Jump to content

mspart

Members
  • Posts

    3,835
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Everything posted by mspart

  1. Yet he has the faculty to run the country AND to run circles around his staff while doing so. mspart
  2. Not really. It is reality. It is a lot of mental gymnastics for UB and apparently you to support Hamas. mspart
  3. Like you would support bringing this case to trial so a judge could say Biden is fit or unfit to stand trial. If unfit, you would be happy. If fit, you would complain that it was a Trump judge and was unfair. mspart
  4. Israel warns everyone where and when they will strike. That is beyond what International Law requires and more than any other nation has done during war. Yes UB, Israel follows international law. But they must prosecute the war against a lawless entity. Give the warning, then others are responsible for the result. Does Hamas have to follow International Law? You say they should but do not. That's very convenient. What you are saying is that Israel cannot prosecute a war against Hamas because Hamas uses human shields. Your logic is twisted and shows your bias to Hamas, as you have denied all along but has been proven all along as well. mspart
  5. You conveniently ignore reality UB. Israel warns everyone where and when they will strike. That is beyond what International Law requires and more than any other nation has done during war. How can anyone fight a war in such a way. They do that because of Hamas' tactics of using civilians as human shields, against your vaunted international law. Then if the civilians don't clear it is either their fault for not clearing out to safety or it is Hamas' fault for either contradicting the Israeli warning or threatening the civilians that they must stay. Hamas does not care for the Palestinian people. The more that get slaughter the better is their thought. They do not feel those people are their responsibility to protect and defend. They have said that is the UN's responsibility. Please explain, how, with all the aid that has gone their way, they are in the deepest poverty and still depend on others to provide water, food, fuel, and electricity? Others is defined as Israel. Gaza should be a veritable paradise with all the monetary aid they have been given. Further proof as Hamas uses the aid for enriching themselves and building tunnels and buying armaments that the poverty is the fault of Hamas. They are as corrupt as it gets. They are not there for the people, they are there to kill as many Israelis as possible. And if they die, they get 70 virgins in the afterlife. So all is good. mspart
  6. True, I figured since it was a state mandate, it was state funded. If I had that wrong, my mistake. mspart
  7. Whatever makes you feel better. You want to conflate this. If they had not done Oct 7, there would be no bombing of Gaza. There would be no misery in Gaza except as Hamas dictates to their own people. Israel provided electricity, water, fuel, and food to Gaza until Oct 7. If there is any complaint, it should be against Hamas who miscalculated international support. Because of Hamas, Gaza is a now a parking lot rather than a beautiful area in which to live and thrive. And they have made that the case since 2006 when Israel unilaterally gave Gaza to the Palestinans. Israel has offered many times a two state solution and it was rejected by the Palestinians each and every time. They don't want a two state solution. They want Israel eliminated. That is where war and suffering starts. Please remember that in Palestinian areas, Jews are not allowed. In Israel, there are Palestinians in the Knesset. Palestinians live in Israel. You may be able to deduce who the intolerant are here. mspart
  8. You said it. You are the one who said only Israel has to abide by international law. True story. You should explain your meaning in that post rather than try to twist my words. It isn't that complicated man. Come on man! mspart
  9. To me this seems like a waste of money. Light up the bridges with white lights like a normal road and be done with it. I don't mind the red white and blue lights, but that costs money that is not necessary for road and traffic safety. Lots of bridges means lots of man hours changing out lights. Just seems like a waste of money. mspart
  10. Deny if you want. You said it. So now read the rest of my post. mspart
  11. Yet, you only apply international law to one side there UB. And you fail to actually assign blame. If Hamas did not do Oct 7, this would not be happening. Yes, you remember, the butchering of 1100 Israelis, some in the most heinous fashion. If Hamas did not kill the Israelis, Hamas would not be at actual war with Israel. The fact that they use the Gazans as human shields (also against international law, but ignored by sympathists) is what gets a lot of those folks killed. When Israel says evacuate and Hamas says don't, then Hamas has the blame, not the Israelis. Israel has tried to avoid innocents to the greatest extent possible. Yet it is not enough for Hamas nor their sympathizers. This is 100% the fault of Hamas. It doesn't matter how many they recruit because all of Hamas has targets on their backs as well they should. mspart
  12. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13444539/fbi-donald-trump-raid-deadly-force-mar-lago.html https://nypost.com/2024/05/21/us-news/fbi-was-authorized-to-use-deadly-force-in-mar-a-lago-classified-docs-search/ mspart
  13. I have been white water rafting and my raft toppled over head over heals and I was caught beneath. There is more to that story really. On another trip I almost got thrown out (barely hung to the raft) and the photographer on the shore happened to catch that very moment. I remember it quite well. I love white water rafting. Kayaking on a river I have never done. Looks fun sort of. When I was much younger I would have been in shape enough to attempt. Not even close now. But being on a white water river is a lot of fun. mspart
