A retraction should require naming the false sources who initially lied to the reporters.

Sources should be protected. Folks who purposely plant false stories, for personal gain should be exposed.

"You can argue I'm a fence sitter all day and it's true."

I thought you hadn't decided on that.

"That's a stupid way of pretending it didn't happen."

I'm not saying it didn't happen. I'm saying the folks most upset by HRC's comment were deplorable.

"These comments were directed at millions of people."

Throw a rock at a pack of mongrels; the one who yelps is the one who got hit.

" You need to leave us alone, and we need to leave you alone."

We can start by ending the $10 Billion/yr taker status of North Carolina.

Will you be returning this year's $10 billion as well?

" This incident looks like a skilled and motivated individual murdered another individual in a small city in Utah."

Red state, red city.

Send in the military!!!

" Everyone thought the insurance executive shooter was a criminal mastermind until he was caught at a McDonald's eating hashbrowns"

It's always the hashbrowns. Always.

"Bell is not ignored"

He lies a lot. You're surprised he gets corrected a lot?

In fact, sometimes he lies ... just to be corrected.

" you believe Trump's deal was staged?"

I keep trying not to, but the unanswered questions abound:

When seen without the tea bag, there never appeared to be any damage. Wounds don't heal that fast.

Additionally, cartilage doesn't grow back.

The presiding doctors never had a press conference. After an assassination attempt?!? That's never happened in ANYBODY's lifetime.

SS scurried photographers into place.

A crane LOWERED an American flag.

SS violated protocol by allowing the subject to stand, and get back in the line of fire.

To all those facts: Why? What's the explanation?

"The mid-aged man not the shooter."

Let me guess ... he spoke Spanish?

"it's yet to be seen that he has destroyed the economy."

He promised to bring down prices on day one. He's brought down the price of NOTHING.

And the value of the dollar has dropped double digits.

But Trump has made over a billion dollars, so it's all okay, right?

"You're fuzzy on the concept of "behavior"."

In Eb's defense, he was quoting me.

"so you can see that Zed is lying as well?"

On the contrary.

Zed is telling the truth, and you're carrying water.

Have you seen the segment where Trump says he'll definitely release the JFK files, and definitely release the MLK files ...

... and then stumbles when asked if he'd release the Epstein Files ... ?

Or do you watch one of those outlets that would NEVER air something like that?

The judge literally claimed this was NOT an election interference case.

Corruption squared.

These folks signed a form under penalty of perjury THEY WERE the legitimate electors, when they knew they weren't.

Their sole "proof" was they lost the election. That's it.

"I never mentioned ambition, I said opportunist.

Okay.

Aside from the two words meaning roughly the same, how on earth did you decide Trump was the lesser opportunist?!?

At least Harris didn't look at everyone else like a potential mark. Trump would rip off his grandmother if he could.

And me, I would call anyone who gets caught stealing from a children's charity, a raging ------- opportunist.

"Then why didn't Biden DoJ use them?"

Maybe because Clinton is in the files.

But that's not what's stopping Trump.

"-Then why didn't Biden DoJ use them?"

They were sealed until 2024:

From Google AI: January 2024: A batch of documents containing roughly 900 pages was unsealed by court order. These records were related to a civil defamation case filed against Maxwell by victim Virginia Giuffre. The release was highly anticipated but mainly included figures whose names had already been connected to the case.

By then, slo-mo Garland would've been too late.

"YOu believe you already know what's in those files."

Well, he's basing that on pretty solid evidence, wouldn't you say?

Personally, I've NEVER seen Trump react to ANYTHING like the Epstein Files.

Clearly, there's SOMETHING in those files that ------ the schitttt out of him.

" Is where I mentioned evaluating Trump positively in the room with us Danforth?"

Who'd you vote for?

You mentioned ambition as the barometer.

Are you actually pretending Trump was the LESS ambitious candidate?!?

" Trying examining her actions through that lens and you'll see why so many of us think she was unfit."

And Trump somehow PASSES that test?!?

Clearly, you're the one who's "unfit".

" If thats your "good", you've lost the argument."

What a riot.

Your "argument" is law enforcement shouldn't use social media as a tool.

" bUt MaIl-In BaLlOts ArE SeCuRE!"

Oddly, this proves they are:

A wierd one-off, with the attempted number of fraudulent votes barely above zero. Nothing at scale. Nothing worse than the garden-variety single-vote fraud.

And, because of the current safeguards, the perp was caught.

"If I misunderstood you then, please tell me"

I'm just stating MATH.

Any place with the greatest monetary opportunities will also have the greatest income inequality. Those two go hand in hand.

Any surprise they exist side by side with each other means you don't understand the equation behind it

"California, which has the most income inequality."

The greatest opportunity ALWAYS accompanies the greatest income inequality.

That's the equation.

" the only secure, trusted record keeping method is in person"

That's the easiest to manipulate, in many different ways.

Why shouldn't EVERY voter decide how he or she wants to vote? What business it it of yours, unless your business is to PREVENT certain people from voting?

You CLAIMED you want it easier for the legal voter to cast a legal vote. What's easier than allowing the voter to participate how they choose?