Crowder didn't quite hold his feet to the fire like he promised. Cruz cya here was to say "well I agree there was fraud, but Trump went to far by saying there was enough fraud that the election result would have been different." Uh, it's Trump's job to get people to look at fraud and no court will look at fraud that is not dispositive of the result of the election. Trump going out on the stump and saying "there was fraud but I still legitimately lost" is a bad idea on multiple levels and when called on his chiding Trump, this is the narrative Cruz went with, that Trump should have framed his concerns about elections in terms of the fraud being not that big of a deal. It's disingenuous and he knows it. Crowder can be great but he becomes too much of a fan boy on the spot to ask any real follow up questions of consequence.
I hope this is true. I tend to like Favraues work. Still done with Disney, but a nice bit of infighting could really put Disney in trouble with their shareholders. I welcome it.
100k+ votes. Biden "won" by 10k votes. This alone is easily enough to overturn the election result.
Keep in mind these are friendly polls. You look at the non-biased polling and I'll bet he's at least another 5-10 points underwater.
It would be malpractice for Trump's team not to point out this and the doctored videos and tweets as evidence of the prosecution making shit up.
Agreed. Coulter has been in the business for a long time and she's made almost as many terrible moves as good ones. A lot of times she has actually been a mouthpiece for the establishment side of the party. Hell, she was on the stump for Romney to win the senate seat in Utah around the same time she was bitching about Trump not making a wall (uh he was, and he was also fighting an obstinate Congress despite having a republican majority). Coulter is paid opinion writer. Her job is literally to just be a factory for conservative sounding opinions and she delivers them in volume, problem is a lot of them are mass produced crap.
Gina Carano: The holocaust happened because they shut down political discourse and encouraged people to attack their fellow citizens
Lucasfilm:.Fire her for her opinions and #fuckginacarano
I mean it's like they demonstrated her point in real time.
Agreed. Matt Walsh's angry dad schtick is worse than Ben's smarmy "I'm always right" schtick.
You miss my point. Romney is bad. Everyone knows he's bad. Nobody is surprised when he stabs us in the back. When Cruz does it it catches people by surprise and sows distrust among the movement. My point is that the fence sitters are the ones that cause the most problems in the end, not the clearly labeled good guys and bad guys. The deepest circle of hell is reserved for traitors.
You my friend need to learn where to put your anger and activism and correctly identify problems. Funding Israel isn't bad because it helps the Jews. It's bad because taxation is theft and government shouldn't put the welfare of foreign countries above their own citizens. Ive been called a racist plenty of times. I'm not afraid of the term. It's a meaningless label at this point. What I do care about is people being convinced that the term racist, as used to describe me, is an appropriate term. If the left calls me a racist and 70 percent of the population thinks that's an inaccurate descriptor, I win. If the left calls me a racist and 90 percent of people, including my own followers abandon my cause, than the label has done real damage and it is a problem and I lose. Let the left call us racists all they want, but I'd rather convince more people they are full of shit than convince people they are right. Occupy Wall Street succeeded for a time because it attracted both the left and the right against the establishment. The moment it started to catch on, the establishment began pushing intersectionality. Racism and other isms are an easy tool used to divide people away from addressing real issues. Trump won because he convinced a lot of people not traditionally on the right that all the times he got called a racist were bullshit and he was actually addressing important issues. Focus on the real problems and don't get distracted by shiny objects. Again, funding Israel isnt bad because the Jews are bad. Funding Israel is bad because taxation is bad and government shouldn't put other countries before their own citizens. If you focus on the latter you can convince the moderates and the left and effect real change. If you make it about the former you get yourself easily dismissed and accomplish nothing. Work smarter, not harder my friend.
I want to like him too, but it's very hard to do that with how he behaves. He walks the thin line between being a real patriot with some balls and being a crony establishmentarian. Too often he falls on the wrong side of the line and it creates trust issues. Romney is Romney and you know exactly how you feel about him any given day. Same goes for Hawley. People like Hawley because he's upfront about who he is. It's the fence sitters that everyone hates because you can never tell whose side they're on.
I agree. In the end pandering to the Israel lobby won him marginal support among establishment GOP (and that marginal support is easy come easy go). Pandering to Israel didn't help him make significant inroads with the Jewish company, that votes overwhelmingly left. They still called him a Nazi. Trump got tricked into trying to win the game by their rules and ultimately the left doesn't live up to its rules and the establishment right will stab you in the back in a heartbeat.
