NATO is a defensive treaty. They have absolutely no obligation to support or get involved in offensive operations.

He's on his own.

Which of his kids has volunteered to join the military to support this war? Oh... none of them? Big surprise. Republicans are such f-ing cowards.

Biden had a child in the military, who was deployed to Iraq. If anyone is curious what not-a-coward looks like.

She had better stay away from windows. She is liable to get unexplainably sucked out of one in the near future if she is not careful.

So two school shootings, both by Islamic supporters, for what? What was the goal?

#18 | Posted by oneironaut

Probably the same goal Trump had when he bombed an Iranian elementary school.

Violent criminals are not the low hanging fruit. Violent criminals do not want to be found. Violent criminals do not check in and update their residence information and pursue the process of getting work permits and pursuing naturalization.

Immigrants who follow the process, who follow the law, who do what their told are the low hanging fruit. They are easy to find, and easy to push around. And easy to deport.

Republicans and ICE are too incompetent to find the criminals. They are going after the good immigrants, leaving the criminals alone, because that's the only way they can get anyone deported. They only care about boosting their numbers. Actually would prefer to have the criminals here, because if they deport all the criminals they won't have anyone left to hate.

How many pushes have we seen to be carbon free by, say, 2035?

#26 | Posted by BellRinger

Can you see the difference between transitioning away from oil over the course of 10 years vs transitioning over the course of a month?

None of you can deny my point.

#26 | Posted by BellRinger

There you go. I just did. Now are you going to deny mine, or just run away?

It is funny watching lefties whine about the price of oil when they want to regulate its usage out of existence.

Consistency? Nah!

#22 | Posted by BellRinger

I do want oil prices to be higher, for it to be taxed more over time to encourage people to use safer and more socially responsible alternatives.

But I also realize that people currently rely on oil for heating and getting to work. And that it is not reasonable for people to switch to alternatives (electric cars, heat pumps) in a short period of time.

I advocate for increasing the price of oil over the course of years and decades. While you are talking about increasing its price by almost 50% over the course of three weeks.

I want consistent, deliberate, and gradual policy change so that people can make informed decisions about the future and adjust gradually. Not conservative chaos that results in 50% oil spikes and American citizens getting caught in a war zone without any warning.

So yes, your strawman is pretty idiotic.

We have the US strike maps, and the school was actually one of the targets on the map.

#4 | Posted by Corky

Time to pull out the Sharpie!

Why is US oil not first used in the US and the 'extra' sold on the world market?

#33 | Posted by justagirl_idaho

Becuase we have a free market economy. Oil gets sold to the highest bidder, so if another country is willing to pay more for it, it will get sold to them, driving the price up locally.

The US is now a net exporter of oil. Though I am not sure we have the cross country infrastructure to actually transport all of the oil we have from the places it is produced to the places where it is needed.

The way to actually reduce the price in the way you are suggesting is to restrict or ban exports. You force an increase of supply in the US, driving down prices.

But, if you do allow the 'extra' to be sold on the world market, how do you choose? Which oil companies get screwed over selling on the local market with depressed prices, and how do you choose which ones are the 'winners' which get to reap the high profits the non-fascist/non-goverment controlled prices on the international market?

I guess the other thing he could do would be to put a high export tariff on oil. That should also force more oil supply to stay local, as well fixing the problem of picking winners and losers. The only winner would be the US government.

What can they possibly do to reduce gas prices?
other than to reduce their own cut from a gallon of gas....what else can the government do to lower gas prices?
#28 | Posted by eberly

Release from the strategic reserve.

Not advocating for that. Strategic reserves are currently at a historically low level, so it would probably actually be a bad idea. Just listing options.

So, another idea that does nothing except to stick it to middle class folks leaving the uber wealthy untouched.

#9 | Posted by eberly

What do you consider to be middle class?

The wage cap is currently $184k. I feel that if you are making $184k then you are probably up past middle class, at least upper middle class.

Though I do agree with you if you are pointing out that most of the wealthy have their income in capital gains. I would be completely in favor of expanding Social Security to include ALL income.

Relatedly, I would also be in favor of treating all income the same. So that there is no special "capital gains" rate, and all income, regardless of source, is taxed under the same progressive rates.

Does anyone here remember the conservative outrage and meltdown when NYC tried to tax large sodas? That was just a tax at the local level, not a prohibition or regulation of it.

Now the is a Conservative in the White House and you have RFK trying to regulate it at the national level and... crickets.

#6 | Posted by eberly

True. That was my first throught. Income taxes at the lower end are kinda negligible compared to payroll taxes.

