Biden announces reelection campaign

Ironically, the more Republicans dwell on Biden's age the more they lower the bar regarding his performance in the likely presidential debates. By constantly questioning he cognitive ability all that he has to do to win would be not coming across as a bumbling idiot. It was true in 2020 and it will be true again next year and while neither candidate (assuming that Trump will be the Republican nominee) isn't particularly great at self-discipline Trump is more likely to go completely off the reservation than Biden.

 

What is the proper role of a media outlet in regulating its own content is an interesting area for analysis. On the one hand, it’s tempting to go with your answer that they should never make any editorial judgements and just report things that happen and what people say.

However, a news show has a finite duration, and therefore simply won’t be able to fit into their 30-60 minutes everything that happened the day before, so immediately judgement calls about what is most important to report must be made.

Once that is admitted we are left to determine how best to make these judgements. Probably most would agree that editing for truth is a proper criterion. Then of course we must ask whose truth? Always a tough question, but in this case ABC is on pretty firm footing. Few scientific hypotheses have been as thoroughly studied as the link between vaccines and autism, and not one time has a single study recovered this link. (Unless we count the original Wakefield study, but it was a terrible and turns out fraudulent study, so we shouldn’t.)

In the end, 1) giving RFK Jr air time, 2) editing for potentially dangerous claims that go against scientific consensus, and then 3) being transparent about the editing seems as solid of a journalistic procedure as I can imagine. Really, I find this example rather heartening.

 

I think he’s been a great president, but as to the border, this appears to be smart politics, good optics, sending “troops to the border”, but only in an administrative support role to allow the Border Patrol to do the fieldwork, and as part of a proposed long-term solution for humanitarian processing. Mind you, it wouldn’t be my preference to do any of this, but I realize I’m in the small small minority of citizens across both parties on the issues.


Military personnel will do data entry, warehouse support and other administrative tasks so that U.S. Customs and Border Protection can focus on fieldwork, White House spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre said Tuesday.

The troops “will not be performing law enforcement functions or interacting with immigrants, or migrants,” Jean-Pierre said. “This will free up Border Patrol agents to perform their critical law enforcement duties.” The troops will carry out this support for 90 days, said Pentagon spokesperson Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder, “until CBP can address these needs through contracted support.”

The COVID-19 restrictions allowed U.S. officials to turn away tens of thousands of migrants crossing the southern border, but those restrictions will lift May 11, and border officials are bracing for an expected surge of migrants. Even amid the restrictions, the administration has seen record numbers of people crossing the border, and President Joe Biden has responded by cracking down on those who cross illegally and by creating new pathways meant to offer alternatives to a dangerous and often deadly journey.


But the deployments have a catch: As a condition for Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s previous approval of National Guard troops to support the border mission throughout fiscal year 2023, which ends this Oct. 1, DHS had to agree to work with the White House and Congress “to develop a plan and implement solutions to staffing and funding shortfalls to maintain border security and the safe, orderly, and humane processing of migrants that do not involve the continued use of DOD personnel and resources after FY2023,” said Pentagon spokesperson Air Force Lt. Col. Devin Robinson.

Biden sending 1,500 troops for Mexico border migrant surge
Biden sending 1,500 troops for Mexico border migrant surge - Tampa Bay Times

For more great content like this subscribe to the Tampa Bay Times app here:

 

We will see if they are right, but if I were a Republican this would make me nervous.

Biden and Trump Are Frontrunners for 2024, and Rich Democratic Donors Are Thrilled

 

Oh "boy" .... JoBi strikes again.

>>The president sparked outrage after telling an audience member to "hush up, boy" during a White House event celebrating the Islamic holiday Eid-al-Fitr.

The incident occurred after the audience member, believed to be a Muslim man, interrupted the President as he addressed the crowd. Biden responded by asking if the individual wanted to make a speech before derisively mimicking a Southern accent and saying, "Hush up, boy, as my mother would say."

This comment was met with laughter from other attendees, but many criticized its racially loaded connotations.

Biden has faced accusations of racism in the past, with reports highlighting the historically offensive nature of the term "boy" when directed towards black people. The president used the phrase in February, when referring to Wes Moore, the first Black governor of Maryland.<<

Biden in Hot Water: President Tells 'Muslim Man' to 'Hush Up, Boy' During White House Event (msn.com)

 

Old Joe is apparently tone deaf although at his age he probably considers any male under the age of 60 a "boy". While conceding that he should have known better I seriously doubt that he was using the term in a racist context.

 

Time is up for Biden. The DNC will discard him soon and begin branding for replacement. They turned it over to Weiss.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...03/hunter-biden-criminal-charges-david-weiss/

 

What office is Hunter Biden running for that the DNC would discard him?

 

Aren't grandiose conclusions a bit premature?

 

Hunter Biden Derangement Syndrome is real. Even if Hunter is charged except in the minds of MAGA nation and the right-wing media there is no connection between anything that Hunter is alleged to have done and Joe. There is also the real possibility that Hunter may not be charged. Even assuming that the allegations against him are accurate failure to file timely tax returns and to pay taxes in a timely manner although still a violation of the law usually isn't prosecuted if the taxpayer does file the returns and pays the taxes due including penalties and interest which Hunter has done. Similarly, although it is technically a violation of the law, a minor omission on a federal gun purchase form (in the case of Hunter his drug problem) is seldom prosecuted.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...-form-yields-few-prosecutions-new-data-shows/

 

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I'm 100% convinced I won't be voting for Hunter Biden for President! As for Joe Biden, he'll have my vote. And if the Rs have actual evidence that ties Joe to any/all crimes Hunter may have committed, present said evidence and allow it to be examined and scrutinized. Until then, Joe is innocent.

 

Was it an omission on the gun permit application, or an actual false statement? I thought that his form checked "no" on the question about recent illegal drug use, which seems to imply intent to mislead and not necessarily a minor oversight.

 

You are correct, even so errors on gun permit applications are seldom prosecuted.
Lying to ATF on gun-purchase form yields few prosecutions, data shows

But according to newly revealed Justice Department records, the odds of being charged for lying on this form are virtually nonexistent. In the 2019 fiscal year, when Hunter Biden purchased his gun, federal prosecutors received 478 referrals for lying on Form 4473 — and filed just 298 cases, according to data extracted from the U.S. attorneys’ case management system. That’s out of approximately 27 million background checks undertaken in a 12-month period. The numbers were roughly similar for fiscal 2018 (444 referrals and 271 cases) and fiscal 2020 (433 referrals and 243 cases). The data does not indicate the success rate of the prosecutions.

The data released by the Justice Department does not show how many people might have been prosecuted for falsely answering the question about active drug use. But a review of such cases in Delaware, also provided to The Fact Checker, shows that in fiscal 2019, only three Form 4473 cases were referred for prosecution in the state — and the U.S. attorney opted not to bring them.

Many of the prosecutions concerned obvious instances of “straw buyers,” such as a woman purchasing a gun while on the phone with a friend receiving instructions about what type of gun to buy. Straw buyers are often acting on behalf of people who would not pass a background check, such as a felon. Keeping guns out of the hands of people who already have committed heinous crimes is probably a higher priority than a drug abuser.​