#3 Liar. Coward. Cuck.

Are you actually justifying ICE being in Minnesota?

Nobel Prize
Nobel Prze
Nobe Prze
Nobe Pre
Nob Pre
No Pre
No Pe
Nope

Donald Trump is the Milli Vanilli of Nobel Peace Prize winners.

#21 Nothing but lies, from the lying coward cuck.

#303 Rene Nicole Good lost that battle.

Reichwingnuts are celebrating that murder.

#22 The lying coward speaks.

#16 Anyone have any idea who "Ashely Babbitt" is ? ? ? ?

#21 Last I heard it was 4,100,000,000 let in.

Your numbers keep changing.

#105 Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, bell boi.

Your integrity is shot, so whatever.

Blame it on someone else.

Not at all unexpected.

snip ...

What about Congress? Is it enthusiastic about annexing Greenland? Well, a bipartisan team of Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) has written a bill that would ban using U.S. funds to annex the territory of a NATO member state without the consent of that member. It is too soon to see how much support it has, but probably all Democrats will support it and likely some Republicans as well. Murkowski said "The mere notion that America would use our vast resources against our allies is deeply troubling and must be wholly rejected by Congress in statute."

What about the American people? Quinnipiac University ran a poll on the subject. It turns out Project Greenland is just as unpopular with Americans as it is with Greenlanders, with 86% of Americans opposed to taking the island by force and only 9% approving of the idea. When was the last time you saw 86% of Americans agreeing on anything? We bet if QU asked: "Do you approve of the American flag" they wouldn't get 86% approval.

So, Greenlanders don't like the idea of being annexed, Denmark doesn't like it, members of Congress don't like it, and the American people don't like it. We are pretty sure no other country approves So who does? Donald Trump. He is the only one, against essentially the entire world. Will he do it? At this point it is unclear, but the QU poll might actually deter Trump since doing something 86% of Americans don't want is not going to help the Republicans in November.

Ironically, Trump's approach is making it even less likely that he will be able to take Greenland without military force, which would destroy NATO and put the entire E.U. against him.

Without lifting a finger (or losing a single Russian soldier), Pedodent Vladimir Netanyahu Trumpf will deliver Europe on a silver platter to Putin.

snip ...

Who is the intended audience? Americans? Greenlanders? Danes? If Greenlanders, it will likely backfire. They don't want to join America in any way, shape or form. In a poll from a year ago, 85% of Greenlanders said they do not want to become a part of the U.S., with only 6% saying they WOULD like that to happen. It is likely even worse now that Donald Trump is talking about annexing the island by military force. On Tuesday, Greenland's prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, said that if Greenland has to choose between America and Denmark, it will choose Denmark.

What about Denmark? Yesterday, the Danish foreign minister, Lars Rasmussen. and Greenland's foreign minister, Vivian Motzfeldt, had a meeting with J.D. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Afterwards, Rasmussen and Motzfeldt held a press conference outside the Danish embassy in D.C. Rasmussen and Motzfeldt said the parties had a fundamental disagreement over the future of Greenland. In easy-to-understand terms, Trump wants to buy Greenland but Denmark doesn't want to sell it. At the presser, Rasmussen added: "We didn't manage to change the American position. It's clear that the president has this wish of conquering over Greenland. We made it very, very clear that this is not in the interest of the Kingdom."

Yesterday, Denmark began moving defense forces to Greenland and said other European NATO members would soon do so as well. The ministry said the move was to train the troops in Arctic fighting, but didn't specify who the potential enemy might be. There is no way the European troops could stave off an American attack, but having them there trying to at least slow an American advance would be a major PR hit to Trump. If American troops have to force their way in, against even nominal resistance, it would be impossible for Trump to say to the American people: "The Greenlanders welcomed us with open arms. It is also worth noting that, even if you have a force of superior size, it can be very, very hard to gain control of an enormous, largely empty, very cold piece of land. Ask Napoleon, if you have any questions.

