Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "Fox News" channel.

  1. Separating children from their parents was a feature, not a bug. a) looking tough, message to voters, midterms are coming b) we do it differently than Obama (and Bush), that is a virtue in itself c) we hope it will scare potential other people (with children) coming - Jeff Session said that as defense d) blackmail the Dems into voting for the border wall (I read that not sure if it is true) - it sounds true to character
    1
  2. Sarah Sanders is willing to DEFEND all of that. - And again: this in not about what you think about immigration. - She is willing to work for such an admin. - Get out of the kitchen if you cannot take the heat.
    1
  3. The medical facts and legal definitions differ from the emotional assessment: it is called a fetus and for a reason, and before that an embryo. - The overwhelming majority of abortions happens at the early stage of around the 12 months when the fetus is far from having human characteristics. Yes ! - even though the tiny form starts resembling the form of a human child. A heart or a developing brain is NOT a human characteristic, animals have it too.
    1
  4. For all who want to know what is going on - and why the war mongers REALLY are against the deal: go to the following youtube channels: National Summit to Reassess the U.S.-Israel "Special Relationship" or Washington Report on Middle East Affairs or Israel's Influence: Good or Bad for America? [Yes those channels really have such names *] You can add the names Ray McGovern (fomer CIA) and Lawrence Wilkerson (Chief of staff to Colin Powell in the Bush admin) when your search. Both are likely to have appeared during the events covered in the clips (some are current, some date back to 2016). One example - youtube should show you more clips if you go there: Gareth Porter: The "Manufactured Crisis" and drive for U.S. / Israel military actions against Iran the channel is again: National Summit to Reassess the U.S.-Israel "Special Relationship" - it is 23 minutes long youtube . com/watch?v=PY-6mmj3HsI (remove the blanks)
    1
  5. That professor is not very good in handling a DISHONEST actor like Tucker Carlson. he is so eager to misrepresent it - he will not let get facts or reason into his way. And of course he has not read the proposal (a non-binding resolution !). never bind the outright smaller and large ones he weaved into his narrative.
    1
  6. Trump and son(s) appeared to be engaged in a real estate project in another state (not New York) - and made public appearances during events and appeared in TV ads to promote it and give the impression that they had a stake in the project. In reality they got licence fees, put their "good" name on it - many regular wealthy citizens associated the name Trump with being a rich successful real estate investor. - Professionals, real estate insiders did not fall for it - in New York he was notorious after his bankrupcies. Well the marketing did not target professionals, and insiders, they targeted consumers. And the internet had not yet become a major source of information. He did not get any money from the U.S. banks after his several major bankrupcies (or near bankrupcies they had to to make massive write-offs). That makes it plausible that he is now in bed with Russian banks / oligarchs or with other shady financial institutions and may have laundered money. No one (except a few people at the IRS) know if he is as rich as he claims to be, there is a reason he does not release his taxes. That project was in another state - not in New York where he was well known - and not in a good way. Meaning if he had targeted New York consumers the local press and media might have talked about his former shenanigans, so he would not have been a good front for questionable projects there. The country wide press and TV did not a thorough job on his failings. They liked the yellow press aspect (the divorces, the luxury life style, the weddings, the trophy wives, the TV show, the beauty contests, his flamboyance). Whatever they thought of him as business man - he was not very much exposed. Trump father had created the myth, Donald Trump could hold on to it as long as the market was good (and it was easy to make money). And he had the outgoing brash personality that made it interesting to report on him. So countrywide Trump could sell himself as good businessman when New Yorkers who were naturally more tuned in would have begged to differ. Wealthy unsuspecting people OUTSIDE OF NEW YORK fell for the myth - as they were supposed to. When he and Eric appeared on stage and in ads to praise the unvetted real estate project, potential clients assumed the project had his money in it, that he worked on it , and that the project was well vetted. And they assumed that the Trumps who continued to MANAGE projects like he did in the beginning. Trump does not build and finance, he mainly gives the name - well at least before he could exploit the office of POTUS, that helps big time with international deals - Malaysia, Argentine, Saudi Arabia, China (for Ivanka). Trump having a stake as experienced savvy real estate tycoon was exactely the impression that the people that