Rand Paul was always a Piece of Shit

[Hmbre97 6337]

6 hours ago, Anastasis said:

He was told 6B to cure world hunger. Imagine what 40b could do domestically? I am sure Lockheed will come up with something better for it. 

Please espouse on what the "fiscally conservative" GOP would spend that 40b on domestically that would be of great need to the citizens of the US of A.  Trickle down tax cuts for the wealthy don't count...

 

[956 Worldwide 35524]

Rand Paul sucks.  It’s things like this that make people lose faith in institutions. The fact is that he was offered a vote on an amendment to the bill for a special inspector (his demand) and he refused that. He wants to send the bill back to add the inspector to the bill itself which is simply procedural foot dragging and it reveals he just wants to drag this out as long as he can.
 

The bill has overwhelming support. His entire purpose here has nothing to do with spending and oversight, he’s just delaying something that has broad bipartisan support. At a dear cost to the people in Ukraine who are trying to defend their homes and families, and who matter not at all to Rand Paul. 
 

@Anastasis and Paul’s beliefs about America’s (non)-involvement in Ukraine’s fight against an autocratic invader are deeply unpopular. So unpopular that they are reluctant to state them clearly and debate them. So we’re reduced to obstructionism and bad faith arguments which is the definition of spineless politics.

[SKJ 1317]

4 hours ago, Anastasis said:

 

Sounds about right. 

 

 

I generally oppose  short-sighted, hegemonic-based, interventionist American foreign policy. Have for a long time in these exchanges. Proxy wars are fun and all, but we've seen how this shit plays out time and time again. Blowback after blowback. Some of y'all like to reference the "rules-based international order", but that's all horseshit. It is the "hegemon makes the rules" based order. Doesn't matter if it is Russia, Israel, SA, China, the Solomon Islands or proxy wars in Syria and Ukraine. Feed the "defense" industry, gag down the media propaganda we are spoon fed, and throw out the platitudes about freedom, self-determination, and democracy while actually only rarely standing behind them.  It's not like these all aren't plays that we have been running out of the same playbook since the mid 20th century. But maybe this time it's all different! 

And yet you're against a woman's right to choose. 

 

Fucking hypocrite 

[Anastasis 23703]

5 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The bill has overwhelming support. His entire purpose here has nothing to do with spending and oversight, he’s just delaying something that has broad bipartisan support. At a dear cost to the people in Ukraine who are trying to defend their homes and families, and who matter not at all to Rand Paul. 

Rand is 100% a masturbatory theater show at this point. But so is the rest of it. That a 40B package is rushed through both the House and Senate with virtually no meaningful debate, the process is all political theater. Rand jerking it to procedural delays is not necessarily new.  The only real novel observation this go around is how quickly the house progressives came to heel when the whistle blew.     

Edited May 14, 2022 by Anastasis
heal is hard

[Nivek 17341]

Russia! Russia! Russia!

Is there any proof that Russia colluded to occupy Ukraine?  I mean sure there are videos but anyone can doctor those.   And flying of Soviet Flags, well are we sure that wasn't the Ukrainian False Flag?  I mean, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union.  It could be Latvia occupying Ukraine for all we know or Ukraine itself. This seems like it is just a money grab by Ukraine to fleece the dumbocrats.     We should get back to letting the fiscal conse(choking laugh) conserv (haha) conservatives (haha oh fuck man) of the GOP to lead us through this conflict.   Both sides are really at fault here since Ukraine shut off the water to Crimea, if there really are both sides that is.   Try being reasonable like me.

(Can anyone guess who I am pretending to be?)

[Pam Cummings 9827]

8 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Meh, Rand undermined himself by aligning with Trump in the way that he did. Go back to posts in 2018-2019 timeframe on this thread and you will see that opinion registered. Rand is right about some things and wrong about a good bit more, esp wrt certain aspects of the issues you mention. 

Every post you make undermines any good discussion that has any possibility of happening here. You're a complete joke.

