The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

One nature of the two-party system is that when dirt is unveiled, one party raises the dirt into a mountain, and the other party says the dirt is a molehill. 

The grifting of the Biden family ergo becomes 'Phant-party fodder. The Donks say it is a molehill. 

But your only proof of grifting is the timing of Chinese donations to a University.

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

That does not make the dirt untrue, or me a Trumper for wondering about the Biden family grifting. 

It’s the Trump playbook to repeat a phrase over and over no matter how un-moored it is from fact.

“Biden Family Grifting” (tm)  is a projection of MAGA dishonesty.

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Sure, Biden family grifting automatically becomes Trump-'Phant talking points. I can't help that. 

BFG — there it is again!

Rinse and repeat!

Edited January 12, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Matthew Koch]

 

[Steve Thomas]

Lost their minds': Missouri Dems cry foul over GOP-proposed dress code for female state lawmakers
https://www.rawstory.com/missouri-dress-code/

The Missouri House of Representatives has started off 2023 receiving scrutiny nationwide as they have debated the proper attire that women legislators should wear when they are on the floor of the Capitol in Jefferson City, reports the St. Louis Post Dispatch.
In this particular case, the Missouri state legislature is considering a ban on women's apparel that exposes bare arms.

Oh my God, we've turned into the Taliban

Steve Thomas

Edited January 12, 2023 by Steve Thomas

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

But your only proof of grifting is the timing of Chinese donations to a University.

It’s the Trump playbook to repeat a phrase over and over no matter how un-moored it is from fact.

“Biden Family Grifting” (tm)  is a projection of MAGA dishonesty.

BFG — there it is again!

Rinse and repeat!

Money is a fungible commodity. The university co-mingled funds. 

Did the China money go into Biden's pocket and build the gloriously  named "Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement"?

Probably. Nevertheless, money laundering is hard to prove. You can claim there is no proof, and in a court of law I would have to vote "not guilty" unless there were some written stipulations on the gifts. 

Side note: Really? "Biden's 'Global Engagement'"? What does it mean when a capitalist nation, with foreign policy run by multinationals, speaks of "global engagement"?  Like 800 offshore military installations? Iraq? Vietnam? Afghanistan? 

HRC is now teaching a course at Columbia: 

"Hillary Clinton will join Columbia University as a Professor and Presidential Fellow in Global Affairs, the university announced Thursday.

Clinton will become a professor of practice at the School of International and Public Affairs and a presidential fellow at Columbia World Projects next month, Columbia President Lee C. Bollinger said in a statement."

---30---

Does anyone in DC care about potholes in Cleveland or what happened to Detroit? Life in Baltimore or along the El Paso border with Mexico? Keeping US labor markets tight? 

This is not about red v. blue. This is about who runs your government. 

Obviously, a ton of foreign money is swamping DC.  Both parties imbibing heavily. 

Edited January 12, 2023 by Benjamin Cole

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Money is a fungible commodity. The university co-mingled funds. 

So what?  Every donation to a university has strings attached?

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Did the China money go into Biden's pocket and build the gloriously  named "Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement"?

Probably.

Spoken like a true partisan.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

I don't find Scott Ritter implausible , Chris.

That's good, perhaps progress?  Sometimes your words really do reveal a lot about yourself, Kirk. 
 

10 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

I'm not sure if you remember Ritter, Chris . But he was first  a thorn in your side, an outright nemesis to you, being an advocate for the Bush Blair War in Iraq. I first followed him approvingly because he was asking , Where is the WMD?

This is very emotive. With a barb or two thrown in. You do like to try to mis-frame the opinions of others where possible. You've been caught out numerous times, and it doesn't show a great deal of sophistication or imagination on your part. I'll give examples. I do accept that this is part of your mischievous nature. 

We have discussed Iraq and no WMD's previously, perhaps even twice. I was very open and honest about the sentiment in Britain and how public consent was achieved under Blair, whilst I was enjoying the prime of my youth. I explained to you that it was a case of "once bitten, twice shy" in terms of listening to a host of mainstream media networks and leadership both sides of the Atlantic. It was a valuable lesson. As for Ritter, I obviously commend him for his stance on Iraq which @Matthew Koch actually highlighted earlier when I shared the link to him via Whatsapp, before posting here. However, Ritter couldn't be a thorn in my side, as I was out courting ladies and enjoying everything life had to offer. He wasn't even a figment of my imagination, let alone someone I remember. Your country did such a good job with 9/11 propaganda that few questions were asked by a majority of people. Fear/anger achieved consent. 

