American Politics

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2962872]Why is it that some blue states, counties and cities are so inefficient? It shouldn't take Californians weeks to count votes.[/QUOTE]All those little Red Counties work so hard to hide the few Dem ballots it takes a couple of extra weeks of treasure hunting to find and count them.

All states have until Dec. 11 to certify their votes. I'm sure that late date, more than a month after the election day, was not established just because of some mythical "Blue state inefficiency. ".

And the nation must always allow for the usual losing Repub candidates in Federal, State and Local elections to get all their whining, crying, lying and accusations of rigging and stealing out of their and the court system. California would always figure highly among the plum prizes in such a Repub scam. Kansas would not.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnyrtjVTt9I[/URL]

So it turns out that Trans Nigerian boxer with male chromosomes is a man with a micro penis and undescended testicles and had the testosterone levels of a man. Shocker right LOL? No need to tie in a Russian conspiracy to this, just people being fair and reasonable. Hopefully they make him relinquish his Olympic Gold and they award it to the silver medalist. I feel so bad for all the women whose dreams he selfishly shattered at the Olympics. Thank god Russians stood up to this. At least they are good for something.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2962918]It would have been so much better to have lost WWI, ignored Germany's declaration of War Against the USA in WWII, let the NAZIs win 80 years sooner and just sent unrequited love letters to the North Koreans, right?

All of those American deaths combined and we can include Eisenhower's Vietnam War and GW Bush's 9-11 Attack, War in Iraq and War in Afghanistan barely put a dent in Trump's Mass Murder of Americans by simply defunding and removing the Pandemic Prevention team leadership from those Chinese labs in 2019 against all expert warnings for him not to do something so dangerous and stupid and his next decision to spend critical year 2020 lying about the inevitable outcome of that previous horrific decision.

AND the spectacular, historic economic downturn that followed as night follows day and as he was warned about from the get-go.

But nice try.[/QUOTE]There were 4550 American military members killed in Iraq and 2401 in Afghanistan. That's like a gnat on an elephant's ass compared to hundreds of thousands of Democrat war deaths. Bloodthirsty Democrats.

As you well know by now, my post was satirical. I believe correlations between the party of the president and (a) recessions and (b) American war deaths are mostly spurious. That is, coincidental. You can make a much stronger argument though that Roosevelt could have avoided U.S. involvement in World War II than you can that Trump could have avoided the 2020 recession and pandemic.

Vietnam was Eisenhower's war. Haha, yes, nice try. There were nine American fatal casualties in Vietnam during Eisenhower's terms.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2962966]There were 4550 American military members killed in Iraq and 2401 in Afghanistan. That's like a gnat on an elephant's ass compared to hundreds of thousands of Democrat war deaths. Bloodthirsty Democrats.

As you well know by now, my post was satirical. I believe correlations between the party of the president and (a) recessions and (b) American war deaths are mostly spurious. That is, coincidental. You can make a much stronger argument though that Roosevelt could have avoided U.S. involvement in World War II than you can that Trump could have avoided the 2020 recession and pandemic.

[B]Vietnam was Eisenhower's war. Haha, yes, nice try.[/b] There were nine American fatal casualties in Vietnam during Eisenhower's terms.[/QUOTE]If you can find any credible historical time-line for Eisenhower's Vietnam War that cites JFK or LBJ replacing the retreating French with USA Military in 1953/1954 and then spending the next 7 years trotting Diem around the country to sell the American people on the mindset that the Domino Theory (established by Ike) required the total USA commitment to fighting for and defending South Vietnam by word, deed and treaty, including harkening to images of USA war dead on the beaches of Normandy, all of which Ike did first and nobody else, and without using the word "expand" to accurately describe what JFK and LBJ did with Eisenhower's commitment to total War in Vietnam, I'll give you a cookie.

The fact that Ike "got out of dodge" right before the assassination of Diem and before Ike's maneuvering of American military personnel into harms way by land, sea and air as targets in that war until the inevitable strikes occurred that would force whoever took over from him to "expand" our military involvement in it is no different than when Trump "got out of dodge" just as his Pandemic viral spread had infected thousands more Americans, especially those who shunned vaccination on his insisting it was not necessary, only meant the majority of his American Mass Murder victims died after he was kicked out of office.

