Jump to content

sheeeit

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    701
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sheeeit

  1. Man it is hard to agree with this. He has been in a couple of roles that I thought he was really good. But he has been in about 20 roles where I literally want to leave the theater every time he comes on the screen because his acting is so stiff and unbelievable.
  2. This is partly true and partly not true and it depends on the type of techniques employed by the scientists. Studying different viruses to see how they react does have limited benefit. My opinion is that it is.a very small benefit but a benefit. It is interesting that when you try to get a scientist in this field to actually quantify the benefit it is very, very vague. However, taking a known coronavirus that is not contagious to humans and then mutating it in someway to the point that it is contagious to humans offers virtually no benefit whatsoever. The only argument for this type of research that is ever made is that it may (not will) help mitigate a disaster in the future but to date, it hasn’t helped with the small number of viruses that have gotten out. And the cost, as we have now potentially seen, is enormous. The extremely small group that works with these coronaviruses is very, very protective of their work. they are 100% reliant on government grants as there is virtually no money at all from the private sector that goes into this type of research. As a result, when an outbreak does occur, they close ranks pretty quickly and pretty tightly because they know if it becomes public as to what they are doing then they’re very work and livelihood will be instantly shut down. Obama certainly recognized this.
  3. Huh? Makes no sense. Are you suggesting that the LOCs dont have to be paid back at some point if someone dies? Are you suggesting that if someone dies and then the heirs sell assets to pay off the loans that they are not taxed on the sale? The reality is that the only time you really see this type of set up, using large lines against assets, is purely for liquidity issues for the owner due to SEC regulations on large stock divestitures from insiders. If Elon Musk wants to buy the Dodgers or a huge luxury yacht then using a personal LOC against his stock holdings is going to be 1000x easier than selling the stocks to purchase the team or yacht. It has nothing to do with tax avoidance. He, like many in his world, also like to gamble. They think the stocks in their companies will go up and they want to profit from that. They also know if they start divesting stock that the market may sense some weakness and the price of the stock can be hurt for no other reason than him selling large chunks. In fact, him borrowing against his stock sends a strong signal to the market that he believes in his companies long term. Lastly, why do you or anyone else care? It is much, much better for the economy for the uber wealthy to take out loans and get that money into the economy versus paying taxes on it. I get the argument for some kind of wealth tax and there is probably a fit there in some capacity but this argument that using personal loans is some how gaming the system is just stupid. You take away that option and the uber wealthy will just buy less stuff and the economy suffers.
  4. I have to agree with Brew here. This is just a made up vehicle. Warren Buffet would laugh his ass off if someone suggested he take out a line of credit against his assets for his day to day living expenses so he could avoid capital gains tax on potentially selling some stuff. At the very best, you are just delaying taxation and not avoiding it. And contrary to what some here have suggested (that you can get a line at an interest rate that is guaranteed to be lower than the rate of return of your assets) there are no sure things. At some point all of those loans have to be paid back. For short term capital needs or some specific project or something then sure an LOC can make sense. But as a way to fund your lifestyle to avoid taxation is just a horrible financial decision.
