You love your daughter? Imagine everyday there being enough of a chance the building she is in gets blown to “F” all that you both think about it all the time. Or someone kicking in a door she's behind with no intention of asking questions before shooting. Imagine her living the rest of her life having had her best friends gore blown over her face, seeing bodies in the streets, living in constant fear of any of the above happening at any moment.
That's just you and your daughter. Multiply that by everyone. You think quarantine sucks? You have no clue what you're wishing for, and apparently think it's about the same as the loveless marriage you feel trapped in. I guarantee you'd trade back in a heart beat.
Ajax, “Wars suck in a silmilar way that divorce sucks. Sometimes they are necessary.”
Ah. Hrm. Well. As a veteran of both a miserable’ish marriage (and subsequent divorce) and a bit of war, I can tell you war was much, much less debilitating for this average joe than divorce was. That said, I don’t see any good reason to enter a war, unless it’s an existential threat. Divorce, though? Gtfo of a bad situation.
A Bill Clinton appointed judge and Howard alumni. No, nothing new here, just more partisanship.
Did you miss the part where a conservative bench just struck down Wisconsin's stay at home order? Did you miss the part where Flynn was only released because Trump has politicized the Justice Dept so much that thousands of former prosecutors have called for Barr to be removed?
Every time you make idiotic comments like these you only go to prove EA's point about you.
In his remarks, Tucker Carlson excluded key context around Dr. Anthony Fauci’s comments during a May 12 Senate hearing regarding whether schools can reopen in the fall in an effort to paint the public health official as unreasonable and drunk on power.
Carlson claimed that Fauci “implied that schools and colleges would be able to reopen only if there is a cure for this virus, or a vaccine. He said that prospect was a bridge too far. In other words, no school until the coronavirus has been cured -- stopped. ... Fauci says that children must stay home or countless people will die, that's the message.”
Carlson’s unhinged rant does not reflect reality. Here’s what really happened: Following a question from Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) about what guidance Fauci would give to the chancellor of the University of Tennessee Knoxville about reopening campus in the fall, the public health official said, “I would be very realistic with the chancellor and tell her that in this case, that the idea of having treatments available, or a vaccine, to facilitate the reentry of students into the fall term would be something of a bit of a bridge too far.” Fauci added, “If this were a situation where you had a vaccine, that would really be the end of the issue in a positive way. But as I mentioned in my opening remarks, even at the top speed we’re going, we don’t see a vaccine playing in the ability of individuals to get back to school this term.”
Later, Fauci clarified his remarks, saying “I did not mean to imply at all any relationship between the availability of a vaccine and treatment and our ability to go back to school.” The clarification was even included on Fox’s 6 p.m. “news”-side show, Special Report with Bret Baier.
But just hours later, Carlson ignored this context from his own network in order to attack the public health expert, and in doing so his characterization of Fauci’s remarks was completely inaccurate and intentionally misleading. Unfortunately, if Tuesday’s ratings from the prior week are any guide, it would be fair to estimate that at least a million more people watched those false claims on Tucker Carlson Tonight on May 12 than saw the full context on Special Report.
1) The "unmasking" list refers to people who potentially would've been informed, not the specific people doing the unmasking. 2) You don't necessarily know who know the person is until they are unmasked, though context clues may provide enough hints to make a decent inference. That's why it refers to unmasking them. Up to that point, it's just a US citizen caught in foreign intercepts doing dubious things. In this case, it's clearly appropriate to understand who the person is, at least in the instances we know about, to understand the underlying intelligence.
2) Rand Paul had a very different idea of executive authority during impeachment proceedings. Not knowing about his Trump sycophancy, I'd be tempted to write his bizarre behavior off as just part of the John Bircher black helicopter conspiracy mongering popular in the Lew Rockwell crowd he hails from, but since I do know about his Trump sycophancy, I'm more inclined to seem him as a hypocrite who is an eager participant in Republican attempts to kick dirt in voters faces with ginned up pseudo-scandals. Happily, one of my favorite libertarians, Julian Sanchez, is CATO's primary expert on surveillance and politics. Let's see what he has to say:
"The Court exercises its inherent authority to appoint The Honorable John Gleeson (Ret.) as amicus curiae to present arguments in opposition to the government’s Motion to Dismiss. . . . It is further ORDERED that amicus curiae shall address whether the Court should issue an Order to Show Cause why Mr. Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury."
Why would a UN ambasador Samantha Powers need to unmask Gen Flynn. We have Brennan on video telling Trey Gowdy he doesn't recall unmasking Flynn, Samantha Poweres telling a reporter the unmasking claim was false, and Biden saying he only was briefed when in fact today we've learned they all specically requested the unmasking. of Gen. Flynn. This is a clear violation of the 4rh amendment.
We wouldn't know any of this had DJT lost the election. If he wins again we'll find this is just the tip of the iceberg. Obama was never brought to justice on Benghazi. I'd be surprised if Obama goes to jail. But the tables are turning. We heard for 3 years about Mueller. Now you're goingv to learn the name John Durham.
"The Court exercises its inherent authority to appoint The Honorable John Gleeson (Ret.) as amicus curiae to present arguments in opposition to the government’s Motion to Dismiss. . . . It is further ORDERED that amicus curiae shall address whether the Court should issue an Order to Show Cause why Mr. Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury."