I will be interested to see if this turns out to be (as I have maintained from the beginning) a case in which the DoJ broke the chain of custody of purported classified materials. They did not execute an inventory in concert with Trump or his lawyers, nor did they execute document-by-document custody receipts. As matters stand, I think it will be impossible for the DoJ to PROVE that any classified documents they claim as being kept by Trump were in Trump's custody. Trump could say "I don't recognize any of those materials," and they would have nothing to prove he had custody of them (no receipts).
Of course, if the materials were unclassified, there would be no receipts. And---again---no proof that Trump had classified materials. Anybody who has worked with classified custody will understand what I am talking about.
Absent a case for contributory negligence, I agree. Rational minds await more information. I don't understand this Lynch mentality.
I'm only tired of stupidity. "Almost complete replicas" means "different." It is called a family resemblance. Not identical. We reserve that for actual twins. Even fraternal twins are not identical.
I don't have to demonstrate anything. You are the one proposing this fantasy, so you get to be the one to prove it by providing evidence. Like, for example, a video of someone other than Biden being made up to look like him. That would be evidence. Everything else about this has been speculation and supposition, and reading things out of unclear photographs. I even look different in photographs, and I'm not doing anything to change. Biden is a perfect stooge and there would be no reason to replace him. You lack motive for such a plot.
Somebody declines involuntary servitude to risk death in an imperial war, and you can only think of it as a lack of patriotism? I guess you must despise the 13th and 14th amendments to the Constitution. Who is the patriot here?
And how did John Kerry "dodge the war" when he served in Vietnam? (Not that I have any respect for him, but facts are facts.)
The mermaid theory is more credible.
They are alleging what amounts to contributory negligence, so let's see their case.
This is so tiresome. Joe and James are immediately distinguishable, though the reasons are subtle. My two brothers and me look/ed all alike, and no one would even dream that any of us could substitute for another. This is something we've been used to for thousands of years, folks.
In the case of Clinton, it was her theme for no follow-up. In what I said, I emphasized that it was useful for prosecutions (follow-up), but not for what to do next to prevent more of the same. That is still true, and your allusion to Clinton is off-target.
I've got plenty of logic, based on factual knowledge. I was alleging nothing else, and you have nothing to say against it, except to compare me to morons. And then, with wounded pride, celebrate your ignorance.
Your ability to target the truth is reflected in your wild and untrue speculations about me (that I am vaxxed, am a loser, and hide behind money). Humans are indeed pathetic when they follow your path of pride in supposition.
I make a big distinction between what I "believe" and what I know. I am trained as a scientist to be aware of that distinction and what makes the difference. You don't know, and you don't care. You are happy to think that belief is knowledge.
As for 2 trillion dollars, who knows where it went? And what difference does it make? It is irrecoverable, a total loss, and the lesson is that the parties responsible for it cannot be trusted. Looking for evidence may be of interest for purposes of prosecution, but that shouldn't stop corrective action at the top.
Most of the "psyops" I have encountered are complete bullshit conspiracy theories. It is appalling to see how many self-selected bright guys fall for this nonsense without questioning it. The problem is that they only pose questions from a standpoint of total ignorance (flat earth, chemtrails). They seem to be unable to get the difference between an "open mind" and an empty mind. The other "psyops" are straightforward falsehoods and propaganda surrounding events like covid-19 and Ukraine. Yet another "psyop" is the egocentric belief that one is endowed with special knowledge (through rejection of all objective evidence)---so as to draw totally unsupported conclusions about what I believe, the truth of government reports, and of "the narrative." You wonder about me. And the problem is, with no connection to the perspective of how to parse evidence, you will always be in a state of wonder.
More blurs. You really think fine detail (wing outline) will be discernible when the entire fuselage is a blur? Who says the wings were able to penetrate into the Pentagon? Or even all the fuselage? The main deck was probably the only major structure that wasn't obliterated. About the size of the hole.
The image of the ALCM cruise missile is a hoax. Those were all military deliverable product and no airline livery would ever be painted on them. (I worked next to the building where they were manufactured.) It is altogether the wrong size for the hole, far too small (the fuselage diameter is only 2 feet).
I don't need to have a theory when I can refer to the facts. Your theory somehow requires a missile 20 feet long and 2 feet in diameter to make an 8-foot-diameter hole by collision. But you don't have any evidence beyond blurry photos and a very inaccurate assessment of dimensions. An AGM-86 would barely be visible in the video, being MUCH smaller than a 757.