Edited May 14, 2022 by Pam Cummings

[Brisketexan 106642]

 
I generally oppose  short-sighted, hegemonic-based, interventionist American foreign policy. Have for a long time in these exchanges. Proxy wars are fun and all, but we've seen how this shit plays out time and time again. Blowback after blowback. Some of y'all like to reference the "rules-based international order", but that's all horseshit. It is the "hegemon makes the rules" based order. Doesn't matter if it is Russia, Israel, SA, China, the Solomon Islands or proxy wars in Syria and Ukraine. Feed the "defense" industry, gag down the media propaganda we are spoon fed, and throw out the platitudes about freedom, self-determination, and democracy while actually only rarely standing behind them.  It's not like these all aren't plays that we have been running out of the same playbook since the mid 20th century. But maybe this time it's all different! 

Not entirely wrong, but still hinting at a fantasy-based outcome.
In this world, occupied by human beings in their present form and mentality, there WILL be a hegemon (or more than one, if you take a regional instead of global approach). The choice is not “hegemon vs no hegemon.” It’s “who will be the hegemon?”
I’d prefer it be the US. As shitty as our track record is at certain stretches, I vastly prefer us to the alternatives.
In a world that will have hegemony, realists choose the best one.
You have proposed no realistic or meaningful alternative. And the thing is, you never do. Ever. About anything. It’s why nobody takes you seriously. You’re the critic who just shits on everything on the menu, without making a realistic suggestion about what we SHOULD eat. Pussies sit on the sidelines and snipe. Participants weigh the options, choose the best one, and then work to make that option come to fruition as positively as possible.
And yeah, I’ve seen fruits of US hegemony, both positive and negative. I believe that’s the best choice, and we continue to work to make it more positive than negative. Because I live in reality. A reality that is often a shitshow that I hate (especially here at home), but that doesn’t make it any less real.

[NameAlreadyInUse 5167]

10 hours ago, Anastasis said:

 

 

Prime grade derp, imo. 

 

Your great grandchildren would be served by far better uses of that money than subsidizing LMT and other private contractors in the context of this proxy war.  

Can you list for me the better uses that would have support of this Congress?  I mean there’s no point talking about better uses that are a pipe dream, but we can talk about the one that would pass so let’s talk about them. What are they?

[jimmyjazz 46986]

Topic for discussion:  WW2, European Theater . . . should the US have remained on the sidelines?

[GW Hayduke 1957]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Rand is 100% a masturbatory theater show at this point.

[Underdog 29107]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Rand is 100% a masturbatory theater show at this point. 

That’s a fantasy best kept to yourself. 

[Anastasis 23703]

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Not entirely wrong, but still hinting at a fantasy-based outcome.
In this world, occupied by human beings in their present form and mentality, there WILL be a hegemon (or more than one, if you take a regional instead of global approach). The choice is not “hegemon vs no hegemon.” It’s “who will be the hegemon?”
I’d prefer it be the US. As shitty as our track record is at certain stretches, I vastly prefer us to the alternatives.
In a world that will have hegemony, realists choose the best one.
You have proposed no realistic or meaningful alternative. And the thing is, you never do. Ever. About anything. It’s why nobody takes you seriously. You’re the critic who just shits on everything on the menu, without making a realistic suggestion about what we SHOULD eat. Pussies sit on the sidelines and snipe. Participants weigh the options, choose the best one, and then work to make that option come to fruition as positively as possible.
And yeah, I’ve seen fruits of US hegemony, both positive and negative. I believe that’s the best choice, and we continue to work to make it more positive than negative. Because I live in reality. A reality that is often a shitshow that I hate (especially here at home), but that doesn’t make it any less real.

At least this post, jingoism fueling as it may be, spares us the right out garbage platitudes and rhetoric about the rules-based international order. The "menu" on this issue is one item, a three course chef's choice of propaganda, platitudes, and profits straight from the slop trough. I remain unsurprised that your political evolution has resulted in you digging your snout down even further into it and with greater conviction. 

Edited May 14, 2022 by Anastasis

[956 Worldwide 35524]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Rand is 100% a masturbatory theater show at this point. But so is the rest of it. That a 40B package is rushed through both the House and Senate with virtually no meaningful debate, the process is all political theater. Rand jerking it to procedural delays is not necessarily new.  The only real novel observation this go around is how quickly the house progressives came to heel when the whistle blew.     

