>>6759996 (PB)
Not enough information to make any sort of call. Was he the aggressor or was he responding to an attacker? Was he directly a part of the argument before firing or was he an observer to another attack?
When people start belly-aching about bakers. I have a tendency to read the belly-ache and then filter. As delightful as it might be, I don't think we even need perfection … and we certainly won't get it.
Bakers are exercising their editorial judgment. As long as the bread is "sort of" close, that's good enough for me.
I agree. Incremental defeat is not the same as winning.
Liked Cotton yesterday. But that was yesterday and yesterday's gone.
My wife bought me a pedometer.
I didn't know that there was a way to measure that shit. :-)
Happy Father's Day, gang. Femanons, remind him why it's great to be a Dad today, eh? The rest of the year he just gets beat up and then sent the bill.
>>6763848 (PB)
>Pentagon and intelligence officials describe to the Times "broad hesitation" to tell Trump about the details of the operations against Russia. They tell the Times there was concern over how Trump would react, and the possibility that Trump might reverse the operations or discuss it with foreign officials.
And that, my friends, is Deep State treason. DJT sits at the head of the country ... no one else.