is inconceivable a majority of them would agree that Sullivan can prosecute a case on his own.
Even the dissenting Judge of the three judge panel agreed to that. That Judge wanted to WAIT to allow Sullivan to issue the dismissal. That Judge felt a Writ of Mandamus was premature.
But "Justice delayed is Justice denied" is a legal precedent. I sincerely doubt the majority of the court will decide "Let's see what he will do" when he has clearly shown in his actions his intent to delay justice.
This court hearing is not even about Flynn, per se, it is about a Judge's role in the case.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mar-a-lagofbibug8833 Had a chance to read the ruling. I am guessing you did not.
As I had stated, (see comments above) there was the possibility that the Circuit Court MAY return the case to the Federal Judge on the grounds that the Writ of Mandamus was premature. And that is what they did.
NO WHERE has the Appeals Court stated that the case against Flynn should NOT be dismissed, but rather that it should be dismissed by the District Judge (Sullivan) and IF he does not do so, THEN the Circuit Court should issue a Writ of Mandamus.
One of the remarkable things about the Writ in this case, is that it WAS issued prior to a ruling by the Federal District Court. It was done so on the belief that due to Sullivan's statements and actions that he would not do so. The full Appellate Court says: "Let's wait and see what he does"
Now Sullivan can play his game a little longer. He will eventually have to rule, and if he fails to dismiss the case, THEN the Appeals Court will do so.
As I noted many times, this action was NOT about Flynn, it was about Sullivan. Morals are NOT Statutes. There IS NO CRIME without a violation of a statute. Flynn was FIRED for his MORAL misbehavior in his job...that is the usual punishment for such things.
Remember that the purpose of this action by Sullivan is an effort to provoke Trump to issue a pardon for Flynn. If Trump did that, the DOJ and FBI are off the hook and the Democrats can forever say "Flynn was guilty". Sullivan is attempting to protect the Obama appointees of the DOJ and FBI.
Trump will not pardon Flynn at this time.
The case is settled. The guilty plea has been withdrawn, the charges have been dropped, there are no pending charges against Flynn. The case WILL be dismissed.
Flynn is not in jail, Flynn has pro bono legal representation from an excellent attorney. Flynn can wait. Trump can wait.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
No. He can't.
McCarthy, as Speaker, can submit his recommendations to the rules committee to remove her (or any other member) from any committee and the rules committee decides (by majority vote) whether to advance that recommendation to a floor vote. The rules committee has already done this for Omar.
It now requires a majority vote of the full House to actually remove someone, unless their leader, Joachim Jefferies in this case, withdraws their name from consideration and nominates someone else to that committee. He won't do that.
If the majority of the House members vote to remove her...she's removed. Not from Congress, just from that committee. Since Republicans have a majority in the House and since they will USUALLY follow the recommendation of the Republican Speaker and Republican controlled rules committee, she will most likely be removed from the Foreign Relations Committee.
The Republican majority is slim and at least one, Matt Gaetz, has said he may not vote to remove her. He sees her removal as being based on her policy preferences, not on any risk to national security like Schiff and Swalwell. Gaetz argues that members should not be removed just because you don't like their policy positions.
Whether you agree or disagree with Gaetz, the Republicans can only stand to lose 5 votes in any floor vote or it will not pass.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@barbarahazelwood2186 And how would having debt make that better?
What forces you to work hours and hours more at a job you don't want to be at? Debt? Or the government?
The government cannot tax money saved from not having to earn income to pay debt.
I saved $171,000 in interest by paying off my house early. That means I do not need to earn...and pay tax to the government... that much money. The higher the interest rates go and the higher the taxes on income go...the more I save. The "Fed", the government, raises interest rates. Doesn't affect me.
How much money would I have to earn, pay taxes on, save and invest to have a return, after taxes on that investment that I already paid taxes on, to equal $171,000? How many hours would I have to work to earn that money, instead of going fishing?
And the savings are guaranteed, the investment and earnings are not. And that's just the interest. And that's just the house. And my mortgage was rate was very low compared to what it is now. Mortgage rates now are about double what I was paying.
Debt makes you a slave to the debt.
One of the strangest things to me was that calendar dates no longer meant anything. The 1st of the month was no different than the 11th or 23rd. Now...a bill comes, we pay it. Same day. Whatever day that is. Doesn't matter. What's the due date? I don't care.
