• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

Meanwhile, keeping an eye on the future - this from Catholic media: "Turning Point USA’s Erika Kirk, a Catholic, backs Vice President JD Vance’s potential 2028 presidential bid"
... and from other MSM
www.bbc.com

Erika Kirk endorses JD Vance for president at conservative event

Conservatives traded criticims at this year's annual Turning Point USA America Fest conference.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
www.ctvnews.ca

Turning Point USA’s Erika Kirk backs U.S. Vice-President JD Vance’s potential 2028 presidential bid

Erika Kirk, widow of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk and the organization’s new leader, endorsed a potential presidential bid by U.S. Vice-President JD Vance on the opening night of the conservative youth group’s annual conference.
www.ctvnews.ca www.ctvnews.ca
www.foxnews.com

2028 power move: Turning Point's Erika Kirk throws support behind JD Vance as MAGA ‘heir apparent’

Erika Kirk, widow of the assassinated Turning Point co-founder Charlie Kirk, endorses Vice President JD Vance for president in the 2028 White House election
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
 
Cloud Cover said:
I was just down in the US. Nobody at US border asked me for squat other than my ID, where I’m going and why. Coming back into Canada was the real shit show. Bunch of clowns and morons up here.
Click to expand...
Let me guess. They just wanted to know if you’re bringing in cigarettes or booze, and didn’t care if you’re Canadian or not?
 
FJAG said:
It probably would have been reasonable if they hadn't spent all that time redacting things that shouldn't have been redacted.
Click to expand...
Such as? Which should be more upsetting: unnecessary redactions (which can of course be challenged), or people taking it upon themselves to leak unredacted information (by definition without appropriate processes and controls)? Missing deadline, or failing to safeguard the information which is to be protected?

As I wrote, critics can take it to court. The worst thing that can happen for over-redaction and failing to meet deadline is that it takes longer (to issue the challenges to see everything that should be revealed); the shortcoming can be undone. The worst thing that can happen for under-redaction is revealing that which should not be revealed and hurting people, which cannot be undone.

It's always instructive when the goalposts move away from the target/subject to the process. The salivating hordes failed to collect Trump's head because it was never there to be collected. All that's left is trying to collect some kind of process consolation prize rather than focusing on whoever else has been implicated and giving them the kind of treatment which Trump would have received. It should be goose, gander, unless the whole point of the exercise is just to keep finding fly shit in the pepper to attack Trump.

My guess: whatever was "over-redacted" will not damage Trump once it is unredacted, but will damage a bunch of other people. Undoubtedly some of them don't deserve protection, but equally undoubtedly some are not guilty of anything except poor choice of associates.
 
Nvlgzr said:
Let me guess. They just wanted to know if you’re bringing in cigarettes or booze, and didn’t care if you’re Canadian or not?
Click to expand...
US didn’t ask me that. They didn’t even ask me what kind of American I am.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6221.jpeg
    IMG_6221.jpeg
    84 KB · Views: 4
Brad Sallows said:
Such as?
Click to expand...
Not going there. I've had to redact legal documents. The volume they had and time to do it properly was pretty much impossible.

I frankly don't care who gets caught up in this. Greasy people playing with underage women deserve to be exposed. I'm far from a liberal but I'm pretty sure the vast majority of them agree with me.

I'm also resigned to the fact that if anything is found out about Trump, he'll slide out from underneath it until it doesn't matter anymore. I think he was 100% right when he said "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?" Even if charged he'd skate through court until he was long dead of natural causes.

🍻
 
FJAG said:
I frankly don't care who gets caught up in this. Greasy people playing with underage women deserve to be exposed. I'm far from a liberal but I'm pretty sure the vast majority of them agree with me.
Click to expand...
And I am in full agreement. Release the names and let the chips fall where they may.

Killary and Bill the Diddler on anyone's list?
 
I stand with "better 10 guilty men free than 1 innocent convicted". I could never be convinced to become sloppy about that just because some politically hyperactive people are increasingly deranged over their failure to find something to implicate Trump and therefore willing to be sloppy about disclosing information that, if it weren't for the Trump angle, pretty much the entire legal establishment would ordinarily be arguing to keep confidential to protect the rights of victims and alleged accused. The taint of accusations of sexual impropriety never really goes away.

People are pressing hard, which means risking potentially harmful disclosures to settle what is only a political grudge. Moreover, the effort appears increasingly unlikely to bear the fruit they seek - if a scandal with Trump at the nexus existed to be found, it would have been found and blown wide open long ago. So again: "Undoubtedly some of them don't deserve protection, but equally undoubtedly some are not guilty of anything except poor choice of associates."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top