No, I don't.

You need one to believe you're a real man. AR-15's only satisfy your need for respect.

"No gun, no respect."

Try commanding respect instead of demanding it.

More evidence why Democrats are wrong. This is why you need an AR-15.

ROTFLMFAHS!!
You actually just said that. Holy shit!

You only say it's ok to lock him up now that Trump has turned his back. If Trump still stood with him, you would too.

Bob, you need some serious self examination. You are a high ranking cultist in the cult of Trump.
You yourself said lying is fine and proper even under oath, making up any bullshit that supports your position. You said that, you said only idiots tell the truth if it hurts their case. You absolutely do not look for, or care about truth or facts. You have been crystal clear about that.


Bob....I'm a registered independent. I don't have a party.
I see your party, the most criminal, dishonest, and divisive in American history that repeats like a mantra that they have no obligation to tell the American people the truth....I see them and wretch. The pedophilic, anti science, anti equality, anti ecology, anti truth, pro secret unlimited bribe money in politics party of say anything is what Republicans have become.

You are so deep in the cult, you only see what the Trump party tells you that you see, and you damn your eyes if they disagree.

Dont worry, as long as you need a wall to keep people out, youre fine.

Someone told me you needed a fact check

Here's the information he had available to him at the time

https://downloads.aap.org/AAP/PDF/AAP%20and%20CHA%20-%20Children%20and%20COVID-19%20State%20Data%20Report%207.30.20%20FINAL.pdf


338,982 total child COVID-19 cases (cumulative) have happened
BEFORE he gives this press conference.

Then he explains that kids are "basically immune".


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


He made the claim so assertively https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-twitter-trump-video-misinformation-removal-children-immune-coronavirus/ Facebook and Twitter removed it.


So, let's review with a quote from someone who cares about public health.

"Children as a group are clearly less impacted by this virus than adults, but to say they are almost immune does not provide a truthful message," said University of South Florida public health professor Dr. Marissa J. Levine.


"does not provide a truthful message...
"does not provide a truthful message...
"does not provide a truthful message...
"does not provide a truthful message...
"does not provide a truthful message...
"does not provide a truthful message...
"does not provide a truthful message...
"does not provide a truthful message...
"does not provide a truthful message...
"does not provide a truthful message...



Look, a good rule of thumb, just wait for that social media guy to start ranting, if he says "Fake news!" that's probably true.

If he says "Believe me" that's probably false.

Easy.



For example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7elKHRjwc
Donald Trump: (00:42)
Our mortality rate is right now at a level that people don’t talk about, but it’s down tenfold, tenfold. So you look at deaths are way down from this horrible China virus,

Donald Trump: (03:52)
There was only one person that died that was under 18 years old in the state of New Jersey, and that was somebody I guess had a problem with perhaps diabetes or something else. But one person out of thousands of people, one person died who was under 18 years old.

Well, he's saying that in July, the problem with that is in June https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2020/06/2nd-child-dies-from-coronavirus-in-nj.html

So much for only one eh? but don't worry
Here's the current data

https://downloads.aap.org/AAP/PDF/AAP%20and%20CHA%20-%20Children%20and%20COVID-19%20State%20Data%20Report%204.15.21%20FINAL.pdf


And
Here's how many kids are currently infected as of the most recent data
See? Immune

3,631,189
13.6%




p.s. roughly 1/2 of every-single-class i teach right now has students who

let me be perfectly clear

can
-NOT-
taste
any
more


(yes really)

Good thing they're immune.

Depends on your definition of "need", and your definition of "stopping" climate change.

Because I'm convinced enough natural feedback loops are in effect that there's no chance at all of stopping further climate change, and only a slight chance of slowing the rate of change and only if humanity fundamentally changes first, I find the question flawed.

I find it odd that tidal energy (different from hydro) is never considered in these debates. It's simple, relatively cheap, easy to maintain, and best of all predictable and consistent. All you need is a shoreline with a relatively large tide swing, a small inlet, and a tidal flat.

At best, nuclear is a stop gap measure that trades one planetary poison for another.....largely because we aren't responsible with it....building on shores in earthquake zones for convenience, banning fuel recycling, having no long term waste plan and handling waste insanely (Japan, I'm looking at you and your plans to dump Fukushima irradiated water into the ocean)....It's far from "green" the way we do it.