The government cannot make you a slave.
Debt absolutely does.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"I know how to get votes for Democrats", says Biden, "Let's FORCE the highest turnout voters, age 35-54 to PAY for the educations of the lowest turnout voters, age 18-24. Yeah, brilliant idea!"
So let's FORCE the truck drivers, HVAC mechanics, plumbers, carpenters, electricians, factory workers, construction workers, small business owners to PAY for the educations of the Starbucks baristas! 🤪
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I do not expect this to work. They will end the federal benefits and STILL not have a low wage work force.
Millions of those employees ARE working, but they are not going back to low wage jobs where they get laid off on the whims of unelected "scientists".
I personally know three people who were laid off from retail work when their employers were forced to close. They were determined to be "non essential" businesses. While collecting the $600/wk unemployment last year.
One became a phlebotomist and is now working in a hospital making far more money than retail, with full benefits. (she reports her phlebotomist training course was filled with former retail and restaurant workers looking to make sure they never went back to that work)
One completed his education as an electrician, got an electricians' license and is now making triple what he did in retail with full benefits.
Another used the money he got from unemployment, bought a stump grinding machine and is busy as many days a week as he wants to work, making $400- $900 day. And this is Florida, he can work year 'round.
They are NEVER going to go back to low wage retail work. Many workers over age 62 just took early retirement.
Florida already has low unemployment... 4.6%, even though several major Florida industries are still not at full capacity. To imagine that there is a vast pool of low wage workers waiting to go back to low wage jobs that can be ended the next time Dr. Fauci says so is ridiculous.
Many of the workers still unemployed are people who made $40,000+ pre-pandemic. They are still seeking work in their areas of training. What do they want to do...force mid level managers into restaurant work? Who will that benefit?
The trades, medical technician fields and new small businesses are skyrocketing. This pandemic FORCED a lot of people to reconsider their careers and gave them the opportunity, and money, they needed to improve themselves. They are never going back.
They aren't lazy. Neither are they stupid.
Some of the low wage jobs will get filled by seasonal college students out for the summer...as they always have. But there is going to be a net change in the labor market...not to mention commercial real estate and business travel. Businesses were FORCED to telework and found out it works! Zoom calls will, forever, replace a lot of business travel. Employers are going to downsize office space. Employees are going to take their NYC and LA salaries and telework from South Carolina, Arizona or Montana. There will be vacant office buildings in NYC and LA and Chicago.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Kennedy, why do you have idiots as guests? The black guy is spouting Democrat talking points only..."We worked with Joe Manchin, we did everything he said" NO, they didn't! They played a shell game and made some of the social programs "end" after only a year, and everyone knows they would have been extended beyond that, in order for the "cost" to be reduced. For example...FREE two year community college, but only for one year. PAID leave, but only for one year. FREE daycare, for one year. Eye care and dental care for seniors, for one year. (already covered by many Medicare Advantage plans, I know, I have one)
It's like saying you'll buy a house but only pay the mortgage for 1 year, then claiming the house only "costs" what 1 year of payments amounts to.
Manchin said all along he wasn't falling for the games.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The FBI uses media "leaks" or "feeds" the media information for their own purposes all the time. It is often used to generate information, or to "smoke out " a suspect, or to make a known suspect feel "safe" so he comes out in the open. Etc., etc. You can be pretty sure that ANY TIME an agent of the FBI makes a public appearance and speaks publicly about an ongoing investigation, it is for THEIR benefit...NOT yours. Whatever you are told is intended to produce a result for THEM. Even discussing ongoing investigations or confirming investigations exist is not allowed without higher permission and only then when it benefits the FBI. Basic "spycraft" So...they are VERY GOOD AT IT. And, used properly, it can be an affective crime fighting tool.
In this case, again, we see that agents of the FBI used their "tools"...very powerful tools...for political purposes and THAT is wrong. It would also seem to indicate that Strzoks testimony in Congress, that he did not allow his political bias to affect his work, is a LIE.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnnyd6715 The "country coming together" has NOTHING to do with Congress coming together. Congress IS, always has been, and is INTENDED to be, an adversarial system. It is NOT supposed to be easy to pass Federal laws. Congress should NEVER be the yardstick by which we measure "national unity". THAT would be stupid.
The Constitution leaves it up to STATES to make most of the laws and they can make it as easy as they wish.
