Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, September 23, 2026

Donald Trump and the leaders of Greenland and Denmark signed an agreement with no expiration date Tuesday that permits a larger US military presence in Greenland. The agreement, signed during Trump's visit to the United Nations General Assembly in New York, expands American military access and cooperation in the Arctic as the United States responds to the growing presence of Russia and China in the region. I believe this agreement provides a practical path toward a safer and more positive future for America.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Main terms of the Greenland agreement signed by the United States, Denmark and Greenland,

The agreement has no expiration date and can only be amended by mutual consent.

The United States may modernize and expand Pituffik Space Base.

The United States may establish additional defense areas at Narsarsuaq and Mestersvig.

Additional US defense areas may be established later, subject to consultation and mutual agreement.

Requests for unmanned US military installations outside established defense areas are to receive accelerated governmental review.

US military forces, vehicles, aircraft and public vessels receive broad rights of access and movement between defense areas throughout Greenland.

US military aircraft may fly over and land anywhere in Greenland, subject to the terms of the agreement.

US public vessels receive undersea access and movement within Greenland's territorial waters, subject to mutually agreed restrictions.

The agreement specifically recognizes US military access needed for defense of Greenland, NATO territory and North America, including establishment of a Golden Dome defense system.

Non-NATO countries may not establish military installations or maintain a persistent military presence in Greenland unless the parties agree otherwise.

Certain investments from countries outside NATO, NATO partner nations or the European Union can be restricted in sensitive areas, including critical infrastructure and natural-resource extraction, when national security or public order is at risk.

The United States may raise security concerns about construction or changes in land use near US defense areas. The parties then jointly determine what steps should be taken.

The United States, Denmark and Greenland will cooperate to counter espionage in Greenland.

Denmark commits to strengthening its Arctic defense capabilities, including land, sea, air, space and surveillance capabilities and cooperation with NATO allies.

US contracts involving construction, maintenance and servicing of Greenland defense areas are to go to Greenlandic businesses to the maximum extent possible, when they have the capability to perform the work.

Greenlandic society, including hunting, fishing, cultural activities and traditional ways of life, is to be respected when US military access rights are exercised.

If Greenland eventually becomes independent, Denmark and Greenland are to ensure that an independent Greenland remains in NATO and assumes the rights and obligations contained in the defense agreement.

The agreement takes effect after the required parliamentary procedures in Denmark and Greenland are completed and the United States receives formal diplomatic notification.

#1 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-23 06:38 PM | Reply

Trump,

1. Southern border,

2. Greenland for protecting the North.

Now he needs to do something about protecting our future by tightening up our voting.

#2 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-23 06:40 PM | Reply

Trump's Greenland deal, explained
www.politico.eu

... Eight months after Donald Trump almost destroyed NATO by threatening to annex Greenland " by force, if necessary " he signed what he called a "fantastic" new deal that would give the U.S. all the control and military access it needs over the Danish territory.

European allies were so alarmed by Trump's apparent determination to take the territory at the start of the year -- and his threat of 25% tariffs on anyone who got in his way -- that they began talking about a future for the West without America. In many ways, the transatlantic relationship has not been the same since.

Tuesday's agreement on security in the Arctic and North Atlantic, signed at the United Nations by Trump and the prime ministers of Greenland and Denmark, ends the dispute. But what exactly is in the deal? Who will pay for it? And who are the winners and losers from months of high-stakes talks?

What exactly is the deal?

This new agreement, which still needs ratification by Danish and Greenlandic lawmakers, is not, in fact, completely new. Instead, it sets out to "amend and supplement" an earlier deal between the U.S. and Denmark dating back to 1951. Many experts have been saying for months that this earlier agreement gave Trump most of what he said he wanted in terms of more or less unfettered freedom to set up military bases and police the region's security.

One key difference this time is that Greenland itself is a signatory. ...

Trump promised to build two "very major" bases in Greenland. According to the text released by the Danish government, the two touted new American bases aren't entirely new either, at least in terms of their locations. ...

Trump has often spoken about Chinese and Russian military activities around Greenland, claiming earlier this year that, "if you take a look outside of Greenland right now, there are Russian destroyers. There are Chinese destroyers ... there are Russian submarines all over the place. We're not going to have Russia or China occupy Greenland, and that's what they're going to do if we don't."

