Honestly, I've never heard of it before OCD's post... so I've done very little research into it... but any frame work that can look at policies and structure through the lens of racial bias is not a bad thing...
I took an unconscious bias course earlier this year and it was extremely eye opening... the more we can look at our biases and find opportunities to improve things the better... again, I haven't looked into it enough but that's what CRT seems to be doing...
oh I agree... I frankly don't give a damn what the Catholic Church does... I was just commenting that the article wasn't surprising that the Catholic Church would come out against politicians who are pro-abortion... and that it didn't seem to be the 'GOP' trying to rally against communion for Catholic politicians...
I always thought the Catholic's church view on communion was stupid... I went to a catholic school and found it fascinating (and insulting) that I couldn't take communion because I was a protestant and basically not worthy to take their communion...
and overall I 100% agree with you on Biden's beliefs... he seems to be very genuine in his faith... I do wish he was more anti-abortion... but whatever...
CRT highlights the importance of other events in history that are glossed over and/or outright removed from history.
For example, CRT does NOT teach that 1776 or any of the other dates in American history aren’t important, contrary to the whining from right wingers. What it DOES do is highlight why 1619 was so important.
Because without 1619, there is no 1776. Without the invention of the cotton gin, there is no massive boost in the slave trade, which means there is no economic powerhouse that is the south pre-civil war.
The reconstruction era was so glossed over in American history books that hardly anybody knows what really happened. too many of us have been taught a very whitewashed version of what happened. we're all taught that the civil war ended slavery and white people we're our saviors.
CRT teaches the realities of the situation. such as Lincoln, while against slavery, didn't actually want the slaves freed, so much as he wanted to preserve the union. it was only after the union started taking L's left and right on the battlefield that he realized he needed to make the war about something more than preserving the union. thats when he decided to free all the slaves ONLY in states that were rebelling. it was AFTER the civil war that all slaves in the country were freed.
CRT teaches the harsh reality of freed blacks after the assassination of Lincoln. see, everyone loves lincoln (including me). but you know what isn't highlighted in american history? his racist ass VP, who took over after lincoln was murdered. Andrew johnson was not only sympathetic to the confederacy, he was a former slave owner himself, and tried to bring in policies that still helped the ex-confederates back into the union on their terms.
after the 13th and 14th amendment was passed, along with forceful efforts by congress to integrate and grant freed blacks full rights as citizens, thats when the KKK came up, not only killing freed blacks, but any politicians who were in favor of integrating them.
and thats just a small taste. i didn't include that massacres that southerners committed on freed blacks. history doesn't teach the fact that southerners in the south blatantly massacred black politicians. American history doesn't teach about all the paramilitary organizations that murdered freed blacks and politicians in the south in order to restore white supremacy. this trash would kill blacks just to swing the election, such as a brutal massacre in south carolina in the 1870's, that killed the black politicians and restored white supremacist in political power.
^^^^^^^^
i can keep going, but thats some REAL important stuff that should be taught in history books, but it isn't. don't get me started on the treatment of asians during the railroad construction period. or the ethnic cleansing of american indians.
americans don't start learning "real" history until college, and we see the culture war the right wingers wanna wage on them. even then, there's so many important factors glossed over in college, and the right wingers banks on the uneducated NOT going to school, thus not knowing the truth.
thats one of the biggest takeaways i have from living in Germany compared to America: how history is taught. The germans don't shy away from their past. they teach every aspect of the WW1 and WW2, and make it very clear that not only were they wrong, but the aspects and environment that lead to those wars were also wrong. they send their students to the concentration camps to SHOW them how screwed up it was, to make sure that the country never repeats that crap again.
here in america? America is one biggest ass Desperate housewives suburb, constantly trying to pretend that everything is fine and we got everything covered...until we don't. we ignore or downplay history, and would rather cover up everything until the bodies can no longer be hidden. and then once it explodes out in the open, we're told to get over it and move on.
there's a lot of conservatives in this country who simply can't handle the truth: without 1619, there is no 1776.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I may be missing something but I didn't realize the bishops were the GOP?
Also how are you surprised by this? The Catholic Church has always been very pro-life... so why would the bishops not take a stand against catholic politicians who are pro-choice?
Honestly I don't see anything surprising about the article...