Disingenuous is too mild a word to use for that kind of argument.

Of course, Trump's American Mass Murder count is still just shy of the total number of American deaths in every military operation since the 1860 election of the first Repub president by 200,000 or 300,000 deaths, only because the number of American deaths under that first Repub was so astronomically high.

But with RFK Jr and Dr Oz on the mission, I am quite sure Trump's 2nd term has a damn good chance of seeing Trump succeed in beating that total number since 1860 by quite a lot.

And we'll probably get a historic shit storm of economic disaster even greater than the one he conjured up the first time around to boot.

A gentle reminder:

[B]1955 in the Vietnam War[/B]

[URL]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1955_in_the_Vietnam_War[/URL]#text=The%20 State%20 of%20 Vietnam%20 referendum, widely%20 known%20 as%20 South%20 Vietnam).

[QUOTE][b]8 to 11 May[/b]

During three days of talks in Paris among Dulles, French Prime Minister Edgar Faure, and the British, Faure proposed that both the U.S. and France withdraw from Vietnam because "Diệm is leading to a catastrophe." Dulles did not agree and indicated that the U.S. would continue to support Diệmeven if that support caused the French to withdraw from South Vietnam. [B]At this conference, in the words of historian Seth Jacobs, Vietnam became "America's war" rather than France's.[/b]15: 2115[/QUOTE]From that 1955 conference forward, there would only be an "expansion" or an "escalation" of Eisenhower's Vietnam War. It was no longer possible for any future USA president to "start" it or to "commit" us to it any more significantly by word, deed and treaty, whichever direction it went, than did Dwight Eisenhower. It would only change by matter of degree here and there, by the need to surge more troops into the region in order to finish it or to simply declare defeat, surrender and withdraw. Multiple subsequent presidents from both parties would find themselves having to choose one, the other or both.

However, none but Eisenhower could legitimately and accurately take credit or blame for turning it fully into America's War by word, deed and treaty.

[QUOTE=Tiny 12;2962867]Close to 100% of the members on this board have paid women for sex and have had PFP sex while traveling, like Gaetz allegedly did. By your standards board members should be automatically disqualified from becoming Attorney General. Are you willing to give that up Spidy? Are you willing to renounce your chance for becoming Attorney General of the United States of America, ever? I don't think so. [/QUOTE]Uh! Not sure where you're going that logic, but good luck with wherever you think it's going!

[QUOTE=Tiny 12;2962867]Somehow if you travel with a sugar baby it's trafficking, punishable by up to 10 years in prison...

And I'll point out that Gaetz and Joel Greenberg allegedly met the women on Seeking Arrangement. You have to be 18 years old to be on that site, ergo any woman who's under the age of 18 who's on the site lied about her age.[/QUOTE]

Tiny 12, oddly enough, that was the failed Joel Greenberg's defense, [i]"...I didn't know she was 17-yrs old", [b](...kkkk!),[/b][/i] before being carted of to prison for 11 years, Greenberg plead guilty to having sex with a 17-yrs old, who he knew was being paid for sex.

Under the law, irrespective of whether Gaetz and Joel Greenberg, knew or didn't know she was 18 and she intentionally lied on some sugar daddy dating website, it doesn't matter one iota, in the eyes of the law. As an AG only needs to show, "reckless disregard", in not knowing, the women you were sex trafficking. Especially since it was dozens of "drug-fueled sex parties", and wasn't very difficult to prove with Greenberg.

It's still a mystery (but not really, under a Trump admin and Repub Florida AG, where the records for some unknown reasons, remain sealed) as to why Gaetz wasn't indicted or charge with many of the same sexual criminal counts that Greenberg was indicted on. Since prosecutes had learned that Gaetz had had paid sex with the a 17-yr old, twice (2x) within the span of a day, in 2017.

Why prosecutors didn't indict Gaetz, is all very Jeffery Epistein, don't you think? But Greenberg, was still, either thrown under the bus, or volunteered to fall on the grenade, since he was already going down on a long list of other related charges?

Tiny 12 and Elvis 2008, keep defending and sympathizing with pedo, sex trafficking Gaetz and his long standing laundry list of sexual criminal activities, all you want, as your defense of pedo Gaetz, is just symptomatic of a larger Repub MAGA problem. That being, Trump, as a morally bankrupted president-elect.