pulled off the project wanted to create when they paid the Trumps for advertising for them. The scheme was unvetted, it went bust, the investors lost money. A professional investor would have wondered why the Trumps and their business partners would be raising money that way. With a savvy real estate tycoon on board any project would get cheap bank loans, no ? Being the sole investors with help of banks loans would mean they can cash in all the benefits and profits themselves and do not need to share. Large investors with a good reputation do get cheap money, it was certainly available at that time. Interest rates had been lowered substantially by Greenspan. The people that really were behind the project did not get bank loans, the banks had examined the business plan (and found it unconvincing) that was the whole point of collecting funding from unexperienced investors with Trump as front puppet. Trump did not lose money though - HE made a good profit of the project, he had extracted high licence fees / fees for advertising before they got bust (paid for with the downpayments of duped investors), THEY got paid - for the job of deceiving the investors. They had not stakes in the investment and no legal liability either. I am sure they had carefully crafted the statements so the investors could not sue. He was just doing an advertisement - while the people were led to believe he had more stakes in it. You must be a real crook and/or incompetent or greedy/desperate for money _ to not vet your licence projects better_ Verifying what your (allegedly) good name is used for. My take on this affair: they were really desperate to get their hands on money, danmed be ethical considerations. He must have good contacts with the media (then !) that he did not get more negative press. Well, in a legal sense he had his ass covered, and he had a reputation to sue as well. Some bribes to the management might have gone a long way. Going with the story of the flamboyant business man got ratings, exposing him would only in detail interest the "nerds" or "insiders" and might create legal problems ... so they did not bother. Trump continued to enjoy an undeserved reputation as savvy business man. Only in New York a broader audience (inc. consumers) was aware of his real track record.
    1
  7. The iran deal WORKS, that is why every signatory country other than the U.S. (under influence of the war mongers and the Israeli lobby) wants to keep it. Netanyahu HATES the deal because it is working. Saudia Arabia and Israel would love the U.S. to go to war on their behest - not gonna happen if they cannot paint Iran as a threat - not possible with the Iran deal in effect. They are willing to fight Iran till the last drop of blood - of U.S. citizens. (got that sentence from Larry Wilkerson, former Chief of staff to Colin Powell - check him out - THAT is what you are missing).
    1
  8. It is not a question the founders dealt with (but they had considerations for the census, that all residents - not citizens - must be counted.
    1
  9. + Jon - The families of victims (that includes people that died and such that survived) maybe, maybe getting money in many years out of a courtcase does NOT equal the responsibility of the U.S. government to take care of the SURVIVING first responders. I heard the law is to EXPIRE - so this is on Trump. if Trump allowed that legislation so the Saudis can be sued I am positively surprised. Obama did not want to upset the Saudis (buyers of weapons, partners in the crime in Syria, investors in big biz, for instance twitter !!, donors ...) and Trump is even closer to them (the company has direct business ties). BUT: that law that the families can sue (I take your word for it) brings not quick relief. I am not even sure the families would sue for much money, more that they could demand insight into files and get a court decision. And I have not heard THAT any family sued. (but I did not follow THAT aspect closely).
    1
  10. Bernie 2020
    1
  11. Sure - let's ignore the mainland where the overwhelming majority of people live and talk about the small colony that became a state after WW2.
    1
  12. T R E A S O N the Reagan admin sold weapons to the enemy = Iran (these were no "normal" deals) when there were officially U.S. initiated international sanctions in place (those sanctions covered a lot of things never mind sophisticated U.S. military technology). the deal was that the Iranian revolutionaries would not let go the hostages (the U.S. embassy !!) that they held in Teheran. The Reagan campaign undermined the efforts of the sitting president Jimmy Carter to get the hostages free. They thought it might help him win. They promised the Iranians that they would secretly sell them weapons. No doubt the Iranians had material to blackmail the Reagan admin. - what did they have to lose ? so they kept the hostages (the U.S. ambassador and people working for the embassy) alive and well. If Carter would win against Reagan they still could hand out the hostages - as they had always planned. If they would have killed them this would have been war and they did not want war with he U.S. If Reagan won - well they would get weapons that would not be sold to them otherwise. Never mind the US government with help of the CIA bringing drugs into minority neighbourhoods to finance operations that Congress had forbidden. While starting the "war on drugs". More like: war WITH drugs on poor U.S. citizens. T R E A S O N