NATO officials have quietly pushed back against those claims, with one diplomat saying "we're not seeing any Chinese activity" around Greenland, while Russian movements in the High North haven't changed significantly and there's little, if any, Russian presence near Greenland. ...

Instead, the deal explicitly reaffirms Danish sovereignty and Greenland's right to self-determination -- including choosing independence from Denmark, potentially. For what it's worth, the deal also explicitly recognizes the need to protect the "pristine" environment of the territory and Greenlanders' cultural, social and economic rights.


"Reading it, one wonders why so much fuss for so little, when this could have been done from the start," said Grgoire Roos, program director for Europe at the Chatham House think tank in London. "I also think it's well played from Denmark -- clean and diplomatic. Some might call it the European touch."

Speaking before the deal was published, the Atlantic Council's Daniel Fried, a former U.S. ambassador to Poland, said the deal gave Washington something it could call a win, and "allowed the U.S. to walk back from its damaging and pointless threats of aggression."
...



#3 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-23 07:23 PM | Reply

Lamp,

"When this could have been done from the start"

Obama and Biden both had years to pursue a major expansion of the US military presence in Greenland. They maintained the existing base and defense relationship, but neither negotiated anything comparable to this agreement.

So if it really could have been done from the start, why wasn't it?

I think it took a real leader willing to push for it and get it done.

#4 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-23 08:07 PM | Reply

@#4 .... So if it really could have been done from the start, why wasn't it? ... I.

The point being made was that Pres Trump's threatening approach was not needed. Both Denmark and Greenland were quite willing to negotiate with Pres Trump from the start.

But, instead, Pres Trump threatened and did some long-term damage to our relationship with our European allies.

So, did the end justify the means?

More of an explanation ...
drudge.com

#5 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-23 08:31 PM | Reply

BJ is just sad that the Hostile Takeover didn't werk.

#6 | Posted by Corky at 2026-09-23 08:41 PM | Reply

Two threads on the same topic in the same day?

drudge.com

Looks like BillJohnson is very excited.

Too bad he can't explain why.

Trump,

1. Southern border,

He did nothing about it and despite being asked, you can't provide any citation or information to show he did.

2. Greenland for protecting the North.

Greenland has been a part of NATO.

So again, Trump didn't do anything.

Now he needs to do something about protecting our future by tightening up our voting.
#2 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

Which, again, you can't provide any information pointing to there needing to be federal involvement in elections.

In the end, you've got nothing.

Just another sad day for Bill.

#7 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-09-23 08:42 PM | Reply

"Now he needs to do something about protecting our future by tightening up our voting."

Since Bill can't ever find actual voter fraud by illegals, he's clearly referring to suppressing LEGAL voters.

#8 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-23 09:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If piggy wants to protect our northern border, how come he isn't doing anything about Russia?

Only Piggy would brag about getting something he could have had without resorting to threats.

An agreement at the barrel of a gun is no agreement

#9 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-23 09:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

So if it really could have been done from the start, why wasn't it?
I think it took a real leader willing to push for it and get it done.

#4 | Posted by BillJohnson

Is it really needed though?

Anything the Iran war has taught us, or should have taught us, is that the nature of war has radically changed.

What good are bases in Greenland against this new warfare?

But keep building those billion dollar patriot and thaad missiles that are useless.

#10 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-23 09:40 PM | Reply

What is piggy going to do about the 28 US bases destroyed in the middle east?

#11 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-23 09:42 PM | Reply

What is piggy going to do about the 28 US bases destroyed in the middle east?

Good thing none of them were Benghazi.

God knows Benghazi was a sacred lamb for the GOP.

The rest of those bases, not so much apparently.

#12 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-09-23 10:03 PM | Reply

Clown,

"Just another sad day for Bill."

I don't know how you came to that conclusion.

I have absolutely NO voter's remorse over voting for Trump.

Even if Congress goes completely Democrat this election, Trump still accomplished more in two years than Biden or Obama did in four.

I'm very satisfied with my vote.

If Democrats get Congress, they'll spend 2 years just opposing Trump regardless what it is.

#13 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-23 10:45 PM | Reply

You're a ------- drooling imbecile.

#14 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2026-09-23 10:48 PM | Reply

Legal,

I might be -------, but I don't drool and I'm no imbecile.