[b]PS:[/b] BTW, I think Joel Greenberg, has already "ratted" Gaetz out as a pedo. Those sealed records/documents, once unsealed, are sure to be quite revealing, once a decent AG, actually files charges, against Gaetz this time.

Judging by all the Greenburg-Gaetz Venmo payments, this wasn't Gaetz's first 17 yr old rodeo, from a sugar daddy website. [URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/20/us/politics/matt-gaetz-venmo-payments-sex.html[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2962983]If you can find any credible historical time-line for Eisenhower's Vietnam War that cites JFK or LBJ replacing the retreating French with USA Military in 1953/1954 and then spending the next 7 years trotting Diem around the country to sell the American people on the mindset that the Domino Theory (established by Ike) required the total USA commitment to fighting for and defending South Vietnam by word, deed and treaty, including harkening to images of USA war dead on the beaches of Normandy, all of which Ike did first and nobody else, and without using the word "expand" to accurately describe what JFK and LBJ did with Eisenhower's commitment to total War in Vietnam, I'll give you a cookie.

The fact that Ike "got out of dodge" right before the assassination of Diem and before Ike's maneuvering of American military personnel into harms way by land, sea and air as targets in that war until the inevitable strikes occurred that would force whoever took over from him to "expand" our military involvement in it is no different than...[/QUOTE]Undoubtedly some Americans in the employ of our government have died in Ukraine. Russia says it's about 400, while the USA is coy. If Trump starts a nuclear conflict with Russia over Ukraine are you going to call it Biden's War?

Again, through 1960, Eisenhower's last full year in office, there were 9 American fatal casualties in Vietnam. Compare to 16,899, LBJ's last full year in office. (Republican Richard Nixon proceeded to wind down the war. There was only one death in 1974.).

[URL]https://www.archives.gov/research/military/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics[/URL]

In 1960, there were 900 American servicemen and women in Vietnam. In 1968 there were 536,100.

[URL]https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=11&psid=3844[/URL]

If you're going to use your illogical reasoning, then Democrat Harry Truman is the one that got us into the Vietnam war:

"No sooner did the French arrive back in Vietnam, with the guns of World War II barely gone cold, than fighting broke out against Ho's Viet Minh forces. At first, the United States remained officially neutral, even as it avoided any contact with Ho. In 1947, however, Truman asserted that USA Foreign policy was to assist any country whose stability is threatened by communism. Then the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950, plus the flow of aid from China and the Soviet Union to the Viet Minh, prompted Truman to reexamine Vietnam in a Cold War light.

Fearing that Vietnam, too, would become a communist state, he sent over transport planes and jeeps, along with 35 military advisers, as part of a multimillion-dollar aid package.

USA Involvement in the conflict would only deepen from there. By the end of Truman's presidency, the United States was funding more than one-third of France's war costs. ".

[URL]https://www.history.com/news/us-presidents-vietnam-war-escalation[/URL]

The reality is that most historians and nonpartisan, knowledgeable people blame Vietnam on LBJ.

Bloodthirsty Democrats! They don't give a damn how many people die because of their wars. Seven thousand dead in Bush's senseless Afghanistan and Iraq wars. And 616,698 in Democrat wars! That means if you're a young man in America, you're 88 times more likely to die in a Democrat War than a Republican War! Thank goodness we're going to have a Republican President in a few more months! We can only hope and pray that Biden doesn't get us into a war before then.

As some board members have a tough time recognizing satire, even you, please note.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2962966]As you well know by now, my post was satirical. I believe correlations between the party of the president and (a) recessions and (b) American war deaths are mostly spurious. That is, coincidental. [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]when Trump "got out of dodge" just as his Pandemic viral spread had infected thousands more Americans, especially those who shunned vaccination on his insisting it was not necessary, only meant the majority of his American Mass Murder victims died after he was kicked out of office.

Disingenuous is too mild a word to use for that kind of argument.

Of course, Trump's American Mass Murder count is still just shy of the total number of American deaths in every military operation since the 1860 election of the first Repub president by 200,000 or 300,000 deaths, only because the number of American deaths under that first Repub was so astronomically high.

