OlDawg

82.7% of statistics are made up on the spot. Steven Wright

Maybe. But, he has immunity, and the statute of limitations has run out on the others. Like you said elsewhere…legacies.

Just as inaccurate a statement as some from the Trump supporters. FACT: The bipartisan committee stated that Russia ATTEMPTED to influence the 2016 election. It also found it had little to no effect on the election results, and didn’t change any outcomes. Did Russia interfere? The conclusion was ‘yes’. Just as they’ve done for decades. Two separate issues that many conflate. As far as a diversion, the timing is suspect. But, not definitive or out of the ordinary in politics. As I’ve mentioned, the Parties always seem to have something in hand ready to pull out in an emergency. Even if a diversion, it doesn’t make the accusation any less true. At the least, Obama has never acknowledged that Clinton paid for the dossier that blew the whole episode out of proportion, and led to some highly suspect surveillance of an opposing political campaign. He hasn’t admitted that to this day, even though he knew before the 2016 election.

I think that was already known. He was already a celebrity of sorts, and easily recognizable to most. Easy to recall if he attended a party. Some of the other wealthy elites may not have been as well known. If I were asked to remember who was there, I’d probably remember a Harrison Ford, Sean Connery, or someone like that over a Steven Schwarzman (co-founder of Blackstone Group & worth about $52 Billion) who isn’t seen a lot outside of the elite type power circles. I don’t see this as a big, breaking story.

Sylvia Garcia had the state change the road to/from the San Jacinto Battleground Monument from Battleground Road to Independence Pkwy. Cost the businesses a ton to change all their info & the truckers were lost for weeks. Also, had to change the Deer Park vs La Porte Rivalry football game (one of the oldest town vs town big school rivalries in the state) from The Border War to The Border Battle. Apparently ‘Battle’ was more palatable than ‘War.’

About the same as yours. Except I’m at least part of the supposed offended group. What’s your involvement? You’re the one who didn’t even know what The Trail of Tears was while I had ancestors walk it. Probably not a good topic for you.

I would imagine if the Washington franchise had offered to share a small portion of royalties from merch sales, no one would have been offended at all. As it is, my peeps make their own reparations the easy way anyway. From drunk white folks at the casinos. 😂

Great song either way.

Loved Half-Breed and I’m 12.5% Cherokee/Blackhawk. Saw Paul Revere & The Raiders at the Summit in an ‘Oldies’ show in the late ‘80’s I think it was. Was worried about being drug tested at work because everyone lit up when the Mamas & Papas came on stage. lol Like @tvc184 said, if you want to be offended, you’ll find a way. As a small portion of the supposed “offendees”, I never much cared one way or the other. Not near as much as a bunch of rich, white liberals looking for something to make themselves look good. They should stay in their big houses, with all their money made off other’s backs like some other Democrats did back in the 1860’s.

[Hidden Content]

The description of it being a “coup” may be a misnomer. But, it’s definitely not just a distraction. I laid it out as I understood in simple bullet points. This attached article lays it out in easy to understand language as well. [Hidden Content]

‘Cowboy’ was originally used to describe young blacks (‘boys’) who worked the cattle. Another good reason to dump Jerry and the Cowboys. They are definitely offensive. Henceforth, they shall be called 'Jeraldo y El Vaquero Ninos'. Sad to say, they will still choke.

I just hope people don't forget who started it all.

Another Nixon. Nixon had China trade and Watergate. Obama can have first black POTUS and this episode. Neither will be prosecuted. Others might though. They don't have the SCOTUS protections.

I'll admit to being somewhat nervous. Was willing to give it time. Still am. But, was nervous.

So, I have no idea what--if anything--will come of this stuff. But, let me see if I can get it straight. Clinton initiates fake dossier on Trump claiming Russian ties. Obama doesn't deny. Probes, arrests, and a lot of money and time is spent to find out what was already known. It was all hogwash started by Clinton. Obama doesn't deny. Obama endorses Clinton. Trump wins 2016 election. Clinton accuses Jill Stein & Tulsi Gabbard of being Russian assets during 2020 election. Obama says nothing. Biden is elected. Democrats toss Biden and install Harris as 2024 candidate. Trump is elected. Gabbard and the IC find evidence that Obama Admin. knew everything was rubbish from the beginning, but never denied & pursued a false narrative anyway. Obama denies. Obama has yet to admit the entire story was fabricated from the very beginning. Have I got this about right?

[Hidden Content]

AstraZeneca to invest $50 Billion in U.S. Medicines, R&D and Manufacturing [Hidden Content] This is very big news. Pharma coming back to the U.S. This is why I try to judge based on policy vs personality. Policies are what matter.

So, are we taking advice from Brennan now? Again, not disputing the seriousness of the crime. Yes, it was a crime if proven. Just disputing the characterization from a legal standpoint. SCOTUS has ruled on treason many times as you've pointed out. This doesn't appear to fit. But, it does fit numerous other felony categories that could justify SERIOUS jail time among other penalties. I've mentioned falsifying documents already. Election subversion would also seem to be an easy one if the documented evidence proves out. Providing false testimony, and--yes--even criminal conspiracy could be other pertinent charges. These are all felonies in this circumstance. Not quite sure what it says about us that we could have 2 POTUS/former POTUS with felony convictions.

I think I know what you're trying to say, but any legal system based on religion is against the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. So, Shariah Law will never be legally binding according to U.S. law. Parties can enter into an agreement using it if both agree. But, it won't be legally binding. Any agreement would roll back under U.S. law if there were a dispute. I do think the Democratic Party has gotten themselves into a pickle with this issue. New York City is really making many have a wake-up call.

They’re becoming so real looking now, it’s hard to tell what’s real and what’s not. Pretty soon it’ll get to where if you don’t see it live, you’ll have to really dig to find out if it’s real or AI. Gonna’ make it even more difficult to make sure you’re getting something accurate from the direct source. Have to think about more than just ‘spin’ nowadays.

Just wanted to let everyone know, if I call you a bad name, it wasn’t me. It was my AI influencer. Wimbledon influencer with over 165k followers is actually an AI creation [Hidden Content]

The issue I see is with any federal charge, a full pardon could be granted by a future POTUS. Like TH said, legacy may be the biggest impact. Legacy means a lot to these people. Income would be affected. Maybe some jail time until the next sympathetic POTUS. But, the cases would probably drag through the next election cycle.