I've said repeatedly I don't want him to run in 2024. He just didn't commit a crime as you continually claim without evidence.
I believe he has committed a plethora of crimes during his real estate/business career and thousands of political no-nos as President, but January 6th was designed to put pressure on Pence to void the election with the huge crowd yelling loud enough to be heard in the Senate chambers. He was not trying to get Pence and Pelosi killed, but he well could have if the crowd had been able to enter a different door slightly sooner.
trump was told the mob was armed and trump encouraged metal detectors to be taken down. Despite knowing the mob was armed, Trump urged the mob to march on congress and fight like hell. Later, meadows said trump was generally approving of the attempted assassination of pence.
Sure, trump would have been fine if pence had been intimidated and not killed. but killed would have been ok too.
If Warnock is beating Walker in the Quinnipiac GA poll by 10 points then I am a unicorn that sprinkles free gas and groceries. The "Q" is an over sampled dem poll.
President Joe Biden said Americans should pay higher gas prices for 'as long as it takes' as he doubled down on blaming Russian President Vladimir Putin for the United States' domestic woes.
yeah! And if a Republican president insisted on marching on congress with an armed mob your clean and undiseased mind would obviously lead you to condemn him forever as unsuited to serve, right!
There was no armed mob.
There's no evidence he "insisted".
I've said repeatedly I don't want him to run in 2024. He just didn't commit a crime as you continually claim without evidence.
If you would watch the hearings, you would see that there is plenty of evidence for agip's claims.
But you are afraid, so you hide your head in the sand.
I can read about the testimony without viewing it through the leftist circus of the 1/6 committee...
So you went to your "safe place" and got a sanitized version.
Grow a pair and watch the hearings. Watch all the former Trump administration officials present their sworn testimony.
Then you can judge for yourself.
Why are you so obtuse?
You are literally viewing leftist propaganda.
Sworn hearsay is still hearsay.
Cheney knew Hutchinson's testimony was full of falsehoods. She put it out there anyway because she knows the media won't question it because they are openly working for the Democrats.
The supreme court never made it illegal for the EPA to regulate emissions.
"The U.S. Supreme Court gave the Environmental Protection Agency the green light to regulate greenhouse gases that are emitted from new and modified utility plants and factories on Monday. Greenhouse gases are blamed for global warming, and the court's 7-2 decision gave the EPA most of what it wanted. But in a separate 5-4 vote, the justices rejected the agency's broad assertion of regulatory power under one section of the Clean Air Act. You might call the outcome in this case the 83-percent solution. Or, as Justice Antonin Scalia put it for the majority, the EPA got "almost everything it wanted." It sought authority to regulate the large polluters responsible for 86 percent of all greenhouse gases emitted from stationary sources like utility plants and factories. Instead, it won the power to regulate 83 percent of those emissions."
The EPA was originally formed in 1970 by Nixon (yes, it was a Republican that created the EPA) to address toxins in the environment. The main measures covered by the EPA were chemicals that were Corrosive, Reactive, Ignitable or Toxic. Operating within those parameters, CO2 and climate change are not really covered. The courts got it right by leaving the onus for climate change to the governed to decide for themselves than for the courts to decide, as regulating climate change (which is a global phenomenon, not a local one) has profound repercussions for large swaths of the economy of this country. Liberals talk about how climate change may force migrations of people, but ignore migrations of people that will occur via attempts to regulate climate change [without fossil fuel production (which is our number one export) a number of US states will not be able to support their current populations]. Legislation with such far reaching economic consequences should not be left to the courts.
So you went to your "safe place" and got a sanitized version.
Grow a pair and watch the hearings. Watch all the former Trump administration officials present their sworn testimony.
Then you can judge for yourself.
Why are you so obtuse?
You are literally viewing leftist propaganda.
Sworn hearsay is still hearsay.
Cheney knew Hutchinson's testimony was full of falsehoods. She put it out there anyway because she knows the media won't question it because they are openly working for the Democrats.
Only one part was hearsay. The rest of Hutchinson's testimony is first hand accounts. Nothing she said was false. Watch her and judge for yourself if you find her credible.
And don't forget all the other Republican members of the Trump administration who have testified. Watch them as well.