But with RFK Jr and Dr Oz on the mission, I am quite sure Trump's 2nd term has a damn good chance of seeing Trump succeed in beating that total number since 1860 by quite a lot.

And we'll probably get a historic shit storm of economic disaster even greater than the one he conjured up the first time around to boot.[/QUOTE]A lot more people died from COVID during Biden's presidency than Trump's. Where were the COVID test kits when Omicron hit? Exactly how many N95 and equivalent masks did Biden get in the hands of people? Trump pushed the mRNA vaccines through the FDA and into the arms of people who wanted them in record time, saving hundreds of thousands of lives.

I share your concerns about RFK Jr, however he may turn out better than you think. That's if he lets the NIH and CDC operate normally. And he concentrates on things like improving the American diet instead of, for example, discouraging use of vaccines because of autism fears.

Trump didn't conjure up an economic disaster. That's ridiculous. The USA was in great shape going into COVID. When he left the presidency, except for our budget deficit and national debt, we were in better shape than the rest of the world. So what did Biden and the Democrats do? Even though employment and GDP were on the rise, they pumped an immense amount of government money into the economy, igniting inflation, and running unprecedented deficits considering the USA was at peace and the economy was doing well.

The biggest risk to the economy in a second Trump term is from his tariffs. And your Good Buddy Biden historically was just as bad as Trump on that issue. If he'd taken off the China tariffs, that would have had a favorable effect on inflation, and not only for the obvious reason, that importers were passing the cost of the tariffs onto consumers. Also, the effect of logistical and supply chain snafus on inflation wouldn't have been as great if Chinese products had been able to compete in the USA Market.

The second biggest risk from a second Trump term is deficit spending. Well, Biden and the Democrats showed in 2021/2022 they were even worse than the Republicans when they controlled the whole ball of wax (presidency, Senate, House) in 2017/2018.

Sincerely,

Neithersider Tiny

[QUOTE=Spidy;2963002]Uh! Not sure where you're going that logic, but good luck with wherever you think it's going!



Tiny 12, oddly enough, that was the failed Joel Greenberg's defense, [i]"...I didn't know she was 17-yrs old", [b](...kkkk!),[/b][/i] before being carted of to prison for 11 years, Greenberg plead guilty to having sex with a 17-yrs old, who he knew was being paid for sex.

Under the law, irrespective of whether Gaetz and Joel Greenberg, knew or didn't know she was 18 and she intentionally lied on some sugar daddy dating website, it doesn't matter one iota, in the eyes of the law. As an AG only needs to show, "reckless disregard", in not knowing, the women you were sex trafficking. Especially since it was dozens of "drug-fueled sex parties", and wasn't very difficult to prove with Greenberg.

It's still a mystery (but not really, under a Trump admin and Repub Florida AG, where the records for some unknown reasons, remain sealed) as to why Gaetz wasn't indicted or charge with many of the same sexual criminal counts that Greenberg was indicted on. Since prosecutes had learned that Gaetz had had paid sex with the a 17-yr old, twice (2x) within the span of a day, in 2017.

Why prosecutors didn't indict Gaetz, is all very Jeffery Epistein, don't you think? But Greenberg, was still, either thrown under the bus, or volunteered to fall on the grenade, since he was already going down on a long list of other related charges?

Tiny 12 and Elvis 2008, keep defending and sympathizing with ****, sex trafficking Gaetz and his long standing laundry list of sexual criminal activities, all you want, as your defense of **** Gaetz, is just symptomatic of a larger Repub MAGA problem. That being, Trump, as a morally bankrupted president-elect.

[b]PS:[/b] BTW, I think Joel Greenberg, has already "ratted" Gaetz out as a ***. Those sealed records/documents, once unsealed, are sure to be quite revealing, once a decent AG, actually files charges, against Gaetz this time.

Judging by all the Greenburg-Gaetz Venmo payments, this wasn't Gaetz's first 17 yr old rodeo, from a sugar daddy website. [URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/20/us/politics/matt-gaetz-venmo-payments-sex.html[/URL][/QUOTE]You wrote, "Under the law, irrespective of whether Gaetz and Joel Greenberg, knew or didn't know she was 18 and she intentionally lied on some sugar daddy dating website, it doesn't matter one iota..." Do you have a problem with a mens rea defense in general, or just if the accused is a Republican?