Sorry, this is some nonsense both sides-ism. The bill isn’t theater. It’s 40 billion dollars that will be used to kill the soldiers of a country that is nuclear armed, has pretensions on being a peer competitor, and that is engaged in aggressively challenging the security architecture and norms in Europe. As you’ve noted, the approval of the bill implicitly contains support for a particular vision of America’s place in the world and what sort of international order we should try to shape.  
 

Which is why Rand is a piece of shit for hiding behind “my inspector needs to be part of the bill and not an amendment.” Get out there and make your fucking argument, Rand— “I want to delay this because I don’t believe in the international order we’re trying to preserve and I don’t believe in containing authoritarian aggression in Europe.”

[tx 3 putt 78475]

10 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

 

And some pro-Trump, pro-Russia troll wants to complain about spending to defend freedom and democracy in Ukraine? Of course Anastasis is doing that. It’s so on brand. Pay him no mind. 

 

trumpers maga gqp despise freedom and democracy, both are enemies to their ideology and plans to establish a qtaliban regime  

[Anastasis 23703]

Speaking of blowback.

 

Flood of weapons to Ukraine raises fear of arms smuggling

Vague U.S. assurances spark concern about lost military equipment in Ukraine, a longtime hub of arms trafficking

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/05/14/ukraine-weapons-trafficking/

President Biden is expected to sign in the coming days a $40 billion security-assistance package that will supercharge the flow of missiles, rockets, artillery and drones to a war-torn Ukraine.

But what remains unclear is Washington’s ability to keep track of the powerful weapons as they enter one of the largest trafficking hubs in Europe.

Ukraine’s illicit arms market has ballooned since Russia’s initial invasion in 2014, buttressed by a surplus of loose weapons and limited controls on their use.

This uncomfortable reality for the United States and its allies comes amid urgent pleas from President Volodymyr Zelensky to provide artillery needed to counter Russian forces in the country’s east and south. The Ukrainian leader’s appeals are credited with uniting House lawmakers behind the latest funding request in a bipartisan 368-to-57 vote on Tuesday. But the unprecedented influx of arms has prompted fears that some equipment could fall into the hands of Western adversaries or reemerge in faraway conflicts — for decades to come.

“It’s just impossible to keep track of not only where they’re all going and who is using them, but how they are being used,” said Rachel Stohl, an arms-control expert and vice president at the Stimson Center.

A State Department spokesman said the United States has conducted thorough vetting of the Ukrainian units it supplies while forcing Kyiv to sign agreements that “do not allow the retransfer of equipment to third parties without prior U.S. government authorization.”

But the means of enforcing such contracts are relatively weak — and made even weaker by Washington’s own mixed history of compliance, as recently as last month.

On the battlefield with Russia, Afghanistan’s loss is Ukraine’s gain

In mid-April, the United States boosted its involvement in the Ukraine conflict by announcing that it would transfer a fleet of Mi-17 helicopters to Ukraine that it originally purchased from Russia about a decade ago. The initial sale of the aircraft required the United States to sign a contract promising not to transfer the helicopters to any third country “without the approval of the Russian Federation,” according to a copy of the certificate posted on the website of Russia’s Federal Service on Military-Technical Cooperation.

Russia has denounced the transfer, saying it “grossly violates the foundations of international law.”

Arms experts say Russia’s brutal aggression in Ukraine more than justifies U.S. support, but the violation of weapons contracts chips away at the foundations of counter-proliferation efforts.

“Breaking of those end-use agreements is a serious threat to the underlying, but weak, capacity for countries to control how weapons are used,” said Jeff Abramson, an expert on conventional arms transfers at the Arms Control Association.

A Pentagon spokesman dismissed the criticisms, calling Russian charges a distraction and the transfer “permissible under U.S. law and consistent with our national security priorities.”

“Russia’s claims are a disingenuous attempt to distract attention from Russia’s unprovoked invasion and its history of aggressive actions against Ukraine since 2014,” said Marine Corps Lt. Colonel Anton T. Semelroth.