  5. Blacks are more likely to be killed by police https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/Yale-Black-people-disproportionately-15682869.php less likely to be approved for loans https://www.forbes.com/sites/ginaheeb/2021/04/15/businesses-owned-by-blacks-latinos-less-than-half-as-likely-to-be-approved-for-loans-than-whites-fed-says/?sh=3edd71e353da Earn less than whites https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/01/racial-gender-wage-gaps-persist-in-u-s-despite-some-progress/ Votes suppressed https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/25/us/politics/georgia-black-voters.html Finally had a minute to cycle back to this. Maybe you guys didn't read what I said but I am comparing poor whites and poor blacks and advantages that exist in 2021. It may be counter intuitive to many here but the actual data suggest otherwise. I will start with Neon's points: 1) Blacks more likely to get killed by police. As a general statement that is an absolute fact. However, we are talking about poor whites and blacks. The actual statistical data show that poor whites are more likely to be killed by police than poor blacks. It is a very similar ratio but for poor whites it is actually a bit higher. 3.3/100,000 for poor blacks and 3.6/100,000 for poor whites. https://replicationindex.com/2019/09/27/poverty-explain-racial-biases-in-police-shootings/ 2) Less likely to be approved for loans. First, your link is about business loans. It is nearly impossible to draw any conclusions from the report provided as there are so many differentiating factors involved in business loans. For personal loans and home loans in 2021, it is actually not required to provide your race and it is illegal for the lending institutions to require it. There is exactly no data that exists that show that black people with relatively identical income levels, debt to asset ratios, debt to earnings ratios and the same piece of property being purchased have any less approval rates than white people. Zero evidence of this. And if we go back to business loans, there exist hundreds of special grants and loan options (predominantly through the SBA) that are available only to black people. There exist ZERO similar programs for poor white people. 3) Earn less than whites. Again, the data is pretty clear on this in 2021. There is a very small (admittedly less than the standard error margin) difference in 2021 for same job salaries between white and black. The latest data show that black men earn $.98 for each $1.00 earned by white men in the same jobs (almost the entirety of this small gap is accounted for in the age of the workers as blacks are typically younger in these jobs than whites due to the hurdles that have existed historically) . The study authors admit that the gap could really be zero at this point and they admit that if a gap actually exists it is closing every year. If things continue as is, the gap will be completely non-existent (it really is non existent now) by the time a person born today enters the workforce. https://www.payscale.com/data/racial-wage-gap 4) Voter suppression (i could not access your link but I will assume what it says generally). Like the above, the actual data do not support that things like voter ID, polling places etc have any affect on voter turnout or vote casting. And the reality is that when you look at things like polling locations, it is actually very much bigger problem for poor white communities than poor black communities. https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/3/15/14909764/study-voter-id-racism Again, I am not at all saying things have been very different in the past as they most certainly were, but I stand firmly that when analyzing the actual data and not emotion, it is probably harder for a poor white kid to get ahead in 2021 than a poor black one. And every example you provided above showed that to be true.
  6. Lets discuss it then. What ways do you think a poor white kid born in 2021 has more advantages than a poor black kid born in 2021?
  7. Like the Obama quote you referenced, there are different ways of looking at things. No sane person doesn't recognize that we have an infrastructure in place that makes it possible to achieve things. The founders and subsequent political leaders all decided that it is better for the overall good of the country to have these services paid for and maintained by the govt. So the debate is not whether Bezos benefitted from our system, the debate is why did Bezos get farther ahead than his peers? He was certainly not born rich. I don't know a ton about his background but I have read a few articles about him and i do know he worked the breakfast line at a Mcdonalds when he was 16 or so. So when Obama says "he didn't build that" he is technically correct that Bezos had the inherent benefits of our society. But so did all of his peers. There were zero special benefits provided by the state that were somehow available to Bezos and no one else. So I think it is just petty jealousy from some and excuse making from some and political grandstanding by Obama when they try and discount the successes of some people. Now it is undeniable that certain races, especially blacks, faced obstacles in the past that a Bezos did not face. But those are largely gone today. I do not think a poor white person born in 2021 has a built in advantage for success over a poor black person born in 2021. And i also think it is great that extra advantages exist in 2021 for a poor black person versus an equally poor white person.
  8. This post is kind of the crux of the disagreement on things like income, wealth, taxes etc. You seem to think that if a person works for a firm and thinks they should make more money that it is the fault of the firm for not paying them more. I could not disagree more and the real world and human nature and a capitalistic system could not disagree more. If a person thinks that they are under paid in their job then they should ask for more. If they do not get it, then they should leave and go somewhere where they can make more or at least have the opportunity to make more. Because if they just stay where they are and complain, then they are, in fact, whiners. If a person thinks they deserve more in salary from their current firm but can not find any other firm to pay them more then, by definition, they are making what they are worth. If I think my house is worth $1M and I put it up for sale and only get offers of $750K then it is worth $750K. And if you a person still thinks they are under paid then they should start their own firm.