I'm sick to death of the catholic church... In fact, organized religion has entirely too much power in America...
Not as much as the federal government.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
Pence faces hecklers shouting 'traitor' at religious conservative conference
Former vice president Mike Pence on Friday was heckled at a conference for religious conservatives, ahead of a speech that took aim at his successor. Shouts of "traitor" and "freedom" were heard coming from a small group within the audience as Pence took the stage. Wearing red "Make America Great Again" ball caps, they were immediately escorted out of the conference hall by law enforcement.
One of the hecklers later told CNN that she interrupted Pence "because he's a traitor," presumably referring to Pence's role in validating the 2020 election results during Congress' certification vote on January 6. Pence has previously been criticized by Trump for proceeding with the certification, which took place after Trump-aligned protesters stormed the US Capitol, including some who threatened to "Hang Mike Pence."
A police officer did not reply when CNN asked if the female heckler at Friday's speech was under arrest. Pence's team also declined to comment on the incident.
The moment came before Pence criticized Vice President Kamala Harris for declining to visit the US-Mexico border during a recent immigration-focused trip to Central America.
Echoing a complaint lodged by other Republicans in recent weeks, Pence said it was "past time for our current vice president to go to the border, put our policies back into effect and end the Biden border crisis today."
"Literally, in five months they turned the most secure border in the world into the worst border crisis in American history," he charged in a speech lasting about 30 minutes at The Faith & Freedom Coalition's annual Road to Majority Conference.
Pence, who only recently reemerged onto the public stage with appearances in South Carolina and New Hampshire, used the occasion on Friday to embrace former President Donald Trump and argue that Republicans are well-positioned to retake control of Congress and the White House in the November midterm elections and in 2024.
A rumored presidential hopeful himself, much of Pence's remarks focused on Biden and his policy agenda -- including a critique of the Democratic president's "weak leadership abroad" that Pence claimed was on display during Biden's first foreign trip over the past week.
"It's amazing to think in 2020 Joe Biden actually campaigned as a moderate and he's governed as one of the most liberal presidents in history," Pence argued, adding that the Biden-Harris administration is "intent on transforming our country along the agenda of the radical left." "We don't have to exchange the American dream for a socialist nightmare," Pence said.
Despite facing ongoing criticism from Trump over his refusal to back the former president's unconstitutional ploy to overturn the 2020 election outcome, Pence weaved praise of his former boss into his remarks. At one point, he said it was "the greatest honor of my life" to serve as vice president alongside Trump.
"President Trump taught us what Republicans can accomplish when we stand firm on conservative principles and don't back down," he said. "In 48 months, the Trump-Pence administration achieved the lowest unemployment, the most secure border and the strongest military in the history of the world."
Unlike his most recent public appearance at a Republican fundraiser in New Hampshire, Pence did not specifically mention the January 6 riots at the US Capitol during his speech in Kissimmee, Florida. Rather, the former vice president stuck to a familiar script filled with references to religion, cultural flashpoints and his own political identity.
"I'm a Christian, a conservative, and a Republican in that order and I am honored to stand before you today," Pence said at the outset of his appearance, borrowing a line from his stump speech as a then-vice presidential contender in 2016.
Look in to why people at the DC protest have been identified but not charged. Maybe because they were agents just like the agent in Garland?
So now you're supporting the Tucker carlson, Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene conspiracy theories. I knew you were getting close to being there but now you've certainly crossed over the threshold.
Tucker Carlson Ignored Laws and Common Practices While Suggesting Undercover FBI Agents, Not Pro-Trump Criminals, Are to Blame for Jan. 6
The Fox News opinion host whose legal defense has been that viewers shouldn’t believe what he says is literally true has now tried to suggest that “unindicted co-conspirators” cited in connection with the Jan. 6th siege on the U.S. Capitol Complex may have been undercover government actors. Tucker Carlson insinuated that the government was to blame for what happened at the Capitol by citing to a website which failed to cite or analyze the law or common legal practices while claiming a government conspiracy surrounded what occurred on Jan. 6th.
In a Tuesday evening monologue, Carlson ranted about “Person 2” — a man alleged to have “stormed the barricades” around the Capitol and stayed in a hotel room with indicted Oath Keepers member Thomas Caldwell — and “Person 3,” another unidentified and uncharged co-conspirator.