#15 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-23 10:51 PM | Reply

"I'm no imbecile."

Sure, Fredo.

You're smaart.

Not like, dumb.

Smaart.

#16 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-24 01:05 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I have absolutely NO voter's remorse over voting for Trump.
#13 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

I know.

You hate America and Trump has done more to destroy this nation in 2 years than most thought possible.

Also.

You never explained how he "closed the border".

Just another lie by BullSheetJohnson.

#17 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-09-24 03:49 AM | Reply

I'm very satisfied with my vote.
#13 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

Of course you are, Bill, of course you are.

#18 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-09-24 07:05 AM | Reply

It's the exact same deal we already had from back in the 1950s. Nothing changed.

#19 | Posted by qcp at 2026-09-24 07:41 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

It's not, it bans foreign investment which was China's approach to getting people on the ground there.

#20 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2026-09-24 08:06 AM | Reply

The claim that President Trump's Greenland agreement is completely identical to the 1950s arrangement is partially true in its framework, but inaccurate because the new deal adds distinct and practical changes.

The Core Framework Is the Same

Built on the 1951 Treaty: The security agreement signed by the U.S., Denmark, and Greenland builds directly upon the historic 1951 Defense of Greenland Treaty between Washington and Copenhagen, which has long given the U.S. broad military access to the island.

Danish Sovereignty Maintained: Just like past decades, the agreement explicitly reaffirms that Greenland remains under the territorial sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark and rules out U.S. outright ownership or annexation.

What Actually Changed in the New Deal

Greenland Is at the Table: Unlike the bilateral 1951 treaty signed solely by the U.S. and Denmark, Greenland's own self-governing leadership is a direct, formal signatory to this agreement.

New Military Bases Authorized: The deal explicitly greenlights the process for the U.S. military to build and operate two new major defense sites/bases at Narsarsuaq in southern Greenland and Mestersvig in the east, alongside upgrades to the existing Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base).

Blocking Adversarial Investment: The pact introduces specific security-screening provisions and investment bans preventing non-NATO competitors"specifically China and Russia"from establishing military footprints or acquiring sensitive infrastructure and critical mineral/mining assets in Greenland.

Future Independence Planning: It includes political commitments ensuring that these defense arrangements and NATO alignment will remain legally binding and intact even if Greenland transitions into a fully independent nation separate from Denmark

#21 | Posted by sentinel at 2026-09-24 08:48 AM | Reply

How Important and Urgent Was the Deal?

Geopolitically High (The Arctic Race): Proponents and security experts argue the deal is highly important due to the rapidly changing security environment in the Arctic. As polar ice melts, the region is becoming a hotbed for new maritime trade routes and untapped critical minerals. Because Russia has aggressively militarized its Arctic coast and China has declared itself a "Near-Arctic State," locking down Greenland's security and resources was seen by Washington as an increasingly urgent priority to protect the U.S. homeland.

Strategically Low (No Immediate Threat): Conversely, critics point out that the threat was never actually imminent. Adversary activity directly around Greenland remains virtually non-existent. Denmark"a fiercely loyal NATO ally"was already in complete alignment with the U.S. and would never have permitted a Russian or Chinese military base on the island anyway, making the "urgent" legal ban more of a formality than a response to an active crisis

Could This Have Been Done Sooner?

Critics, including former diplomats and political opponents, argue that the agreement absolutely could have been achieved much earlier and without the severe diplomatic fallout.

Manufactured Crisis vs. Real Diplomacy: Critics like former Ambassador Michael McFaul note that Denmark has always been a cooperative democratic ally. They argue previous administrations (like Obama or Bush) or even Trump's first term could have quietly negotiated these same expanded basing rights and investment screenings through standard diplomatic channels.

Aggressive Tactics Slowed Things Down: Rather than the deal being "delayed" by past presidents, critics argue it was President Trump's own aggressive tactics"such as threatening to forcibly "take" or annex Greenland"that created a massive diplomatic rift with Denmark. In this view, the months of quiet negotiations leading up to the September 2026 pact weren't solving a long-standing geopolitical puzzle, but were rather an effort by U.S. and Danish diplomats to clean up a self-inflicted diplomatic crisis and find an elegant way for Trump to claim a "victory".