    1
  13. I hope Kerry galvanizes the Europeans to stand up against the war mongers that want to dismantle a WORKING international agreement (under strict supervision of UN weapons inspectors). Netanyahu and the Saudis HATE the Iran deal - it makes it harder for them to let the u.S. fight on their behalf against Iran. - Not sure if Trump knows what is going on - but the war hawks and the "Israel first crowd" which Trump CHOSE as his advisors for sure know what is going on (Bolton or Pompeo come to mind) I recommend Larry Wilkerson, Ray McGovern, or Michael Scheuer for some perspective. If you are TRULY worried about the country and are not just partisan. Michael Scheuer: "The safety and the interests of America have to come always, always first." But there are a LOT of people out there who are either misled by the media (this clip is a good example how the obfuscation and the lying is done) - while others know full well what is going on and they put the foreign policy goals of Israel and Saudi Arabia or the interests of the weapons manufacturers over that of the U.S. as a whole. The Logan act is not very specific. Kerry might act in contradiction of the letter of that law (as unspecific as it is). But at least he acts in the best interest of the U.S. (in this case - not regarding Syria when he was part of the admin). The Trump admin will of course NOT prosecute him - it would give Kerry an even larger platform to make the case (although I think he tries to stay in the background. When the Iran deal passed Congress the Republicans WROTE a LETTER to the government of Iran - at least he is not so blatant/stupid/ about his efforts to counteract the actions of the government in charge). And of course the Iran deal was and is in the INTEREST of the U.S. the Republicans were throwing a trantrum in 2015 because a) it was Obama and b) they are paid and bought for by the Israeli lobby. The Dems are bribed by Aipac as well - but in that case they could hardly backstab their president. What Trump - under the influence of the war hawks and "Israel first" crowd does now - does damage to the U.S. beyond his presidency. think about the situation in the Middle East. Dismantling the deal is the first step towards WAR. Think the Iraq war was bad, upset the security of the whole region and was excessively costly in financial terms ? This is nothing compared to a potential U.S. war against Iran. it will not be easy, cheap of swift. Think about reliability regarding internationally negotiated deals. Where ALL partners agree that everyone kept their obligations - with the EXCEPTION of the U.S. - who now claims they deal is void and they want to have it changed - just because. Well not" just because" - Israel HATES the deal because it works. How is Israel - and Saudia Arabia - supposed to make the U.S. go to war for their crazy foreign policy objectives if Iran is so obviously NOT a threat.
    1
  14. Remember when the Republicans signed the LETTER directedto the government of Iran directly and in writing undermining the Iran deal (Kerry at least works behind the scenes). - Waiting for Obama to show up as well. He has let the U.S. down mostly - by undermining the efforts of those who want ANOTHER war in the Middle East he could somewhat redeem himself.
    1
  15. Voter roll purges all over the place. Operation Crosscheck in 2016 was the last Republican assault (in the GE, the Dems were active in New York and maybe also in California in he primaries). Back to Crosscheck: you voted in the recent elections and someone with the same (or almost !!!) the same name also voted in another also Republican controlled state - they threw them from the list. The names were ethnic names btw no John Smiths. They did not CARE to match for birth dates, social security number or middle names - which would be the first thing if they would really care about not violating anyones rights and just trying to catch the alleged cheaters. So a person with a certain name voted in one state and a 5 hours drive away a person with (almost) the same name voted in another state. That must have been the same person for sure. In a country with approx. 325 million people there cannot be 2 people with the same name (see operation Crosscheck - Greg Palast).
    1
  16. Parents (families) that are joyful about the pregnancy treat the early signs of it like if "the baby is already manifest". They envision how it is gonna be, think about names.The parental instincst are already triggered by the POTENTIAL of having another human with them in some months. - and that is fine and everybody goes happily along with their joyful EXPECTATION - while the human slowly !! manifests itself. What they ensions is manifest at the earliest !! at 5,5 months when there are chances thanks to modern medicine, that the child could survive outside the womb with intense care, immense costs (and often they are unfortunately damaged). The chances for survival are getting better with 6 months and onwards.
