So....anyone recall how Barrett swore she would recuse herself from any case she had a personal interest in? Specifically about abortion cases....she didn't, religious cases, she didn't, and now she's refusing to recuse herself in a case against the Koch brothers PAC Americans for prosperity, that actually spent millions running ads to support her during her confirmation hearing.
This isn't just a blatant conflict of interest, it's pure pay for play bribery of a supreme court "justice". She should be not just removed but disbarred.
At some point this outrageous behavior by the highest court will end in assassination, it's the only way to remove them.

This is why, for every seat filled by Trump's criminal cronies who are all crooked as a pig's penis, we need to add two seats filled with actual judges with integrity, not prejudiced bigoted rapists and liars....add three for the seat stolen from Obama.

This is interest. I follow a number of Russian propaganda channels on YouTube and read Zero Hedge. A few weeks ago, their tone became super-militaristic, talking about US/Russia/Syria/Iran/Israel conflict, and how Russia (of course) would kick everyone's ass. This previously happened right before the S-400 sales to Turkey and the Armenia/Azerbaijan conflict. I'm not sure what they're hinting at, but it feels like a telegraphed move is in store.

I'm not sure "coddled" is the right word. I believe there are very deep reasons why bob is the way he is. One reason is I believe he loves his family and his friends. I also believe he is looking for real answers for the conflict in his life.

He wants something but he doesn't know what it is. This becomes a problem for him for which he has no answer. In his effort to find the answer to his problem, the only thing he can do is pass his problem onto others and see if they can give him the answers he is looking for.

My comment to bob that started this conversation was to illustrate the hypocrisy in his quote. My comment to him were HIS own words. Although the quote is a good one it can be looked at in two ways. Was it a light that just turned on for him or was it a message to the people who give him shit for his beliefs?

I don't hate bob. I also know he is in a deep hole where there seems to be no way out. I think bob also knows, deep down, that I would never hold anything against him because he is in tough spot.

He knows what good is but, he has to protect those he loves. He can't turn on his friends and family.

I think the real reason bob sticks around here is because he may find the answer he's been looking for. I think that day may come for him.

As far as lowering myself, sometimes you really need to reach deep.

----------------------------------

Thank you @StukaFox. For me, Christmas is every day.

Such bullshit, bob, democrats wouldn’t support the Republican bill that didn’t give a dime to American citizens but had nearly a trillion in corporate welfare and pork, and included immunity for even gross negligence that gives people COVID so we can get back to work and not be responsible.

What he’s talking about with rivers and fish and foreign funding is the appropriations bill that, at his direction, was joined to the COVID relief bill. They aren’t the same bill. He’s just too dumb to realize it, or at least hopes you are.

Republicans wouldn’t budge on giving people more, at first offering zero and just recently finally offering $600 as an absolute limit, Democrats said they’ll support his $2000 socialist handout and will vote it through this week. Makes you feel conflicted agreeing with the liberals, doesn’t it?

While it could only be an improvement, no. My idea of a smooth transition is the way it's been my entire life, the new president gets access to international intelligence to inform his international plans, and access to data to inform his national policies like a comprehensive covid plan, to be implemented Jan 20, and access to classified information about those he intends to make up his administration so he doesn't end up with a bunch of crooks with foreign ties and conflicts of interest.

If he's denied this ordinary government assistance until he takes office, or even before then but close, it severely hampers his ability to be ready day one to start solving problems and saving lives. We can't afford that, it will cost lives and public treasure.

I don't know where you got the idea I thought he would run the government before Jan 20, I do not think that, but I think he should be as ready to go as possible on that day, not still vetting his administration and learning about our secret international agreements, not learning about covid response but with a plan ready to implement.

Sure...and those same people drive technologically advanced cars to computer designed buildings to enjoy technology rich events they bought tickets for on the internet....all science based acts...but if science is in conflict with their feelings, it's the devil.

Proof that religion rots your brain.

An explanation of the conflict. Starts at 44 sec.

For context (because I know I was curious): this video is from November 2017, 3 months after the "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville in which a neo-nazi dickhead ran over a peaceful protestor. Trump had stated that in the conflict between the peaceful anti-racism group and the white supremacist / neo-nazi group there had been "fine people on both sides". I get the impression some of the people at PBS weren't thrilled about that, and wanted to give the public a gentle reminder that it can, in fact, happen here.

Fascism is alive and has been thriving the last few years in the US. With any luck we'll soon defeat it, like we did 75 years ago.

Trump has blamed State governors for fires on federal land for 3 1/2 years+ but has done nothing to solve the problems on land he controls.

The failure has been in the making longer than that, try since the industrial revolution. I live in a rain forest starting it's third decade of drought. It's a major climate shift. The science is settled, not in question for decades.