#22 | Posted by sentinel at 2026-09-24 08:49 AM | Reply

Spending a few years, or a few decades, opposing the everything Trump has done strikes me as a good use of time.

#23 | Posted by Zed at 2026-09-24 09:37 AM | Reply

BILL is a sick man. He'll never lt himself understand how sick.

#24 | Posted by Zed at 2026-09-24 09:38 AM | Reply

"Spending a few years, or a few decades, opposing the everything Trump has done strikes me as a good use of time"

I almost flagged this as funny, but it's really just too sad. You're admitting that someone you hate owns and controls your behavior and that he can troll you into opposing anything, no matter what it is. All of your time and energy belong to him now.

"BILL is a sick man. He'll never lt himself understand how sick."

You and Bill have a lot more in common than either of you would like to admit.

#25 | Posted by sentinel at 2026-09-24 10:12 AM | Reply


It's the exact same deal we already had from back in the 1950s. Nothing changed.
#19 | POSTED BY QCP

Exactly? Here's my take, you knew nothing of the 1950 before this, and some narrative MSM generator yelled this out of the TV, and you agreed because you hate Trump.

How do I know this, because Sentinel lays it out perfectly, using information available how its NOT exactly the same.


You're admitting that someone you hate owns and controls your behavior and that he can troll you into opposing anything, no matter what it is.

This sounds like Speaks, not buying the Model S and doing his part in saving the planet because of Musk.

#26 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-09-24 10:31 AM | Reply

Speaks bought the 3.

But why would you buy a tesla now when theres so many better options?

#27 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2026-09-24 10:50 AM | Reply

Snoofy,

From what I can find, people coming over the border and getting away dropped anywhere from 80 to 90% from Biden.

That is significant.

#28 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 01:01 PM | Reply

That is significant.

#28 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

I suppose. To those keeping score in the Make Americans Hate Immigrants game. But I'm not playing that game.

And what does any of what Trumpy has done regarding immigration do to Glorify the Lord Mr Fake Plastic Christian?

#29 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-09-24 01:06 PM | Reply

#28
Figures, Bull, from where and based on what? Gracias.

#30 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-09-24 01:13 PM | Reply

Bill not Bull

#31 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-09-24 01:14 PM | Reply

Sent,

"Aggressive Tactics Slowed Things Down"

Trump has only been in office a little under two years.

If you're referring to Trump's "aggressive tactics," just how much faster do you think this could have happened?

And in the end, does it really matter?

Trump got it done.

Could you imagine Harris pulling this off any faster or ever?

Like it or not, Trump's techniques for dealing with people and other countries will be studied for years.

Biden and Obama?

I think history will end up treating them as footnotes in the Trump era.

#32 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 01:17 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Doc,

homeland.house.gov

#33 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 01:23 PM | Reply

Bill - You appear to be okay with that data, but I find it questionable - much like the government's claims about having intercepted x or x percent of illegal drugs. Problem is, the basic number cannot be known, whether it's how many people cross or how many tons of junk are brought in. Estimates, sure? But actual numbers? No.

#34 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-09-24 01:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Doc,

"You appear to be okay with that data"

Actually, it doesn't really matter whether I'm okay with it or not. I'm not a statistician writing a paper that requires every number to be heavily scrutinized.

What I do know is that Trump is doing a lot more to address illegal immigration than Biden did.

To me, the exact numbers aren't the main point.

The main point is that Trump is addressing the problem in a way it wasn't being addressed before.

But please do tell me your opinion about those numbers.

#35 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 01:36 PM | Reply

But please do tell me your opinion about those numbers.

#35 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics"

The numbers are rigged. Just like everything else this corrupt administration touches. Unless verified by two outside reliable independent sources they obviously cannot be trusted.

"During the second Trump administration, official DHS social media accounts have been used to disseminate lies, inflammatory rhetoric, and partisan political content that seek to divide, rather than inform, the public. At a time when Americans rely on DHS for accurate information about public safety and disaster response, the Department's communications must be factual, objective, and worthy of public trust."

"Under the failed leadership of Kristi Noem and Markwayne Mullin, the Department of Homeland Security is constantly posting inflammatory rhetoric that appeals to the Great Replacement Theory' of replacing white, native-born populations with non-white immigrants," said Ranking Member Thanedar. "My bill brings commonsense changes to how DHS operates its social media, to include personal and official accounts, by requiring mandatory media trainings and oversight by the DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG). It is time that Congress brings an end to this unacceptable behavior."