You have no concept of what's transpiring.
You think it's localized to the middle east.
Moron

#13 | Posted by oneironaut

Of course it is not localized to the middle east. It is localized to the Epstein files.

And my other option was Kamala Harris. Enough said.

#16 | Posted by BellRinger

Did Republicans not have a primary?

I wonder if any Republicans are even aware that this shows blatant disregard for Constitutional Separation of Powers.

#3 | Posted by snoofy

The justice department is part of the executive branch, so there are no constitutional powers that are supposed to be separate.

Rather, Republicans have undone all of the norms and reforms established after Nixon and the Watergate scandal.

I leared on DR some time ago, that agencies created by congress have a life of their own and cannot be deleted by anybody even the president.

#6 | Posted by john_savage1

Agencies created by Congress cannot be deleted by the President. They can be deleted by Congress, though.

That is what is called separation of powers. Congress has powers that the President does not.

And it's not only Republicans. There are alot of progressive/Democrat rich and famous that love diddling kids.

#3 | Posted by boaz

Then why is Trump protecting them?

Why are YOU protecting them?

I want ALL of them to be exposed. Republican or Democrat. And especially people in power that Russia has compromising material on, so that they can be removed as a danger to the US, as pawns of Russia.

"driving away from a collision"....
and you blatant lying idiots don't know what that really means ?

#1 | Posted by shrimptacodan

They dropped the charges. Do you know what that means? It means they didn't have a case, because she did nothing wrong.

What's the excuse? These records didn't exist until Feb 2025?

#6 | Posted by Petrous

What do YOU believe that the Biden administration should have gone with that knowledge?

Are you saying they should have charged Trump?

Are you saying they should have leaked the information to try to embarrass him and hurt him politically?

The fact that the Biden administration was unwilling to weaponize the justice system against their political opponents only proves that they are better people than pretty much all conservatives. What it does not do is prove that Trump is not a pedophile.

#16 | Posted by eberly

I think your question was a valid question and that some of the posters here and that some posters here knee-jerk attack you because they cannot separate out their emotions.

On the other hand, the answer to your question was clear to me just from reading the summary and embedded tweet. So I can see why it could feel to other people that you were being intentionally obtuse. I just mark it down to laziness and your inherent bias against Democrats, and the impulse to immediately assume that they are "just as bad" as Republicans.

But you do seem to be able to acknowledge the facts when they are pointed out to you, which puts you way ahead of the curve vs most other conservatives, in my opinion.

It's the weirdest thing.
All these years of the Right yapping about how things like this are the end of the world.
Now it doesn't matter?

#5 | Posted by Zed

It is not weird at all. Conservatives accuse their opponents of things they ARE doing or WANT to do.

The flip side of the coin is once it comes out that they or other members of their tribe are going it, they go into full coverup mode.

What is Trump's endorsement worth these days?
Fiddy cents?
#1 | Posted by Corky

Depends if it is just for Republicans, or for the electorate at large.

It is probably still pretty valuable during a Republican primary. But is now worth less than nothing for a general election.

I'd add 4) about women and children were raped and murdered because of open borders and even
though that's a 1000 percent true, that FACT would fall on deaf ears.

#29 | Posted by shrimptacodan

ICE agents have a higher homicide rate than illegal immigrants. The illegal immigrant homicide rate was less than 2 per 100,000. There are only 22,000 ICE agents and they have murdered AT LEAST two people... THIS YEAR (we are only 1/12 the way through the year). That is AT LEAST 5x the rate of murders of illegal immigrants.

That is 1000 percent true. But, you are a hack so it will fall on deaf ears.

I would MUCH prefer to have the illegal immigrants. At least they are likely to be decent people. ICE agents are just thugs on a power trip who cannot cut it being a productive member of society. So instead they terrorize the productive members of society.

Sometimes I have to wonder, just how much is Pres Trump projecting his own actions onto others with there unsubstantiated accusations.
#3 | Posted by LampLighter

Like, all of it.

That is a conclusion I came to a few years ago. If you want to know what crappy things conservatives are doing, then just look at what they are accusing Dems of (election fraud anyone?). Conservatives don't have empathy. They seem just inherently incapable of considering someone else's perspective. They can only imagine what they would do if they were in someone else's situation. So if someone is different from them they cannot understand the struggles that they have to deal with (discrimination, racism). And they project their own flaws on everyone else, assume that if THEY would do something (immoral, unethical, illegal) that everyone else would too, that everyone must share their own immorality and lack of ethics or integrity.