“In potentially every single case, they were FBI operatives,” Carlson suggested. “Really? In the Capitol on Jan. 6th!”
“They were almost certainly working for the FBI,” Carlson also said of these “persons.”
He then called the unnamed individuals the “organizers” of what took place.
“So, FBI operatives were organizing the attack on the capitol on January 6th, according to government documents,” he exclaimed. “So, it turns out this white supremacist insurrection was — again, by the government’s own admission in these documents — organized at least in part by government agents!”
Embattled congressman Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) and controversial congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) quickly amplified Carlson’s speculation on Twitter, using it to call for an investigation.
Much of the Carlson monologue was sourced to Revolver News, a website Forbes has described as a “right-wing” aggregator of content. Last summer, the site advocated the shooting of racial justice protesters. It has been heavily promoted by Donald Trump and members of his administration.
The underlying Revolver story claimed that a “curious lack of indictments” against unindicted co-conspirators referenced in various capitol siege cases — including individuals known as “Person 2, Person 3, Person 10, Person 14, Person 15, Person 16, Person 19 and Person 20, along with many co-conspirators” — raised troubling “red flags.” The Revolver story also suggested, as did Carlson, that the unnamed and unindicted individuals were undercover government agents.
The Revolver article used the word “entrapment” a sum total of four times to describe the alleged actions of these alleged government agents. That’s a legally operative word we’ll discuss further in a moment.
A Revolver representative, Darren Beattie, appeared on Carlson’s broadcast to agree that the “remarkable” report “certainly suggests” the “possibility” that the FBI “organized the riots.” Beattie claimed that the piece is “the most important and the darkest investigative piece” many people have seen “in years.” Beattie said people deserved to know the truth about what occurred on Jan. 6th for the sake of Ashli Babbitt and others. Babbitt was shot and killed by a law enforcement officer as she attempted to enter the Speaker’s Lobby during the siege.
Beattie claimed the “key that unlocks the truth to 1/6” is the question of whether the key militia groups were infiltrated and led by the FBI and other government agencies — in other words, spurred to do what they did by the government and then branded as domestic terrorists.
As an aside, the New York Times reported last November that Beattie was fired from the Trump White House as a speechwriter in 2018 for attending “a gathering with white nationalists.” He later was placed on a commission which aims to preserve sites related to the Holocaust — a move which was opposed by the Anti-Defamation League.
Both Carlson and Beattie admitted that additional information was necessary to fully answer the question. Gaetz agreed by midday on Wednesday and demanded to know whether FBI agents were “active instigators.”
Let’s discuss these claims.
Conspiracy?
The Carlson/Beattie claim that government agents are unindicted co-conspirators makes very little logical sense as a matter of law. It is well-settled law — at least in the Eleventh Circuit — that “government agents and informers cannot be conspirators.” And other legal experts agree. So, when Beattie and Carlson suggest that FBI agents might be unindicted co-conspirators involved in the Capitol breach, they are suggesting something that is literally not even a thing. It’s like a liquid solid, or a working flux capacitor, or an underground sky, or a Declaration of Independence from 1775 — a figment of the imagination.
However, “a defendant may be convicted of conspiring with persons whose names are unknown or who have not been tried and acquitted, if the indictment asserts that such other persons exist, and the evidence supports their existence and the existence of a conspiracy.” So, it is possible for a Jan. 6th defendant to be charged for conspiring with someone who the government cannot identify.
Standard Practice — Who Is Who?
It is not common for federal court documents to refer to undercover agents or criminal informants merely as “persons.” Under common DOJ parlance, Informants are referred to as “Confidential Human Sources” (“CHS”), and agents are referred to as “Undercover Employees” (“UCE“), as the Revolver story itself points out.
Additionally, the Justice Department’s manual for U.S. Attorneys says “prosecutors generally should not identify unindicted co-conspirators in conspiracy indictments.” The manual, citing case law, suggests only “generic reference” to such individuals.
The 1975 case upon which the Justice Manual’s prohibition is based warns of “harm to the citizen who is accused but not indicted.” It suggests “private injury” may “stigmatiz[e] private citizens as criminals while not naming them as defendants or affording [them] access to any forum for vindication.”
