Medicare advantage should just be ended. It's all a grift. They're just private companies taking Medicare money and trying to extract profit from funds that should be used for medical care. If the plans sound too good to be true, well they are.
Yeah they were biased. He got handled with kid gloves because he was a former president. He deliberately took all of this stuff from the white house, even though he knew he wasn't allowed to and that it was illegal. He was given years, multiple warnings, and many opportunities to comply with the law. He chose to lie to the national archives and the fbi repeatedly, continued to hide highly classified documents he stole in his damn bathroom at a beach resort. He even conspired with his staff to try and hide them from the fbi. And when the fbi one last time told him we know you have more, literally have your staff on video moving it around, give it up, he still lied! The national archives and fbi did everything possible to avoid having to seize it all back with a search warrant.
If anyone belongs in jail for mishandling classified documents, it's Trump. We probably don't even know the worst of what he had stuffed away at Mar-a-Lago. The worst stuff doesn't get disclosed to the court because they just can't risk it leaking out even with court procedures to try and protect classified info.
Oh look it's an article about how the Biden admin imposed a blockade on Palestine! Wait, it's not, because that never happened, if anything it's quite the opposite, and you lied or misspoke and just won't own up to it. So you are changing the subject to something else, again. I'm done.
They started screaming "stop the count" in that one as well, but that time unfortunately were successful in doing so. Many of the rioters who attacked the counting center got nice political appointments by the Bush admin too.
You didn't read my comment did you? Because nothing you posted disproves what was in my comment or argues against it in anyway. My comment was about the United States' actions and all you've posted about is what Israel is doing, which I'm not in disagreement with you on. I just disagree with your bizarre assertion that the Biden amdin is somehow responsible for Israel's blockades in aid, when in actuality they've been publically urging Israel to allow additional aid through for months. And prior to the war even beginning, the Biden admin restored Palestinian aid that had previously been stripped by Trump. And everything I wrote in my comment is clearly sourced and proveable regardless. But yeah not commenting again, since you couldn't be bothered to even read the comment, or did but jusy decided to talk past it. Plenty to criticize America or Biden over without making up lies too.
Hey I'm just happy someone is stopping the airlines from consolidating even further. Rare victory. But to answer your question the Biden admin has been more aggressive about using anti trust law to stop big mergers that would reduce competition. Unfortunately not always successfully, up to the judge to rule in the end.
Geeze I figured it wouldn't pass but didn't realize support was quite that weak.
Here's the list who actually voted in favor. All democrats except for, Rand Paul of all people? Since when does he give a crap about human rights? Guess he's just in favor of any bill that might reduce foreign aid.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky
Democratic Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico
Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon
Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont
Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland
Democratic Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts
Democratic Sen. Laphonza Butler of California
Democratic Sen. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico
Democratic Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii
Democratic Sen. Peter Welch of Vermont
Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts
If you're senator isn't on here, would be a good time to write them.
She was also separately the judge in an earlier lawsuit that Trump filed trying to stop the government from examining what it obtained with the search warrant, for reasons that made no sense and they couldn't really articulate. The Trump filings were essentially legal nonsense, so this judge took it upon herself to try to weave together something else for them, that still didn't make any sense. She was faffing about with appointing a time consuming special master (not at all appropriate for that situation) and trying to find ways to prevent the government from examining the evidence. Jack Smith played along with her but at the same time appealed the legality of any of this to the eleventh circuit (actually pretty conservative circuit too). When they finally got the case they said this is all legal nonsense, you never should have even taken up this complaint, accused them of just doing all this only because he was a former president. It was a pretty crazy opinion to read, they were not happy with her. Case was dismissed and the government was finally able to examine all the evidence they had seized with the search warrant. Whole charade delayed the investigation by at least 6 months.
And then when the government finally file charges after the investigation is complete, she gets pulled, again, to be the judge in this case (randomly apparently but from a very small potential pool). Ugh. So that's why we have her again. It's been reported Jack Smith has contemplated filing for her removal from the case. It's a tall order though and would also delay things. Potentially could be trying to gather even more evidence for bias before trying to make such a play, or could be trying to see if there's any way he could still get it through in a timely manner while she plays interference for Trump. Either way it's infuriating, as she's tying up probably the most solid criminal case against him, probably trying to delay it past the election.
This is the exact sort of thing they need to be encouraging if they want a lasting peace! Greater understanding between cultures. But I guess we know now more than ever that's not what the Netanyahu government is after. They also said the words progressive and free which are probably a huge trigger to Netanyahu.
That doesn't even make sense. Just going full trumpian, not only am I not guilty of what you accuse me off, I am the most opposite of that in the entire world. It's about as believable for them as it is when Trump says it. What on earth is their strategy here? I mean rhetorical question I guess, strategy is just spewing BS it seems.
Yes? They've been pushing for "pauses" (can't call it a cease fire, too unpopular I guess) in fighting and to get through Israel's blockade to get more humanitarian relief to Gaza for months now. You could argue not forcefully enough (I would, though who knows what goes on privately in diplomatic negotiations), but blaming Biden for the blockade is just misinformation.
The United States has contributed at least an additional $121 million in funding and humanitarian supplies since October. Probably much more in actuality since many of the UN relief agencies with boots on the ground are heavily funded by the US.
Attack the US all you want on continuing to allow weapon sales to Israelis and other misdeeds, but you don't need go over the top and start introducing misinformation as well. There's enough they do wrong to attack them on without making up new stuff as well.
And your US defending the red sea to get more weapons to Israel doesn't even make sense. Weapons from the US and Europe have a much more direct path than going all the way around the cape of good hope and then the horn of Africa. If you need a more real politik reason besides the obvious ones like the US doesn't like threats to the global economy, a more likely reason would be the houthis targeting all oil freighters except Russia's, oil that will become more valuable if other sources are shut down and help fund the war against Ukraine.
I'm aware it managed to avoid the specific word "race." It still enshrined chattel slavery thanks to the fugitive slave clause, even though they deliberately avoided using the word slave. I'm also aware the 3/5ths clause is often misconstrued (was pushed for by the northern states not southern), but it's a huge indication that it was generally understood that the rights enshrined by the constitution did not apply to people of other races and slaves and they were to be treated differently. Not until the 14th amendment were the benefits of the constitution and the law in general theoretically available to people of all races, though on a state by state basis sometimes people of other races got some rights prior to this. It ultimately is a compromise document between pro and anti slavery framers with varying levels of racist thoughts and opinions, as was common at the time.
Nikki Haley of course also ignoring the vast multitude of even more explicitly racist laws throughout all of the colonies. Heck even though Pennsylvania law didn't mention race in regard to voting, black people there lost the right to vote in 1838 because of course when we say men in the state constitution we just meant white men not black (they didn't get the right back until the 1870s). A document can still be racist without explicitly using the words race or slave, if that's how everyone understands it.
And then there's Jim Crow and that whole era, not to even get into more insidious manifestations where race isn't explicitly mentioned but racist effects result (but that brings up critical race theory, the ultimate conservative boogeyman).
And yes the confederate constitution definitely dials it up to 11, agreed.
I know the constitution isn't the perfect example, but I bring it up because it shows that racism was a part of the country from the beginning. Overall point is just that saying we've never been a racist country is a ridiculous statement no matter how you frame it.
Ranvier @ Ranvier @sopuli.xyz Posts 9Comments 928Joined 2 yr. ago
Haha, I had no idea, I didn't use this name in the other place. Good name though imo.