And how does your theory explain the radar track of Flight 77 from takeoff to the Pentagon? How does it explain the loss of people? How does it explain the multitude of people who saw it arrive and identified it as an airplane? How does it explain the airplane wing being observed clipping off a lamp post?---which would have caused an AGM-86 to auger into the ground at that point. How does it explain the airborne observer who watched it approach and identified it as an airplane? It doesn't...and it can't. It is bunk, and you are deliberately denying all the factual evidence. It is easy enough to get confirmation of wreckage and debris of an airplane. I am sorry that you think it is more important to nurse your pet obsession than it is to understand the truth.
Not doing. Nothing better than contrails, if you want to reflect sunlight.
This image is nothing but blurs. The airplane is mainly a fuselage (polished aluminum) visible as a streak, the wings having the same brightness as the ground background and therefore not particularly visible. (Matching background sky brightness was an Army Air Force research project for airplane invisibility in World War II. It worked perfectly, but was effective only in the direction it was designed for.)
How stupid are you? Pretty damn stupid, because there is no way in the world a Scud missile could fly such a trajectory. (I would happen to know, because I have modeled those trajectories.) And anyone who knew anything about Scuds would also know that. Tell me then why Flight 77 was radar-tracked from takeoff to crash? And why no one noticed a Scud launch? You are a category of person who will deny the facts in front of your face.
The ELCA has been a pandering church since its beginning. Ordination of women (prohibited by scripture) is a sign. Difficult to find true, confessional Lutherans.
And if anyone did the math, they would quickly discover that the physical requirements are so vast, the idea is a non-starter. Useful only for headlines that can jerk the uneducated public around. We can't come close to the energy and mass dissipation of a volcanic eruption, and even those events have effects of only limited duration.
"The isotope"? Methinks you have confused physical chemistry with biology. A coronavirus is a member of the "flu" family, which doesn't mean that there are no differences. There sure as hell was something that put my wife and me down for a week with distinctive symptoms. ("There are no zebras. It was just an attack of a horse variant.") The reality of the virus implies nothing about the (un)wisdom of taking mRNA therapy.
I'm willing to agree that many cases of flu were listed as "covid" for the sake of ulterior motives. I tried to do an analysis of covid vs. flu vs. pneumonia statistics, but could not get data on the # covid and the # (covid+flu). The two were being conflated in the data, is my surmise.
Not really. The sequence of colors is different. The French flag has the white stripe/bar in the center; the Russian flag has it on the top/side.
For the longest time, Algeria was categorized as a department of France proper. More than just a colony. Hard to exclude Algerians.
Indistinguishable from not hiding, or having anything to hide. Fighting wildfires is dangerous work, even from the air. It's all supposition. I'm a retired person with no fixed routine or obligations. Isn't that a great cover operation? So, what conspiracy am I supporting?
Come up with evidence, and we can talk. Supposition is not evidence. Just because some businesses provide legitimate services to government agencies is not evidence of participation in a conspiracy. I'm sure newsstands sold newspapers and cigars to Al Capone, but were not involved in any Mafia affairs.
Thanks for the clear hearing. I would say I am a skeptical realist: Is there anything in the glass at all? Is there even a glass? I am increasingly interested in the ethos that says "Question everything," yet goes whole hog for the most outlandish conspiracy fantasies, seeking only confirmation bias without any questioning. This is a mental pathology.
If you want to say something intelligible, please do so. You are simply yet another example of how people who have no evidence or argument resort to personal attacks, the basest form of fallacy.
My take is that Zelensky knows perfectly well that Ukraine is doomed and he is preparing the narrative of "If only you had assisted us, we would have won! It's all your fault! You stabbed us in the back!"
When the Russian columns are converging on Kiev, and the Ukrainian army exists only as generals at headquarters, and the U.S. stands on the sidelines, biting its lip and fingering its top hat, Zelensky will be looking for a hidey-hole like a rat trying to escape fire. I won't envy him, but neither will I feel any sympathy.
His thought seems to be crystalizing in this direction. Leading up to this point, he was more circumspect in his opinion (possibility rather than probability).
This is Old Hat. The Japanese in World War II sent balloons adrift across the Pacific with the objective of starting forest fires in the U.S. Pacific coast forests. They achieved some fires (I think in Oregon), but the program was essentially ineffective.
Not particularly. The atmosphere provides plenty of oxygen already. Accelerants are especialy volatile fuels, not oxidizers.
Perhaps "fateful awe" might come close. Imagine having a really big but friendly elephant in the home. Any stray move could crush you. It concentrates the attention. You don't sass back and you are always mindful of walking in its ways.
But there is something to what NanaQ45 has to say. My parents lived the principle that they were Forces of Nature, not to be quibbled with. No argument was relevant to any outcome. That instills obedience, which is a survival trait. They loved us dearly, showed it, and we believed it completely, and thus loved them well in return. They were right. It is more important in parenting to be respected, than loved. The love will come, but without a foundation of respect, it will be fickle.