Dementia ridden Trump was asked if he’s going to use more campaign funds to pay his penalty awards (he already used $50 million to pay his legal fees)…he had no idea what she meant, said “what penalties” claimed he had won in court, claimed he had won again in the court of appeals, and when he was reminded he just lost to Carrol he just said “I didn’t do anything wrong, that case is a ridiculous case, that case is less case that case is…”
Yes, he doesn’t even realize he lost $88.3 million last week. He thinks he’s winning these cases that he’s already lost. He thinks he won the NY fraud case despite losing it completely and only litigating damages.
He doesn’t know where he is, who he’s running against, who is president now, that WW2 already happened, can’t tell his rape accuser from his own wife, and has 91 felony charges to defend against…it’s the only reason he’s running for president, so he can pardon himself….he’s so clueless he doesn’t realize the President cannot pardon state charges/convictions and his lawyers are so terrible they haven’t told him.

You know, the claims wouldn't have to be "hearsay" if the parties involved (Meadows, Trump) were willing to testify before the committee. After all, if they didn't do anything wrong they shouldn't have anything to hide, right? Isn't that generally one of the right-wing mantras around justice? But Meadows at least has refused to show, and based on Hutchinson's testimony I can understand why - he's clearly up to his neck in actual crimes.

Yes, he's making his point quite well.
He's pointing out all the ways they follow the law and rules of civilization, even though they're sometimes inconvenient or uncomfortable, even though many laws are to protect others more than themselves. He's doing it in a way that no one ignores. He's exemplifying the selfish, outrageous behavior they are championing in such a way that they can't help but disagree with him, which MAY lead to them questioning their own actions and recognising they resemble that display he put on.

When did he call them names?

Mask mandates are in place, put there by responsible representatives. This meeting was to explain why to those too obstinate to understand why, not to let them choose.
They have been told hundreds of times by calm reasonable people, calmly and using data and statistics to explain why masks and vaccines are necessary, and the answer was "keep yer govment vaxine urtta mah blud and yer Fouchi facemask off me and mah chilin!"

Only enforcing it when it's absolutely necessary, only where it's absolutely necessary, and for as short a time as possible has led us to wave 4, the worst yet. It's necessary now until the virus is gone, it's necessary everywhere so the virus doesn't have a Petri dish to evolve in and become far more virulent and dangerous, it's necessary to continue wearing them and getting vaccinated/boostered until the virus is eradicated....maybe until civilization falls if we're unlucky or too stupid to follow directions.

I have no idea why this touches such a nerve for you. It seems so obviously proper to most of us, and an excellent way to show them that they already do tons of annoying stuff for other people's safety, like driving the speed limit and stopping at lights and wearing clothes, not starting random fires, etc....all stuff mandated by the government.

Explain please, why that's improper.

Wait....so you say we shouldn't have a discussion at all with anti maskers/antivaxers, because they'll spout some nonsense?!
Um.....no.
You don't convince people to do the right thing by ignoring them when they do the wrong things for the wrong reasons. WTF are you saying?! Don't have any discussions because extremists will take hold and you think reasonable people can do nothing. Only true if reasonable people stop trying to discuss and convince them of reality, which is your suggestion? Um......

If a war takes 20 years someone is doing something wrong.

Probably least of all the guy in charge for the last couple of months.

The withdrawal IS a mess.

Trump did nothing positive and contributed a lot to the current situation.

Obama should have pulled out as soon as Usama was gone. The result would have been the same as today but at least the war would be over.

You cant fight a war in the name of people who dont want to fight for themselves, with unclear or unrealistic objectives.

When has getting involved in a foreign civil war ever worked? Its like getting involved in a family dispute that is not your own.

I'm at a point where I can agree that "Trump didn't do anything wrong"... FOR HIMSELF. Narcissism is what a narcisist do. What's wrong with that, am I right?

It's the idiotic, blind, gullible, unthinking, racist, over-privileged, brain-damaged, "billionaire"-worshipping, unpatriotic, non-sensical, self-defeating cultists that's doing everything wrong. What's sadess & most pathetic is that there's enough of these cultists to make America turned to shit by voting Trump into the WH in 2016.

Your video, Trump didn't do anything wrong, 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 530 Badge!

Wait, Katie Taylor is a boxer, why mention her under an MMA video?

