Wow Latin. I guess you've moved on from the Golden Book Encyclopedia. You really need to follow the conversation. What we are saying is Jordan is not qualified to be on, let alone be the Chair/Head of the Judiciary Committee.

Thanks for correcting me about Jordan not taking the bar; I'll move him up a couple of notches in IQ; he was smart enough to not take it and fail.

BTW you forgot to give the reason for Biden's Class Rank. He was caught plagiarizing in a course, which brought him down. Nice to know like Trump he c***ted; the problem is Trump got caught c***ting on his wives, his property values, f**e charity, f**e university and so on. I put the Trump thing in there just to bring it to your attention. I apologize - I know that you get annoyed when someone other than yourself, goes off topic.

BTW tried doing any photography lately? You know that's the overall purpose of this forum. Just saying.

Have a good night Rac, I'm off to see the latest episode of Shogun. It's partly about a Japanese noble who wanted to be Japan's dictator in the 17th Century - you know sort of what Trump's trying to do now here.

Oyasumi

Jim Jordan who is head of the Judiciary Committee went to Capitol University which is ranked 175th of law schools and never passed the bar. Gives you faith in government, doesn't it?

Great

Rac is often confused, but never in doubt.

Rac: your lack of knowledge, particularly history is clear in most of your writing and often totally absurd conclusions. Let me start first with the Cato Institute:

“Cato advocates for a limited governmental role in domestic and foreign affairs as well as strong protection of civil liberties. This includes support for lowering or abolishing most taxes, opposition to the Federal Reserve system and the Affordable Care Act, the privatization of numerous government agencies and programs including Social Security and the United States Postal Service, demilitarization of the police, open borders and adhering to a non-interventionist foreign policy.” From Wikipedia

I guess you didn’t know about getting rid of borders – be careful who you quote without knowing what they are all about.

The idea of isolationship was a tenant by Henry Cabot Lodge and the Republican party post World War I. Membership in the League of Nations was rejected and many feel that with US membership the rise of Hitler may have been stymied. How many lives, American and European, could have been saved with the UK and France’s pacification of Germany? What would the world be like today if we had kept moving west after the defeat of Germany which Patton suggested? He recognized the Soviet Union/Russia interests and appetite.

Perhaps the author and you have never spoken to people as I have that lived in Poland, the Baltics or other former Soviet states. They had relatives, friends and acquaintances that were set to gulags under the Russian boot. Do you think that they thought that NATO gave them the protection so they could live their lives?
BTW you recently parroted Trump about NATO; specifically, about their living up to the percent of GNP for defense. You might find it interesting that the majority of former Soviet states are matching that per cent. States such as Belgium, Netherlands and so on need to step up to the plate. But did you note that for Russia to get to these deadbeats they’d have to march through the states that were meeting their obligations?

You might want to check if Russia consider Ukraine part of Russia – Kiev was a major Russian city in previous centuries. The Ukrainians have a different view.

The lesson of history is simple, the costs to stop aggression increase the longer it is allowed to continue. IM O any move to change NATO opens the door for the Russians. As usual, like Trump, you didn’t do your homework.

Rant away in your usual manner. As noted above, your lack of research and ability to see the validity or non-validity of your sources is obvious.

Unless you've been living in the basement and ignoring the news - the Senate had a bipartisan bill that would potentially ease the border crisis and Johnson k**led the bill in the House on the behest of Trump who wants the victory for correcting the issue under his guidance if he becomes the President again. No matter that more people still come under the wire - the victory for Trump is more important than the needs of the American people.

Johnson and the House Republicans remain as puppets of Trump. BTW I said before here that Johnson reminds me of the kid in high school that even the nice kids wanted to beat up.

This does not excuse the negligence of Biden in dealing with the issue before this.

Your title is wrong - the Texas National Guard is under the purview of Governor Abbott; only the border agent is under Federal Jurisdiction. Every state National Guard is this way, with the exception of DC, which is under the jurisdiction of the Defense Secretary and the President.

[quote=Blurryeyed]

Personally I think it's a shame that we have to choose either of these bozos. I'm with Mark Twain that politicians should be changed often like diapers, for the same reason.

Nope he's just a self-serving a**hole, so's Biden, but not nearly to the degree of Trump.

[quote=Blurryeyed]I see your point but lets look at it from a different perspective - if Obama was guilty of murder, the same could be said even more of Trump. When C***D became known he was advised that the disease was highly contagious; then proceeded to have indoor rallies, aka spreader events. It has been estimated that some 30,000 people got C***D and over 700 people died as a result of those events:
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/31/c****av***s-trump-campaign-rallies-led-to-30000-cases-stanford-researchers-say.html
In legal terms, a case could be made for "depraved indifference."

Obama was pursuing a war on terror, Trump was interested in getting v**es - that's a significant difference. Just so you know, I never v**ed for Obama, who I considered a corrupt union organizer from Chi-town.

In terms of immunity, it falls under common law dating back to the Magna Carta where a bunch of barons got King John to sign off that "even the king is not above the law." King or President, it still should be so.

That and Little Annie Fanny. I loved Wilsons cartoons.

I thought that and Fractured Fairytails were better than Rocky & Bullwinkle.

[quote=dennis2146]
I saw your note this morning – I apologize for not going beyond my initial reason for disliking Trump.

I did not v**e for Trump largely because of my indirect dealing with him through my clients and the other factors I listed before. I v**ed in the past for virtually for all Republican P**********l candidates before in every e******n until him. In the last 2 e******ns I held my nose to v**e. As far as Trump’s records here are the additional reasons I could never v**e for him, not necessarily in order:

1. C***d – when Trump was elected, he disbanded the National Security team for disease/p******c. When advised about C***d, he ignored the people warning him of its contagious nature, kept poo-pooing it and had indoor spreader events that estimates advise infected at least 30,000 people resulting in at least 700 deaths. His experts were constantly bumping heads with him and he came up with totally ridiculous methods to control it. He ignored the p******c plans instituted by Bush 2 and Obama.

2. His comments in Europe about our sacred dead that served in Europe, his comments on McCain who was a POW (one of my mentors was a POW in Germany), his continued barbs such as disrespecting Haley’s husband who is on National Guard duty.

3. His believing Putin over his advisors regarding the Russian interference in the 2016 e******n.

4. Leaving many ambassador posts empty during his term.

5. His unwillingness to listen to all sides of arguments – he wanted and still wants people that only say yes; the problem is that no one is an expert on everything. The brilliance of Reagan and Bush 1 was they had the best advisors, listened to all sides then made a decision – perfect no, but more effective than surrounding yourself with yes men.

6. His pushing after and to this day that the 2020 e******n was r****d; after his own experts and judicial inquiry said it was not. That will haunt our e*******l process for a very long time.

7. His pushing to get Pence to not accept the e******n results; Pence’s role was ceremonial.

8. His condemning of the Constitution, which he swore to uphold.

9. His inability to keep his staff; those that left paint as Kelly pointed out “the most flawed person he ever met.”

10. His inciting of the J** 6 mob.

11. Morally – the Republican party always stood for family values – screwing the Bunny and the Porn star while his wife is pregnant and his locker talk on camera.

12. His alienation of our allies. I did agree that each country should pay their own share per NATO – the way he declared it recently was not the right way.

13. His dictatorial rule of the Republican party.

14. Like Biden, he’s too old.

I could go on, but I think you get where I’m coming from. I dealt with sales guys my entire career – many were good but there were some that if the project was won, took all the credit – “Look what I did.” If it went up in smoke, it was somebody else’s fault. IMO Trump is one of those guys.

On the Ukraine war – the lessons of history IMO are clear, unless aggression is stopped in its tracks quickly, to eliminate the threat later is more costly in dollars and lives.

I’ve said all along, I’m not a fan of Biden and I really worry that he will die and Kamala will take over.

As always, I respect your opinion and we can agree to disagree. I just wish we could find somebody new

Side note off topic – a couple of weeks ago I saw a video on photography of your state Idaho – what a beautiful place.

[quote=ArtzDarkroom]

I can accurately predict who will lose the 2024 P**********l E******n today. You read it here first.

The ultimate loser in this e******n is all of us. Both of these guys are too old and carry too much baggage.

Neither party is reading the tea leaves that the majority of Americans want somebody new.

[quote=dennis2146]https://www.townhallmail.com/jbthbpdthhqwbthtwtbjdwzmmnwmmtndffjpkbqbrrbfsjb_drrphssghhjftdgsjrjtgg.html?a=b2e3dd7593a75ac3959f6457b1e7d38ad454dacb651fe4e078cbaa8719a91b3b&b=23880339

There's a pretty good analysis of both sides here:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/02/21/trump-new-york-fraud-case-appeal/72660908007/

A couple of points:
1. The author compares this to what would happen if a private person did something similar (hint it's a felony).
2. It's the first case of this magnitude.
3. The judge group can require the full or a lesser amount of the award while the appeal progresses.
4. Deutsche Bank interesting enough took Trump's valuation and cut it in half. From the AG's valuation, that might not have been enough, but the bank has done nothing to date.
5. The prior tax fraud conviction didn't help him.

I think I've made it pretty clear I'm not a fan of Trump, largely due to his misdeeds in Atlantic City (I also don't like Biden). Some of what he's accused of he pulled in AC. He hurt creditors, workers, contractors and domestic banks., perhaps why he's dealing with the Germans. It was not victimless then; the NY law does not require a victim.

I also believe that his attorneys did a pretty crappy job - they had the ability to request a jury trial, not sure it would have worked, but they didn't.