 

10 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

I personally don't have 40 minutes to give to him anymore, but I did enthusiastically watch all your first installment of Scott Ritter, I believe  just before Putin invaded.  He was very confident and scoffing at the West and Nato, declaring Nato would be totally exposed for the fraud it was  once Putin invaded Ukraine as there was no way they were going to be able to keep together because they're all so inherently selfish and will thankfully disintegrate once Putin cuts their  off oil, and that goes doubly when winter comes later, but it won't even even last that long!

It does seem like you have a lot of time on your hands. I have a fair bit on my plate. You could up the listening speed via the Youtube settings, which may help. 
 

 

10 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

I'm always interested in people's predictions, and like to make a few myself, because I believe, you can only make successful predictions,  if you have an unbiased grip on the present reality. When people exhibit that, despite if i like the result of their predictions, I give them credit.

You are only as good as your word. Where is my credit for figuring out the C19 racket, and working out that it wasn't stopping transmission or people getting the virus? And that it wasn't anywhere near 100% safe and affective. Obviously that was all contrary to the MSM narrative and your leader. 

While we are there, my approach after this had all kicked off, was and still is; detente, rapprochement, peace. I have been very consistent while others have been actively cheerleading the one side or the other. It suddenly seems more palatable. 

 

10 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

I award no bonus points to Scott Ritter for his pre Putin invasion prediction, as I think he got complete egg on his face. His cocky tone of Russian superiority was a bit off  putting honestly.

Although the western narrative has been trying to kid the public that Ukraine is winning, Russia is looking more superior. Did you perhaps take Ritter out of context? Though I should add that there are no real winners in a war like that. Only the people who make the arms and the creeps trading. That's a consistent view of mine. 
 

 

10 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

I listened to the last 15 minutes to try to get to his futures. He predicts Ukraine should come to the table immediately, accept reality,  and thankfully accept that they will lose only Crimea, Kherson, the Donbass Region and province starting with "Z". They should also swear to never join Nato., eliminate the Bandera National Socialist influence, (whose to say to what degree it still exists anyway, apart from anywhere else in East Europe?) and in exchange, Ukraine will be let to live, and can actually keep Zelensky. And his tone at 37:00 is spiteful and punishing as if talking to an errant 6 year old. Do you share Scott's emotions on that Chris?   

Do I share Scott's emotions that you have characterised as spiteful? I don't feel that emotions should come into it if you are to be objective. I said this in a thread yesterday or the day before. 
What do you think his motivations are, Kirk? 
 

 

10 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Ritter presumes to have some inside tract on Putin, (even though I don't believe he ever thought Putin was going to invade in the first place!) and confidently predicts that Russia's only intention at first was to seize the Donbass from National Socialist Ukraine and hold on to Crimea!    He say the U.S., Russia and Nato should negotiate a more lasting peace after this, (which sounds good!) but a Peace that will benefit everybody except  Ukraine, which lost the War!

Ukraine is the victim of being the latest territorial front for the superpowers (two of them anyway). 

 

10 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Chris, I find myself wanting to cut film lengths that I submit here, so people will watch them, but I realize it's not possible. But what I've done in the last couple of paragraphs, summing up what Ritter's solutions are , you could also be doing for us , rather than just submitting  a 40 minute film , and just say "plausible?"  It would be interesting hearing in your words , how you interpret Ritter's solutions. Somebody said this recently on the JFK side, when submitted a long video clip. "Could you quickly give us some idea?" and then let us decide if we want to spend 40 minutes on it , or how we're going to handle it. It's a good suggestion, if you want people to listen to you.

It is possible, I can perhaps help you if required. You'll need to upload links on a third party site and post links. I think it's not ideal but, being a person who does a bit of video editing, the file sizes would put the forum in a different storage category. Or, if it's just clips of this video, give time markers (all time consuming). 