An Mi-17 helicopter over Afghanistan in 2010. (Petty Officer 2nd Class Vladimir Potapenko/U.S. Air Force)

The job of ensuring U.S. weapons are used for their intended purpose — a joint responsibility of the departments of State and Defense — is made all the more difficult by the sheer volume of arms making their way to Ukraine.

The emergency spending bill awaiting approval in the Senate will cement Ukraine’s status as the world’s single largest recipient of U.S. security assistance, receiving more in 2022 than the United States ever provided to Afghanistan, Iraq or Israel in a single year.

Pentagon will buy Ukraine laser-guided rockets, surveillance drones

It will add to the stocks of weapons the U.S. already committed to Ukraine, including 1,400 Stinger antiaircraft systems, 5,500 antitank missiles, 700 Switchblade drones, 90 long-range Howitzers artillery systems, 7,000 small arms, 50,000,000 rounds of ammunition, and numerous other mines, explosives and laser-guided rocket systems.

Shoulder-fired Stinger missiles, capable of downing commercial airliners, are just one of the weapon systems experts worry could slip into the possession of terrorist groups seeking to carry out mass-casualty events.

U.S. Marines in Twentynine Palms, Calif., test Stinger missiles during a training exercise. (Lance Cpl. Rachel Young/Marine Corps Air Ground Combat C)

The Biden administration’s funding request includes $8.7 billion to replenish U.S. stores of weapons shipped to Ukraine, $6 billion to train and equip Ukrainian forces and $3.9 billion for U.S. forces deployed throughout Europe in response to the security crisis that’s been set off by the war.

Other NATO countries have transferred billions of dollars in arms and military equipment since the start of hostilities.

“The assistance exceeds the peak year of U.S. military assistance to Afghan security forces during that 20-year war,” said William Hartung, an arms control expert at the Quincy Institute think tank. “In that case the U.S. had a major presence in-country that created at least the possibility of tracking where weapons were ending up. By comparison, the U.S. government is flying blind in terms of monitoring weapons supplied to civilian militias and the military in Ukraine.”

Ukraine’s history as a hub for arms trafficking dates to the fall of the Soviet Union, when the Soviet military left behind large amounts of small arms and light weapons in Ukraine without adequate record-keeping and inventory control. According to the Small Arms Survey, a Geneva-based research organization, a portion of the Ukrainian military’s 7.1 million small arms in stock in 1992 “were diverted to conflict areas” underscoring “the risk of leakage to the local black market.”

The problem grew more acute after Russia’s invasion in 2014, which saw combatants looting arms and munition-storage facilities of Ukraine’s Security Service, Interior and Defense ministries. “Irregular fighters on both sides progressively gained access to a wide range of military-grade equipment, including the full spectrum of small arms and light weapons,” according to a report by the Small Arms Survey in 2017. “Officials estimated that at least 300,000 small arms and light weapons were looted or lost between 2013 and 2015,” providing a boon the country’s black market run by Mafia-style groups in Donbas region and other criminal networks.

The U.S. government is well aware of the country’s challenges with weapons proliferation, though it has been vague in describing the precautions it’s taking.

Weeks after Russia’s latest invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, a group of interagency officials in the Biden administration met with outside arms-control experts to discuss the risk of small-arms proliferation in the conflict. According to Stohl, who attended one of the meetings, U.S. officials offered assurances about vetting Ukrainian security forces and addressing reports of unauthorized transfer — but scant details on how the vetting or monitoring happens.

“It does not inspire much confidence,” said Stohl.

Other arms experts feel similarly in the dark.

“It is unclear what risk mitigation or monitoring steps the U.S. and other countries have taken, or what guarantees they have obtained, to ensure the protection of civilians through these very large transfers,” said Annie Shiel, a senior adviser at the Center for Civilians in Conflict.

Some of the recommended steps include establishing a special investigator as the U.S. government did in Afghanistan, ensuring any weapons transfers contain strong tracking procedures, adding human rights obligations in the terms of sale and including specifics about what units can be authorized to receive such transfers. (In 2018, Congress banned Ukraine’s Azov battalion, a far-right nationalist group associated with neo-Nazism, from receiving U.S. weapons.)