  9. Sometimes the truth leaks out. What if they are really nice and not bratty? Do they get a pass?
  10. https://www.independentsciencenews.org/commentaries/a-proposed-origin-for-sars-cov-2-and-the-covid-19-pandemic/ this is a very good read. It really dumb’s down the scientific jargon so people like me can understand it. it is obviously just an opinion but it certainly raises lots and lots of circumstantial evidence that isn’t easily explained. This particular line of facts is quite high opening to me: 1) The bats that apparently carry the original virus have only been found in Yunann. None of the bats in and around Wuhan have been found to carry the virus. Yunann is 1300 or so miles from Wuhan. 2) The researchers in the Wuhan lab have documented that they traveled to Yunnan to collect virus samples from the bats there. 3) The researchers have publicly stated that the original virus in the bats was not harmful or contagious to humans. For the transmission to be zoonic (meaning that the virus was harmless to humans im the bats but then the bats infected the virus into some other animal host which it then mutated in that new host into a form that was contagious to humans and was transmitted from that animal to humans) there would obviously have to be some other animal that had the virus. it is highly unlikely to the point of almost being preposterous that the initial outbreak in humans, which is confirmed to be in Wuhan, occurred naturally by a bat some 1300 miles away infecting some other animal that somehow made its way to Wuhan and didn’t infect anybody in the 1300 mile journey. Certainly there were no initial cases in Yunann. 4) The lead scientist in the Wuhan lab published research in 2017 where they actually took a bat virus and mutated it into a form that was attached to human cells. It would have to be the greatest coincidence in the history of the world that somehow a bat virus infected some other animal and that animal somehow migrated 1300 miles and began infecting people in the exact same city that housed China’s largest laboratory for infectious disease research that was openly known and a actually published results of work that they did that combined bat viruses to human cells. anyway, it is a good article for laypeople to read and understand.
  11. I completely disagree with this and I think the opposite is probably a much more realistic interpretation. To date, all of the cases being made for US based funding are only talking about extremely small amounts of money in the grand scheme of things. The vast bulk of funding for these labs is from China. And no one is going to buy an excuse that a lab in Communist China that is being run by Chinese scientists somehow did some thing that the Chinese either were not aware of or did not approve of because the US gave a little bit of money. That is a preposterous position. Nothing happened in those labs that the Chinese government was not aware of. The fact that China will not release that information nor make it open to outside investigators is much more bolstering to the case that the virus was somehow lab manipulated. It is by no means a smoking gun but, to me, is much more indicative that Chyna knows more than they are letting on.
  12. Interesting take here. You certainly did seem to care where it came from when you posted earlier in this thread articles that seemed to assure you that the virus had not come from a lab. Now that it is certainly possible that those articles and the people who contributed to them were wrong, instead of getting mad at those people for duping you or trying to figure out other explanations, you resort to who cares, Trump is an idiot. there is a tremendous need to know where the virus came from. The virus is responsible for the deaths of millions of people and trillions of dollars in economic damage. literally one of the worst events in human history. If it did come from a lab and if it was altered in the lab (which certainly seems extremely likely now that the genome has been sequenced and there are specific markers that are used to make viruses attachable to human cells that do not occur naturally) there absolutely needs to be a worldwide discussion about whether this type of research should be happening at all. I do not know the answer to that question but, I think it is going to be difficult for someone to make an argument that there was any net positive benefit to this research that could offset millions dead and trillions in economic loss. further, there is tremendous geopolitical capital in determining if this happened in China. For all of our lifetimes, China is going to be an adversary. Whether it Is national security, trade negotiations, pollution, climate change, human rights, currency manipulation etc, this is potentially a huge stick that the rest of the world, and especially the United States, can use against China. Amd the investigation has to happen quickly. There are too many ways that the evidence can be hidden or scrubbed or disappeared over time. Our government is massive. We could very easily be doing whatever is necessary to mitigate the damage to the virus while simultaneously investigating its origins. It is juvenile to think that one couldn’t happen because of the other.
  13. I’m probably like most people here. I rarely watch the news on television. I go to 4 websites (Fox, CNN, Reuters and Politico) for news updates. I watch the Today show in the morning with wife. there have been 100s of different black leaders or black people on those mediums over the last 15 years or so. I don’t think I have actually ever heard one single one of them talk about the various advantages that are in place and ready to be accessed by minorities. I never heard Obama talk about it and I’ve never heard Biden talk about it. I never heard Trump talk about it and I never heard Bush talk about it. I’ve never heard AOC, Pelosi, McConnel, Schumer, McCarthy etc talk about it. I’ve never heard Abrams, Sharpton, Jackson, Waters etc talk about it. Maybe they have and they do but it certainly is not getting much attention. I could be completely wrong and just unaware. This is just my personal observation. Do you have examples?