I mean there is a lot of trash talking in boxing too, but boxing can be a reasonably sane competition, this MMA stuff is just imposibly stupid. If they could do what they pretend to be able to do, half of them would be dead after a fight. Either they are doing it wrong or its all just a show of pretense. No point watching that. A bit like being a "motor racing fan" just for the occasional bad crash.

Dont get me wrong you have to train hard and have some skill to do MMA (or "wrestling") it just is not a good competition format, its a show. Movie fights can be more fun.

Yes the manner she's complaining is there to draw attention and hopefully embarrassed the person. As I said above this, she's not complaining about something happening, she's just complaining that the person exists.


On your second question, I was taking a pee when my kid was in and let me be brutally honest here. I thought she was still infantile enough to file things like this into 'I don't remember ' but she piped up very articulately "daddy, let me see your body" and I swear on my grandfather's grave it's the only time I've felt genuinely self conscious around my kid. I shut the curtain to the tub and explained to her that there are boys and girls, etc. But...and don't get me wrong, I'm not wanting to wander around just naked all the time, however, I see my wife on occasion interact with her like that and I wish I didn't have to feel like worried that my own kid is going to see me naked. If she does it's not the end of the world, but I guess when I'm not doing anything wrong - I wish I didn't have to worry about it. Yes.

I know different cultures have more nuanced views of nudity. Not all nudity is inherently sexual.

Moreover, the woman never even made it clear that they saw anything. She never says they saw it

Double checking

No, she says a lot of variations of "I see" or "he has" those verb forms fit with the other hypotheticals that she lays out to make them sound as close to something happening as possible.


Note - she doesn't say "I saw" or "(s)he showed" or "(s)he had" the way one would if an event happened in the past. She's talking in present tense.

But let's assume someone saw something in a flash of a towel to garment transition. For sayings sake. Yeah... I don't think it's too much to ask that parents sit their kids down and explain "well, you know Elton John? That guy is WAYYYY more manly than these people ever want to be. These people hate manly things so much they have decided they want to be women." Or something like that.

Oh I could not resist. The vaults of youtube stupidity and offhand reactions are rich on this one, to the point of being blandly monotonous. Marxist! Defund! Paid for by our taxes!
Nowhere is his name mentioned, so the edited video could be debunked easily.

Even from this artificially short excerpt it is easy to see that in the first half he is describing not his own views but those of Coca Cola corporatespeak. In the second half he is explaining what Coca Cola means by that shit.

Nowhere does he add his own views on the matter at hand, so he could well be trying to warn the world that Coca Cola is doing it wrong. Or vice versa. Except someone edited out the facts and meaning and left just trollfood.

Those are decent points, but have absolutely zero to do with the mass abandoning of their positions. It was 100% due to one of their own being charged after beating nonviolent protesters. They originally admitted exactly that, and now that they aren't being supported in their walkout, they are coming up with excuses that didn't matter to them the day before the officer was charged.

I think they should have to pay for the training and equipment they now refuse to use.

What are you talking about? You think budget cuts caused time off to be cancelled?! It costs double to not rotate in other officers, because you pay those on duty overtime, it doesn't make it cheaper. Budget cuts were not the issue when these cops were doing crowd control, only now that they're suddenly called to account for their own actions. No time off temporarily, because of extreme circumstances, was not an issue until one of their own was charged. It's certainly not abnormal, and absolutely not because of budget cuts, it costs more.

No prosecutions is the norm, if I recall, over 98% of charges levied at protesters have been dismissed nation wide, mostly because police had no evidence to back the charges they brought. You might note, as described in the article, "Mr. Schmidt immediately announced that he would focus on prosecuting cases of violence or vandalism; protesters who simply resisted arrest or refused to disperse after a police order would not necessarily be charged." They are taking a stand against anarchic violent protesters, but not the peaceful protesters with a legitimate gripe about violent, racist, deadly police acting as an anarchist gang that believes rules only apply to you, not them.