“[W]e know of no reason why, if the indictment wishes to center upon a specific person but not name him as defendant, he cannot be described as ‘John Doe,'” the court said. “An unindicted conspirator anonymously designated as an ‘other person’ or as ‘John Doe’ may be unmasked in a bill of particulars or at trial.”
The procedure followed generally by the Capitol siege cases follows these patterns and practices.
The Identities
The identity of at least one of the “persons” referenced in Capitol siege cases is known. For instance, “Person One” is Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes, the Washington Post has reported.
“The Oath Keepers are led by Person One,” federal court documents also explain.
According to those documents:
On January 4, 2021, Person One posted an article to the Oath Keepers website encouraging Oath Keeper members and affiliates to go to Washington, D.C., for the events of January 5-6, 2021, stating: “It is CRITICAL that all patriots who can be in DC get to DC to stand tall in support of President Trump’s fight to defeat the enemies foreign and domestic who are attempting a coup, through the massive vote fraud and related attacks on our Republic. We Oath Keepers are both honor-bound and eager to be there in strength to do our part.”
Rhodes has military experience and is a graduate of Yale Law School, the Southern Poverty Law Center says. BuzzFeed reported that he stayed outside the Capitol on Jan. 6th. The Montana Supreme Court disbarred Rhodes in 2015. He has not been charged with a crime in connection with the Capitol siege.
Indeed, links between the various Jan. 6th defendants, the military, and the government have been long acknowledged. Thomas Caldwell, a named member of the alleged Oath Keepers conspiracy, is a retired lieutenant in the military who later worked for the FBI, court documents have revealed. The entire mission of the Oath Keepers, after all, is to recruit former police, military, and first responders into the organization’s ranks. Finding individuals with FBI connections within the group’s roster should not be a surprise.
But even if active, loyal FBI agents infiltrated the group, the person at the top, who is not by any account an FBI employee, was alleged to have been calling the shots.
And federal prosecutors remain in the process of filing charges and bringing superseding indictments. There has been a clear pattern of targeting, then eventually identifying and naming individuals for prosecution in the Jan. 6th Capitol breach cases
It’s Likely Not Entrapment
While we await the identities of the various “persons” referenced by Carlson and the Revolver, it’s important to acknowledge that the underlying law of entrapment does not suggest the type of legal bombshell contemplated by Beattie or Carlson.
And that’s important. Even if Beattie and Carlson are completely correct — and that’s unlikely — it likely won’t matter much legally.
The Revolver story started to insinuate an entrapment defense for those charged:
If it turns out that an extraordinary percentage of the members of these groups involved in planning and executing the Capitol Siege were federal informants or undercover operatives, the implications would be nothing short of staggering. This would be far worse than the already bad situation of the government knowing about the possibility of violence and doing nothing. Instead, this would imply that elements of the federal government were active instigators in the most egregious and spectacular aspects of 1/6, amounting to a monumental entrapment scheme used as a pretext to imprison otherwise harmless protestors at the Capitol — and in a much larger sense used to frame the entire MAGA movement as potential domestic terrorists.
[ . . . ]
Indeed, if the federal government knew of a potential for violence in or around the Capitol on 1/6 and failed to call for heightened security, the agencies responsible may in fact be legally liable for the damages incurred during that day.
The Revolver story went on to attempt to compare the acknowledged use of undercover agents in cases involving a plot to kidnap Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and the cases involving the Jan. 6th siege at the U.S. Capitol Complex.
“The possibility of an FBI entrapment-type operation is especially disturbing in light of the striking parallels between the Michigan Plot and the so-called Capitol Siege of 1/6,” the Revolver story said.
The problem is that the story logically leaps to — or suggests — the legal conclusion that the use of undercover informants is a bad thing. The Revolver cites no laws, so the piece asks its readers to agree that “a potentially extraordinary scandal” is afoot without any authoritative argument as to whether the alleged underlying conduct — even if it is true — is illegal.
Generally speaking, entrapment defenses focus on what the U.S. Supreme Court and other courts have called “predisposition” — that is, whether the defendant was “ready and willing without persuasion” to commit a crime and was “awaiting any propitious opportunity to commit the offense.” Though there is some disagreement in the case law about the precise parameters of law of entrapment, the legal test employed generally measures a defendant’s propensities and inclinations regardless of an undercover agent’s involvement. If a defendant is already on track to commit a crime and an undercover agent merely greases the rails and helps make the crime happen, entrapment does not occur, and the defendant is usually caught red-handed by a government agent witness who is more than willing to testify about the particulars. The legal theory at play here is that the defendant would have simply engaged the assistance of someone other than the undercover government agent and committed the crime anyway.
A successful entrapment defense generally shows the defendant’s “unreadiness” to commit the crime. An “unready” defendant is one who is badgered or pushed by the government into committing an illegal act after refusing or expressing clear doubts and misgivings about so doing.
As one U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Court case explains:
Inducement by law enforcement officials may take many forms including persuasion, fraudulent representations, threats, coercive tactics, harassment, promises of reward, or pleas based on need, sympathy or friendship. A solicitation, request or approach by law enforcement officials to engage in criminal activity, standing alone, is not an inducement.
Based on what we know right now about the Capitol siege cases, few if any unready or reluctant defendants have been identified. Most seemed ebullient about the thought of disrupting the proceedings to install Joe Biden as president.
Then there’s another related legal doctrine called “entrapment by estoppel.” That’s when an individual asks a government official whether or not a certain activity is legal, is given bad advice, and henceforth relies on that advice to commit an illegal act — all while thinking the act was legal based on the government agent’s advice.
An unpublished but often cited 2008 case from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania explains the law:
A defendant who raises this defense must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that: “(1) a government official (2) told the defendant that certain criminal conduct was legal, (3) the defendant actually relied on the government official’s statements, (4) and the defendant’s reliance was in good faith and reasonable in light of the identity of the government official, the point of law represented, and the substance of the official’s statement.” United States v. Stewart, 185 F.3d 112, 124 (3d Cir. 1999) (quoting United States v. West Indies Transp., Inc., 127 F.3d 299, 313 (3d Cir. 1997)).
It’s unlikely that an undercover agent who infiltrated a militia group would have admitted his or her status as an active government agent for the purposes of giving advice to others in the group on the legalities of their actions. Therefore, it’s unlikely this particular type of entrapment defense would apply to the known Capitol siege cases.
In an email to Law&Crime, the FBI said it “received the congressional letter” from Rep. Gaetz but had “no additional comment.”
A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Justice did not return a phone call seeking reaction or comment.
So you're just buying into some conspiracy theory from some right wing rag known to boast conspiracy theories that the right wing media has picked up on with no basis in fact.
I wonder why the same people you seem to believe are so against an investigation to find out what actually happened on January 6th?
Think Peen, think.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
The accused Capitol rioter who put his feet up on Nancy Pelosi's desk did an interview with Russian state TV
An accused Capitol rioter who was pictured with his foot on Nancy Pelosi's desk during the January 6 insurrection did an interview with Russian state TV ahead of a summit between US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Richard Barnett appeared on Russian state TV with his attorney Joseph McBride on Sunday. The interview was first reported on by the Daily Beast.
Rossiya-1 special correspondent Valentin Bogdanov FaceTimed Barnett for the segment, and described Barnett as a "colorful" individual and an "American patriot," according to the Daily Beast.
In his interview, Barnett complained of jail conditions during his brief imprisonment and said that he would fight for the First Amendment.
"I exercise my First Amendment rights every hour, every minute, and every day, and I will never stop," he said.
Barnett is facing a number of charges connected to the Capitol riot, including obstruction of an official proceeding; disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon; and theft of government property.
I may be missing something but I didn't realize the bishops were the GOP?
Also how are you surprised by this? The Catholic Church has always been very pro-life... so why would the bishops not take a stand against catholic politicians who are pro-choice?
Honestly I don't see anything surprising about the article...
No they are not the GOP, they're just influenced by christian conservative values and acting in a purely political way on this point... If they want to be a political organization they should be taxed. Period. And since we are talking about it, I did not see this type of aggression toward Trump on MANY things that go against christian values. So yes, I feel they ARE part of the wackadoo GOP.
I may be missing something but I didn't realize the bishops were the GOP?
Also how are you surprised by this? The Catholic Church has always been very pro-life... so why would the bishops not take a stand against catholic politicians who are pro-choice?