Making FEDERAL laws that affect the entirety of a hugely diverse population of 300+ million people with hugely diverse interests SHOULD be difficult.
That said, in Congress...Democrats in the Senate should compromise on bills enough to get at least 10 Republican votes. A 50/50 "majority" is not reason to stuff the Democrat agenda down everyone's throat. Senators represent STATES, not the people. That is WHY there are two Senators from each state. That is WHY Vermont has the same number of Senators as California. The House of Representatives represents the people.
The "talking filibuster" is OK. The minority party can filibuster as long as they want, taking turns speaking until the majority removes the bill from consideration, OR compromises ...OR in a 50/50 Senate, Republicans could just not show up and deny a quorum to the Democrats. (quorum requires 50 Senators but there MUST BE at least ONE Senator from the minority)
BUT...under Senate rules, they only consider ONE bill at a time. So the talking filibuster (used until 1971) ties up the Senate from working on anything else.
The idea of either is to force compromise. It is always the "majority" that must compromise to get the 60 votes UNLESS they have 60+ Senators.
The cloture rule, requiring 60 votes, simply allows the Senate to move on to other things without the need to waste time with a talking filibuster.
I say, leave it as is.
There appears to be no way to end the 60 vote rule as it stands today anyway. At least two, and as many as seven, Democrat Senators oppose changing it. Smart move. Because the Democrats are very likely going to lose the majority in 2022.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cgrey4082 You said: >>>Opinions are not facts. They are merely opinions. Some opinions are more valid than others. That's invariably opinions which are well grounded in objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts.<<<
Correct.
Still waiting for the objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source related facts that you will provide that...
1. A significant majority of GOP voters support what the Biden administration is doing.
AND
2. That under a Hillary Clinton administration that -0- people would have died from covid-19. (If Trump "caused 500,000 deaths", then that would mean Hillary would have prevented ALL of those deaths. Prove it.)
I expect all your evidence to be objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts.
I'll wait here.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cgrey4082 YOU said: (directly copied from your above comments)
>>>>>>Here's a fact Trumpites don't want to hear: Daughter and Jared cleared more than 500 MILLION in "new" money during four years as WH "employees." <<<<<<
>>>>A significant majority of GOP voters approve of what the Biden Administration is doing. <<<<
>>>What is most unfortunate: while being a "one term loser" he "lost" the lives of up to half a MILLION people living in the US. For no reason than his own self-interest. <<<
>>>>Opinions are not facts. They are merely opinions. Some opinions are more valid than others. That's invariably opinions which are well grounded in objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts. <<<<
“Cleared “ means after tax. Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts to support that statement
Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts that IF Hillary Clinton had been President, covid 19 deaths would have been -0-
“Significant majority” means substantially more than 50%. Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts that support your statement.
Deflection, changing the subject or denial will mean that YOU are a Trumpite.
Still waiting, cathy
1
-
@cgrey4082 YOU said: (directly copied from your above comments)
>>>>>>Here's a fact Trumpites don't want to hear: Daughter and Jared cleared more than 500 MILLION in "new" money during four years as WH "employees." <<<<<<
>>>>A significant majority of GOP voters approve of what the Biden Administration is doing. <<<<
>>>What is most unfortunate: while being a "one term loser" he "lost" the lives of up to half a MILLION people living in the US. For no reason than his own self-interest. <<<
>>>>Opinions are not facts. They are merely opinions. Some opinions are more valid than others. That's invariably opinions which are well grounded in objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts. <<<<
“Cleared “ means after tax. Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts to support that statement
Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts that IF Hillary Clinton had been President, covid 19 deaths would have been -0-
“Significant majority” means substantially more than 50%. Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts that support your statement.
Still waiting.
1
-
@cgrey4082
YOU said: (directly copied from your above comments)
>>>>>>Here's a fact Trumpites don't want to hear: Daughter and Jared cleared more than 500 MILLION in "new" money during four years as WH "employees." <<<<<<
>>>>A significant majority of GOP voters approve of what the Biden Administration is doing. <<<<
>>>What is most unfortunate: while being a "one term loser" he "lost" the lives of up to half a MILLION people living in the US. For no reason than his own self-interest. <<<
>>>>Opinions are not facts. They are merely opinions. Some opinions are more valid than others. That's invariably opinions which are well grounded in objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts. <<<<
“Cleared “ means after tax. Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts to support that statement
Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts that IF Hillary Clinton had been President, covid 19 deaths would have been -0-
“Significant majority” means substantially more than 50%. Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts that support your statement.