Gaetz was a lousy nominee for AG. The Senate would have rejected him. He's a bomb thrower. He has minimal legal experience and none in criminal law. He's never managed a large organization. He was accused of doing favors for people who gave him gifts in violation of House Rules. And of misappropriating campaign funds for personal use.

As to your reasons for rejecting him, they may be the ones the Christian right and feminists and many other Americans would believe are the most damning. But I imagine they'd be rejected by most board members. Here are some of the relevant statutes.

Whoever knowingly transports any individual...in any Territory or Possession of the United States, with intent that such individual engage in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. " 18 USC 2421.

Anyone owning, [B]using[/B], operating, or managing an "interactive computer service" and intending to promote or facilitate prostitution, is guilty of a felony under the Mann Act, punishable by up to ten years in prison. You can face aggravated charges if you [B]use[/B] or manage a computer network that promotes or facilitates the prostitution of five or more people. A conviction for aggravated promotion of prostitution can result in up to 25 years in prison. 18 USC 2421 A.

Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual to travel...in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in...any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. " 18 USC 2422 (2008).

If you transport a minor across state lines for prostitution, the penalties can be even more severe, [B]even if you don't know their age.[/B] This crime is a felony punishable by a minimum of ten years in prison and a maximum life sentence. 18 USC 2423.

[url]https://www.dougmurphylaw.com/texas-prostitution-across-state-lines#:~:text=If%20you're%20facing%20an,Mann%20Act%20for%20human%20trafficking.[/url]

[QUOTE=Spidy;2963002]

Tiny 12 and Elvis 2008, keep defending and sympathizing with pedo, sex trafficking Gaetz and his long standing laundry list of sexual criminal activities, all you want, as your defense of pedo Gaetz, is just symptomatic of a larger Repub MAGA problem. That being, Trump, as a morally bankrupted president-elect. [/QUOTE]No reason to keep talking about it, Soy Boy. You bragged about women. Now you got Pam Bondi who is gong to put a fork in your ass and all of the election denying, lawfare loving, Democratic douches.

And while you are gong off on giving 17 years, 11 months old women gifts to have sex wit them (OMG, that is do pedo), nothing quite says you love children more than some lame duck Democratic douche dip shit president launching missiles under the command of USA personnel into Russia. Ah yes, we Democratic douches love the children so much we want to jail men who have sex with them on one hand and then killing them on the other. That would be the ultimate Democratic douche line: We are launching missiles into Russia to save the children.

And now is perhaps the best time to ask. Why the fuck do you Democratic douches care so much about Ukraine? Pedo camps? Money laundering central? Satan worship? The irony is you call Trump Hitler while you douches literally are arming Ukrainian Nazis.

The fact that you advocate for saving the children while so many die at your hands is something I doubt a hypocritical douche like yourself can even understand.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2963076]A lot more people died from COVID during Biden's presidency than Trump's. Where were the COVID test kits when Omicron hit? Exactly how many N95 and equivalent masks did Biden get in the hands of people? Trump pushed the mRNA vaccines through the FDA and into the arms of people who wanted them in record time, saving hundreds of thousands of lives.

I share your concerns about RFK Jr, however he may turn out better than you think. That's if he lets the NIH and CDC operate normally. And he concentrates on things like improving the American diet instead of, for example, discouraging use of vaccines because of autism fears.

Trump didn't conjure up an economic disaster. That's ridiculous. The USA was in great shape going into COVID. When he left the presidency, except for our budget deficit and national debt, we were in better shape than the rest of the world. So what did Biden and the Democrats do? Even though employment and GDP were on the rise, they pumped an immense amount of government money into the economy, igniting inflation, and running unprecedented deficits considering the USA was at peace and the economy was doing well.

The biggest risk to the economy in a second Trump term is from his tariffs. And your Good Buddy Biden historically was just as bad as Trump on that issue. If he'd taken off the China tariffs, that would have had a favorable effect on inflation, and not only for the obvious reason, that importers were passing the cost of the tariffs onto consumers. Also, the effect of logistical and supply chain snafus on inflation wouldn't have been as great if Chinese products had been able to compete in the USA Market.

