Yes…brilliant in fact…and moral to the extreme, and ethical beyond reproach, and a genuinely nice, thoughtful person too. None of those traits are positives to you though.
And let’s not forget, besides sea testing new nuclear submarines he was also “assisting in the design and development of nuclear propulsion plants for naval vessels.”…but only reached LT, not Captain.

Explain, specifically how was he poor as president?
Because he didn’t go to war in Iran (nor would he break the law and collude with them and sell them weapons like Reagan)?
Because he advocated for renewable energy that would have made us energy independent in the 80’s and oil free before 2000?
Exactly what?

Oh Bob. Always a laugh with you. The unintended self deprecation always brightens my day.

I immediately wondered that; a low yield dirty bomb, at say, the UN on the Upper East Side would be a different EMP profile, I presume, from a higher yielded ship born bomb inside, say, a container which had cleared customs in Pakistan, and that would be different from a high altitude air burst, right? So, and the physics seems calculable if annoyingly in my past--you should be able to calculate a range of EMP from various yields?

The "Quora" answers are: a ground-based (ship based?) lower yield weapon has EMP effects of note to the 3 mile range.

An airburst would be a different issue. "Starfish Prime”. In this high altitude nuclear test, carried out in 1962, a 1.44 Mt warhead was detonated at a height of 400 km. Electrical damage, including burning out hundreds of street lamps was caused in Hawaii - about 1500 km from the point of detonation.

By contrast there was no direct blast damage at all at that range.

The maximal electric fields induced in the Starfish Prime EMP in Hawaii were estimated at 6 kV/m. At high latitudes the value could easily be ten times higher.

For electrical equipment to be damaged by an EMP from a nuclear detonation, the detonation point must be above the visual horizon.

A large yield weapon detonated 400 km above Kansas would have an EMP that extended across the entire continental US, but the ground intensity pattern of that EMP would be peaked towards the South of ground zero, it would not be symmetrical."

“Yeat!” Ok, I’m listening. Tell me anything.

I ask you, can you explain why cons want mad men like him to have unfettered access to firearms?

It’s now being reported he was previously detained by police for threatening to murder his entire family and had 60 knives, swords, and daggers removed from his possession, but not his ability to purchase guns.

Cons are uncompromising about opposing red flag laws, which would have prevented this mad man from getting the weapons to commit mass murder…and about closing loopholes that let anyone buy firearms without background checks or registration…allowing those legally barred from ownership to gain possession of any weapons they like.

Can you explain why these remedies to secretly arming nut jobs are off the table for cons? Not being a panacea for all gun crimes is a red herring dodge, not an answer.

It’s insane you think this video provides justification for 90 shots, 30 of which missed from point blank range, without ever seeing any weapon at all.
(Edit: I must say, the flash from the window looks like a flashlight, not a gun. Guns don’t shine a beam of light onto the street. Let’s see the video, not a single frame that’s inconclusive.)
Also interesting how when it’s police vs unarmed black man you believe police without question, when it’s police vs armed white supremacist Trumpists the police are deep state liars making up crimes every time.
Remember, police went to the Supreme Court to have the right to lie to you, even in press conferences, and they do. Ask Uvalde.

Your video, PILLOW FIGHT PRANK - Assault with a bedly weapon, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 115 Badge!

Unsurprising, you cherry pick the one non crime mentioned then say something amounting to “look, that’s not a crime, it just indicates Trump is an infant that throws physical tantrums….that’s my man.”
And actually it is a crime, destruction of public property and vandalism of the White House….not that you care.
Also, it shows how outraged Trump was that there was no massive fraud. He wanted there to be fraud, he needed there to be fraud, or at least a lie that there was fraud, and was OUTRAGED there was no fraud and more so that Barr had admitted the truth. It shows how he is 100% not qualified emotionally to hold ANY office, much less the highest on earth.

Nice ignoring the physical attacks against secret service members while trying to personally lead the violent attack against America and the lynching of his own VP.
Good job ignoring him trying to let heavily armed crowds join his rally meant to march to the capitol building….armed to the teeth with everything from bear mace and spears to groups carrying assault weapons wearing tactical body armor.
Nice ignoring that he knew his crowd was heavily armed when he told them to fight hard at the capitol building and don’t let them certify the election (he may have said “don’t let them steal your country” , a distinction without a difference).
Be proud of ignoring all the Republicans who admitted knowing they committed crimes in an attempt to overthrow what they knew undeniably was a certified, fair, secure election by asking for pardons for their crimes they committed for Trump, including Trump’s chief of staff. Put your head in a little farther and you might be able to see out of your own throat.

