So you think that the Afghan troops were ok with being ruled by the Taliban? How the fuck were 2500 troops supposed to handle all the equipment and vetting of those who wanted to come to the US?
By May 1st with no one vetted and get 20 years of equipment out with 2500 troops.
I Rember Trump promised lots of things he never did and he lost bigly because of it.
So not letting the government of the country be involved in the talks is a good thing?
Letting 5000 enemy out while leaving only 2500 US forces was a good idea?
I see no reason the deposition can't be streamed live, no need for reporters in the room. Just because Trumps didn't, doesn't mean others can't ask for it.
Why would it be influenced? Ask the same questions in private or public, let the public hear both sides and decide for themselves. Did the Trumps ask for public hearings? I don't know if they did or not. They can still base their opinions on indictments based the facts of the case, not public opinion. Rather than read possibly doctored transcripts I would rather hear it right from the horses mouth.
No, the representatives wanted to release their sound bites. Let the questions and answers be seen by the public, we are not all sheep that want to be told what was said, some of us want to see and hear it for ourselves.
He runs multiple companies, a landfill, real-estate, large auto recycling center, oil companies and many other businesses and he has been on the cover of Forbes, very sharp man.
Trump turned into a stereotypical politician, a huge spending one at that. Remember how you liked the auto bailout? Trumps farm bailout was bigger, funny you never cried much about that.
Yes and all the changes were equal for both sides. The fact that Trump didn't organize people to push his supporters to use mail in ballots was on them, the rules were the same for both camps.
There is always a small amount of fraud in every election just not to the scale to change the results.
There were like 60 plus court cases none of them showed any proof.
Objectively the side that had 10 flags in their yards, drove hours and stood in line for hours wearing their red hats to see their god were far more likely to commit fraud than the voters who just didn't want Trump another 4 years.
The changes made were equal for all involved. In Pa. one of the changes was to accept votes that were late due to slow mail delivery, these votes were kept separate and even if not counted were not enough to change the outcome.
It would be an absolute mess.
The changes effected both sides equally and really weren't that significant, biggest reason the court chose not to be involved.
That is why I said could be, Congress would need to decide to place a fraudulent winner or place the real winner in office, I think they would opt to have another election, might be wrong but that's what I think would happen.
When there is indisputable and provable voter fraud on a scale that would change the results of an election there could be a process to hold another election.
So far nothing even close to your scenario has happened.
I don't think you can claim immunity in every case, certainly not in Trump's case, wait and see what the USSC says, I bet Thomas will be the only judge if any that feels he has immunity.