There are few prosecutions in large part because police declare riots when all participants are peaceful and not causing damage, and police are almost always the one's giving the orders to remove the people they declared "rioters", and in most cases they have zero evidence to back up their declarations, and are as violent as possible, beating peaceful videographers and reporters who were trapped and could not disperse, then charging them with refusal to disperse and resisting arrest, even violence against police for attacking police batons with their faces.
(Edit: remember the freeway shutdown when they marched on the freeway, and police blocked them from exiting or continuing while a second group of police came from behind, forcing them into a small fenced in area with no exit, then charged them all with refusal to disperse and the few that tried to disperse were charged with attacking police officers who blocked every escape route, violently attacking anyone trying to leave...all on live tv?)
Many peaceful protests became riots only after police moved in to violently disperse protests, fully 1/2 were riots because counter protesters and bad right wing actors like proud and boogaloo boys were planting bombs, shooting crowds, starting fires, driving through crowds, and murdering police in an effort to paint protesters as violent anarchists. That is verified fact directly from the DOJ investigation.

It's not a Portland only thing, police abandoning their communities because, as they indicated to the DA, "“It was like, ‘There’s our team and there’s their team, and you are on their team and you’re not on our team. And we’ve never had a D.A. not be on our team before,’” Police assume they are on a team against citizens, and won't do their jobs if, by doing them wrong with bias and malice, they might be prosecuted. They are used to immunity, and don't know how to do their jobs without it because they are abusers of power.

One day after charges were levied they quit in solidarity with the criminal abusive cop, and came up with fake excuses later.

You seem to have missed "the Justice Department said that the city’s Police Bureau was violating its own use-of-force policies during crowd-control operations, and that supervisors were not properly investigating complaints." part.

Had buddy who was a chemical engineer with a petroleum background---After the British Petroleum blow out in the Gulf, he told me that he knew it was going to happen; that it was always going to happen--because BP had always underspent on maintenance. He explained it like owning a boat. If you aren't spending 10% of the cost of the boat on maintaining it every year, you're doing it wrong. That includes maintenance, downtime, and prevention/OSHA/Worker safety.

So you have to ask the person kidnapping you nicely to use one zip tie of questionable quality insuring to position it correctly with your hands in front. If they use zipcuffs or multiple heavy duty ties or put your hands behind your back do you tell them they're doing it wrong?

My body's doing it wrong.
From age 16-35 I drank nothing but Coke unless it wasn't available (Coke, no Pepsi). Between 5-12 a day! Somehow I remained rail thin (probably cycling). Around 35 I decided that was going to kill me if I didn't stop, so I did and switched to lower calorie natural sodas, juices, coffee, and teas.....now I'm fat. Go figure.
At least I didn't give myself diabetes....although I can't explain how.

*promote a *quality reminder of a serving size

For someone who has the answer on all matter you are suddenly dumbfounded in finding such issues.
Gather that fake news does not mention such things. brian stelter and Rachel Maddow are doing you wrong.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ballots-pile-mail-potential-nightmare-looms-election-night/story?id=71719232

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/scattered-problems-with-mail-in-ballots-this-year-signal-potential-november-challenges-for-postal-service/2020
/07/15/0dfb8b42-c216-11ea-b178-bb7b05b94af1_story.html

https://nypost.com/2020/08/05/84000-mail-in-ballots-disqualified-in-nyc-primary-election/

Only delusional cultists would say they failed to prove his motive was personal and against the national interest. Deal with it.
His "transcript", a heavily edited summary that put the best possible spin on his call proved it handily by itself, and not one word, action, or piece of evidence contradicts that conclusion.
His defence was "as president, I'm essentially king and can do no wrong, and everything is permitted. My party is in control and are too scared of me to convict." So much for faithfully preserving, protecting and defending the constitution, he can't even read one sentence from it, said it was a foreign language. (That's fact, not opinion, btw) It's obvious he has no idea whatever it says.
There was no amount of indisputable proof that would have convinced the cowardly sycophantic"republicans" to turn on Trump, they ignored all evidence provided and refused to look at any, much less investigate because they know he now owns what's left of their party and therefore their futures, and they also know the slightest step out of line makes them his target, which means losing their job, power, and family's safety because his cultists include thousands of potential domestic terrorists just itching for him to set their target.
Edit:"The strength and power of despotism consists wholly in the fear of resistance." Thomas Paine

Edit: my theory is they reserved the dozen indisputable criminal acts they can prove until the Democrats run the Senate next year just in case he wins by hook or crook, knowing there is nothing, including cold blooded public murder, that the Republicans would convict him of.