I know that there's a weird revisionist history trend in certain areas and political ideologies, but the Mexican Cession actually happened. In the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, Mexico lost about half of its land to the United States. Almost 15% of the United States' current territory used to be Mexico.
We could have taken all of it if we wanted. But we only took the parts that had very few Mexicans living there.
Is that, honestly and sincerely, what you believe to be the defining reason behind the decision to take those specific land areas in the treaty (hint: the juxtaposition of the treaty signing date, and Sutter's Mill might be worth considering)?
At least we're getting a view of what Democrat gun control would look like with the Hunter Biden case.
What are some of the views that we can gain on Democrat gun control based on Trump's Republican District Attorney's prosecution and plea deal acceptance in the Hunter Biden case?
What are some of the views that we can gain on Democrat gun control based on Trump's Republican District Attorney's prosecution and plea deal acceptance in the Hunter Biden case?
It kind of makes the Big Guy's calls for universal background checks with stiff penalties for lying on the forms that he puts out every school shooting seem pretty empty doesn't it? I guarantee that if it were Don Jr. who lied on the application to purchase a gun and then dumped the gun in a dumpster within a stones throw of a school zone, he'd be in jail and under the most aggressive prosecution Comey could summon. But since Hunter Biden did this, the FBI/deep state actually went to the gunstore owner and tried to confiscate the fraudulent form Hunter filed so they could destroy the papers and cover up the crime.
And when the Confederates saw Jackson standing fearless like a stonewall, the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
the FBI/deep state actually went to the gunstore owner and tried to confiscate the fraudulent form Hunter filed so they could destroy the papers and cover up the crime.
And your source for the bolded statement is … ?
Breitbart? Drag queen story time?
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
What are some of the views that we can gain on Democrat gun control based on Trump's Republican District Attorney's prosecution and plea deal acceptance in the Hunter Biden case?
It kind of makes the Big Guy's calls for universal background checks with stiff penalties for lying on the forms that he puts out every school shooting seem pretty empty doesn't it?
So, in your opinion, Biden Sr. should intervene in a Trump Republican District Attorney's prosecution of a case? I thought we didn't want Biden weaponizing the DOJ?
Incidentally, you might be surprised to learn that even according to right-wing, and center-right legal experts, being prosecuted as a first-time offender for what Hunter did is exceptionally rare.
I guess we can find comfort in knowing that if Don Jr. were to have done something similar, and was to be prosecuted, all of the Second Amendment advocates would be coming out of the woodwork to defend and support him. Just like all of the conservative Second Amendment advocates will be coming out to defend Hunter... any minute now.
WASHINGTON - Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie slammed Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss’s five-year investigation into Hunter Biden’s taxes and alleged gun violation, arguing that it took too long.
“I don't understand how you conducted a five-year investigation and you conclude with two misdemeanor tax pleas and the dismissal of a gun charge…this does not take a long time to investigate. So what that leads me to conclude is that they were investigating a lot more than that,” Christie told USA TODAY. “And for some reason, they haven't charged him."
Last month, Biden agreed to plead guilty to two misdemeanor counts of failing to pay federal income tax. He also agreed to enter a pretrial diversion program that could dismiss a felony charge regarding his unlawful possession of a gun despite being a drug user.
Stay in the conversation on politics: Sign up for the OnPolitics newsletter
Christie said that he has a “real problem with the dismissal” of the gun charge, claiming that Democrats are “running around all the time saying we need more gun laws” and then don't enforce those laws with Biden.
“This is a 10-year charge line on a handgun permit. It's a 10-year charge," Christie said. "And you know who the sponsor of that bill was? Senator Joe Biden. Mr. mandatory minimum − a part of his career that he likes to get everybody to forget now. But he was Mr. mandatory minimum on drugs, and he's Mr. mandatory minimum on guns. Now, all of a sudden, we're walking away from that charge?”
He also raised questions about a letter that Weiss sent to Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., after an Internal Revenue Service official alleged Weiss requested to be named a special counsel to pursue the Biden case, according to The New York Times. Weiss wrote that he never requested special counsel designation and was never denied "the authority to bring charges in any jurisdiction."
“Did he really have the authority he said he had in that letter to Congress?” Christie said. “And if he did, then he needs to explain why he walked away from, well, let's start backwards. He needs to explain why it took him five years to come to this conclusion.”
Biden is scheduled to appear before a Delaware federal court on July 26.
And when the Confederates saw Jackson standing fearless like a stonewall, the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Doesn't bother me. I think he's wrong about the handgun charge; according the the legal Eagle summary, Hunter was treated more harshly than he likely otherwise would have been if not president's kid. Could Legal E be wrong? Sure. Is there a conservative summary that handles the case law of the charge with the same detail? I doubt it. Post it if you got it, but I rarely see thorough analysis of anything coming from conservative sources.
He is right, however, that it's a bad look, and I think Joe generally speaking has made a mistake trying to be patriarch of the Biden family with an unhinged kid while at the same time running a country. How much would Joe do to bail out his unhinged kid who disowned his young daughter for no good reason? Would he engage in corruption or commit a crime? I have no idea. I think he might. And if Christie and others want to pursue it, then go for it.
I will note, however, that the evidence so far isn't very convincing. If Christie takes down Biden via a legitimate investigation, then I can't really be against him for that.
Is Christie saying he thinks that Joe should weaponize the DOJ, and not grant autonomy to Trump appointed investigators and prosecutors? Kind of weird stance for a Republican to take.
Christie also appears to be struggling with the phrase "not more than."
I didn't watch the debate. The only clip I saw was where almost all of them raised their hand in response to whether or not they'd support Trump, if convicted (I think?) and Christie did not.
What do you guys think about how Christie handles himself in this 12 minute + interview?
Chris Christie: There's no reason to show mercy for Donald Trump
Christie was the smartest guy up there. Also, Vivek Ramaswamy is a lying snake in the grass who will say anything and told several whoppers that did not pass a fact check. Does that mean Vivek is a substitute for Trump? Partially. Would Ajax consider him a brother with an okay skin color? Who knows.
Beschloss invokes King: 'Arc of the moral universe is long, but in Fulton County bends toward justice'