    1
  17. Germany does not have many coal MINES (not sure if they still have any open), they definitely are not creating new ones. They exploit (and continue to do so) the coal near the surface. - Merkel started the Switch to Renewable and the abrupt fade out from nuclear not because she is for renewable energy (and you can see that in how the project is set up). She had a political problem in 2011. The former government had installed a plan for an orderly exit from nuclear power (there were some old plants with questionable safety standards, for instance no backup cooling cycle. Or no extra concrete hull. That saved the day in Three Mile Island for instance). She upset that plan and did the industry favors. Big favors ! Nuclear energy is controversial in Germany, but the population was assured that EXTENDING the run times (and with little investment !) was all safe. The industry uncorked the champaigne bottles. Not long after that Fukushima happened and the Conservatives lost a state which they had dominated for decades to a coalition of the Social Democrats with the Green Party. That was when Merkel (she has a Phd in physics) detected that nuclear power plants were not so safe after all. Then they did a hasty exit from nuclear (the "exit from the exit from the exit" was the folksy term for her flipping). Don't ask me why so many Germans vote for her. She does - an in that order - what is good for Merkel, then what is good for the large industries (incl. the banksters) and then the affluent citizens and medium sized companies. Forget about country, long term prospects, a plan for Europe or the not so affluent citizens or companies that are not exporters. So NOW when solar power (even in cloudy cool Germany) is on the brink of the economic breakthrough (for companies and w/o subsidies) - now the highly subsidized German coal industry got favors. And they implement roadblocks for using solar power (everything that is more than a small installation for homes and all installations for companies).
    1
  18. They DID it - and even more openly. Remember when the Republicans WROTE A LETTER to the government of Iran directly undermining Obama the sitting president and his then active secretary of state Kerry (Kerry now at least works behind the scenes and does not put things in writing. PLUS HIS EFFORTS ARE REASONABLE while the Republicans were just throwing a tantrum)
    1
  19. He also misrepresents her remarks of the relationship between crime, poverty. (Crime breeds poverty, not only in the U.S. and that is well documented). Or the current financial insecurity and how that migh lead to stealing and people snapping. - MLK: "Riots are the language of the unheard. society values property more than humans (with little money) so that is what they attack to get heard." (paraphrased). That does not make it O.K. and the damage remains for shops or owners of a building. But if a society does not want to have riots they better start understanding why they happen. MLK did not approve of or advocate for riots, but he wanted to understand the root cause.
    1
  20. The deep state want to convert us into "socialists" - lol - well at least it is an original claim - but he did not think that through
    1
  21. Well police in TN a few days ago watched a man drown while he begged them to help him out (footage is 7 - 8 minues) and they did not even try to throw a branch, a lifeline or spare tire to him and in that case they could have done something. Well, they did something, one of them mocked him. The police would need to go in to gather evidence. We all know how much evidence tampering and false testimony the police comes up with if it suits them. So .... One case that will not be solved. May have been an accident, family quarrel. ....
    1
  22. ** Having the overwhelming majority of abortions in the early stages of pregnancy avoids the ethical minefields if you are pro abortion. Early borns have surivived with 6 months, even earlier. So I am getting nervous when I hear about late term abortions. Some people think it does only become a human (with the protection of the law) after birth. I disagree - and so does the law. Usually late term abortions are only allowed in exceptional cases, and that is true for most (all ?) nations. Practically speaking: If it is not a good fit for your life to carry that pregnancy to term - usually the families / women make that decision in the early stages. It is not like a woman spontaneously detects that she cannot afford to have another child 5 or 6 months into the pregnancy and THEN she wants to have the abortion.Those decisions are made and carried out in a much earlier stage. Even IF her situation drastically changes in the later stage (separation, job loss, ..) - if the woman has decided in the early stages of the pregnancy to HAVE that future child then she already psychologically bonded with it. She will not retract because of economic disadvantages / hardship then (which should not be so overwhelming in a rich nation anyway). Usually these late term abortions have severe medical reasons, and all modern nations have restrictions on them. (defects of the child, health or life of the mother in danger).
    1
  23. The new policies had no PRACTICAL or LEGAL advantages. It was all to make polticial points and for optics (and it made it necessary to separate, which was likely seen as and advantage - see Jeff Sessions of ICE director). It had all sorts of disadvantages, hazards, and costs - which were gladly and/or complacently accepted - for the political gains they hoped to make from it.
    1
  24. Taxation is also a mechanism to keep money in circulation where it is productive That professor may be in an income class where she still SPENDS a good chunk of her income. The 1 % for sure park all additional income on accounts. They cannot spend the money, especially when the are part of the 0,1 %.
