March 4, 20251 yr Senior Conservative MP says UK must consider possibility ‘Trump is a Russian asset’ the "possibility"?
March 4, 20251 yr 9 minutes ago, Mike31mt said: Approximately which year would that have occurred under Democratic leadership? Did you notice that they hadnt yet packed up and gone home, and it's been years now, despite all that strong leadership from Washington?
March 4, 20251 yr 42 minutes ago, Mike31mt said: Approximately which year would that have occurred under Democratic leadership? Did you notice that they hadnt yet packed up and gone home, and it's been years now, despite all that strong leadership from Washington? Why would Putin leave Ukraine when he looks across the political landscape and sees that half of US population is still in support of Trump and his invasion?
March 4, 20251 yr 1 hour ago, Mike31mt said: Only a misguided fool would call this isolationism Oh yeah, what do you call it?
March 4, 20251 yr 45 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: Senior Conservative MP says UK must consider possibility ‘Trump is a Russian asset’ the "possibility"? Brits generally move with caution
March 4, 20251 yr 15 hours ago, Tnt4philly said: You assume that because those that realize trump is a POS, also voted for or GAF about Clinton? F Clinton then, and f Clinton now. Putin couldn’t be trusted then, and he can’t be trusted now. Not sure of you were a POS the, but you are now. LMAO got this dude so triggered he isn't even speaking English at this point
March 4, 20251 yr 9 minutes ago, mikemack8 said: LMAO got this dude so triggered he isn't even speaking English at this point What part of Putin couldn’t be trusted then, and can’t be trusted now, are you having trouble with?
March 4, 20251 yr 58 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: Senior Conservative MP says UK must consider possibility ‘Trump is a Russian asset’ the "possibility"? Never heard of him; the only Graham Stuart I know of was a Premier League footballer, so he can't be that impactful in a party with such few MPs of any note. That aside, our general parliamentary attitude is unquestioned and endless support for Ukraine "whatever it takes", so with that in mind, comments like that aren't a shock from the uniparty. They love their chest thumping Ukraine support and throwing money we don't have at supporting them. Does Westminster represent the UKs view on Ukraine? Not entirely. We stopped paying money to pensioners to heat their homes because we broke, but we can find money ASAP to waste in Ukraine. A lot of people are deeply unhappy at that, especially as we have big tax rises coming down the pipe.
March 4, 20251 yr 56 minutes ago, UK Eagle said: Never heard of him; the only Graham Stuart I know of was a Premier League footballer, so he can't be that impactful in a party with such few MPs of any note. That aside, our general parliamentary attitude is unquestioned and endless support for Ukraine "whatever it takes", so with that in mind, comments like that aren't a shock from the uniparty. They love their chest thumping Ukraine support and throwing money we don't have at supporting them. Does Westminster represent the UKs view on Ukraine? Not entirely. We stopped paying money to pensioners to heat their homes because we broke, but we can find money ASAP to waste in Ukraine. A lot of people are deeply unhappy at that, especially as we have big tax rises coming down the pipe. Hypothetically speaking… what is an acceptable amount of tax to pay to push Putin back out of Ukraine? Or keep him from taking the Baltics? Pushing into and claiming Eastern Europe? The further he gets the more expensive (taxes and lives) it will get. At what point do you decide security is something worth paying taxes for?
March 4, 20251 yr 5 hours ago, Frankfurteagle89 said: @DrPhilly you called it correctly. What a disgraceful day. This "day” and time will live in infamy going forward… TDS folks should have voted harder if they didn’t want to cry and wail this hard. It's a fantastic decision, though. So glad he is POTUS.
March 4, 20251 yr 8 hours ago, DrPhilly said: Sorry mate but that is a pathetic take. All I did was post the entire video - with a straightforward opinion on the entire interview, what led up to the end, etc.
March 4, 20251 yr 4 minutes ago, Kz! said: Rat face with complete and total capitulation. Another win for Trump. 5-D chess. Who could have possibly seen this coming
March 4, 20251 yr 8 hours ago, DrPhilly said: The standard protocol is 1) very short meeting in Oval Office with press ; 5-10 minutes of intro and one or two setup softball questions 2) actual meetings/negotiations 3) longer meeting with press to explain status and next steps ; press gets to ask the tougher questions. The hosts of this meeting either intended it to be a longer gathering or failed to cut it off. Right! It should have been short and sweet. Maybe I'm wrong but it seemed to me that Zelenskyy was the one talking the vast majority of the time for the first 40+ minutes leading up to the final 3 minutes,. Am I wrong?
March 4, 20251 yr 16 minutes ago, Ace Nova said: Right! It should have been short and sweet. Maybe I'm wrong but it seemed to me that Zelenskyy was the one talking the vast majority of the time for the first 40+ minutes leading up to the final 3 minutes,. Am I wrong? Yes, you are wrong to assign that issue to Zelensky. Trump owns that meeting and can close it any moment. He and Vance also spoke as much as Zelensky or damn close to it.