  14. I just picked this particular post to respond to so not necessarily responding to you personally. I can find credit and fault in Biden‘s comments in Tulsa. The sitting president of the United States coming to a community and acknowledging past atrocities is a very good thing. This event was particularly despicable and there is no question that policies and actions in the past have hindered the economic development of minorities. Where I take exception to Biden‘s comments is when he uttered the lines about lawyers and accountants. And this really isn’t specific to Biden as, in my opinion, very few people in powerful positions in government actually want to solve any real issues. My problem with what Biden said is that, while recognizing the past, he offered no positiveOr constructive advice about the future. his comments about lawyers and accountants is just patently false and I think he knows it but doesn’t care. The SBA has hundreds if not thousands of programs that have been established specifically for minority entrepreneurs. they offer free counseling on business plans and business ideas and offerGrants and loans to minority businesses that are not available to non-minority businesses. they provide, apparently to Biden’s amazement, free access to accountants and lawyers to help them in their endeavors. I think these programs are fantastic and are deserved. I personally think the biggest issue is that we do not publicize the opportunities enough to the people that they are designed to help. What Biden is telling these minorities is that they got a raw deal and that it is not their fault for their current position in lifeand that if it were not for white people they would all be thriving.whether or not parts of that are true, I think that it is a very bad message to be sending. Because, if we just agree that it is true, it still does nothing to help people going forward. I think it is much better for the country as a whole and for minorities in particular if Biden would have said something like the following “ What happened in Tulsa and other related events was absolutely horrible and we must, as a country, acknowledge this fact. And as a result, your government has developed an extensive array of programs that are specifically tailored to minorities. I know that you black entrepreneurs are just as bright and hard-working as anyone else. I acknowledge that historically you have not had great access to some of the advantages that non-minority people have had access to in America. But you have that access today. There are many many government programs that are only available to you as minorities that will offer you free assistance and free guidance and free mentoring to recognize your entrepreneurial dreams. We provide grant money, low interest loans, government set-aside contracts, access to lawyers and accountants and all of it is free and waiting for you to take advantage of it. I’m here to help. I want you to succeed. Take advantages of these programs and go out and compete and show the world how successful you can be.” And, for the record, these types of programs that are specifically tailored to minorities, in my opinion, are the absolute best way for us to make up for the actions of the past. I have no idea why I never hear black leaders or really any government leaders ( R or D) speaking publicly about all of the advantages that now exist and touting all of the available avenues. I am guessing the vast majority of the people on this site have never done any research into the available programs that are out there for minorities. It really is expansive and it really is a very good thing. If anything, I think many of these programs should be expanded and there should absolutely be a national approach to create awareness to them.
  15. It took us a long time to get there. And, just a tip, when discussing a specific event and actions that occurred at a specific time, it is not really helpful to lob out accusations that you later admit were not present during the specific period you were discussing.
  16. Lot to unpack here. Lets assume you are right and most everyone, including the general public, knew about the risk to elderly people in early March. So why haven't we arrested the governors that "knew the risk to the elderly in early march" that mandated that infected people be sent to elderly centers in late march and april? Why didn't anyone/everyone in the medical community and especially Fauci who was advising the governors and talking to Cuomo daily not immediately come out and state publicly that sending infected people to nursing homes was the absolute worst place to send them? And, to be very clear, you said Fauci was neutered by trump in march of 2020 when that was absolutely incorrect. What a load of crap. I have never said anything about masks. What I think Fauci should have done in March of 2020 is to tell the governors not to send infected people to nursing homes because that would be the absolute worst place to send them and would result in massive deaths. The reason this specific discussion is focused on early March is because the directives to mandate sending people to nursing homes came out in late march/early april. That is the whole point you dolt. If the knowledge existed to most everyone in early march then the mandate to send people in late march/early april was criminally bad. Fauci testified, under oath, that his recommendations were followed by trump. Here are quotes from his senate press conference on May 12, 2020: Dr. Anthony Fauci: (03:16:58) Yes, no, there is certainly not a confrontational relationship between me and the president. As I mentioned many times, I give advice and opinion based on evidence based scientific information. He hears that, he respects it. He gets opinions from a variety of other people, but in no way, in my experience over the last several months, has there been any confrontational relationship between us. March 10- "said in response to a question about whether the administration was doing all it could to deal with the virus up to that point: “You know, I believe so.” March 22- " “The coordinated response has been…there are a number of adjectives to describe it — impressive, I think, is one of them. I mean, we’re talking about all hands on deck,” Fauci said. “So I can’t imagine that under any circumstances that anybody could be doing more,” he added. Sept 2020- For his part, Fauci also defended the president Wednesday, saying that at no time did he believe Trump was misinforming the public. Look, I am not suggesting that at some point Trump and Fauci got crosswise. I am not suggesting that trump didnt say a ton of stupid stuff. I am saying that in march 2020 Fauci and trump were getting along fine and that fauci was not held back or nuetered or any such thing by trump. You keep saying he was when Fauci himself says he wasnt. I cant open the nytimes link. My quote was that everyone in the GOVT at the time was saying trust Fauci and trust the science. You pointing out that some people on a random message board were saying something different is irrelevent and worthless in this discussion.