There are additional concerns among watchdog groups about arms proliferation stemming from Moscow amid reports it has enlisted mercenaries from Libya, Syria and Chechnya, as well as the Wagner Group, a Russian contractor.

During a televised meeting of Russia’s Security Council in March, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said 16,000 volunteers in the Middle East stood ready to fight alongside Russian-backed forces in Eastern Ukraine.

In response, Russian President Vladimir Putin offered his approval, saying, “We need to give them what they want and help them get to the conflict zone.”

At the same meeting, Shoigu proposed handing over captured U.S. Javelin and Stinger missiles to pro-Russian separatists in Donbas region. “Please do this,” Putin told Shoigu.

The introduction of foreign fighters to a conflict runs the risks of weapons returning to those individuals’ countries of origin when the fighting in Ukraine ends. There are conflicting reports about the presence of foreign fighters there, however, and it’s unclear precisely how many have in fact traveled to Ukraine.

The lack of information has spurred calls for answers from the administration and attention from Congress.

“Some of the weapons being provided in the conflict in Ukraine are likely to be found years, and possibly decades later,” said Abramson. “Congressional leaders should be asking these questions, in classified briefings if needed, and the public should be better informed.”

[956 Worldwide 35524]

My dude @Anastasis, that article doesn’t make the argument you think it does. The instability, increased corruption, and tenuous existence of fake republics that motherfucking RUSSIA introduced caused a spike in illicit arms traffic.  The solution here is obvious, and that is bringing all of Ukraine under Ukrainian government control and then rapidly integrating Ukraine into western structures and expanding the rule of law. Russia and Russia influenced separatists are offender number one when it comes to arms proliferation. This is a regime that’s holding a WNBA player who vapes weed hostage in exchange for freeing a man with the street name “merchant of death.” 

If you have a concern about arms control and any part of your solution involves the expansion of the русский мир then there are only two answers:

1. You’re entirely disingenuous.

2. You’re ignorant. 

[Anastasis 23703]

16 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The solution here is obvious

I agree on that point.  I sincerely hope that you stick around this community long enough that we will be able to examine the longer-term outcomes. 

[Bullneck 19454]

3 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

My dude @Anastasis, that article doesn’t make the argument you think it does. The instability, increased corruption, and tenuous existence of fake republics that motherfucking RUSSIA introduced caused a spike in illicit arms traffic.  The solution here is obvious, and that is bringing all of Ukraine under Ukrainian government control and then rapidly integrating Ukraine into western structures and expanding the rule of law. Russia and Russia influenced separatists are offender number one when it comes to arms proliferation. This is a regime that’s holding a WNBA player who vapes weed hostage in exchange for freeing a man with the street name “merchant of death.” 

If you have a concern about arms control and any part of your solution involves the expansion of the русский мир then there are only two answers:

1. You’re entirely disingenuous.

2. You’re ignorant. 

I have Ana on "Ignore."  I'm surprised more people don't.  He's a troll.

[lemonlime 5503]

15 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

I have Ana on "Ignore."  I'm surprised more people don't.  He's a troll.

A million times this.  I think my ignore list consists of Ana and Sack.  Ana adds nothing to the conversation and feels the need to spam the board with pointless responses to every single post.

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

8 hours ago, Nivek said:

Russia! Russia! Russia!

Is there any proof that Russia colluded to occupy Ukraine?  I mean sure there are videos but anyone can doctor those.   And flying of Soviet Flags, well are we sure that wasn't the Ukrainian False Flag?  I mean, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union.  It could be Latvia occupying Ukraine for all we know or Ukraine itself. This seems like it is just a money grab by Ukraine to fleece the dumbocrats.     We should get back to letting the fiscal conse(choking laugh) conserv (haha) conservatives (haha oh fuck man) of the GOP to lead us through this conflict.   Both sides are really at fault here since Ukraine shut off the water to Crimea, if there really are both sides that is.   Try being reasonable like me.

(Can anyone guess who I am pretending to be?)