March 4, 20251 yr 23 minutes ago, Ace Nova said: All I did was post the entire video - with a straightforward opinion on the entire interview, what led up to the end, etc. Yeah, and your opinion explanation was pathetic.
March 4, 20251 yr 9 minutes ago, DrPhilly said: Yes, you are wrong to assign that issue to Zelensky. Trump owns that meeting and can close it any moment. He and Vance also spoke as much as Zelensky or damn close to it. Nah, people needed to see the midget for who he is.
March 4, 20251 yr 4 hours ago, DaEagles4Life said: And people think this dude knows what he is doing. Only a dumb idiot would believe that I'll be nicer over here than I was to the guy that tweeted it because you guys are awesome, fellow Eagles fans - 2025 SUPER BOW CHAMPIONS!!! If you only want a part of FB post that's exactly what you do. He copy and pasted a post and posted it on his platform. The post is IN 3RD PERSON. What does that mean? It means someone else posted it somewhere else. This is Intended for the the guy that tweeted it, not anyone here: It's not that hard to understand and if you don't understand something so simple, the last thing you want to do is tweet a belligerent R word. It will only make you look that much worse when you are corrected.
March 4, 20251 yr 11 minutes ago, Diehardfan said: Nah, people needed to see the midget for who he is. So you want Russia to take over Ukraine?
March 4, 20251 yr Author 13 minutes ago, Ace Nova said: I'll be nicer over here than I was to the guy that tweeted it because you guys are awesome, fellow Eagles fans - 2025 SUPER BOW CHAMPIONS!!! If you only want a part of FB post that's exactly what you do. He copy and pasted a post and posted it on his platform. The post is IN 3RD PERSON. What does that mean? It means someone else posted it somewhere else. This is Intended for the the guy that tweeted it, not anyone here: It's not that hard to understand and if you don't understand something so simple, the last thing you want to do is tweet a belligerent R word. It will only make you look that much worse when you are corrected. What are you talking about ****
March 4, 20251 yr 34 minutes ago, DrPhilly said: Yes, you are wrong to assign that issue to Zelensky. Trump owns that meeting and can close it any moment. He and Vance also spoke as much as Zelensky or damn close to it. We're all friends here so I don't want to go back and "clock" the amount of time and points each person made. Zelenskyy brought up more points than anyone else in the room and every time he made a point, it extended the meeting that much longer. Trump was being diplomatic and letting the man speak. If Trump just cut Zelenskyy off (like he eventually did after 45+ minutes) during the first 5 minutes, the media would have had a meltdown. The media had a meltdown after he cut him off and ended it after 45+ minutes - essentially saying he was setup and was bullied out of the meeting. And I'm not assigning all the fault to Zelenskyy because I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. It's a very painful and emotional situation he is going through - so of course he's going to want to let the world know what he's going through and what Ulkraine is going through. And when emotions run that high, most people are going to get everything out and will defend it until the end. He just shouldn't of done it during that particular meeting. And who knows - maybe the wrong people got in his ear prior to the meeting - instead of - the right people coaching him about the history of the Oval Office, what it represents and the fact that the sole purpose of this meeting is to show UNITY between the US and Ukraine and NOTHING ELSE. I blame his advisors and the people around him more than anyone else, tbh.
March 4, 20251 yr 2 hours ago, UK Eagle said: Never heard of him; the only Graham Stuart I know of was a Premier League footballer, so he can't be that impactful in a party with such few MPs of any note. That aside, our general parliamentary attitude is unquestioned and endless support for Ukraine "whatever it takes", so with that in mind, comments like that aren't a shock from the uniparty. They love their chest thumping Ukraine support and throwing money we don't have at supporting them. Does Westminster represent the UKs view on Ukraine? Not entirely. We stopped paying money to pensioners to heat their homes because we broke, but we can find money ASAP to waste in Ukraine. A lot of people are deeply unhappy at that, especially as we have big tax rises coming down the pipe. 1 hour ago, MidMoFo said: Hypothetically speaking… what is an acceptable amount of tax to pay to push Putin back out of Ukraine? Or keep him from taking the Baltics? Pushing into and claiming Eastern Europe? The further he gets the more expensive (taxes and lives) it will get. At what point do you decide security is something worth paying taxes for? Quick breakdown from an American standpoint: Trump claims the US has given $350B aid to Ukraine. He also admitted that may be high… Congress has appropriated $174B in aid. The US Dept of State says right around $100B has actually been sent so far, so the truth is somewhere between one third to a half of what trump claims, but let’s go with his $350B. The US Federal budget since the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine: 2022 - $6.27 T 2023 - $6.13 T 2024 - $6.94 T Total $19.34 trillion dollars $350 B is 1.8% of $19.34 trillion Median household income in the US - $78,171 Marginal tax rate for income at $78171 is 12%. Federal income tax owed estimate $9,380. 1.8% of $9,380 is $168.84 So the MEDIAN households paid $168 (really $60-80) in taxes to send our old military equipment to Ukraine and build new for our military.
Create an account or sign in to comment