Covfefe
Oranges of the investigation
Trump is no mental genius….and Biden handed him his ass without even holding rallies.
So….Sleepy Joe doesn’t need to be awake or conscious at all to be a much better president. Is that a compliment to Joe, a swipe at Trump, or both?

PS- kudos for admitting Biden actually is the current POTUS. I know that’s hard for you.

PPS- add to that news of Melania’s absolute refusal (by text, so recorded) to put out a statement calling for a halt to violence…..because they needed that violence and she expected her husband to be leading it.

Not if you excuse the invasion and takeover because they were DUE reparations, or even because they were fleeing the Nazis. I think reparations were due….by Germany, not Palestine.
Palestine paid them…and continues to pay them today.
It’s not feasible today, but it was directly after WW2, and that’s what we should have supported, even enforced.

Do you deny a massive influx of Jewish illegal immigrants invited by those who had been generously granted asylum? Do you deny they had the intent to take the land by force for a Jewish state? Do you deny most came after the war ended so weren’t fleeing war or Nazis? If not, where’s the disagreement? If so, citations please.

If they came illegally, absolutely, I object. If they came secretly intending to take the land of their benefactors by force, absolutely, I object. It was mostly in the later 40’s btw, largely AFTER the war ended. They weren’t fleeing Nazi persecution then.
Yes, when you come against the wishes of the local government intending to depose it, install your own, and expel the natives, that’s called invasion. That’s their history.

If I invite a refugee to live in my yard, and they invite their family, neighbors, and groups of armed militants who steal my house, land, and property and put me on skid roe, and the police turn a blind eye, even supporting the squatters because they’ve had it hard lately, do you think I have a right to get my friends to try to remove them, even if I wasn’t prepared to fight to the death unarmed and alone against their mob? If I do, do you still call me the aggressor? Come on. Don’t ignore the primary original crime that precipitated 70 years of atrocities.

Israel declared war by becoming a state by stealing one. I find it bullshit to blame the Palestinians neighbors for supporting their neighbor against a massive invasion and land grab by foreigners. Again, like Mexicans taking Texas back and you complaining if we tried to keep it, especially if we asked our Allie’s for help. Utter nonsense.

The Jewish people had already invaded and expelled the natives, removing all rights from any remaining. The two state solution = just go ahead and keep Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, and Utah because there’s already illegal immigrants there, in a few years you can have Kansas and Nevada, then keep expanding….those people are currently in Texas at this time. Again, you ignore the invasion, land theft, and expulsion to pretend Israel was already there…nonsense again.

Yes, it took more force to keep it from the armies of the allies of Palestine than it did to steal it from the recently liberated colony of Palestine that had no military. Duh.

What I see differently is I don’t ignore or forget the violent forced invasion by the Jewish zionists, nor the expulsion, theft from, and dehumanization of the natives, I don’t blame the natives for attempting to regain their ancestral home or properties that the Jewish state outright stole, nor do I ignore the horrific conditions those same people and their descendants have lived under for 70 years, constantly invaded further, no travel allowed, no imports, no water, no medicine, no weapons but treated like the aggressors and the criminal invaders for attempting to fight for THEIR OWN LAND, kept in shrinking ghettos, treated as sub humans to be exterminated, exactly what the Nazis did to the Jews but on a national level.

If I remember correctly God said something to the effect of "Thou shalt not kill".

What other weapons do you have left in your arsenal that your God gave you?

Imagine the scenario where a bad guy pulls out a gun, the first "good guy" pulls out a gun, then a second "good guy" pulls out his gun... wanna bet the probability who the 2nd guy points his or her gun to? And the subsequent 3rd-nth good guys' guns going to point theirs to?

Oh, then unevitably the "no duty to protect" police forces come and shoot ALL the guys with guns.

Total chaos, and good luck untangling the legal lawsuits that will inevitably come after. America! F**k YEAH!!

