Free Republic

Here’s one when China’s leader came on:

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/april-22-2021-at-the-invitation-of-u-s-president-joe-biden-news-photo/1232476888

How do they know who voted for Trump?

Love it

https://www.newsweek.com/after-parler-ban-rein-big-tech-now-cease-being-free-citizens-opinion-1560631

"...The rationale given by all these Big Tech behemoths is that Parler doesn't do enough to moderate the violent threats its users make on its platform. This is rich, coming from companies that host and circulate Facebook and Twitter, where violent threats proliferate on a daily basis. Twitter has even gone to court, on free speech grounds, to protect the use of its site for organizing protests..."

I searched Amazon for the reviews then bought the item from eBay.

I saw the original article. They seem to piece together quotes e.g. McConnell is furious. Looks fake. Says (anonymous) sources say....

Try buying from eBay.com

They did not prove that Trump threatened Zelinsky to withhold aid unless they investigate the Bidens. Quid Pro Quo or something for something didn’t happen because where is the quo? No investigation was done in exchange for the release of aid. Zelinsky didn’t even know there was a delay in the aid until he saw it in Politico. Zelinsky himself said there was no such exchange and no pressure. They say Trump asked just to affect the election. Well Trump didn’t receive any data and if he did you can’t prove what he planned to use the data for. Election was affected so again no quo. They have Bolton a former employee that Trump fired saying that Trump said he was witholding aid unless They investigate. That’s a he said she said because Trump says he never said that. Besides why should we believe Bolton more than Zelinsky. Bolton has a motive to lie: he was fired. A video was found of a interview by the Ukraine news of what Bolton said about the Trump Zelinsky call. Bolton said the meeting was warm and cordial and that corruption was very important to this administration.

Bolton’s response appears to contradict three key accusations Democrats have been making against President Trump in demanding his impeachment and removal from office:

1.      That Trump used the meeting to pressure and coerce Zelensky (the calls were “warm and cordial”),

2.      That Trump wouldn’t meet with Zelensky unless the Ukraine president helped meddle in the next U.S. election (Trump was planning a meeting in Warsaw), and

3.      That Trump is lying when he says his phone calls with Zelensky focused on concerns about corruption in Ukraine.

In the video, what Ambassador Bolton tells the reporter appears to discredit the Democrats’ narrative:

“I will be meeting with President Zelensky. He and President Trump have already spoken twice. The president called to congratulation President Zelensky on his election and on his success in the parliamentary election.

“They were very warm and cordial calls. We’re hoping they’ll be able to meet in Warsaw for a few minutes together, because the success of Ukraine, maintaining its free, its system of representative government, a free market economy, a free of corruption, and dealing with the problems of the Danbass in the Crimea are high priorities here, obviously, but high priorities for the United States, as well.”

CNSNews Reader,

I am really frustrated with this impeachment coverage live in CSPAN2. It needs to be said that the House is accusing Trump of what Biden absolutely DID: threaten to withhold 1B to Ukraine unless they fire the prosecutor looking into Burisma Holdings where son Hunter sits on the board. Search YouTube under Biden fires prosecutor. The Biden's did receive large sums of money in return which IS bribery.

military salaries

http://www.airforce.com/benefits/enlisted-pay/?m=2012easearch&pl=google&med=cpc

they do make less than the private sector even after 20
years of service,

govt employees on the PERS system in CA have high salaries and get 5-10 percent raises even in this economy. a low level fireman in the small city i live in gets 100K in salary and that was back in 1996. This is not to say all the employees do well but a significant number do. Why don’t we make them pay more out of pocket for those making over 100k?

military salaries

http://www.airforce.com/benefits/enlisted-pay/?m=2012easearch&pl=google&med=cpc

they do make less than the private sector even after 20
years of service,

govt employees on the PERS system in CA have high salaries and get 5-10 percent raises even in this economy. a low level fireman in the small city i live in gets 100K in salary and that was back in 1996. This is not to say all the employees do well but a significant number do. Why don’t we make them pay more out of pocket for those making over 100k?

correction: so why are we “not” asking them to contribute more for out of pocket? I am speaking as a private sector employee. I have worked with some of these service people who have been trained and they are incredibly talented people who if they had worked private sector jobs would have been paid much more. Instead they have chose to serve our country and for some serve in hopes of getting a college education which they could not afford any other way. These are decent people.

I disagree with the Health care part of it. From a common sense point of view our military service people have always been greatly underpaid so they do not have much in the way of out of pocket income. Their healthcare and other benefits are no where near what government employees (actually on all levels) are receiving. Many government employees receive incredible medical and other benefits, have greater salaries so why are we asking them to contribute more for out of pocket? They are paid more and their benefits are far better than the private sectors. While our military service employees even now are paid greatly under what is paid at the private sector level.