No, he needs to listen to the professional forest managers already there instead of ignoring them because he knows more about everything than anyone. See his recent meeting with California's forest managers for examples of his stupidity, his plan is just like for Covid, do nothing, blame others, deny there's a problem, claim it will just go away, blame others again, pat himself on the back for a job perfectly done.

His idea, rake the forests, is just dumb and impossible. Only a complete moron believes you can rake up 33 million acres of mountainous forests, including removing all forest litter which is necessary habitat for many forest creatures and downed trees like redwoods that are useless as lumber. Only a stupid ignoramus believes that's a solution.

Let's say it costs about $1000 per acre, a vast underestimation, that's an extra $330 billion per year for raking California's forests alone. Is Trump offering to fund that, or is he cutting funding instead? (Hint, he cut funding)

Much of the mismanagement is from fighting fires. For decades the plan was don't let any fire burn, that's left forests with 2-5 times the fuel it would naturally have. The last decade that's been realised and when possible fires are allowed to burn. It's too little too late.

Trump's idea of draining the swamp has been plugging the outlets and pumping millions of gallons of sewage into it. That means removing career civil servants and selling positions to friends and contributors with no experience and massive conflicts of interests. Trump's is the most criminal administration ever, with more convictions than any other including Nixon. Politics are incredibly more swampy than before Trump, and the state of the union is crumbling and poised to dissolve into another civil war.

🤦‍♂️

Sorry, you seem to have bought the right wing antifa lie. Where did you get this explanation?

Most people caught shooting or committing arson were dressed as antifa but were in fact right wingers, largely boogaloos boys, who's plan is to commit crimes and blame antifa and BLM in hopes of sparking a civil (and race) war. Nearly 100% of shootings and fully 100% of attempted bombings fit that model.

Because someone wears a black facemask is no indication they support antifa. If they're armed, it's a near guarantee they are anti antifa.

1) the kid came from out of state with armed friends intent on confronting unarmed protesters with guns, you don't do this to protect a random gas station, you do this in hopes of shooting someone.
2) he sure didn't look like he had been sprayed as he ran from the murder he just committed, hands were on his weapon or above his head, not covering his face like a sprayed person.
3) white pedophile? Explain please....how would you know...because he had a 17 year old girlfriend?
4) white guy in a crowd of black men shouting "nigger"?! Doesn't sound right, and I haven't heard it in any videos, but are you saying that excuses the militia boy shooting him and others?
5) gunshot from Antifa?!? Now I know you're duped by right wing media. Antifa is pretty hard to identify unless you're dishonest and just call any black mask wearing person antifa. Also, what evidence is there of this single gunshot from the BLM crowd?
6) he was NOT running to police lines, he was running past them. He didn't stop at them and say "btw, I just shot at least 3 people and maybe more when I just shot into the crowd.", he just walked on by, still carrying the smoking gun.
7) again, where are you getting this info?

8 ) in short, a cowardly murderer who crossed state lines heavily armed who shouldn't have been there but went looking for trouble, started a fight, murdered another man, ran away armed pointing his gun at many uninvolved bystanders, shot and killed those trying to stop an armed murderer (should have emptied that glok if it existed) so he shot one, murdered another and fled the scene, the city, and the state without ever reporting that he had shot at least three people and killed at least two.

I hope he gets sentenced to life in prison, his dad too if they went together, he went heavily armed to a protest hoping to shoot some liberals, he did, now he wants to use the fact that some citizens tried to disarm and citizens arrest him after he shot someone in the head as an excuse for both murders and the other shootings?! And you buy it?!?

I'm so extremely disappointed you would buy such obvious self serving slant where the out of state multiple murderer who travelled armed looking for conflict is the victim.
That's totally asinine. I have much higher expectations for you.

Again, references for these claims please.

I don't agree with him, but there are normal protesters and then there are Antifa people.

If you dig a bit deeper into the whole Kyle Rittenhouse thing, you find out a lot that is being flat out ignored.

1. The kid was protecting a business that had already been vandalized by Antifa.
2. He was pepper sprayed by Antifa 'protesters' for guarding the site.

3. Then a white pedophile started attacking him while saying the n word, "Cmon and shoot ME, N****!"

4. In the ensuing conflict, which included at least one gunshot from the Antifa folks, Kyle shot that guy and then tried to run to the police lines as multiple Antifa people tried to chase him down to beat him/take away his gun.
5. He tripped and a person with a skateboard, as well as a rap sheet for assaults a mile long, started beating him with the skateboard as he lay prone. This was the second person who got shot.