    1
  25. Bernie's message where he says Joe is a friend, we have strong policy disagreements, but he is not corrupt - Tucker: that is not a campaign message, it is a hostage video. Sadly he does have a point - sort of. - Sanders it seems has the eyes on the prize. But the question is when does being cautious become neglecting the progressive cause. Zephyr Teachout should have tweaked the op-ed in the Guardian a little bit and should have stopped just shy of calling Biden corrupt. They all know (and should factor in) that the disingenuous "liberal" and right media, the DNC, other campaigns (some) are out to get them. That their opponents are no fighting hard but fair. If Sanders or surrogates say Biden is corrupt - they better have convincing and complete evidence in a file ready for prosecution. And they they better be able to make their case convincingly in 15 seconds. Else the next manufactured outrage over "divisive Sanders" and his bad Bernie Bros will follow. The alternative would be to communicate in a really smart manner, to present ONLY the facts * or video footage, formulate CAREFULLY - and let the viewers / readers draw the conclusions. Voters will not apply legal and forensic standards, common sense is good enough for them. If it looks, walks and talks like a duck .... In the gospel Jesus said to his followers: Be innocent like the doves but sly like the snakes ....
    1
  26. Luckily Biden has created a lot of video footage on C-Span, he was more cautious what he said in interviews back in the day (for instance cutting Social Security, veteran's benefits, etc.) But in the Senate he bragged about his rightwing agenda and signalled to the big donors and to Republicans legislators. I have no idea why Biden is even a Democrat, maybe he found it easier to win in their primaries ? Biden never expected it would be possible for citizens to widely circulate these clips. Republicans would have never used these clips (from C-span) in attack ads (they were often enough partners in the crime: votes on trade deals, crime bill, bankrupcy bill, favors for big finance, war votes). The "liberal" media would also not remind the voters of what he said when in Senate or when he held speeches at Brookings etc. Not many citizens even saw those videos even though they were not secret. And if they noticed - they had no platform to inform a LOT of fellow citizens what the likes of Biden (that includes most Republicans) really were about. ... and then the internet and youtube became a thing. Oooops !
    1
  27. The claim of the NRPC guy is not true, not regarding costs and it is not "government" run : Single payer healthcare is in place in Europe, Canada, Australia, .... in most wealthy countries since the 1950s. (I live in one, Germany and also know the system of Austria: worries about healthcare insurance or treatment are non-existent. I mean people are worried about being sick of course, but not of the costs ide of treatment or the costs of insurance). People here that do not know about the U.S. situation would be genuinely perplexed. Everyone has insurance, everyone uses the same good facilities. The DOCTORS decide what is medically warranted. I mean - no one likes to get treatments so there is no danger that people would "consume" too much. And if a treatment makes sense (helps you to recover quicker, saves the life, prevents further damage, you continue to be able to earn a living or taking care of the family) - then it strengthens society to provide that. A for profit insurance agency cannot consider those ripple effects, a non-profit has to stay within the budget, but no profit for the middlemen (the "investors" or shareholders). And if they need more money and it makes sense in the larger pricture - they would have to argue their case. (That is theoretical - but if a treatment would be very costly but also beneficial - let's say a revolutionary cancer treatment - I can imagine such a discussion. And it would be a political issue. And either everyone or no one is getting it). There are constly consequences (like the impact of family and the future ability to work or live unassisted) that are not immediately obvious but still play out in the larger picture. The public non profit agency is kind of government related and apart from the wage deductions which are earmarked and go to the agency there is also tax funding. But governments come and go - the agency (agencies there are a few of them per state) stay the same. And neither the center left or the center right government would dare to not properly fund them. That would be a sure way to lose elections. All these countries (tiny Iceland with 300,000 people or Germany with 85 millions people) pay much less per person for healthare (all ! that is spent in the country divided by number of people = healthcare per capita expenditures). The mandatory "insurance" is a percentage of the wage (employers have to double that). It is known in advance !! it is affordable AND there are no unexpected payments when treatment is needed. Dependent family members are included, and also provisions for people w/o a job. Here in Germany it is per capita healthcare expenditures of 5,600 USD per person which is at the higher end of the European average - add about 65 % and you land at the U.S. level of 9,200 USD. Now, the population in Germany is on average older so the U.S. should beat Germany on demographics alone (I got the numbers from the World Bank - health care expenditures If I remember correctly the costs were 18 trillions BUT you have to consider that there are NO costs for private contracts. No co- payments. nd a public non-profit insurance agency (that is what single payer means) has no incentive to play games with the insured / the patients
    1
  28. Taxation means the mandated contribution for everyone in equal circumstances that helps to keep the system afloat. The very system that makes high income and profits possible. - and that mandated payment is equal for people in comparable situations (income bracket, etc.). Her proposal for the SYSTEM * (it is not only about funding government) is not debunked by advising HER (alone !) to act voluntarily in the spirit of her proposal. The action of a few do not make a dent. We do not suggest to people to drive reasonably and to no to drive at too high speed. ("After all we have all the goal to travel savely, with speed and to arrive in good health".) That does not work in large organisms of people. There must be some steering. In traffic it is laws and precise rules - and they are enforced. In funding the government spending it is a general framework of what income class pays how much for the infrastructure and for a functioning society. * and taxation is not only about money - and it should not be considered a matter of individual preferences. If we are asked on an individual level - we all would like to keep all our money. That does not get us anywhere. It is not a question what we like or what is "fair" - certain taxation and government spending policies have certain outcomes. If we chose the outcomes we have to shape the taxation and policy framework . No need to reinvent the wheel, the experiments were done over decades in all developed nation. Golden Era 1940 - 1970 in the U.S. (the oil crises were a disruptor in the 1970s), the 1980s were the start of a new paradigm In continental Europe it was with the mid 1990s. The era of neoliberalism, lower taxation, globalization (= outsourcing), tax evasion 1980/1990 - until now. How many major bank crashes, private debt, bankrupcies, middle class, job security, government debt, income inequality, influence of money in politics. How content, positve are the citizens ? Development of wages vs. productivity.
    1
  29. The usual reason to have an EARLY STAGE abortion (incl. the SECRET abortions of Conservatives) Economic reasons to not have (another) child, already being burdened with extra care (for a relative or a disabled child), poverty, no relationship and no family network, or a dysfunctional relationship, disruption of the career *, losing status for having a child out of wedlock *, not being able to pursue education *, non-life threatening defects of the child * * these are often the reasons for well-off CONSERAVATIVE women and men ! who purport to be anti-abortion to have their SECRET abortions. And like in the former days money helps them to get the abortion while maintaining the facade. Mothers accompagny their young adult daughters to Hawaii. They could have legal abortions in their home state. But there the Republicans make ALL women jump through extra hoops. Facilities far away, many must close down due to arbitrary and made up "safety" regulations. They must travel there several times (because of a mandatory waiting time). More and more PP are shut down, so there are the specialized abortion only clinics - which of course attract the demonstrators, who write up licence plates, take photos. And since the Republicans limit the number of facilites it is often clear: when a woman goes to a certain facility that she is getting an abortion. Planned Parenthood is more inconspicuous, most of their services have nothing to do with abortion (only 3 % of the treatments/procedures are abortions). But wealthy people do not use PP for regular women's health. If a young woman uses the services of a more expensive doctor (typical for her class) and then is "caught" entering the facility or is seen in the waiting room of PP - it is likely that she wants to get an abortion. Which could undermine her "reputation". Like carrying the pregnancy to term and having the child would undermine her reputation (never mind that these families could help her out financially).
    1
  30. 2:25 "The White House, we are tested regularily." Trump recently: we are testing too much (he meant, they "find" more cases incl. such with lighter symptoms. If it is about not looking good - then you do not want to identify those cases. - On the other hand if you want to get a grip on the virus then you want to find them and isolate them, and follow the chain of infections. But that works only well in the nations that used the lockdown to ramp up testing, have sick leave with pay anyway, and people can afford to stay home 2 weeks, or so. Low case numbers and then they follow all new infections, and they test strategically. Nipping it in the bud. But Trump blew it, the case numbers are out of hand. It is very hard to contain it then with testing, one infected person can trigger a lot of strategic testing. (never mind that in the U.S. people often cannot afford to do what would be necessary). In Florida they waited 7 - 10 days for test results mid of July. Plausible suspicion, contact with an infected person, these were affluent people, they quarantined just to be on the safe side. Not everone can do that.
    1
  31. Remember when the Republicans WROTE A LETTER to the government of Iran directly undermining Obama the sitting president and his then active secretary of state Kerry (Kerry now at least works behind the scenes and does not put things in writing. PLUS HIS EFFORTS ARE REASONABLE while the Republicans were just throwing a tantrum)
    1
  32. Michael Hayden former CIA director: the deal should NOT be dismantled interview on Fox News.. - Interview on TheRealNews -the presentation of Netanyahu was childish. They had an export (an engineer) there. The Iranians have dismantled all technical equipment. So it does not matter what they said in the past. We have evidence they gave up on facilities LONG BEFORE (lost interest in projects). They simply cannot produce the enriched material. And the reason for that is that thy keep the treaty ! And such material is known to the weapons inspectors. It is a lot of more or less trivial but true material - and smuggled into it are things that are not true or misleading. The agency knows such attempst to establish a false trail.