What on earth are you talking about?
Do you believe the government dictates your vows? What "rules"? You just cannot grasp the concept of no fault divorce or prenuptial, can you?

I guess you never planned on kids or shared assets. If you do, not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives, and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first. Uncle Sam is in your relationship, married or not....without a marriage contract, he makes ALL the rules and you have no say.

My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas that in my state would have cost under $10K and you congratulate him? You are one strange person.

Again, your perception, not based in fact since the 60's. You assume women take off time to raise the kids and take care of parents and assume fathers don't take paternity leave or have obligations outside work. How 50's. You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. It certainly hasn't been my experience, I've seen women in the workplace working harder and longer for less pay, sacrificing just like their male counterparts if not more, putting off having families until it's too late while men can have kids long after normal retirement age, putting themselves in dangerous situations where those with power over them have opportunities to abuse that power and abuse those women in ways that rarely happen to men. These aren't exceptions, they're the norm.

Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that, meaning soon women in most catagories will out earn men and have more to lose, you admit you're wrong in your position now, right? Of course not, I expect you will still start from a point that hasn't been correct since the era and sexual revolution, early 70's at latest.

No, many of the studies I've seen compared people in the same exact positions in the same industries, even same companies, and women consistently get paid less for the exact same job and hours, and women rarely work less today, and just as often out work their male counterparts knowing they are often token hires not valued by the bosses so have less job security. If I recall correctly, 80% of job losses due to Covid were women, and the men are getting rehired faster. I think you are thinking of some studies from the 80's that made those assumptions and accusations. Comparing apples to apples, women still get shortchanged and as often as not overworked.

Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk
Tends to have short relationships? Too much risk
Likes attention? Too much risk
Single mother (non-widow)? Too much risk
Any mental issues (depression, bipolar, narcissist, anxiety, etc)? Too much risk
Older (why you still single...)? Too much risk
Likes to party? Too much risk
Drinks? Too much risk"

And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are? Specify what you expect and agree, and you walk with exactly what you agreed to, no government rules or split involved. Geez. You speak as if you had never heard of them.

Most divorces may be initiated by the woman (if that's true, I expect it's just another assumption) because their husbands are more likely to break their vows first, but are not willing to pay to end the marriage, including penalties for breaking the marriage contract, and we're too dumb to get a prenuptial (or got one that spells out harsh penalties for cheating). Yes, I am assuming men cheat on their spouses more often than the reverse, because men are wired that way.

You are not more likely than not to face a divorce, because it's unlikely any woman meeting your criteria would give you a second thought, and you need to get married to get divorced.

I bet if you show your significant other this thread your 20 year relationship will be in big trouble, or at best enter a long dry dark spell. Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches that take more than they deserve or even could give back and destroy you whenever they think it serves them. It's probably a good thing you aren't married.

Laws and family court aren't as you describe. Maybe when you enter the 21st century you'll recognize that. The rules of your marriage can be whatever you agree to, including the specifics of the split if it ends.

It's a sad thing you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks.....almost always unless one or both of you are total douchebags.

So weird seeing people disagree with you and offering various examples of marriages that contradict your blanket statements and then you go off spouting shit about subjective pitfalls some minority still experience after being married as if those outcomes are the only possible outcomes or even the norm.
What you two mean to say is DIVORCE is win win for the woman and lose lose for the man, still dead wrong but at least it's the point you two are trying to make.

Objectively, by the numbers, in terms of who benefits if the marriage ends, it's neither in no fault states.

It's asinine of you two to assume the man always has more assets, and more earning power. It's maybe true on average but it's trending away from that, and it's absolutely not in every instance.

My brother won. He got full custody and child support. No alimony for either. In Texas, a non no fault state where the woman is assumed to be the primary child raising parent.

Really, you still think most women don't work? Are you still living in the 1960's? My wife works, has since before we met in 92. I retired in early 2000's. If we divorced, I would get alimony.

I've known plenty of women who lost in marriage, not sure where you come up with that, and for over 1/2 the population, divorce is 50/50 split of marital assets, no winner.