The second biggest risk from a second Trump term is deficit spending. Well, Biden and the Democrats showed in 2021/2022 they were even worse than the Republicans when they controlled the whole ball of wax (presidency, Senate, House) in 2017/2018.

Sincerely,

Neithersider Tiny[/QUOTE]LOL. Even after I pointed out how disingenuous the argument would be to attribute the American deaths due to Trump's Pandemic after Trump "got out of Dodge" (was kicked out of office) when his ushering in the Pandemic, horrible mismanagement of it and assurances / lies that nobody really needs to take a vaccine for it since it "is disappearing and will go away without a vaccine" meant thousands more Americans were infected, carriers and infecting even more thousands of Americans and killing them, there you went again and pushed that horse crap spin about "more Americans died under Biden" then under Trump.

Uh. Yeah. We know that. And by now ALL of us, even you, know why. And it wasn't because of something Biden started, ushered in or exacerbated. BTW, you know the outgoing Trump Administration was too busy organizing and inciting an Insurrection based on his Big Lie about the election being stolen to meet with the incoming Biden Administration to brief them or smoothly transition from one administration to the next on ANYTHING that was crashing down around our ears and continuing to Mass Murder Americans by the thousands per week, right?

It was the same with the American deaths in Eisenhower's Vietnam War. Ike "got out of Dodge" after he committed America and the American Military fully and completely to that War by word, deed and treaty, officially replacing the lost and retreating French military personnel with USA Military personnel and turning it into [B]America's War[/B] instead of a French war in May 1955.

From your History link:

[QUOTE]USA Involvement in the conflict would only deepen from there. By the end of Truman's presidency, the United States was funding more than one-third of France's war costs. ".

https://www.history.com/news/us-pres...war-escalation
[/QUOTE]"Funding" 30% or 100% of somebody else's War cost is not making it OUR War. By the use of the very words, "France's war", your link confirms my contention and the contention of the historical time-line link I provided previously that it was, uh, "France's war" at the end of the Truman presidency and not "America's War. " But it was absolutely and inarguably, "America's War" by the end of Eisenhower's FIRST TERM as president.

Typically pro Repub Mainstream Media has had to talk out of both sides of its mouth on this blissfully easy to grasp reality in order to blame the Vietnam War on Democratic president's instead their beloved Repub President Dwight Eisenhower. Hell, they started doing it by the 1970's!

In a single breath or sentence they would twist some goofy convoluted pretzel assertion like, "President JFK (or LBJ) involved us in the Vietnam War when he escalated and / or increased troops blah blah blah. ".

WTF? LOL. One can only "escalate" or "increase" something that had already started.

And in this case there is nothing vague about it in the historical time-line; President Dwight Eisenhower turned it into America's War no later than May 1955.

Yeah, he was fine with having our Military personnel simply stand in as targets for the enemy on land, sea and air and not shoot back in those early years. And as long their docile American Military personnel targets under Eisenhower were not yet officially authorized by their Commander-in-Chief to shoot back, oh the enemy we took possession and ownership of from the retreating French by May 1955 were not particularly interested in "escalating" their offensive forces just yet either. No real need to. Just keep up with their target practice over the next few years, send back a few American Military personnel in body bags during those years and everybody could just keep that up for, oh, maybe a hundred years with no end in sight, right?

The biggest change made by JFK and LBJ to Repub Eisenhower's already Quagmire "America's War" in Vietnam was that they officially authorized our Military personnel to shoot back. I don't know how many centuries Ike thought his version of America's War in Vietnam could realistically go on his way. But it was crystal clear to the Admirals and Generals under JFK and LBJ that it would have to change eventually so why not now.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2963002]Uh! Not sure where you're going that logic, but good luck with wherever you think it's going!



Tiny 12, oddly enough, that was the failed Joel Greenberg's defense, [i]"...I didn't know she was 17-yrs old", [b](...kkkk!),[/b][/i] before being carted of to prison for 11 years, Greenberg plead guilty to having sex with a 17-yrs old, who he knew was being paid for sex.