I am a little taken aback my your stance at times. It seems you think my role in your world is to provide you with the optimal viewing experience on the forum. When I am too short with a post, you moan. When I am too long with a post, you complain its too long to read. It does make you seem a grumpy old man at times. Most of us have time constraints and we are accustomed to picking a choosing what we watch, and there is a heck of a lot of content available. Whilst I agree a commentary is nice, I just don't have the time. I listen to podcasts most of the day while working on the computer, if I had to make footnotes and write articles on them, it would be a full time job. 

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

9 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said:

Gallup Poll:

Nurses Retain Top Ethics Rating in U.S., but Below 2020 High (gallup.com)

Wow Doug!

"Still, the current rating is 10 percentage points lower than the highest rating for nurses, recorded in 2020, when they were on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic and their ethics ratings soared."

 

I suppose that's backlash trashing by the remaining covid denier/ anti vaxxers, whose  zombie nurse infecting plan ultimately failed, and now hate them for saving their lives because it perpetuated the covid hoax!

 

That's Darwinism for ya"

 

heh heh

 

 

 

 

[Matthew Koch]

 

[Douglas Caddy]

 

 

FBI reveals it uses CIA and NSA to spy on Americans - Washington Times

[Matthew Koch]

8 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Wow Doug!

"Still, the current rating is 10 percentage points lower than the highest rating for nurses, recorded in 2020, when they were on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic and their ethics ratings soared."

 

I suppose that's backlash trashing by the remaining covid denier/ anti vaxxers, whose  zombie nurse infecting plan ultimately failed, and now hate them for saving their lives because it perpetuated the covid hoax!

 

That's Darwinism for ya"

 

heh heh

 

Kirk Iranian Sylvester Stallone destroyed your side in a recent debate on the subject.. and Bill Maher is even agreeing that the policies people like you support were a huge mistake. 

 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Matthew Koch said:

Kirk Iranian Sylvester Stallone destroyed your side in a recent debate on the subject.. and Bill Maher is even agreeing that the policies people like you support were a huge mistake. 

 

When Maher says the way we reacted wasn’t set in stone; it pretty much was because they (The WHO, Rockefeller Foundation, Koch Foundation, Bill Gates Foundation) practiced the pandemic 3 times and made themselves the prominent voices beforehand. 
 

Neil deGrass Tyson makes the ‘collectivist’ or ‘greater good’ argument. He would trade anything for perceived safety. He is very much the epitome of someone who will seek any fantasy to explain away his poor decision making and opinions constructed under the influence of fear. He keeps finishing his sentences and leaves an opening for Bet-David to talk, he talks and Tyson then claims Bet-David is interrupting him. 
 

Thanks for sharing. 

[Kirk Gallaway]

10 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

That's good, perhaps progress?  Sometimes your words really do reveal a lot about yourself, Kirk. 
 

This is very emotive. With a barb or two thrown in. You do like to try to mis-frame the opinions of others where possible. You've been caught out numerous times, and it doesn't show a great deal of sophistication or imagination on your part. I'll give examples. I do accept that this is part of your mischievous nature. 

We have discussed Iraq and no WMD's previously, perhaps even twice. I was very open and honest about the sentiment in Britain and how public consent was achieved under Blair, whilst I was enjoying the prime of my youth. I explained to you that it was a case of "once bitten, twice shy" in terms of listening to a host of mainstream media networks and leadership both sides of the Atlantic. It was a valuable lesson. As for Ritter, I obviously commend him for his stance on Iraq which @Matthew Koch actually highlighted earlier when I shared the link to him via Whatsapp, before posting here. However, Ritter couldn't be a thorn in my side, as I was out courting ladies and enjoying everything life had to offer. He wasn't even a figment of my imagination, let alone someone I remember. Your country did such a good job with 9/11 propaganda that few questions were asked by a majority of people. Fear/anger achieved consent. 

 

It does seem like you have a lot of time on your hands. I have a fair bit on my plate. You could up the listening speed via the Youtube settings, which may help. 
 

 

You are only as good as your word. Where is my credit for figuring out the C19 racket, and working out that it wasn't stopping transmission or people getting the virus? And that it wasn't anywhere near 100% safe and affective. Obviously that was all contrary to the MSM narrative and your leader. 