I get the Israel skepticism. I really do. It needs to be a matter of not constantly funding them and giving them stuff we wouldn't give ourselves. We fund them to build protective walls from Palestine but we can't get that here in the US? That needs to be the approach. The moment you make it about their religion/ethnicity, you get labeled a racist. I'm sure she will here. It's the wrong approach. Confront the special interests for being special interests that take from the US and give nothing back. Leave it at that and you have a winning strategy.
I'll only accept that to be true if Crowder gets some deliverables out of him. Cruz pretended to be redpilled for a time under Trump. It seems some people need a continuous dosage regimen to stay innoculated from bullshit MSM narratives. Cruz is one of those guys that, if he doesn't keep up the dose, will go back to being a sellout real fast.
Crowder better take Cruz to task. Cruz doesn't get to do the classic Republican chicken footing about Trump. Republicans love to concede points to the left to seem reasoned in their arguments. It's a rhetorical tool they think helps them build ethos with their audience, but all it does is make them seem like inconsistent hypocrites. The left is never moved by these gestures of apparent good faith and the right sees it for what it is, a cynical ploy to appear moderate without rather than do the hard job of defending the utterly defensible behavior of a controversial figure. Republicans need to learn they are in the same boat as Trump and, rather than sell him out from time to time to seem more moderate by comparison, should say "Today they come after Trump, tomorrow they come after me, it's time to draw a line and defend it."
Turns out Hawley was busy reading the impeachment briefs. No lie. He was literally cross referencing the written briefs with the oral arguments. That's more due diligence than anyone else in Congress. He was probably circling all of the wholes and contradictory crap between what the impeachment managers were saying and what they had submitted in their written arguments. And the left is trying to make it like Hawley should be disqualified from serving as a juror.
The Trump curse hits you fast sometimes. It's amazing how often it works.
Trump and Trump affiliated occasionally browsing popular pro-Trump forums is their evidence that they knew Jan 6 was going to be a insurrection. This is retarded. I too have been on the world wide webs and thus am implicated in the hacking operation known as 4Chan.
That laugh is already ugly enough and for a creepy enough reason, but it also went for a few more seconds than is normal. That woman is a psychopath down to the level where she can't even emulate normal human emotion.
Scotus didn't declare anything. They distanced themselves from the process, just like they distance themselves from answering tons of constitutional questions. They do this with gun cases and they did it with the states who changed election rules this election. Rather than answer a constitutional question with any actual substantive impact, they dodge the question, or drop it for bs procedural reasons, lack of jurisdiction, etc. or remand it to a lower court. SCOTUS are a bunch of cowards who dodge questions with obvious answers that have huge constitutional ramifications. They would rather answer questions in the narrowest possible contexts and never in a timeline where their answer will matter or affect an outcome. Roberts not showing up for the trial is him dodging the question. That's not the same thing as declaring something unconstitutional, it's just par for the course for their cowardly avoidance tactics.
Stuff like this is why the Dominion lawsuit attempts will fail. Maybe Linn Wood and Susan Powell and all the others they sued didn't have their facts 100% right, but that's mostly because Dominion has shielded itself from ever having to answer any questions. When you start asking questions and getting answers, you see that not everything they did was above board. Anyone being sued by Dominion can point to this as an example of why a reasonable person would believe Dominion had either incidental or intentional flaws in it's software that enabled undercounting and hiding of GOP votes. The fact that, in this case only Republicans were affected and they were all affected in the exact same way, goes to suggest there was a deliberate system to hide Republican votes.
If this FBI informant guy fights this and refuses to be railroaded, he could undermine a whole lot of other prosecutions.
That means a Republican can challenge her. It also means the Dems can throw all their support behind Murkowski and hope enough GOPe types also vote for her to win. Whoever the Republican challenger is, they will need to campaign their asses off and get 90+ percent of GOP voters. Wouldn't hurt to also run a Bernie Sanders type plant-candidate on the left to draw some of their voters away from Murkowski. Otherwise a good idea might be to get Alaska lawmakers to adopt a closed primary system.
I think Palin has already floated primarying her. And for whatever argument there is that Murkowski has the AK name brand game fixed, Palin kind of cancels that out.
Clinton thinks Billie is such a Gusty woman™ for having successful made a career out of dressing like a hobo and spilling her tourettes out on a mixing board. Celebrity hero worship is just highly ritualistic mutual fellatio at this point. A little dick suckin here and there in the desperate hopes of borrowing the lowest common denominators from someone else's fan base.