Deflection, changing the subject or denial will mean that YOU are a Trumpite.
Still waiting, cathy
1
-
@cgrey4082 gary K
YOU said: (directly copied from your above comments)
>>>>>>Here's a fact Trumpites don't want to hear: Daughter and Jared cleared more than 500 MILLION in "new" money during four years as WH "employees." <<<<<<
>>>>A significant majority of GOP voters approve of what the Biden Administration is doing. <<<<
>>>What is most unfortunate: while being a "one term loser" he "lost" the lives of up to half a MILLION people living in the US. For no reason than his own self-interest. <<<
>>>>Opinions are not facts. They are merely opinions. Some opinions are more valid than others. That's invariably opinions which are well grounded in objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts. <<<<
“Cleared “ means after tax. Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts to support that statement
Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts that IF Hillary Clinton had been President, covid 19 deaths would have been -0-
“Significant majority” means substantially more than 50%. Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts that support your statement.
Deflection, changing the subject or denial will mean that YOU are a Trumpite.
Still waiting, cathy
1
-
@cgrey4082
YOU said: (directly copied from your above comments)
>>>>>>Here's a fact Trumpites don't want to hear: Daughter and Jared cleared more than 500 MILLION in "new" money during four years as WH "employees." <<<<<<
>>>>A significant majority of GOP voters approve of what the Biden Administration is doing. <<<<
>>>What is most unfortunate: while being a "one term loser" he "lost" the lives of up to half a MILLION people living in the US. For no reason than his own self-interest. <<<
>>>>Opinions are not facts. They are merely opinions. Some opinions are more valid than others. That's invariably opinions which are well grounded in objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts. <<<<
“Cleared “ means after tax. Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts to support that statement
Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts that IF Hillary Clinton had been President, covid 19 deaths would have been -0-
“Significant majority” means substantially more than 50%. Please provide well grounded objective, verifiable, credible, replicable and source-referenced facts that support your statement.
Deflection, changing the subject or denial will mean that YOU are a Trumpite.
Still waiting, cathy
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ampersandrascott....To answer your questions
1. There IS NO constitutional limit on the President's power to pardon, except in the case of impeachment. The President cannot pardon himself from articles of impeachment. Impeachment is a political action, NOT a crime. Read Article II, section 2., which states that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment" There IS NO admonition against the President pardoning himself for crimes. The pardon power does NOT apply to state crimes, only crimes against the United States. Murder is usually NOT a "crime against the United States" unless it occurs on federal property or against a federal employee or by acts of terror, hijacking, etc.
2. Nixon was never charged with a crime. Nixon was never impeached.
3. There is no crime for which President Trump has been charged, and he IS NOT "pardoning himself". This was, and is, a hypothetical question.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There IS NO "FBI probe into Kavanaugh" Senator Lindsey Graham laid it out very well on Hannity's show.
Senator Flake requested that the FBI interview FOUR people. The three "witnesses" Ms. Ford named and the woman who said Kavanaugh exposed himself to her. THAT'S IT, THAT'S ALL. In addition, Senators Murkowski and Collins requested that the FBI review the investigation done by the Senate to see if it was satisfactory.
Swetnick/Avenatti are not, and never have been, credible. In case anyone was in doubt, Swetnick went on NBC Monday and made sure everyone saw how NOT credible she was. Did Judge Kavanaugh spike the punch with alcohol or drugs? "I saw him near the punchbowl. And I saw him give some red solo cups to people" Did Judge Kavanaugh rape you? "I think I saw him at the party where I was raped and he was laughing" Swetnick gave the names of four "witnesses". One is dead. One denies even knowing Ms. Swetnick or anything about any rape parties. Two can not be reached.
OK..... NEXT!!!!!!
The "agreement" with those Senators is that if those FOUR interviews and reviews go well, the THREE OF THEM will vote to confirm Kavanaugh. Period. End of story. Kavanaugh gets 51 votes, job done.
President Trump has said he has not "limited" the FBI investigation, which IS TRUE. HE has not. He also said he will "do whatever the Senate wants" and THAT is what the Senate wants.