Under the law, irrespective of whether Gaetz and Joel Greenberg, knew or didn't know she was 18 and she intentionally lied on some sugar daddy dating website, it doesn't matter one iota, in the eyes of the law. As an AG only needs to show, "reckless disregard", in not knowing, the women you were sex trafficking. Especially since it was dozens of "drug-fueled sex parties", and wasn't very difficult to prove with Greenberg.

It's still a mystery (but not really, under a Trump admin and Repub Florida AG, where the records for some unknown reasons, remain sealed) as to why Gaetz wasn't indicted or charge with many of the same sexual criminal counts that Greenberg was indicted on. Since prosecutes had learned that Gaetz had had paid sex with the a 17-yr old, twice (2x) within the span of a day, in 2017.

Why prosecutors didn't indict Gaetz, is all very Jeffery Epistein, don't you think? But Greenberg, was still, either thrown under the bus, or volunteered to fall on the grenade, since he was already going down on a long list of other related charges?

Tiny 12 and Elvis 2008, keep defending and sympathizing with pedo, sex trafficking Gaetz and his long standing laundry list of sexual criminal activities, all you want, as your defense of pedo Gaetz, is just symptomatic of a larger Repub MAGA problem. That being, Trump, as a morally bankrupted president-elect.

[b]PS:[/b] BTW, I think Joel Greenberg, has already "ratted" Gaetz out as a pedo. Those sealed records/documents, once unsealed, are sure to be quite revealing, once a decent AG, actually files charges, against Gaetz this time.

Judging by all the Greenburg-Gaetz Venmo payments, this wasn't Gaetz's first 17 yr old rodeo, from a sugar daddy website. [URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/20/us/politics/matt-gaetz-venmo-payments-sex.html[/URL][/QUOTE]When is the last time the DOJ had a monger running the show?

[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2963152][b]Gaetz withdrawing is a true loss for this community[/b]
When is the last time the DOJ had a monger running the show?[/QUOTE]You're like the few stray clueless South Vietnamese after the fall of Saigon who stood along the road cheering and welcoming Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge as they rolled in on tanks and jeeps to get started on their South Vietnamese Killing Fields. Lololol.

Repubs are already the biggest hypocrites in American History. MAGA Repubs are the biggest hypocrites in Repub Party history.

You think Gaetz or any other Trump-appointed AG is going to go easy on their planned National Outlawing of Sex For Pleasure just because they are all banging trafficked underage hookers and $115,000 bad sex horse-faced prostitutes? Lolol.

There is a growing contingency in and around the MAGA Repub 6 who are already looking at outlawing contraceptives. Perhaps they will not arrest you if you wear a condom, maybe two, any time you dare to skirt their law by having sex for any reason other than procreation.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2963104]LOL. Even after I pointed out how disingenuous the argument would be to attribute the American deaths due to Trump's Pandemic after Trump "got out of Dodge" (was kicked out of office) when his ushering in the Pandemic, horrible mismanagement of it and assurances / lies that nobody really needs to take a vaccine for it since it "is disappearing and will go away without a vaccine" meant thousands more Americans were infected, carriers and infecting even more thousands of Americans and killing them, there you went again and pushed that horse crap spin about "more Americans died under Biden" then under Trump.

Uh. Yeah. We know that. And by now ALL of us, even you, know why. And it wasn't because of something Biden started, ushered in or exacerbated. BTW, you know the outgoing Trump Administration was too busy organizing and inciting an Insurrection based on his Big Lie about the election being stolen to meet with the incoming Biden Administration to brief them or smoothly transition from one administration to the next on ANYTHING that was crashing down around our ears and continuing to Mass Murder Americans by the thousands per week, right?

It was the same with the American deaths in Eisenhower's Vietnam War. Ike "got out of Dodge" after he committed America and the American Military fully and completely to that War by word, deed and treaty, officially replacing the lost and retreating French military personnel with USA Military personnel and turning it into [B]America's War[/B] instead of a French war in May 1955.

From your History link:

"Funding" 30% or 100% of somebody else's War cost is not making it OUR War. By the use of the very words, "France's war", your link confirms my contention and the contention of the historical time-line link I provided previously that it was, uh, "France's war" at the end of the Truman presidency and not "America's War. " But it was absolutely and inarguably, "America's War" by the end of Eisenhower's FIRST TERM as president.