    1
  33. The constitution also grants the freedom of individuals * . So mandatory waiting periods and being forced to have an ultrasound - no MEDICAL reason for that ! - violates the freedom of women. - it is expression of the view of reactionary law makers - usually men - who impose their religious views on women. They would prefer them to not have the abortion, and since they are unable to outright forbid them or punish the women and doctors - they for the second best option: putting up as many arbitrary road blocks as they possibly can. Which is remeniscient of the old times: when abortions are hard to get, they become expensive and out of reach for the low(er) income women. The wealthy woman can easily afford the extra expenses and money helps them to navigate the unnecessary hassle. Unfortunately the morning after pill was invented (it is a from of BIRTH CONTROL it is disputed whether or not it may in rare cases cause an egg that was already fertilized to be expelled). And then there is the abortion pill. Of course reactionary lawmakers earger to meddle with the private affairs (and private parts) of women are trying to concoct up extra obstacles to DENY women that independence, that accessible and affordable way to have a early term abortion. (it is not easy). I am convinced that having good and affordable and quick access to abortions gives a woman more time to think it through. Including the option to consult some pro-life advice (organized and informally within her network) whether to welcome the future child into her life. She can take her time when she knows she must not rush because it is so hard, costly, far away, and difficult to get the abortion - once she made the decision. The Republican lawmakers would of course outlaw abortions - but they still live in a modern nation with a Supreme Court decision from the 1970s. So they can't do that. (and it does of course not prevent them from secretely having abortions in their families, while making them out of reach for their low-income constituents). What they CaN do is BIG government INFRINGING on the personal life and the liberties of women. Red tape, extra road blocks, make arbitrary rules that makes it impossible to have abortions (facilities that had NO medical problems whatsoever, and could offer abortions at moderate costs). * except the SECULAR laws that the nation gives itself - like in approx 1973 the decision that abortions are legal. So then to force a women to watch an ultrasound picture of the fetus when she uses that legal right. There is NO plausible reason for that procedure that is FORCED upon her. Mandatory waiting times, at least 2 appointments before a women that decided she is going to have an abortion can finally HAVE it (as is her legal right). That is an infringement on her rights.
    1
  34. It might MASSIVELY increase turnout for the Democrats. The Republicans activate their base more reliably. They don't do well if the Dems have a good turnout. The possibility of Roe vs. Wade being overturned, etc. might even make the progressives hold their nose to support the Republian-Lite candidates - aka rightwing Democrats. And it can activate the young. With the sell-out Democratic Party establishment one never knows of course : but if they have a trace of spine left, they stall the appointment, wait for the midterms - and stall some more. Bernie 2020
    1
  35. the criminal mayor declared it to be safe - else it would have been bad for biz, no ? allegedly the building had an abestos problem so if that went all into the air .... And better NOT talk about it.
    1
  36. How did that work out in Afghanistan ?
    1
  37. It is called FREE SPEECH - get over it snowflakes. - Pesonally I do not think it was asked for to go after the family (let's assume that is true) ..... although - I do remember very nasty public comments about the teenage Obama daughters * and 13 year old Chelsea Clinton was not off limits for the mean people either. ... So ... there you go. * they seemed bored during a turkey pardoning - at the awkward age of 14/16. A PR person of a R politician thought it necessary to weigh in with some snide remarks about the girls (undeserved) and then seamlessly transitioning to some underhanded kicks against the parents - of course ! How about leaving the children alone and attacking the president directly. No one had a chance to harrass the daughters of the presidents in person, they were well protected.
    1
  38. 3:18 HRC went down her just West of Detroit (Republican county), that was immediately before the election. - in other words chasing after the mythical moderate Republicans that would switch to democrats. That was the strategy: officially ! Chuck Schumer after the convention in summer 2016 (so the GE campaign): for every blue collar voter we use in PE we will get 2 Republicans in the suburbs of Phylly and we can repeat that in Wisconsin, in Michigan,.... Good thing they could signal FU to the young, the progressives, the people that Sanders had activated ! and did not use them, they were going to do just fine with picking up Republicans. - Kaine had two advantages: he is a Democrat with many Republican positions (a right-to-work-for-less guy too) - and he was so boring and uninspiring that he would not steal the thunder of Hillary Clinton. That worked as well as the "pied piper" stragety (agreement between the "liberal" media and the Clinton campaign that they would especially show the most extreme R candidates. Like Ted Cruz and Donald Trump in the primaires. If one of those would get the nomination it was going to be a cake walk for Clinton. Clueless - the whole lot.
    1
  39. 2:00 The Isis fighters we have captured ? The Kurds did the heavy lifting on the ground - and they lost about 11,000 people. (I strongly assume that Erdogan was not bothered by ISIS running amock - as long as they did so in Kurdish areas. While the U.S. allowed ISIS to sell oil from occupied fields in Syria. (Which may explain why Isis did not start any trouble in the other regions of Turkey. The oil was sold to Turkey for the most part and the brother of Erdogan was crucial in the operation (so ISIS had their reasons to find an arrangement and not bother Erdogan with terror attacks in areas where he hoped to get votes. - only the Russian airforce ended the cozy scheme that had made ISIS the best funded group of extremists. Somehow the Russians could find the occupied fields in Syra and the streets where the trucks transported the oil (looks like they also used mobile pipelines - who supplied those btw ??) - and later the ground troops took back control of the areas.
    1
  40. Well actually Kerry SERVES his country be preventing those idiots / war mongers from blowing up a deal that is in the best interest of the U.S.. as for treason - remember when the Republicans WROTE A LETTER to the government of Iran directly undermining Obama the sitting president and his then active secretary of state Kerry (Kerry now at least works behind the scenes and does not put things in writing. PLUS HIS EFFORTS ARE REASONABLE while the Republicans were just throwing a tantrum)
    1
  41. 6:55 the Democratic Party has goneso far to the left ...in what alternative universe ?? (It does not matter if one likes the "left" or not - there are some criterias for being a lefty.
    1
  42. Republicans cannot do comedy - and it does not help that it is Fox News. But they are all very SMUG, I'll grant them that.
    1
  43. Mitch the Turtle has kept Senate inactive for the longest time. They REFUSE to have votes on many bills that come from Congress. No, Senate is not kept from doing it's work, Mitch made sure they stayed ineffective long before.
    1
  44. It is true that AOC currently is not that much in her district, she helps getting Sanders elected. (Now imagine her having the ear of the next president ... I guess her district would get some favors in form of investment). Member of Congress decide on National issues, it is not only her district and helping citzend in individual affairs can be delegated. ALL candidates that run for another office are "missing" in their district or state if they have an intense and contested race. Same for all the Senators in the primary. Mayors or govenors running for Senate or Congress. Etc.
    1
  45. Organized hatred - like NEEDLESSLY inflicting harm on migrants (mostly desperate non-criminal people - whatever you think about immigration) and traumatizing needlessly their children. - in order to APPEAR TOUGH. - appear - there was not practical reason for the altered policy, it cost more, never mind the harm. Plus setting some children up for being sexually exploited. The U.S. foster system is not famous for protecting vulnverable children.
    1
  46. Again this is not about the view about immigration or borders, or letting people into the country.
    1
  47. Melania Trump (Knauss I think the maiden name) is PROVEN to have WORKED while she was in the U.S. with a TOURIST VISA. Is SHE a "criminal felon ? " Later she got an "Einstein visa" - which is weird since she was not a known actress or model then, there were plenty of pretty ladies that were legally entitled to work in the U.S. and could have taken her jobs. - so who BENT the immigration law for her ?
    1
  48. I think it is not a legal point of view to treat crossing the border without the proper procedures as "CRIME". It is also not a crime to ignore the red light. or to jaywalk. - the laws are there to protect civil order WITHIN the country. - Usually there is some perspective - the punishment and the consequences should fit the transgression.
    1
  49. The Trump policy did not intend to hold the migrants longer btw. Yes, from April 2018 on the Trump admin CHOSE the procedures of CRIMINAL PROSECUTION. This was NOT a FIX (the former policies worked as they were intended to), this was (completely useless) grandstanding. - But once the legal decision regarding the migrants was made 1) allowed to stay, granted asylum, etc. - in which case they are "cleared of all charges" OR 2) in most cases deportation - they were not kept in jail anymore. - It is not like they intended to hold them LONGER in jail and used the prosecution process for THAT. WHY would they ? That would just cost the taxpayer more. What would be the point of jailing someone if you just want them to leave the country ?
    1
  50. btw: No they are NOT invading - that would be the colonists that took over the continent with military support And: one can acknowledge the riks the migrants are taking and determination even IF one sends them back.
    1