scourge165

Where did I make a comment on your education? Actually....scratch that. I just want an answer to the last question. Which of the things I pointed out that Trump has said or threatened the media with are false? I know you're waiting for someone else to come in here and try and change the argument for you, but...lets stay on topic. You said your side doesn't ever try and silence anyone, doesn't try and censor them. I'd say jailing reporters, revoking licenses, suing Newspapers is doing exactly that. I'll wait for your next deflection.

LOL...ok, so now after two pages, we're just denying...everything? What exactly are you disputing?

Ok, still not addressing any of the direct claims I made and somehow making this about USAID... Not going to fall for it. These commends predate USAID. Nice try and pivoting, but we're staying on topic here. Point-"Your side" would NEVER try and sensor someone. Me-Pointing out Trump suing media Platforms, threatening to jail them, threatening to cut their licenses. Not moving on to USAID, this is about YOUR claim the right would never do that. You're just throwing out nonsensical lines. "The devils in the details." Yup. And the details are he has said Journalists should be imprisoned. Devils in the Details, the detail is he's suing a News Paper because he didn't like a poll before the election. You're right, the devil is in the details while you offer up just vague nonsense.

LOL...I must have missed the "material" included within quotation marks in my original post. Why don't you cite for me which one of those is "over simplistic representation is wrong to the point of being fraudulent?" You can't, all you can do is say, 'no....you bad.' Which is sad and painful to watch, but I'm not moving off this point until you either tell me how it's "over simplistic," or "fraudulent."

And the argument is now basically... 'nuh-uh.' It's ok. I didn't expect you to articulate how you were wrong.

You ever see Bill Burr's "how to argue argue with women?" Stay on the topic, don't deviate from the topic. The topic... the claim was made that "my side," which in this context was the right, isn't trying to silence anyone. When they have to start changing the topic or moving the argument, you know THEY know they lied. So that's it. The ONLY point of contention until they admit... they're clowns and Trump has REGULARLY threatened Journalists for reporting things he does not like...jailing them, he's called them the enemy of the people. Watch them flail badly trying a 'whataboutism' or trying to do anything but address Trump literally trying to threaten and intimidate voices of dissent.

Oh... just a "whole bunch of out of context and straight up misleading quotes," without actually telling me which one. I don't think I actually quoted anything so much as articulated the threat Trump has made against the media, the "Enemy of the people," unless they're "nice to him. But again, good thing YOUR side never tries to silence anyone! Be a big boy and tell me what is out of context?

LOL...so AGAIN, Trump isn't suing a News Paper for a poll he didn't like, threatening to JAIL reporters, threatening to revoke the licensees of networks he doesn't like? Yeah, good thing the right NEVER tries to silence people!

See...it's the attention span right here. Once again ADD rears it's ugly head. Try and see if you can stay on topic once. Who is "his side?"

Oh... here I was thinking you supported MAGA and Trump. My mistake. Good thing becuase how CRAZY would it be for a paper to get sued over a POLL that the President doesn't like! Which...is happening. (Edit-Taking out the PBS references as... that will be the only thing people will be able to focus on, not the blatant hypocrisy.) Threatening to LITERALLY jail journalists who 'don't treat him nice,' or who don't reveal their sources. And then you have repealing the licenses of the stations who "aren't fair." What's fair? Whatever Trump arbitrarily decides. But hey, it's good your side isn't trying to silence information and viewpoints your side doesn't like! LOL...

Are you just another version of Jimmy? You made a claim that 2.7T of mis appropriated funds for Medicare were sent overseas. Not sure the timeframe. You then posted a link to back that up that doesn't even come CLOSE to doing that. You guys love the moving target game. Jesus Christ... I now see why so many people need to be on Adderall.

Are you unaware that the United States pays tens of billions of dollars subsidizing the Fossil Fuel industry? It's at nearly 1T since 2000. 25B a year. Exceptions for Publicly Traded Partnerships- So they don't have to pay taxes on revenue Percentage Depletion Allowance -They can deduct their revenue...usually more than their capex was to begin with. Manufacturing deduction-Just cause I've honestly never heard of anyone who DIDN'T know we subsidized the hell out of the Oil industry... but...you should look it up on your own. I think you'll find the whole, "lets get rid of waste and fraud," nonsense their chanting is...pretty insincere. Even when they're making record profits often tax free...

You...didn't read that article, did you? Even when you provide the source...you STILL manage to get it wrong.

Eh... I feel like this is a case where Jimmy's the run away winner. The problem is, it takes him 4 or 5 posts to say it...and it's never a unique thought. He's the kid in the background just...yelling without adding anything.

Federal vs. State and Local Impacts The fiscal effects of undocumented immigrants can vary between federal and state/local levels. At the federal level, undocumented immigrants tend to contribute more in taxes than they consume in services. However, state and local governments may experience net costs due to expenditures on education, healthcare, and other services that are not fully offset by tax contributions .Boise State University+1Econofact+1 Conclusion In summary, while some studies indicate that undocumented immigrants may impose a net fiscal cost, particularly at the state and local levels, others highlight their substantial tax contributions and limited access to public benefits. The overall fiscal impact is nuanced and depends on various factors, including methodology, time horizon, and the specific services considered. The idea that we're going bankrupt due to... undocumented immigrants is absolutely ridiculous...

Define it for me?

No, it's more about the execution. Hamas...PLO, PLA...etc... they WANT genocide. Israel is simply more capable of accomplishing it.

LOL... you're asking Jimmy where he got his facts? Twitter. Some...idiot on there Tweeted something and Little Jimmy just lapped it up like a Husky on a hot summer day.

I did. You lied ... for some odd reason and despite your posts still being available, you're sticking to it. So you are still claiming you never argued that this can't be a genocide whilst also creating more extremist/terrorists?

You do need to change subjects because you need to move on from the last one as quickly as possible.

Ok... so you can cut and paste. Egypt has taken in 9 million refugees total and 100,000 Palestinian refugees since the start of the conflict. This is why just guessing and then googling trying to confirm your existing beliefs is...probably not a great idea(though I expect nothing less from you).

Why is a Yes or No difficult for you to answer?

Yes, 1 of 2 things must be true...if you're ignorant and you don't understand what the word genocide means. Show me ONE time I expressed any support for...not JUST Hamas, but Palestine as a whole? A couple of you are so stupid, you just reflexively argue and then when you don't get the response you're looking for, you change the argument. Even if they wiped out EVERY SINGLE PERSON in Gaza(which is absolutely NOT necessary for it to be a genocide)... the way the morons on one side of this discussion think...it's as if they don't realize there are literally hundreds of billions of people who support Palestine in the Middle East...irrespective of treaties or Govt policy governing how many refugees a Nation is taking in. This shouldn't even be a debate. You already have massive terrorist groups right now fighting for Palestine, you might be surprised to learn...Israel...already not very popular in the region. But just that you think it's EITHER 1 or 2 in your asinine little multiple choice perfectly articulates how you don't even understand this feud at all.

Oops what? You just showed me a Google search. Are you denying there are 100,000 Palestinians in Egypt from post- Oct 7th? This is also SOO far removed from the original point that it's...absolutely meaningless, but since I got sucked into @Caveira strawman arguments...lets go.

You never said this can't both be a genocide AND creating more terrorists? LOL...seriously? You've posted this half a dozen times. Is this your way of admitting you were wrong or... LOL...what TF is this? But then... I guess someone hacked your account and made this statement? Or this one; There's always the option to just shut up and let this end or admit you were wrong, but doing the "I never said that," is...the weakest possible route. It's right there.