“Collusion delusion!” 
- Donald Trump
- also Anastasis

[Bama Chick 28596]

Russia! Russia! Russia!
Is there any proof that Russia colluded to occupy Ukraine?  I mean sure there are videos but anyone can doctor those.   And flying of Soviet Flags, well are we sure that wasn't the Ukrainian False Flag?  I mean, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union.  It could be Latvia occupying Ukraine for all we know or Ukraine itself. This seems like it is just a money grab by Ukraine to fleece the dumbocrats.     We should get back to letting the fiscal conse(choking laugh) conserv (haha) conservatives (haha oh fuck man) of the GOP to lead us through this conflict.   Both sides are really at fault here since Ukraine shut off the water to Crimea, if there really are both sides that is.   Try being reasonable like me.
(Can anyone guess who I am pretending to be?)

You left out some irrelevant nonsensery about FISA but otherwise it’s perfect.

[atomheartbevo 90550]

Rand Paul (R-Moscow)

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

No law they don't like is legitimate (unless they can use it on you).

 

[Bullneck 19454]

 

 

[tx 3 putt 78475]

 

[wildcat09 29561]

 

 

[BamaATL 16593]

10 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

 

 

Anyone know what his neighbor is up to these days?

[atomheartbevo 90550]

Rand is just angry that he’s hit his glass ceiling. Nobody gives a shit about him, he knows he only wins re-election because he has an (R) next to his name.  Nobody wants him to run for the Presidency or to be their running mate,

He can’t figure out how to stay relevant, all the while people like RFK Jr steal his Qanon street cred, So this is all he can do, blindly lash out at yesterday’s news.

[Red Five 41605]

So, exactly what charges against Fauci? 

Off topic but reminds me of a CNN segment I saw a few days ago, about impeaching Biden. They talked for a few minutes about R's opening an inquiry, and finished with, "... which would make Joe Biden only the fourth U.S. President to be impeached. Moving on...." But you know what they never once mentioned? The reason for the impeachment. 

[jimmyjazz 46986]

Has anyone ever seen Rand Paul and Chip Brown in the same room?

 

 

[TheStoicPaisano 9948]

16 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Has anyone ever seen Rand Paul and Chip Brown in the same room?

 

Edited August 11, 2023 by TheStoicPaisano

[Bojack 2087]

On 8/11/2023 at 11:19 AM, BamaATL said:

Anyone know what his neighbor is up to these days?

Something like this, I hope.

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

On 8/11/2023 at 12:27 PM, Red Five said:

So, exactly what charges against Fauci? 

He publicly contradicted Trump’s lies during the pandemic. Made Trump look bad. Therefore he must pay. 

[jimmyjazz 46986]

3 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

He publicly contradicted Trump’s lies during the pandemic. Made Trump look bad. Therefore he must pay. 

Well, there was that early advice that uninfected individuals didn't need to wear masks because there was a mask shortage for health care workers, and then later he said everyone should wear masks, so hang him in public.

[C-Man 27690]

9 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

He publicly contradicted Trump’s lies during the pandemic. Made Trump look bad. Therefore he must pay. 

 

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Well, there was that early advice that uninfected individuals didn't need to wear masks because there was a mask shortage for health care workers, and then later he said everyone should wear masks, so hang him in public.

All the right-wing fanatics I see want to go after him for allegedly participating in an operation that apparently funded China labs' work with live viruses or somesuch -- and then maybe lying about his involvement? I dunno. So much squawking on so many things from that side with little-to-no action it's hard to keep up.

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

On 8/11/2023 at 12:27 PM, Red Five said:

So, exactly what charges against Fauci? 

Off topic but reminds me of a CNN segment I saw a few days ago, about impeaching Biden. They talked for a few minutes about R's opening an inquiry, and finished with, "... which would make Joe Biden only the fourth U.S. President to be impeached. Moving on...." But you know what they never once mentioned? The reason for the impeachment. 

They fell into the R’s trap. They’re not talking about impeachment. They’re talking about an impeachment inquiry. Like that’s something that gives them special investigative powers to uncover evidence of wrongdoing on Joe Biden’s part that years and multiple Republican-led investigations have been unable to find.

