TBayXXXVII

What does it matter if she was a DEI Mayor or not? I thought DEI is supposed to be a good thing? If it is, then why are you questioning it and not championing it?

I'm very confident that I don't want to know if I'd win or lose that bet.

So... Trump was found guilty of election interference by a mayor who created a crime in effort to interfere with an election?

Who's dumber.... this woman who doesn't get the point you're making or the people believing the climate activists (who fly around on private jets all year every year)?

In my league, they had 35. That's certainly trash, but it's a lot better than 6.

Unless the Ravens make a move in the off-season that tells me that they're going to reduce his workload, I will still see him as an RB1 next year. If he runs for 400 less yards and scores 5 less TD's next year, that's 70 points less than this year. Based on this years' totals, that would make him RB7.

I just hope it's more accurate than The Blind Side.

LOL, Rusty on tilt again.

Well, no kidding. I have no doubt that if people started dying around Trump, you'd be like "Well, obviously it's purely a coincidence that these people started committing suicide".

You're accepting of your "L" is noted.

I'm saying he didn't do anything physical, it was all financial. Unlike the Clinton's... and apparently Obama. Shame that poor guy who worked for him died. Had to be an "accident", right? Right, he's a bat-crazy clown because you deem him so, because he's not on your side. I mean, you voted for Joe Biden, didn't you? LOL

HAHAHAHAHA!!! That's funny. Guess he was poor and couldn't hire a "security firm" or do stuff like the Clinton's. Ok, fine, so how'd 2016-2020 work out, when he did?

When did he say he wanted to "take them over"? That implies force. He never said that. He said he'd like to buy them. I probably got the nerve to blame people for not being able to take a joke because they're lying in the first place.

Don't care.

So fraud, as in financial?? Thanks for proving my point.

Trump has never had a history, ever, as being physically aggressive. It's always financial and business to him. If someone was thinking he'd use military force, then they're as brainwashed as morons like you, who think he'd take that route. When talking about clowns, you only have yourself to look at as the media and party you listen to, has turned you into one. Everyone knew he was joking about Canada, stop getting your panties in a bunch... even Canadians (normal ones), knew he was kidding. All of this, is a YOU problem, not a Trump problem.

Good, let's do it!! Seriously though, this is why I have an issue with liberals/leftists (whatever you want to call them)... you claim you're not, though I've seen only the slightest evidence of it. The article is clearly written by a liberal and most likely is a shared by the majority of the people who voted for Obama, Hillary, Biden, and Harris. It points to the crap that the core of the left is all about. Meaning, I'm right, you're wrong, and on top of that, you and your leaders are horrible people if you disagree. The author of the article is clearly offended by these people wanting reparations. Here's the thing, some of them are vastly more entitled to it than any black person in this country. You will never meet a black person who was a slave (in the U.S.), or who's parent was a slave, or who's grandparent was a slave. There's even a very unlikely chance their great grandparent was a slave. To give them reparations is an absurd idea. The most far leftist states still float this idea either regularly or in stages. Even Presidential candidates bring it up. Biden even wanted Congress to look into it back in 2021 after he took office. It's purely meant to pander to the white guilters (keeping them guilty), and the naive black folks who think there's still a chance they can see a regular paycheck and at the very least, prevent them from voting for a Republican. To specifically this issue, as @RaiderHaters Revenge points out, the author of the article is making sure the word "reparations" is being put out there because he wants it out there, but what these people are calling for is something that to this very day, happens regularly... wrongful imprisonment settlements. No, I don't think all of them are entitled to it. I think there are some that belong in jail and serving the sentence they got. There are others though that got sentences that were too long and or sentences they should never have gotten. Those people are entitled to compensation for having their rights violated. To that point, the author of the article will get all the right people, including you, as your post proves it, all riled up and try to paint Republican's, Trump, and his supporters, in a bad light. You say you don't believe in reparations... good for you, but you're a sucker of the left, made by this author, for trying to make this an anti-Trump, anti-MAGA, anti-Republican agenda.

Why would Denmark lose? If we strike an agreement with them, then the outcome would be win-win. The only way Denmark would lose, is if we took it by force. Trump had 4 years to do that from 2016-2020. He's never had any inclination of looking to non-monetary means in his past. Outside of believing in conspiracy theories, there's no reason to think Trump would look to forcefully taking over another country. Also, what @Hardcore troubadour said. If the people of Greenland would prefer to be a US nation, they should have a say. If they had vote and they went 85% in favor of being a US territory, wouldn't that make Denmark slave owners by not willing to concede ownership? It shouldn't be up to Denmark, but Greenland. If they want to stay with Denmark, then so be it. I don't fault Trump for asking.

If they don't have a car then I obviously wouldn't care about them driving around in an $80k Escalade, would I? They wouldn't need to have one, just one (or more), needs to be registered to their address. Let's say there's two people "dating". We know they're married, just not going through the formal process in order to make it easier to qualify for government assistance (another thing that should be removed, as it incentivizes single motherhood). The person receiving benefits has no car registered... fine, no issue. But the other person who lives there, has a luxury vehicle has said vehicle registered to that very address. Well, that implies that the household income is a lot higher than what they're claiming. When you fill out the forms for government assistance, "household income" is on there... not just personal income. This is a red flag that the computer kicks out. These instances can be investigated when they pop up. No one needs to go to every household receiving benefits to do an arbitrary audit.

Ok, but you still ignored the economical aspect of that question thought, right? Even though Trump is all about economics.

If that's the case, then military action wouldn't even be necessary.

So like I said, you're suckers. I already knew that.

Trump said in the past that Greenland would be advantageous because of resources and defensive strategies. Panama as well, is an economical strategy. These two things are nothing new. Trump was joking about Canada, we all know that... liberturds are just showing that they missed the joke and just want to use Canada as a way to pile on more hysteria. The original question posed to Trump combined military AND economic means, as to how he plans to go about possible acquisitions. Based on Trump's history, and even going back to the 80's and 90's, which of those two do you think is the most likely approach Trump would take? If you think using military force is possible, then you're just a sucker like Tim, Rusty, Squistion, Gutterboy, etc. He's all about the financial approach.

Libby's all up in a tizzy I see. LOL

You focused on the military aspect but ignored the economical? Why's that? Just curious.