It's only men in fault states who caused the dissolution of the marriage or don't fight for custody that get screwed as you describe. Most of us tossed out the system you describe decades ago. Most of us understand that while women still get paid less for the same work, that's no guarantee she makes less than her husband. As for "marrying up".... plenty of men do that too. Even if your significant other is a homemaker, they contribute enormously to the marriage, at one point they determined the jobs a homemaker does would cost over $80 K per year if you hired people.

With your opinion about women and marriage, I doubt you need to worry about the kind of woman who would marry you. The ones who accept the outdated misogynistic patriarchal mindset you show aren't the ones with much to offer, the desperate and insecure who will take whoever accepts them. They might resemble the women in your descriptions. Treat women better and you'll attract better women.

What makes you think you are some prize that only a near perfect woman would be acceptable to? It sure sounds like you're alone now. How is making the perfect the enemy of the great working for you?

Again, many states have changed the law to no fault, 50/50 splits with no prenup. Hard to be more fair. You complain about issues most Americans evolved out of.

"Sorry, there's no cult of Biden." Saying that in the same breath as all the dribble you just posted. lol what's wrong with you? You are obsessed with Trump being the devil. You just have to shout it with all your cult-like might. The guy isn't even in power anymore yet you need a diaper change every post you make. Your obsessed brainwashed little brain can't understand that non-Americans DONT LIKE TRUMP AND DONT LIKE BIDEN! Also what did I expect, Americans can't read past a headline of an article.

Those gaps would not have been there if Biden didn't freeze the construction. Like it or not half of the US want the wall and it was paid for. Stoping it was cutting off your nose to spite the face. Biden realized that hence the plan to finish it. The point of the article if you read past the headline was how bad Biden is handling the border crisis of his own making. Just like trump fucked up handling it Biden is doing the exact same.

Let me just get this straight. Trump child border camp bad. Biden child border camp good. Trump border crisis bad. Biden border crises good. Trump speaking like a senile Bad. Biden speaking like a senile good. Am I getting it right ?
Derp indeed.

You would think shouting and blaming everybody else for spreading fake news you would be more diligent... You're so blinded by your hate anybody who posts about your hypocrisy must be a trump supporter.
This is why the world hate Americans... Self centred fucks.

Something like that needs haptic feedback. I don't know if it has it built in already but when you place your foot on the ground, you need to feel that pressure against your foot.

Bullshit. Maybe if it was some minor story it could be shunted to page two if there are enough paid adds and sites that pay for preferential treatment. A major revelation like that, with evidence not just crackheads claiming it,could never get off page one of a search. It’s not there because it’s utter bullshit made up by professional bullshit artists to excuse their cohorts from treason and murder....or perhaps because there are a dozen professional fact checks that all debunked it and the original claims have been retracted and taken down by their original posters. (That’s what politifact indicates)
They do not “hide” pages, and they aren’t the only game in town.

The one bit of evidence I can find on the subject is the photo of Trumpsters taking selfies with capitol police that some nut job said proves they are ANTIFA agents working with police to frame Trumpsters....too bad those people have actually been identified as long time trumptards. There was also a claim that facial ID software identified many as ANTIFA, but the company itself said it identified white supremacists and other far right extremists, no ANTIFA. That claim is gone because it was retracted when the truth came out.
Just admit you bought the lie and made it up. If that weren’t the case, you absolutely could have proven me wrong by now, instead you are taking this red herring “it’s been hidden by google” lie as far as you can in hopes you won’t get called out again for just making up bold faced lies, again.

It’s a pure bullshit lie. ANTIFA did not instigate the attempted Trump coup, Trumpsters did, and they planned it online, documented and verified, some for months. Every person asked said Trump directed them to go there and “stop the steal” by “fighting hard” and “not allowing Biden to be declared president” and “getting rid of representatives like Cheney and others that are weak”. Not one said some hipster said attack congress so I did. It’s a transparent, baseless, evidence free excuse for treason. No body is buying it, it’s just so stupid a lie to start with. You need an IQ below 75 to think it MIGHT be true.

Impeachment already happened for a second time. You mean the trial.

It is pretty definitely constitutional because he was impeached while still the sitting president.