  14. There should be no connection in a blind justice system on who appointed the judge and their ability to follow the law. We are certainly getting the idea of biased judges only in the last few years. Ds make a big deal out of more R appointed judges on the SCOTUS than D appointed. But the SCOTUS has not always decided in a conservative leaning way. In some cases, the count is unanimous. The judge in the classified documents case does not want to have any issue with Trump's current proceedings, and necessarily needs to have clarified a host of items as noted in the article I posted. To me that is a judge not jumping to conclusions but deliberating on the efficacy of the evidence as now there have been stories of fabrication that were withheld in the briefs concerning the case as just one of the concerning areas of inquiry in the pretrial motions. Should we rush to convict or should we get the underlying story correct first? If you read the article I posted, you would see that the DOJ has done a shoddy job on this and the judge is calling them out on that. mspart
  15. If the prosecution has failed to prove the allegation, then the judge has that prerogative. It is called a directed verdict. The judge can declare that the prosecution has not come close to prove the case. All of the prosecution witnesses say Trump didn't do what the prosecution say he did. Cohen is a pathological liar and admitted larcenist and perjurer. How has the prosecution proved their case? They haven't is the answer. The judge could say he is making a directed verdict for such a farce of a trial or he can let it go to the jury. In this case, the judge has repeatedly ruled for the prosecution and against the defense so he will let it go to the jury I believe. The closing arguments will be very interesting to hear if indeed it does get that far. mspart
  16. Ha! Just about everyone had a negative reaction to the prosecutions start witness. CNN, MSNBC, and the others all said that his time on the hot seat was not good for the prosecution. Most still say the charges are not clear and that the prosecution did not prove the case at all. They made Trump out to be not a likeable guy but actually proving the charges they did not do. That is not just from one side, most agree with this. https://www.newsweek.com/michael-cohen-had-his-knees-chopped-out-stand-legal-analyst-1901685 https://www.mediaite.com/trump/moment-of-real-triumph-for-trump-msnbc-legal-analyst-argues-michael-cohens-testimony-today-badly-hurt-the-prosecution/ mspart
  17. Translation I think: For non olympic weights, will there be a wrestle off that will determine the reps for those 4 weights to the non olympic weights world championships? And will this be a mini tourney only winner takes all, or will there be a mini tourney and then a final X type 2 out of 3 bout arrangement to determine the rep? That's what I got out of it. mspart
  18. There are lots of pundits saying the Trump judge should end the charade and take it out of the jurors hands and just call it not guilty as the prosecution has not proven anything other than Trump is not a likeable character. There are lots also saying the prosecution is winning. It doesn't look like that to me. The star witness has been eviscerated. His credibility a shambles with jurors audibly gasping at his cross examination. My take - Biden thought Trump would be caught unawares in June as he would be busy with the trial or the pokey. The trial should be over by then. I anticipate a not guilty verdict on the crimes such as they have been explained, which no one understands, not even the left media types. Trump may do his thing and everyone will hate him for it. Or Biden may do his thing and this will be called elder abuse. Trump should come out looking good if he can keep himself in check. My guess is he won't. He won the debates in 2020 but was so unlikable people thought Biden won. It may be the same this time. mspart
  19. I'd vote for her. But I don't think she'll win. She'd probably be shot for impersonating a politician. mspart
  20. Cohen has not been a star witness for the prosecution. He has been a star witness for the defense. mspart
  21. PSU fans would not be disappointed if RBY won. But I'm not sure they would be rooting for him over Spencer. Maybe, but I would not think so. Of course I'm not a PSU fan and don't know how they think. They just might be that way, but I have a hard time seeing that. Did they not cheer for Spencer when he won at Oly trials at PSU? mspart
  22. Hey Fish, What you say is not necessarily false. But the fact that mail in ballots were not checked for signature or that if checked, the sig did not need to match that on file. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/ballots-can-t-be-tossed-out-over-voter-signature-court-n1244585 The prospect of disqualified mail-in ballots poses a greater threat to Biden’s candidacy. ...Republican lawmakers and the Trump campaign had argued that the law is clear that election officials must compare the information on the mail-in ballot envelope, including a voter’s signature, to a voter’s information on file to determine a person’s qualifications to vote. So if we lived in PA, I could have put in a ballot for you and butchered the signature and it would have to be counted. How is that not fishy? As noted, the PA law clearly states that the voter's signature must match the information on file. The State Supreme Court essentially said the legislature and the governor had no right to produce such a law. ID needs to be presented at the polls. Mail in voting is rife for fraud. Absentee ballots are more regulated. This is just one of many such "fishy issues" with the 2020 vote over a number of states. mspart
×
×
  • Create New...