6. The final 'protester' was carrying a Glock 17 and later said (paraphrasing) "I wish I would have just mag dumped the Glock into him while he was laying there". This protester also had a massive rap sheet and shouldn't even have had the Glock, but in his intelligence he started trying to wrestle the AR-15 from Kyle...from the business end. He was the last person shot and lost a bicep.

So, in short, a scared kid who shouldn't have been there was attacked, shot at, and mauled by several 'peaceful' protesters. He defended himself and then tried to run to the police, but they weren't having that, so some more people got shot.

Now he will probably get sentenced to life in a highly politicized trial because he stood up and tried to guard property that 'peaceful Antifa protesters' were trying to burn to the ground.

Turns out DeJoy and his wife have between $30-75.8 million in stocks of companies that directly compete with the USPS, companies that have already benefited from the slowdowns he's causing. Seems like a clear conflict of interest.

"Louis DeJoy and his wife Aldona Wos reported between at least $30 million to just over $75.8 million in assets from XPO Logistics, J.B. Hunt and UPS. All are competitors with U.S. Postal Service operations. While government records confirm their ownership of the assets, the exact value of the holdings is not clear from the records. "

Also, delaying the mail is illegal, with up to 5 years in prison per letter, +1 year for every newspaper delayed.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1703

Ok....I'm confused.
I agree with the 'stay true to your family' part, but I feel like giving lip service to lies and liars can never achieve that, even when done to avoid conflict or contradiction.

To stay true to anyone, you first have to remain truthful, especially when it's uncomfortable.

Did I misunderstand you?

That depends on which bible you mean....there are many.

Really? Lost to history?! Hardly....lost to the ignorant and uneducated maybe, but even atheists like me know full well Jesus the man was a Jew, and definitely not a European or "white". Roman/Italian artists knew this, but worked for a Roman church so portrayed him in their image.

Genetic purity?! Lol. I guess that means no one has EVER become Jewish, you're either born one by two pure Jewish parents or not. Hardly reality, and would reject nearly every person in Israel (or elsewhere). Just because there is a long standing religious/cultural taboo against marriage outside the culture, it still happens, as does conversion. Racial/genetic purity is a fallacy debunked by genetic testing.

Prophecy is a leap. No prophecy has been correctly interpreted until AFTER the events supposedly prophesied occurred. It's ridiculous to go back after the fact and claim "see, now that I know exactly how to interpret the unclear prophecy I couldn't decipher before, it's a 100% perfect prediction" but never be able to predict the future. That's the same nonsensical logic mediums use.

The second temple was also the third, since the true second temple was originally a rather modest structure constructed by a number of Jewish exile groups returning to the Levant from Babylon under the Achaemenid-appointed governor Zerubbabel. However, during the reign of Herod the Great, the Second Temple was completely refurbished, and the original structure was totally overhauled into the large and magnificent edifices and facades that are more recognizable. Logically, the third temple was the one destroyed by Romans, the second replaced by Herod but the new one was still called the second temple anyway. (To avoid contradicting prophecy? ;-) )

If the dome of the rock, the second most holy place in Islam, is destroyed, expect Jerusalem to follow soon after, as that will definitely start a religious war between nuclear powers.

Herodotus is credited with using the term Palestinian first, in the 5th century BCE as an ethnonym, making no distinction between Arabs, Jews, or other cultures inhabiting of the area. Romans adopted the term as the official administrative name for the region in the 2nd century CE, "Palestine" as a stand-alone term then came into widespread use, printed on coins, in inscriptions and even in rabbinic texts.

I think you are confused about the history, here's a primer...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_and_Judaism_in_the_Land_of_Israel

The area was populated by various people's including Jews until the Jewish–Roman wars of 66–136 CE, during which the Romans expelled most of the Jews from the area (well, really they arguably left voluntarily because they refused to be second class citizens barred from practicing their religion freely) and replaced it with the Roman province of Syria Palaestina, the Arabs were already there, not invaders or immigrants. When Assyrians (Mesopotamians) invaded in circa 722 BCE, they ruled empirically, meaning only the Jewish ruling elite left, returning in 538 BCE under Cyrus the Great....so no, the Arabs didn't just settle after the Jews were dispersed.

It's patently ridiculous to say the Arab nations were unprovoked, Jewish illegal immigration led to a hostile takeover of the region by illegal immigrants with rapid expansion of their territories into their neighbors continuing through today. The Jews defeated the Arabs thanks to American backing and exponentially better hardware. It was only their right if might makes right, and the Arab nations are under no obligation to let them keep what they stole any more than the Jews were obligated to let the Arab nations retain control in the first place. If Iran, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, or any combination can take it, by your logic they have every right to do so.

I do agree, in the end there will be more conflict until the area becomes uninhabitable....largely because every religion's prophecies end with them in control, and no one wants to admit it's all nonsensical iron age tribalism at work.