One reason for it is, in a criminal trial, they have to prove he intended to start a violent insurrection, a very difficult bar to clear especially considering his contradictory instructions in his speech and his mental state....in an impeachment trial they only have to show that his words incited it, not his intent. That’s a no brainer.

The only way it hurts Democrats in 2022 is it would hinder his creating a new party that would split “conservative” votes and guarantee victory for democrats across the board. Thinking conservatives should be itching for conviction and a ban from office to save the Republican party in 2022, if he’s let off conservatives are domed....republicans can’t win without Trumpists, Trump can’t win without Republicans. Conversely, letting him off with no consequences would hurt the democrat vote badly...why elect them if they let Republicans get away with everything including violent and deadly insurrection and attempted assassination.

Your fear of libs coming for your guns makes me sad. You drank the fear flavored koolaid, they just aren’t unless you go violently nuts, stalk someone, or beat your wife up, or if you need to buy them illegally because you’re a felon. Note, the NRA went bankrupt under Trump and McConnel, not Biden.

If Republicans want to fight everything because a murderous and treasonous coup is prosecuted as if it were disturbing the peace with no prison time possible, they should be tossed as traitors to the constitution that they swore to uphold that requires a punishment for inciting insurrection and attempting a government overthrow. Really, they want an excuse for fighting everything, it’s a foregone conclusion that they will no matter what, they have zero interest in compromise or bipartisanship. They insisted Trump had a mandate and should ignore Democrats completely because he won the electoral college, but now that Biden won it and the popular vote and the house and senate they insist he has no mandate and must let the minority call the shots. It’s not consistent because they aren’t honest about anything anymore.

No one that thinks prosecuting directing an attempted coup is wrong would be voting democrat anyway. Prosecuting incitement of murderous insurrection is not vengeance, it’s barely a thin slice of justice, but it’s the best that can be reasonably hoped for in today’s hyper partisan climate.

No moron. That's absolutely bullshit and you know it. The vote was in November. These comments were Jan 6, when the only way to get rid of them is kill them. He absolutely, positively, unambiguously did not mean get rid of them by voting, he repeatedly said they cannot allow Biden to be president. Too late to vote against that. It's clear he meant terrify them into installing Trump as dictator for life. Only totally delusional cultists believe the fraud fraud from Don the con, and you dumb asses bought it hook line and sinker based on nothing but a con man's say so (and sycophants repeating it).

Not one time did he say "vote them out". It was months too late for that.

Trump hasn't been right for a decade.

There was no meaningful election fraud. Proven uncountable times, and at least 60 times in court. You needed proof of what Trump said on the record, so now show proof of fraud, not more stupid videos that don't show fraud, not more Trump whining because he lost, not morons agreeing with his baseless accusations, not misrepresentation and outright lies like more people voted than lived in some counties or votes were counted 50 times or signatures weren't confirmed....all total lies verified as such by Republican election officials. I know you can't, there wasn't any. The best you've got is misrepresentation of edited videos.

No meaningful fraud, just a few Trumpsters voting twice. We all know it. Trump knows it. You know it. Election officials know it.
You're a bold faced liar, though, willing to spread any lie that supports your moronic messiah. You've proven it consistently for the last 5 years, proven wrong with verifiable fact every single time.

You sir, are a moron and traitor to the US.

Patriots don’t violently attack their own government and representatives because they lost an election. That is the opposite of patriotism. It’s called insurgence.

Democratic tyranny? Is that what you ass hats are calling elections now? Only when you lose them. Interesting you had no problem when the minority, the party that received fewer votes and was representing far less than 1/2 the population was tyrannical. Clearly you support being treasonous, anti constitutional and despotic if it’s your guy.

Redcoats? So real American patriots, you know, the kind that stands WITH the US and election results even when they lose, not against it, are now considered invading British monarchists and those that wish to dispose of elections to install an unelected monarch for life by force are the defenders of democracy? You need a history lesson, buddy. You would fail a 6th grade civics quiz. You’re arguing at or below Bob level.

Edit : Perhaps I misunderstand you....by patriots do you mean those who stood against the Trump insurrection, and by democratic tyranny are you referencing the treasonous Trumpsters and the Republicans who legislated as if on a vendetta against over 1/2 the country? In that case you’re right....and many were wearing their red MAGA coats and hats to prove the point.