Honestly I don't see anything surprising about the article...
Not really true,,, Religion is running the government.. At least on the Right,.
I'm sick to death of the catholic church... In fact, organized religion has entirely too much power in America...
Not as much as the federal government.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
I may be missing something but I didn't realize the bishops were the GOP?
Also how are you surprised by this? The Catholic Church has always been very pro-life... so why would the bishops not take a stand against catholic politicians who are pro-choice?
Honestly I don't see anything surprising about the article...
Not really true,,, Religion is running the government.. At least on the Right,.
I'm sick to death of the catholic church... In fact, organized religion has entirely too much power in America...
Not as much as the federal government.
The problem with the government is that many of those elected officials have forgotten they work for us...
We grant them the power to do our bidding... they don't always take us into consideration.
Religion needs to be taxed... if they want to influence elections and public policy, then let them pick up their fair share of the expense...
We don't need to support TV preachers living in mansions and flying around on private jets... By not taxing them, that's exactly what we are doing...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
oh I agree... I frankly don't give a damn what the Catholic Church does... I was just commenting that the article wasn't surprising that the Catholic Church would come out against politicians who are pro-abortion... and that it didn't seem to be the 'GOP' trying to rally against communion for Catholic politicians...
I always thought the Catholic's church view on communion was stupid... I went to a catholic school and found it fascinating (and insulting) that I couldn't take communion because I was a protestant and basically not worthy to take their communion...
and overall I 100% agree with you on Biden's beliefs... he seems to be very genuine in his faith... I do wish he was more anti-abortion... but whatever...
It's actually not "the Catholic church". It's American bishops......
Vatican warns bishops not to deny communion to Biden, politicians over abortion
The Vatican cautioned American bishops against denying communion to politicians, including President Biden, over their support for abortion rights.
The New York Times reported Pope Francis has warned that communion can’t be used as a political weapon by Catholic bishops. Biden is the second Catholic president in U.S. history, following President John F. Kennedy.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) will convene their three-day June General Assembly starting on Wednesday and are expected to force debate and a vote on the issue of communion, despite the pope’s warning.
“The concern in the Vatican is not to use access to the Eucharist as a political weapon,” Antonio Spadaro, a Jesuit priest and ally of the pope, told the Times.
Earlier this month, the pope spoke about communion as “not the reward of saints, but the bread of sinners,” the Times also reported.
Biden’s support for abortion rights has often been in the spotlight since it’s at odds with some leaders of the Catholic Church. Biden has been open about his devotion to his Catholic faith and attends Mass most weekends.
You found it insulting that you weren't allowed to take communion, interesting. Don't know IF you're Christian, that's your business- please don't insult Catholics for wanting to take communion without believing in our sacred belief that the real presence of Christ is taken. Read your Bible, Protestant bibles many times have Jesus's spoken words in read...he stated this is my body, yet many Protestant faiths state communion is but a symbol....don't take communion if you don't believe as Catholics and please don't be INSULTED. On to Republicans- too many Republicans are into conspiracies. Every person on this earth has an agenda. EVERYONE- and most normally think and act in their best interest. Isn't it strange Trump, the hero businessman turned President, his best decision ever, he milking the government for millions, protection details, government entourage, etc. all or most staying in his owned hotels/ resorts....what a racket and he doesn't pay taxes because he's the KING of DEBT....he's a bigger slime ball than Clinton. On my box- EVERYONE has an AGENDA, our job is to figure it out and see which "Leader" hurts us least.
Last edited by hitt; 06/20/2111:19 AM.
"You've never lived till you've almost died, life has a flavor the protected will never know" A vet or cop
Paying taxes and being on the sexual predators list in all 50 states should bring the "church's political activities" into the spotlight. Just saying, to hell with them.
I know lol, he landed a crushing blow on Lemon. But he's still an idiotic ass. I personally can't stand him, but even the most vile of men are capable of a little good.
So Abbott doesn't care if people leave their dogs tied outside with no relief from extreme weather. He supports animal abuse.
He and Trump have not liking dogs in common. I don't trust people who don't like dogs. I don't trust people that dogs don't like. Something tells me neither of these chumps have ever loved a dog or had a dogs love.