Typically pro Repub Mainstream Media has had to talk out of both sides of its mouth on this blissfully easy to grasp reality in order to blame the Vietnam War on Democratic president's instead their beloved Repub President Dwight Eisenhower. Hell, they started doing it by the 1970's!

In a single breath or sentence they would twist some goofy convoluted pretzel assertion like, "President JFK (or LBJ) involved us in the Vietnam War when he escalated and / or increased troops blah blah blah. ".

WTF? LOL. One can only "escalate" or "increase" something that had already started.

And in this case there is nothing vague about it in the historical time-line; President Dwight Eisenhower turned it into America's War no later than May 1955.

Yeah, he was fine with having our Military personnel simply stand in as targets for the enemy on land, sea and air and not shoot back in those early years. And as long their docile American Military personnel targets under Eisenhower were not yet officially authorized by their Commander-in-Chief to shoot back, oh the enemy we took possession and ownership of from the retreating French by May 1955 were not particularly interested in "escalating" their offensive forces just yet either. No real need to. Just keep up with their target practice over the next few years, send back a few American Military personnel in body bags during those years and everybody could just keep that up for, oh, maybe a hundred years with no end in sight, right?

The biggest change made by JFK and LBJ to Repub Eisenhower's already Quagmire "America's War" in Vietnam was that they officially authorized our Military personnel to shoot back. I don't know how many centuries Ike thought his version of America's War in Vietnam could realistically go on his way. But it was crystal clear to the Admirals and Generals under JFK and LBJ that it would have to change eventually so why not now.[/QUOTE]So you're saying Ike wouldn't allow the 900 (max) military advisors in Vietnam to shoot back? And still you're blaming 50,000 USA military deaths in Vietnam on Eisenhower? From your other posts, you also believe there wouldn't have been a pandemic if a good Democrat had been president from 2017 to 2021.

You're a wee bit partisan and biased.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2962130]LOL. Oh no, you didn't. Gaetz v. Hunter?

I noticed that Harvard types are usually masters of the system and rarely want to shake the system up and that was decades ago. Now studies shows the Ivy League schools have the least diversity of thought of any universities. So for me, it is a no go on Harvard types.

At the end of the day, the decision is going to made by Republicans. Now some do not like Gaetz, but I would not underestimate the passion of the MAGA folks. Keep in mind that when Tucker Carlson predicted assassination attempts, we MAGA folks believed him, while everyone else thought we were nuts, and then two assassination attempts happened.

So now you and others are acting as if those do not matter. Just like you said Hunter Biden's laptop would not have impacted the election, the natural tendency to blow things off and let institutions off the hook comes in. You think the two assassins were lone nuts. Again, that is just what you want to believe. Just like Hunter Biden's laptop, there is nothing in the news about them is there?

The attorney general pick is the most important appointment there is to us MAGA folks because we hated Trump's last two attorney generals. They were not loyal to Trump at all and allowed Democrats and the Deep state to get away with Russiagate and Ukrainegate.

These deep state assholes have not just been using lawfare and assassination attempts in the USA but around the world. They are killers, and it is going to take someone with some serious balls to put them in their place. So that is the passion on our side, and I think that passion is going to mow down any Republican who stands in our way.

I looked at the #2 and #4 guys on the Polymarket site. #2 is a Dem who just turned Republican. #4 is a Mormon senator from Utah who looks anything like a fighter. #3 is a fighter, but he has some dirt as well, so I prefer Gaetz to all of them.

Thing is the MAGA youtube channel has posted videos that show Gaetz at his best, [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHopN6x4KIg[/URL].

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARqHokc6EFw[/URL]

I think then there is a fight that is coming. I was worried that Trump would not find someone with the balls to fight the deep state. I am not worried now.[/QUOTE]Elvis, are you reasonably happy with the Pam Bondi pick, as a replacement for Gaetz?

I don’t buy the insider trading accusations that Gaetz leveled at Republicans. Anyone following the news knew what was happening in Ukraine. If he were going to investigate and prosecute those two Congressmen in the first video, he wouldn't have made a good AG.

I agree with Gaetz (and Trump) on seeking an end to the war in Ukraine. But that’s not the reason he made a lot of enemies.