"Good Guy With A Gun" Theory. These NRA honchos reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaally don't want their subservient cohorts think one more step ahead of any argument. The sad truth is there's enough of mindless American too lazy (or even capable?) to think ahead just as they wished due to America's educational system and pathetic "freedom at all costs" patirotism & American 2nd Ammendment Exceptionalism crap.

There are many democratic countries that said no to widespread gun ownerships (Australia, NZ, Japan) and are far better for it. I guess (read: I don't watch C-SPAN) that sense of American Pride infects even the Democrats to be gutsy enough to compare the US to other countries during legislative gun-control debates?

That assault-style (like the ARs) gun ownership rights is pretty FUBAR from the get go. If that's a right, why not grenades? Tanks, fighter jets, subs and heck, nuclear missiles? As long as I'm a "no criminal record" American citizen, isn't it my God-given right -- and my freedom! -- to own any weapons as long as I can afford it? Unhindered Capitalism at its finest we're talking here! The most American of values!

19 43rd trimester abortions thanks to the right’s “everybody gets a gun” mindset that lets any criminal or nut job buy and carry a deadly weapon in Texas.
I guess those children don’t count, only the pre-children without brains or organs deserve safety.
With The gun laws in Texas, this is as foreseeable as the sun rising in the morning. It will happen again.

🤦‍♂️

sometimes the truth reveals itself at the most unexpected moments.

but it wasn't wholly one man that launch the [redacted] war against Saddam. it was the work of many.

SIDEBAR: recall during those times, the administration tried five 'slogans' to sell the war. wasn't until WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (WMDs) that they found a 'winner'.

Colin Powell forever gave up his chance at the US Presidency when he tried to sell the UN on the idea. Remember it well. Watch it live, at work, with w/boss. We saw nothing to warrant a war.

Remember it well, indeed. Hunter S. Thompson was a guest on Letterman the following night and said something to the effect of "you couldn't get a search warrant for a known mobster's house w/that kind of evidence". (have looked on YouTube for it but can't find it)

Also, remember Angela Merkel saying she couldn't ask her people to go war w/info given. A comedian remarked later that when you can't Germany to agree to invade a country - there has to be something terribly wrong w/the idea.

Sadly, this was the moment the Republicans must have believed they could sell any lie, anytime, anywhere, about anything.

They might be correct.

Nothing indicated the riders changed their route to follow the guy who cut them off (incredibly dangerous if you’re the bikers in that situation)…when you get cut off, you end up following the person who cut you off unless you just pull over to cry.

“When both men (and the woman) eventually stopped” (at a stop sign? The truck was in front…it was smart to not go around him, it’s not smart to put yourself in front of a raging out of control driver, especially as a rider).
“Rivera stepped out of his truck holding a knife.” Who escalated?

I’m hard pressed to understand how you think the motorcycle escalated the situation considering the circumstances. He was cut off, the truck in front stopped, the crazed man got out brandishing a knife and trying to use it. The rider didn’t pull a weapon until he was actually attacked. He could have legally shot Rivera dead in Florida. I thought he showed great restraint. The police clearly thought the rider had done nothing wrong.

I think you do.
Already many states have, or are in the process of, defining conception as the point when cells become a human, and denying the implantation and successful incubation of that zygote/blastocyst is murder, meaning in a real legal sense even contraception is murder as most work by not allowing the fertilized egg to implant. That means essentially all chemical contraception, IUDs, etc are murder weapons.
This is not hyperbole or exaggeration, it’s the actual law being enacted in Louisiana, possibly Mississippi, likely Texas, eventually all 22 states outlawing abortion.
It’s not just about abortions, it’s about women being forced back in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant, and returning to the misogynistic ideals of the man Alito gleefully quoted in the leaked decision, Sir Matthew Hale, who believed husbands can’t be prosecuted for raping their wives (it’s their right), and disobedient women are likely witches.
I’m pretty sure you understand.

BTW- still waiting to hear how much more in taxes you’re willing to pay to support the unwanted children this policy forces on mostly poor women. *crickets*

I would argue that the man who killed the most human beings in history is Fritz Haber. Between breaking the Malthusian Bargain (leading to a massive population explosion and everything associated with it) and creating the means by which high explosives can be created on an industrial scale (and everything associated with it), he's pretty much the single most influential person who's lived since the establishment of agriculture.

Bonus points for: creating the first "true" chemical weapons (in WW1) and his encore, Zyklon B (yes, he created the precursor, not the final product).