Just watch their testimony and judge for yourself. What are you so afraid of?
The supreme court never made it illegal for the EPA to regulate emissions.
"The U.S. Supreme Court gave the Environmental Protection Agency the green light to regulate greenhouse gases that are emitted from new and modified utility plants and factories on Monday. Greenhouse gases are blamed for global warming, and the court's 7-2 decision gave the EPA most of what it wanted. But in a separate 5-4 vote, the justices rejected the agency's broad assertion of regulatory power under one section of the Clean Air Act. You might call the outcome in this case the 83-percent solution. Or, as Justice Antonin Scalia put it for the majority, the EPA got "almost everything it wanted." It sought authority to regulate the large polluters responsible for 86 percent of all greenhouse gases emitted from stationary sources like utility plants and factories. Instead, it won the power to regulate 83 percent of those emissions."
The EPA was originally formed in 1970 by Nixon (yes, it was a Republican that created the EPA) to address toxins in the environment. The main measures covered by the EPA were chemicals that were Corrosive, Reactive, Ignitable or Toxic. Operating within those parameters, CO2 and climate change are not really covered. The courts got it right by leaving the onus for climate change to the governed to decide for themselves than for the courts to decide, as regulating climate change (which is a global phenomenon, not a local one) has profound repercussions for large swaths of the economy of this country. Liberals talk about how climate change may force migrations of people, but ignore migrations of people that will occur via attempts to regulate climate change [without fossil fuel production (which is our number one export) a number of US states will not be able to support their current populations]. Legislation with such far reaching economic consequences should not be left to the courts.
Sorry, but what a load of nonsense.
"Nixon", "1970", "original targets for EPA action (corrosive, etc.)" are not relevant. To preface your conclusion with "operating within those parameters" renders everything else you state to be idiotic at best. There is no reason to "operate within those parameters" which were relevant 50 years ago.
And stating that, "legislation with such far reaching economic consequences should not be left to the courts" while trying to justify your conclusion that "the courts got it right" is nothing if not a stroke of comedic genius.
Cheney knew Hutchinson's testimony was full of falsehoods. She put it out there anyway because she knows the media won't question it because they are openly working for the Democrats.
Only one part was hearsay. The rest of Hutchinson's testimony is first hand accounts. Nothing she said was false. Watch her and judge for yourself if you find her credible.
And don't forget all the other Republican members of the Trump administration who have testified. Watch them as well.
Just watch their testimony and judge for yourself. What are you so afraid of?
COMPLETELY Free Public Service Announcement for All You Trumpers and Trumpers-in-Denial:
IF you need to claim that one of THE most conservative members of Congress is peddling "leftist propaganda" in order to support your delusional, destructive, head-in-the-sand Trumpist view of things, you might - JUST MIGHT - have gone way off the tracks some way back.
Check it out. You lost cell coverage, credibility, and dignity MILES back. But maybe Dinesh or Rudy or Mike can come pick you up. Oh right, no, they're out there with you, too. Oh well.
Only one part was hearsay. The rest of Hutchinson's testimony is first hand accounts. Nothing she said was false. Watch her and judge for yourself if you find her credible.
And don't forget all the other Republican members of the Trump administration who have testified. Watch them as well.
Just watch their testimony and judge for yourself. What are you so afraid of?
COMPLETELY Free Public Service Announcement for All You Trumpers and Trumpers-in-Denial:
IF you need to claim that one of THE most conservative members of Congress is peddling "leftist propaganda" in order to support your delusional, destructive, head-in-the-sand Trumpist view of things, you might - JUST MIGHT - have gone way off the tracks some way back.
Check it out. You lost cell coverage, credibility, and dignity MILES back. But maybe Dinesh or Rudy or Mike can come pick you up. Oh right, no, they're out there with you, too. Oh well.
And by the way, that "Mike" could be either the massive joke of a pillow guy, or probably THE most embarrassing flag officer of my lifetime (3-star Army intel; I'm sure that the community is just thrilled with the possible reflection.....).
Thanks to #Bidenflation, this 4th of July is going to cost you more than EVER. According to the Farm Bureau, prices for July 4th are up 17% from last year.