The other side of the story. More at democrats-homeland.house.gov

Accountability is coming my loonie friend.

Im sure we'll find out more about how the corrupt Trumpy admin had twisted the data when the adults regain access and oversight.

Which is why they are deleting and changing data as fast as they can. Of course it will get much worse after November and the reality of what they have done sinks in and the desperation to hide the evidence takes over.

#36 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-09-24 01:48 PM | Reply

Sent,

"You're admitting that someone you hate owns and controls your behavior"

When you responded to Zed with that quote, and then said Zed and I are similar, did you mean that someone I hate controls me?

I really don't have a lot of "hate" in me, and I'm not compelled to be like anyone I know.

One thing I do think I have in common with Trump is that he doesn't spend his life stepping into other people's footprints. He makes his own way.

And so do I, and always have.

Mostly because I've known very few people whose lives I would want to emulate.

#37 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 01:49 PM | Reply

BJ is just sad that the Hostile Takeover didn't werk.

#6 | Posted by Corky

Again... The president of the D.R. LADIES AUXILIARY... Proves she doesn't know a GD thing about Donald Trump.
---when they sat down trump said " this is what we want".... And they agreed because he had them " set up"
-- what makes you illiterate dopes and --------- sad is that the leader of Greenland is thrilled with the deal...
-- and that's the kind of pro American thing that makes you leftist radical psychos reach for your therapist phone on speed dial.

#38 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2026-09-24 01:55 PM | Reply

The greatest trick the Devil ever played was to convince BILL that the Devil is not Donald Trump.

#39 | Posted by Zed at 2026-09-24 01:57 PM | Reply

Dan,

"Since Bill can't ever find actual voter fraud by illegals, he's clearly referring to suppressing LEGAL voters."

If a state offers early voting, I don't see that as voter suppression at all.

Unless someone is immobile or otherwise physically unable to get to the polls, they have time to arrange transportation and vote.

Calling that "suppression" is illogical.

#40 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 01:59 PM | Reply

Anything Trump got from Greenland he could have gotten over a cup of coffee.

#41 | Posted by Zed at 2026-09-24 02:00 PM | Reply

Corky,

"BJ is just sad that the Hostile Takeover didn't werk."

Sure..right...I wanted to invade Greenland.

#42 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 02:01 PM | Reply

Donald Trump has successfully bolted from BILL'S mind the difference between success and failure.

#43 | Posted by Zed at 2026-09-24 02:02 PM | Reply

Thank you Bill Johnson for the articles.

I signed on figuring I'd have to comment about this on some other thread because these

leftist dilettantes do not want anyone to read about it.

#44 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2026-09-24 02:04 PM | Reply

Zed,

Who says Trump's threats over Greenland had anything to do with this agreement anyway?

Personally, I never got the impression he was actually going to use force to take Greenland.

To me, it was just his usual midnight madness and posting.

#45 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 02:05 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Why threaten an old friend at all, BILL? No one lives their liv s that except criminals and the insane.

#46 | Posted by Zed at 2026-09-24 02:09 PM | Reply

No one lives here heir lives that except criminals and the insane,

You are a crime washer as well as a sane washer.

#47 | Posted by Zed at 2026-09-24 02:11 PM | Reply

Some people are just belligerent. Trump is one of them.

#48 | Posted by horstngraben at 2026-09-24 02:11 PM | Reply

Anything Trump got from Greenland he could have gotten over a cup of coffee.

#41 | POSTED BY ZED

Or with an email or a phone call. I don't even think an actual meeting was required except maybe for the signing. Definitely did not need ANY of his threats lies and temper tantrums.

#49 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-09-24 02:12 PM | Reply

Why threaten an old friend at all?

That's a deadly serious question, BILL. Want to answer or wussy out?

#50 | Posted by Zed at 2026-09-24 02:13 PM | Reply

'LL leave the rest to you Mr. Johnson.
-
-my work today centers on the real Dem positions and not the lies of the GD lying media..
--"Not ONE Democrat showed up to today's Senate Judiciary hearing to ask questions about how we can keep our female athletes safe."
Absolutely absurd.