While we are there, my approach after this had all kicked off, was and still is; detente, rapprochement, peace. I have been very consistent while others have been actively cheerleading the one side or the other. It suddenly seems more palatable. 

 

Although the western narrative has been trying to kid the public that Ukraine is winning, Russia is looking more superior. Did you perhaps take Ritter out of context? Though I should add that there are no real winners in a war like that. Only the people who make the arms and the creeps trading. That's a consistent view of mine. 
 

 

Do I share Scott's emotions that you have characterised as spiteful? I don't feel that emotions should come into it if you are to be objective. I said this in a thread yesterday or the day before. 
What do you think his motivations are, Kirk? 
 

 

Ukraine is the victim of being the latest territorial front for the superpowers (two of them anyway). 

 

It is possible, I can perhaps help you if required. You'll need to upload links on a third party site and post links. I think it's not ideal but, being a person who does a bit of video editing, the file sizes would put the forum in a different storage category. Or, if it's just clips of this video, give time markers (all time consuming). 

I am a little taken aback my your stance at times. It seems you think my role in your world is to provide you with the optimal viewing experience on the forum. When I am too short with a post, you moan. When I am too long with a post, you complain its too long to read. It does make you seem a grumpy old man at times. Most of us have time constraints and we are accustomed to picking a choosing what we watch, and there is a heck of a lot of content available. Whilst I agree a commentary is nice, I just don't have the time. I listen to podcasts most of the day while working on the computer, if I had to make footnotes and write articles on them, it would be a full time job. 

 

 

10 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

When I am too short with a post, you moan. When I am too long with a post, you complain its too long to read. I

Whew!....you're right. It is long.

Seldom too short--You're obviously no Estonian. But that's cool! Ben does a decent job of what I'm saying.Just trying to help. 40 minutes for Ritter is long. Even on fast speed. Which I employed way too late,---My Bad! ---To the podcast!

 

Chris: Russia is looking more superior.  What kind of original statement is that? At the beginning everyone thought that Russia was superior. What happened?

Of course, you were the one who posted Ritter back in Feb., Who so as much as said, NATO would never act, and be exposed as the fraud they were and would now be defunct!

The only curiosity I have about the first 25 minutes I'd ask you is. Did the narrator ask him how he got his first prediction so wrong?  I don't think so. It is kind of a Canadian love fest interview.      heh heh    a joke!

 

10 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

Your country did such a good job with 9/11 propaganda that few questions were asked by a majority of people. Fear/anger achieved consent. 

I suppose, it never convinced me. Actually a strong majority of Dems in the house were against the War in Iraq. I give the population a "D-".  It was an elective war, that could have been avoided.

 

Edited January 12, 2023 by Kirk Gallaway

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

 

Whew!....you're right. It is long.

Seldom too short--You're obviously no Estonian. But that's cool! Ben does a decent job of what I'm saying.Just trying to help. 40 minutes for Ritter is long. Even on fast speed. Which I employed way too late,---My Bad! ---To the podcast!

 

Chris: Russia is looking more superior.  What kind of original statement is that? At the beginning everyone thought that Russia was superior. What happened?

Of course, you were the one who posted Ritter back in Feb., Who so as much as said, NATO would never act, and be exposed as the fraud they were and would now be defunct!

The only curiosity I have about the first 25 minutes I'd ask you is. Did the narrator ask him how he got his first prediction so wrong?  I don't think so. It is kind of a Canadian love fest interview.      heh heh    a joke!

 

I suppose, it never convinced me. Actually a strong majority of Dems in the house were against it. I give the population a "D".  It was an elective war, that could have been avoided.

 

Cool. You found it plausible. Cheers. 

[Guest]

https://fb.watch/hZ_ZcDdIV4/
 

Tucker Carlson discusses an Op-Ed piece from Robert Gates and Condoleezza Rice, regarding the Russo-Ukraine war. The article was published in the Washington Post.
 

Have the media lied to us about how well the Ukraine is doing? Of course they have. It’s called propaganda, both sides are doing it. 

 

[Douglas Caddy]

 

Tesla shareholder attorneys taunted Elon Musk over his attempt to move a trial to Texas due to 'local negativity:' He has a 'knack for attracting 'negative' coverage' (msn.com)