Wasn't sure which thread had been talking about election fraud, so I put this here.
GOP-led Michigan Senate investigation finds no evidence of election fraud
Erin Doherty Wed, June 23, 2021, 10:01 AM·1 min read An investigation by Michigan's Republican-led Senate Oversight Committee found no evidence of widespread voter fraud in 2020, and recommended that Michigan's attorney general investigate individuals who made false claims "for their own ends."
Why it matters: A 35-page report released by the committee debunks election falsehoods and conspiracy theories spread by former President Trump and his supporters in the aftermath of November's election.
Stay on top of the latest market trends and economic insights with Axios Markets. Subscribe for free
As recently as May, Trump was falsely claiming that votes in Michigan were "intentionally switched" from him to President Biden, calling the fraud allegation "MASSIVE and determinative."
Driving the news: The months-long investigation repudiates claims from GOP activists who alleged that some voting machines were “manipulated” in rural Antrim County, where human error by the Republican clerk led to initially skewed results, per Bridge Michigan.
"The committee finds those promoting Antrim County as the prime evidence of a nationwide conspiracy to steal the election place all other statements and actions they make in a position of zero credibility," the report says.
The report acknowledges that "there are glaring issues that must be addressed in current Michigan election law, election security, and certain procedures," but says the issues should not bring into question the integrity of the 2020 election.
What they're saying: "Our clear finding is that citizens should be confident the results represent the true results of the ballots cast by the people of Michigan," the report concluded.
“The committee strongly recommends citizens use a critical eye and ear toward those who have pushed demonstrably false theories for their own personal gain.”
"The committee recommends the attorney general consider investigating those who have been utilizing misleading and false information about Antrim County to raise money or publicity for their own ends."
I think the point behind all these 'investigations,' probes and "fraudits" is less about uncovering fraud as it is to poison future elections. The longer they drag these inquiries out, the longer 45*s claims stay in the news cycle. The longer election fraud is in the news cycle, the more it's subliminally planted in the heads of weak-minded voters.
Two benefits:
1. if you can keep the dummies riled up until mid terms, you ensure a healthy-sized turnout. 2. At the end of a close election, the notion of fraud will have already been placed, making it easier to run this same scam the next time.
It's not so much about winning or proving anything. It's a ploy to control the narrative from a party that no longer has a public policy platform.
Yes, they will be keeping the dummies riled up until mid terms. They also will keep bringing up fraud so they can continue changing the election laws on the state level.
And the state level is one area in the last 10-15 years that the dems have just been crushed. The dems pay a bunch of attention to the national elections, but have been getting crushed on the state level. And, while the repubs keep whining the big lie about election fraud, as soon as they gain majority on a state level, they change the state laws and redistrict the hell out of the districts so they keep the majority.
Ya gotta keep'em p$$d if ya wanna keep'em coming back. Viewership drives ratings, and outrage drives viewership. Say something- anything to keep'em riled up- every day, 5 days per week, 42 weeks per year.
What a s##y, cynical way to earn a paycheck.
So she's picking a fight with a decorated General who had the temerity to call out rotting, fetid BS when he saw/heard/smelled it. Good luck with that. That 2-minute dressing-down he gave Matt Gaetz (and all who goose-step in sync with that tribal drumbeat) is what it looks like every time serious people of substance can no longer suffer fools gladly. I'm certain he could deliver a dose of 'The Reals' to Laura any time he wanted, as well.
Manufactured outrage is all the rage on cable news. She's no better or worse than any other of them.
I won't watch a single one of them. On any channel.
*edit* for the record, I didn't play the embedded clip in your post before I responded. I really meant it when I said I don't watch!
Last edited by Clemdawg; 06/24/2103:28 AM. Reason: extra content
Lol..This clip of her “white rage” should be installed into the curriculum of West Point’s diversity classes.
If you open the Twitter feed and scroll down, Dan Rather has a comment. I don’t know how to post the Twitter thing directly so I’ll quote it directly… “@DanRather · Jun 22 There is about as much courage DNA in the Republican Party as there is tuna DNA in a Subway sandwich.”
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
all the times he put on his stupid face and said "What sources? Who are they?" ... IT WAS HIM! 
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/PortlandDawg/banner.jpg)