On the positive side, the parties agreed to set up a working group to address security issues and whether they could be addressed without changing Greenland's ownership. It is possible they will come up with something, but that is unlikely to satisfy Trump. At heart, he is a real estate developer, and he likes to buy ground and develop it. He sees Greenland as a large chunk of undeveloped land he could buy and develop in case his deal to buy Gaza doesn't work out. The two have different problems. Greenland is cold and has no people. Gaza is hot and has a lot of people. However they are similar in that neither of the current owners are interested in selling the place to him. How long will it be before he gets the idea of moving all the people in Gaza to Greenland, so he can build hotels and condos in Gaza? That would violate international law, of course, but so what?

#60 Bravo, AU, for this great comment!

Bravo!

Well, if last night's little exercise taught us all anything it was this:

When ever bell boi gets all sanctimonious and tells us that we live in an information bubble, it is nothing but pure projection/confession on his part.

After spoon-feeding him proof - including links, that he clearly didn't bother to read - that the 60 Minutes crew did reach out for a comment from the White House, DHS, etc...

... his lame, final comment was "How long before the piece was set to air?" (#77).

As I told him last evening...

Your absurd implication, after being schooled on how stupid your "now you expect me to call the 60 Minutes staff?" comment was, is intended to produce a "See, they didn't give the WH, etc., enough time to respond" gotcha.

(Thanks to Sycophant, Corky, Lamp, Alex, Speak, Red, Snoofy, Truth, Hamburglar, AU, and Doc for their excellent follow-ups to bell boi the coward's impotent comments.)

Doc's #89 is spot-on target:

Their infantile behaviors are geared towards validation, which means they crave the soothing pablum of propaganda. Usually in the form of propaganda as group-comforting fables (lies).

#35

#281 Rene Nicole Good did not forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate (LOL), or interfere with anything or anyone.

She was told to leave, and she was trying to leave.

Besides that, where in federal law does it state that any of those are capital offenses?

#281 There wasn't an order of events I saw.

#281 None of those.

She was told to leave.

She was leaving.

#80 Sycophant, it is clear that bell boi's idea of so-called "journalistic standards" comes from the James O'Keefe/Project Veritas/Joseph Goebbels School of Journalistic Standards and Practices Propaganda.

#77 Plenty of time.

Certainly before it had been, and I quote, "Our story was screened five times and cleared by both CBS attorneys and Standards and Practices."

Your absurd implication, after being schooled on how stupid your "now you expect me to call the 60 Minutes staff?" comment was, is intended to produce a "See, they didn't give the WH, etc., enough time to respond" gotcha.

Won't work, bell boi.

60 Minutes understands journalist standards.

You do not.

"You are the one making the allegation that they did reach out (you have ZERO proof of that) and are being ghosted. You call them, lazy-ass."

You've been bested.

#277 A traffic violation is not an offense against the United States.

It is an offense against the state in which said offense occurs.

And being told to leave, and proceeding to do so, isn't even an offense against the state (traffic violation).

It is called "following the lawful orders of a LEO."

bell boi, your #68 is not a good look for you.

Hell, it isn't a good look for anyone.

So, now you expect me to call the 60 Minutes staff? First off, I doubt they'd even take my call. Secondly, if they did, they probably wouldn't answer my question. You are the one making the allegation that they did reach out (you have ZERO proof of that) and are being ghosted. You call them, lazy-ass.

#68 | Posted by BellRinger at 2026-01-14 09:06 PM

#11 That was Ronald Reagan who released you and your fellow mental patients into the streets.

You're welcome.

#65 Gosh, bell boi, can't you.read?

I cited my source.

The source quoted the actual memorandum from the 60 Minutes reporter to her staff.

Apparently, your devotion to the lies is more important than seeing what's in front of you, liar.

#65 Gosh, bell boi, I didn't have to call 60 Minutes, either.

I just didn't rely on the Space Nazi's Nazi bar for information.

For example, I read the site I cited earlier, and knew on December 23rd that 60 Minutes had been ghosted.

Why didn't you know that, liar?