How long should it take to interview FOUR people? THREE interviews, as of Monday, have been completed (per the lawyers representing those three) Mark Judge's interview has begun but is not yet complete. The Senate will have the FBI report Wednesday. No reason they cannot vote by Friday. The Democrats do not have to like it. They have the option to vote NO.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RobinPhillips1957 Which 1% is not correct?
She will not be prosecuted. Period. Was that the plan? Maybe. And was it Durham's plan or was it Hillary's plan? People have not been cooperating with Durham all this time, because...covid. You know. Pandemic. The universal excuse for non-performance.
Will the investigation fail? Only if success means putting Clinton, Comey, Brennan, Clapper, ad nauseum in prison.
If success means making sure they never do this again and rendering them irrelevant for the rest of their lives...oh, I think we will have that.
I am not sure who benefits from being required to house and feed these parasites for extended periods at taxpayer expense.
Clinton could easily lose her pension as a Senator and Sec. of State, lose her law license and lose any possibility of ever running for office again. So could Comey, Clapper, Brennan, etc. They could all be sued by President Trump AND anyone else caught up in this...Flynn, Papadopoulos, Manafort, Stone, Don Jr., etc.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bw2408 You really have no clue what you are talking about. Your statement about term limits is completely unintelligible.
Congress does not and can not investigate "crimes". They are not law enforcement and cannot charge anyone with a crime. In case you missed it, the J6 Committee just "referred" their findings to the DOJ for investigation of crimes. The DOJ may or may not do their own investigation on the matter. Congress doesn't do that. EVER.
You seem to forget that it doesn't matter what YOU want for AOCs and Jefferies districts...and it never should matter, unless you live in and are registered to vote in that district.
YOU don't get to decide who I, or anyone else, votes for. Ever.
YOU get to vote for the candidates in YOUR Congressional district and for the Senators from YOUR state.
That's it, that's all. You don't like AOC? Then move to her district, register to vote and vote for her opponent. Otherwise, your opinion is irrelevant.
THAT is how a Representative Republic works.
You seem to hate our Constitution. You don't want people to choose their own Representatives. You don't like the separation of powers, you want Congress to be law enforcement.
It's a big country, people vote. Some of the people they elect, you won't like. Get over it.
You always have the option of moving to a State and Congressional district of Senators and a Representative you like.
You DO NOT have the option to restrict who other people vote for.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Let's not be too hard on Obama. He DID get more Republicans elected to office than any other President during his term in office. He DID lose control of both the House and Senate during his term. He WAS so lazy that he did everything by Executive Order...and that could be un-done by President Trump just as easily. He WAS such a failure in foreign policy, domestic policy that he caused an upheaval in the country and, in fact, created the climate in which Trump could be elected.
Just as Jimmy Carter's greatest contribution to the country was the election of Ronald Reagan, Obama's greatest contribution will be the election of Donald Trump.
And Obama was SO LAZY that he left a Supreme Court seat open AND more than 100 Federal District and Appeals court seats OPEN for President Trump to fill and have a 30-40 effect on US policy. (YES, I DO blame Obama for not nominating a more centrist judge than Merrick Garland, had he done so, McConnell would never have taken the incredible risk of delaying the confirmation and we would not have Justice Gorsuch) Thanks, Obama!
We may also mention that Obama sold more guns than John Browning, signed up more NRA members than Charleton Heston and raised more money for the NRA than Ted Nugent.
Thanks, Obama!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joe5923 Sorry, Joe. Hate to burst another conspiracy theory, (not really) but...
While you are correct in raw numbers, it was 50R, 48D and 2 I, the independents declared they caucus with the Democrats. Under the Senate rules, that makes them "count" as Democrats.
That is NOT a "media lie". It's just a fact, whether you like it or not.
In the new Congress, with Sinema's change, it will be 49R, 48D and 3 I. Two of the Independents already caucus with Dems, that makes it 50D, 49R. IF Sinema caucuses with Republicans (extremely unlikely) it will be 50R, 50D and Kamala Harris will break the tie. If she does not declare who she will caucus with, (she doesn't have to) it will be 50D, 49R. Sinema could say nothing and the Dems still have the majority.
UNLESS Sinema declares she will caucus with Republicans AND another Democrat Senator defects (Manchin?) and declares they will caucus with Republicans, Democrats WILL have the majority in the Senate for the next 2 years.
All of that happening is about as likely as Donald Trump being chosen as Speaker of the House.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1