  17. I started to call you a non truthful poster again but it is possible you just have selective memory or something similar. We are discussing a very specific timeline in early March 2020. At that point, Trump was still lauding Fauci. Fauci and Trump were doing their daily press conferences. fauci is on record before the senate committee where he said that trump implemented every recommendation that fauci gave him. It was much later that Fauci fell out of favor with trump. Fauci was not "neutered" in the slightest in march of 2020. Not one single bit. I think trump was a horrible communicator and i am glad he is not the potus and hope he never runs again. But in march of 2020, everyone in the govt, past or present- Obama, Biden, Bush, Trump, Clinton etc) said we have to trust the science and the doctors. Everyone. Fauci has said publicly and under oath that Trump never asked him or insinuated to him that he should modify his public comments. And fauci was indignant that he would never follow such orders if they were ever given. So your but trump because somehow Fauci was "nuetered" in march of 202 is just complete bullshit.
  18. You used to care about truth and accountability. I am not suggesting that Fauci did anything intentionally wrong. I am sure he was overwhelmed. And i do not really care about the NIH funding and other issues surrounding Fauci. What I am very specifically saying is that in mid march Fauci "should" have been acutely aware that elderly people were the most vulnerable to the virus and, as a result, should be given the highest priority in terms of prevention and treatment. One of the emails clearly stated this to Fauci, and as the other poster linked, there were lots of statements from the CDC and other medical institutions regarding the very high risk to seniors. Fauci was the face person and point of contact for the govt on the pandemic. He advised the governors who then advised the mayors and so forth. According to most, everyone in the medical community, certainly including fauci, should have known in mid march that seniors needed extra protection. Yet, in late March/early April, several states (not just Cuomo and some R and some D) implemented directives to send infected people to nursing homes. This is not just a matter of hindsight or second guessing and there was certainly panic and chaos. Everyone makes mistakes and makes bad decisions but some are certainly worse than others. In this case there really are only 2 plausible scenarios. Either Fauci was derelict for not telling the various governors that sending infected people to nursing homes was the absolute worst thing they could do or the the worst plan of the limited options they had at the time or the governors completely disregarded the advice of the medical community and sent infected people to nursing homes anyway and ended up massively increasing the death toll. That is why it is important to know what happened. In a vacuum the decision to send people to nursing homes made sense. They had beds and quasi medical people already on staff etc. But the medical world already knew that the elderly were the most vulnerable so, with that knowledge, the decision to send infected people to nursing homes was likely criminal. It is not hindsight or a case of they did not know. It was known in early march that elderly people were in deep shit. We know fauci was advising the governors in february and that in the specific case of Cuomo was personally consulting with him daily. Again, either Fauci didnt tell the governors that the elderly were the most vulnerable and that sending infected people to elderly centers was the stupidest idea he had ever heard, or, Fauci did tell them that and the governors did it anyway.