--as well as posting several videos of mr. I'm a Christian talerico's pastor saying he's saying things to get elected then he'll go right back... FOLLOWED BY telling reporter that his church is mostly atheist and agnostics.

#51 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2026-09-24 02:14 PM | Reply

I'm putting my money on Wussy.

#52 | Posted by Zed at 2026-09-24 02:15 PM | Reply

pastor saying he's saying things to get elected, FOLLOWED BY telling reporter that his church is mostly atheist and agnostics.

#51 | Posted by shrimptacodan

Pastors usually would fall over themselves considering themselves graced to have their churches full of atheists and agnostics. Where else would you want them?

Beats the hell out of fake Texas megachurch cross-humpers who always end up too stinking close to pedophilia and naked greed.

#53 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2026-09-24 02:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Some people are just belligerent. Trump is one of them.
#48 | POSTED BY HORSTNGRABEN

He's also an accused pedophile and a convicted criminal.

He's also a Russian asset. There so much ------- proof it's insane he's still the president.

#54 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-09-24 02:20 PM | Reply

POSTED BY SHRIMPdick

You stupid cretin.

#55 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-09-24 02:22 PM | Reply

Who says Trump's threats over Greenland had anything to do with this agreement anyway?
#45 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

Well, Trump did.

You'd have to actually listen to what he was saying. Instead of staring at him and gooning.

He's not going to let you touch his dick, you're way too old.

#56 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-09-24 02:24 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#35
Bill -
Blowing off the numbers you've used to buttress your "case" - e.g., #28, #33, #35 - is just plain odd.

#57 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-09-24 02:25 PM | Reply

Doc,

I'm not trying to build a "case".

Illegal crossings are down under Trump.

#58 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 02:36 PM | Reply

"If a state offers early voting, I don't see that as voter suppression at all."

Except some states only allow CONDITIONAL early or absentee voting.

And some states are closing polling places in "certain" areas, where it will doubtless make lines longer and voting more difficult.

"Calling that "suppression" is illogical."

Nonsense. It's observational. Folks who run elections KNOW longer lines in "certain" areas will suppress the overall vote total in those areas.

And again...every method you've proffered of "protecting" the vote leads to many more legal votes suppressed than illegal ones thwarted.

For example...your home state of VA averages one voter fraud incident per decade. How many votes are you willing to suppress, to protect against THOSE TWO VOTES?

And why are you pretending ONE FRAUDLENT VOTE PER DECADE is a problem in need of fixing?

#59 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-24 02:36 PM | Reply

I'm not trying to build a "case"
#58 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

That's good, Bill, because you failed to make it.

#60 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-09-24 02:51 PM | Reply

Zed,

"Why threaten an old friend at all?"

My personal opinion is that Trump plays head games to keep people off balance. It's hard to know where you stand with him or what he actually means.

It strikes me as a Machiavellian tactic. Fairly manipulative. You can't always take what he says at face value.

I've worked with people like that. Sometimes they tell you exactly what they think you want to hear. That doesn't mean they're all bad, but it makes them difficult to read or trust.

I'm not convinced the people Trump threatened actually believed they might be invaded.

But recognizing a possible tactic doesn't mean I think it worked or was wise.

#61 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 02:51 PM | Reply

You can't always take what he says at face value.

#62 | Posted by REDIAL at 2026-09-24 02:53 PM | Reply

Dan,

No voting method meets everyone's needs perfectly.

By "everyone's needs," I don't mean only the voter's convenience.

The public also needs a system that is secure, accurate, and trustworthy.

A good voting system has to address all of those needs.

#63 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 02:54 PM | Reply

Redial,

Politicians work hard to appear honest. That's part of winning people's trust.

Whether or not we believe they're honest depends on how we judge their actions and how our own biases influence our judgment.

I don't expect to get the full picture from politicians.

Withholding and controlling information is a form of power.

#64 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 03:04 PM | Reply

Doc,

If you're a good little Democrat, you're supposed to be complaining that Trump is making things harder for the poor immigrants who want to be in America.

That goes hand in hand with your acknowledgment that illegal border crossings are lower under Trump.

I mean....right?

#65 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 03:12 PM | Reply

Trump is making things harder for the poor immigrants who want to be in Americans

You hate America.

It's why you love Trump and what he's done to this county.

#66 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-09-24 03:28 PM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort