Typical election choice, the least of evils. What would you rather have for "leaders". bad or worse?
US Elections (& Politics) :)
- Thread starter sdkid
- Start date
Honestly, the way my morning is going, the lesser of two weasels is the better choice.
Not that that's any kind of good choice at all.
Not that that's any kind of good choice at all.
Parley
Known around here
I think Judge Reinhart is trying to cover this a$$.
Parley
Known around here
If I lived in Pennsylvania I would be voting for OZ. IMHO the better candidate between the two.
Oceanslider
Known around here
Sybertiger
Known around here
How the fuck is that guy leading? There is truly something wrong with the people of Pennsylvania is the conclusion I'm coming to...LOL!
Last edited:
Ssayer
BIT Beta Team
Ssayer
BIT Beta Team
Gargoile
Getting comfortable
They must have deployed Plan "B" at this point.
Anthony Fauci says: "Mission Accomplished...I'm outta here...good luck finding me"
www.cnbc.com
NYTimes Headline:
White House chief medical advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci to step down in December after more than 50 years of public service
The 81-year-old Fauci said he has no intentions of retiring. He's leaving public service to pursue the "next chapter" of his career.
www.cnbc.com
NYTimes Headline:
Ssayer
BIT Beta Team
Anthony Fauci says: "Mission Accomplished...I'm outta here...good luck finding me"
White House chief medical advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci to step down in December after more than 50 years of public service
The 81-year-old Fauci said he has no intentions of retiring. He's leaving public service to pursue the "next chapter" of his career.
NYTimes Headline:
Parley
Known around here
The Trump Warrant Had No Legal Basis. A former president’s rights under the Presidential Records Act trump the statutes the FBI cited to justify the Mar-a-Lago raid.
Was the Federal Bureau of Investigation justified in searching Donald Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago? The judge who issued the warrant for Mar-a-Lago has signaled that he is likely to release a redacted version of the affidavit supporting it. But the warrant itself suggests the answer is likely no—the FBI had no legally valid cause for the raid.
The warrant authorized the FBI to seize “all physical documents and records constituting evidence, contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§793, 2071, or 1519” (emphasis added). These three criminal statutes all address the possession and handling of materials that contain national-security information, public records or material relevant to an investigation or other matters properly before a federal agency or the courts.
The materials to be seized included “any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021”—i.e., during Mr. Trump’s term of office. Virtually all the materials at Mar-a-Lago are likely to fall within this category. Federal law gives Mr. Trump a right of access to them. His possession of them is entirely consistent with that right, and therefore lawful, regardless of the statutes the FBI cites in its warrant.
Those statutes are general in their text and application. But Mr. Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978. It has long been the Supreme Court position, as stated in Morton v. Mancari (1974), that “where there is no clear intention otherwise, a specific statute will not be controlled or nullified by a general one, regardless of the priority of enactment.” The former president’s rights under the PRA trump any application of the laws the FBI warrant cites.
The Trump Warrant Had No Legal Basis - WSJ
Was the Federal Bureau of Investigation justified in searching Donald Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago? The judge who issued the warrant for Mar-a-Lago has signaled that he is likely to release a redacted version of the affidavit supporting it. But the warrant itself suggests the answer is likely no—the FBI had no legally valid cause for the raid.
The warrant authorized the FBI to seize “all physical documents and records constituting evidence, contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§793, 2071, or 1519” (emphasis added). These three criminal statutes all address the possession and handling of materials that contain national-security information, public records or material relevant to an investigation or other matters properly before a federal agency or the courts.
The materials to be seized included “any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021”—i.e., during Mr. Trump’s term of office. Virtually all the materials at Mar-a-Lago are likely to fall within this category. Federal law gives Mr. Trump a right of access to them. His possession of them is entirely consistent with that right, and therefore lawful, regardless of the statutes the FBI cites in its warrant.
Those statutes are general in their text and application. But Mr. Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978. It has long been the Supreme Court position, as stated in Morton v. Mancari (1974), that “where there is no clear intention otherwise, a specific statute will not be controlled or nullified by a general one, regardless of the priority of enactment.” The former president’s rights under the PRA trump any application of the laws the FBI warrant cites.
The Trump Warrant Had No Legal Basis - WSJ
Sybertiger
Known around here
The education system in this country is horrific. The peeps simply don't have a basic understanding of much of anything. Twitter, TikTok and FB is all most people seem to know. Perhaps we should just close the schools down and issue everyone a mobile device so they can continue their education on Twatter, TikkityTock and FaceButt. It must be very frustrating to be China and/or Russia and continue to see the incompetent Americans continue to be a world leader in so many areas.
www.foxnews.com
Liberal ‘thought leader’ roasted by critics accusing her of not knowing how government is funded
Activist Nina Turner received scorn on social media for apparently being unaware that the government is funded by taxpayers while advocating for student loan forgiveness.
www.foxnews.com
Parley
Known around here
Now I see where Judge Reinhart is going to let the DOJ redact some of the affidavit. I bet it will be heavily redacted.
Enjoy it while it lasts. I'm certain UselessToob will find some excuse to block it on copyright grounds.
[media]
[media]
Looks like DJT filed that 4th Amendment lawsuit this afternoon:
Sybertiger
Known around here
Ha hahahahahahahahahahahaha libs....job well done. Enjoy your utopia!
www.foxnews.com
Restaurants in deep-blue cities starved for diners while Florida is feasting
Global restaurant industry data from OpenTable shows that cities such as Minneapolis, San Francisco and Seattle are struggling to recover from the pandemic. Florida cities are booming.
www.foxnews.com
What I'm hearing is that they wanted to recover documents Trump had with very damaging info about Russiagate or other hoaxes, so if they have them they can say we can't release documents of an ongoing investigation. No doubt they would never see the light of day, maybe the info is so bad they don't give a shit how bad this looks for the FBI or DOJ as long as the info doesn't get out.