  19. Are you and Jimmy the retard actually questioning whether or not Fauci was advising the nations’ governors? This isn’t even really debatable. Here is the first article that came up when I googled. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/5467859002 From the article: “In this crisis, again and again, we’ve turned to these experts like Dr. Fauci for the hard facts and to be voices of reason within the sprawling federal bureaucracy. The first time I met Dr. Fauci was in early February, when as chair of the National Governors Association, I convened a meeting with the nation’s governors and the federal government’s top health officials: Dr. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Ken Cuccinelli, acting Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security; Robert Redfield, director of the Centers for Disease Control; Jay Butler, CDC Deputy Director for Infectious Diseases; and Robert Kadlec, Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response at the Department of Health and Human Services. At a time when other federal leaders — including President Donald Trump — were downplaying the threat, the briefing was a game changer for me and many of my colleagues. “ again, there is nothing nefarious about the governors relying on Fauci for guidance. It was the prudent thing to do. This particular issue came up because the other poster said that it was widely known and discussed in the medical communities in March 2020 that the elderly people were much more susceptible to Covid and that all kinds of protections were put in place for those people.I questioned whether or not this was true. He linked many articles that appeared to show that there was discussion about this.I then questioned if anybody was really openly talking about the directives that he linked because fauci was advising the nations governors and many governors made the decision to send infected people to nursing homes. That would obviously be the absolute worst place to send infected people if everyone knew that elderly people were the most susceptible. we are talking about Fauci‘s credibility at this point. I am not even sure what you are arguing.it might have been you or another poster that suggested that nobody knew what Cuomo and some of the other governors were doing regarding the nursing homes. That is just patently false.The nursing home operators were on TV and in the newspapers every day saying that while the state was mandating that they accept Covid patients that their residents were dying in huge numbers. It is impossible that Fauci did not see any of these claims and itis beyond unbelievable that when he did hear about it that he did not immediately go public and say sending infected people to nursing homes is a horrible idea and needs to be stopped immediately.
  20. Lol. I am quite aware that Fauci was originally installed during the Reagan era. I have no idea what that has to do with what we are discussing now.
  21. You can google it also but there was a meeting in early February 2020 of the nations governors and Fauci and his team. They established a “hotline “ for advice and counsel on how to deal with the virus. In fact , many of the governors used those meetings to criticize Trump as they said they were getting all of their information from Fauci. Cuomo made a big deal about calling Fauci at all times of the night for advice. This was in early March 2020. obviously, it would be prudent for governors dealing with a new problem like covid to consult with someone like Fauci. Again, this is why I suspect that Fauci was downplaying the effects on the elderly. It was either that or he told the governors that elderly people were the absolute most vulnerable and the governors still made the decision to send infected people to nursing homes. You really should go back to late March early April 2020 and look at all of the nursing home operators that were questioning the decision to send infected people to their facilities. It was all over the country. They were literally telling anyone that would listen that people were dying in their nursing homes. Yet there was no criticism of this practice by Fauci until late spring/early summer.
  22. Sure. Sorry for the word choice. But the Cuomo stuff is not irrelevant. In fact it is incredibly relevant because it is where the theoretical and the actual met up. We are specifically talking about Fauci here. What you are suggesting simply just does not add up. I am happy to stipulate that the CDC and parts of the medical community were aware that the disease was far more deadly to elderly people in mid March. Presumably Fauci was also aware of that. Cuomo, and other governors, have used the defense that they were following federal guidelines when they made the decision to send people to nursing homes and Cuomo said he personally spoke about it to Fauci on numerous occasions. I am having an extremely hard time agreeing that Fauci counseled Cuomo and other governors to not send infected people to nursing homes in mid March. I feel this way because Fauci was the main contact for the Governors in their efforts to control the virus and many of them did, in fact, direct their states to send infected people to nursing homes. I suppose it is possible that Fauci told them that doing that would be the absolute worst thing that they could do and they just did it anyway on their own. However, if that were the case, then why didn’t Fauci come out and publicly tell them that what they were doing was going to get lots of old people killed? And further, once it was very public that many states were sending infected people to nursing homes, Fauci still went on record and said that New York’s response was one of the best in the country. It is just not plausible at all that Fauci gave them the direction that sending people to nursing homes was a horrible idea. I think it is much more likely that Fauci downplayed the significance of sending people to nursing homes in mid March. Because he was the one advising the governors, they did send people to nursing homes, Fauci did not publicly tell them this was a bad move and, ultimately, he praised the very governor that did this by saying his response was proper.
  23. It really does amaze me that there are some people who I consider to be fairly stable and quite smart that buy into this nonsense that Trump is somehow going to be reinstated. I have talked with a few of them and asked them to articulate how exactly this is all going to happen. They really don’t have much of an answer. regarding the military, the only possible way that the military gets involved is if the courts somehow legally determined that Trump should be reinstated. I cannot see any possible scenario in which that happens. I suppose that there is an incredibly small chance that the election audits find substantial fraud of some sort. But even in that amazingly tiny Instance, I would think the resolution would be a new election and not trump being reinstated. Biden is the president and we will go back to the polls in 2024 And see what happens. I for one will be extremely disappointed if Trump runs.
×
×
  • Create New...