That payroll tax cut was SUPPOSE to be temporary. It was put in place for 2 years so that people would have a little more money to spend. Some say to stimulate the economy. Apparently people receiving it didn’t notice otherwise they would not be complaining that it’s gone. That tax break was a very small percent.

I don’t understand why anyone who voted for Obama esp because they said he would continue the Bill Clinton years for them should complain. That means they SHOULD have accepted the Bush tax cuts to expire for everyone and phase back the Clinton tax rates. That little payroll tax break is nothing in comparison.

Fiscal Cliff included expiration of Bush tax cuts, the payroll tax cut expiring, and sequestration (automatic cuts).

The media made many believe that if we only tax those making 200K and above we would have avoided the fiscal cliff. Um that amount of revenue would only pay for 8 days of the spending they have now and yes they are spending on borrowed money, money they don’t have: a credit card so to speak. That 200K break was only to avoid the expiration of the Bush tax cuts “part” of the Fiscal Cliff. It does not and never was intended to address sequestration or the automatic cuts. Many of the MSM lied to you about that. I believe some in Congress and the President “have” agreed in the recent past to reform the tax code further to cover those making 200K or more but that this could not be done by the end of 2012. Some argue it should be 100K or more. So enjoy your tax break for 2013. Next year will be different.

The automatic cuts will happen if the current government cannot “balance” the budget. The pass 4 years they operated on “no” budget because they could not agree to one. This should be interesting to see how they are going to fix this.

Some who voted for Obama say we need to help the poor. Put your money where your mouth is then. Congress did pass a law allowing people to voluntarily pay more taxes. When Obamacare phases in citizens who previously did not have health insurance will have to buy it. Those in a lower income level will quality for Medicaid whereas before they could not. So we will have “free” healthcare for some. Hehe I just said that to be funny. Of source it’s not free. When the need for spending goes up the working class will have to pay for it.

A sad part about Obamacare is those currently working 40 hours a week will be cut to 30 hours a week so their employer would not (some could not pay) have to pay them health care benefits. The um Federal government will be able to help them with subsidies but with 30 hours a week they won’t be able to pay the rent. Nevertheless a number of them voted for this current government and wanted what they can get from it. I didn’t vote for it.

After reading that article my first thought was is that the real reason he was pulled out or is it that the school can’t handle her son? Being autistic may mean he can do well in math (which he did), but he would not be able to do well in other subjects which was the case. Pushing someone at too young in age, according to development theory, is not a good thing. Nevertheless this child may just very well be strongly mentally ill. Someone who said they were a neighbor to that family said the younger one (when initial reports said the oldest one did it) was the one likely to commit such a crime.

I wondered after reading about the shooting how that kid knew how to shoot. Later I found out it was his mother who took the kid to the target range and got them to learn how to shoot. “She” trusted her kid with guns. Neighbors who knew the family said that the younger son was likely to committ such a crime: killing lots of people. It seems she is to blame.

“He really wants to redistribution to those outside the USA. He’s not going to care when your EBT card doesn’t work.”

Just ask the Sandy victims in the very blue state of NY:

Too bad I already have your vote.

You are right. Wording is important and I did notice your point about the media distortion during the presidential election. It’s not a tax increase but leaving things the way they are.

That is a good idea. 500K and up is fairer. It would be funny if Boehner came back with a proposal to increase taxes on “the top 2%” not “250K and up”. The top 2% would miss people like Romney but cover people like JayZ.

We should still call them on their lies. They want people to believe they are helping the deficit with increased taxes. However they plan on increased spending.

They are asking for more $$$ in bailouts. Look what happened to GM. After their bankruptcy and government takeover GM went on to lose 40% profits. The government cannot run a business. The only thing they get out of it is to guarantee $$$ and jobs to union employees who in turn must (yes by force) provide $$$ and support for the Dem Party. Thus creating a new class of elite that are NOT poor.

Why are we giving entitlements to people who are not in a period of need then?

Why must small businesses pay increased taxes if all it’s used for is increased spending?

When Bush was in office the deficit went up to 7 trillion during his 8 year term: complete with long term Iraq war, lots of troops and weapons used (far more military spending). But under Obama where he sends some aid here or there the deficit doubles to 16 trillion during his 4 year term! Yet that is not enough for them.

The whole idea of the fiscal cliff was to reduce the deficit. They need to do something about their out of control spending. The economy is just going to get worse and pumping more $$$ into it with our credit going bad means inflation, lost jobs, and a Carter economy. “We” know whose fault that is.

R/e Media pressure: it does make a difference. Conservative talk radio and news does affect how they have to report the news. Example: For awhile they we got Obama & Co. forced to report on Bengazhi (sp?). They had to because the conservative news outlets and Fox news wouldn’t let it go.