They know there’s nothing there. They don’t have anything they can impeach Joe Biden for. They know there’s nothing they can get Hunter Biden for other than tax evasion and illegal gun ownership (things no Republican really thinks anyone should be penalized for anyway). But by talking about an impeachment inquiry, they can get people talking about Biden getting impeached and that makes him seem just like Trump because Trump was impeached too. And they can keep the talk going about investigating Hunter Biden and the “Biden crime family” so they make it look like the Bidens are corrupt just like the Trumps. Nothing ever has to actually come of any of it in order for it to serve its purpose. It’s a campaign strategy and they just have to maintain it through the election. It’s Benghazi all over again. 

[jimmyjazz 46986]

8 minutes ago, C-Man said:

 

All the right-wing fanatics I see want to go after him for allegedly participating in an operation that apparently funded China labs' work with live viruses or somesuch -- and then maybe lying about his involvement? I dunno. So much squawking on so many things from that side with little-to-no action it's hard to keep up.

There is some truth to that.  As I recall, Fauci's group helped fund a couple of virus researchers in Wuhan for a year or two.  I think the total was less than $1M.

[C-Man 27690]

28 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

They fell into the R’s trap. They’re not talking about impeachment. They’re talking about an impeachment inquiry. Like that’s something that gives them special investigative powers to uncover evidence of wrongdoing on Joe Biden’s part that years and multiple Republican-led investigations have been unable to find.

They know there’s nothing there. They don’t have anything they can impeach Joe Biden for. They know there’s nothing they can get Hunter Biden for other than tax evasion and illegal gun ownership (things no Republican really thinks anyone should be penalized for anyway). But by talking about an impeachment inquiry, they can get people talking about Biden getting impeached and that makes him seem just like Trump because Trump was impeached too. And they can keep the talk going about investigating Hunter Biden and the “Biden crime family” so they make it look like the Bidens are corrupt just like the Trumps. Nothing ever has to actually come of any of it in order for it to serve its purpose. It’s a campaign strategy and they just have to maintain it through the election. It’s Benghazi all over again. 

If they're really honest with themselves, Hunter is what a stereotypical right-winger aspires to be -- including Hunter's 9-inch schlong.

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

If you subscribe to PBS Passport, check out the American Masters episode on Dr. Fauci. It covers his career, mistakes he’s made, successes he’s had, misconceptions about all things pandemic-related, the death threats he, his wife and children received after he contradicted Trump, etc.

https://www.pbs.org/video/tony-a-year-in-the-life-of-dr-anthony-fauci-zjnloe/

Here’s an excerpt. Decades long career, well respected, then one day he doesn’t go along with Trump’s campaign of lies and suddenly he’s a monster. It’s like there’s a pattern or something.

 

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

1 hour ago, C-Man said:

All the right-wing fanatics I see want to go after him for allegedly participating in an operation that apparently funded China labs' work with live viruses or somesuch -- and then maybe lying about his involvement?

That’s all bullshit, of course. Fauci addressed that allegation in the American Masters doc. Trump turned them into the party of conspiracy theories and these people will believe the most outlandish claims. But it all boils down to finding somewhere else to point the finger of blame in order to distract from Trump’s disastrously incompetent response to a national health crisis. 

[tx 3 putt 78475]

#pos #traitor 

 

[wildcat09 29561]

Rand Paul's neighbor needs to initiate a rematch.

[jimmyjazz 46986]

Libertarians are so damned smart.

[DigglerontheHoof 21516]

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

Rand Paul's neighbor needs to initiate a rematch.

and get Mike Tyson as his new roommate. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 34081]

fuck, I almost forgot this guy existed. thanks for ruining that.

[BamaATL 16593]

2 hours ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

and get Mike Tyson as his new roommate. 

it would be pretty ironic if Ivan Drago finished him though...

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20839]

 

 

[atomheartbevo 90550]

He always says that because he knows Republicans will never pull the trigger on it.

[BamaATL 16593]

23 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

He always says that because he knows Republicans will never pull the trigger on it.

They'd also never get a court so stacked to get rid of Roe.

FAFO, when people tell you who they are, believe them.  

[atomheartbevo 90550]

3 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

They'd also never get a court so stacked to get rid of Roe.

FAFO, when people tell you who they are, believe them.  

They've had the WH and Republican majorities in Congress but somehow they just couldn't do it.

Edited March 7 by atomheartbevo