Cardin Drake

If I were Biden I’d figure out this whole border problem quick. He has figured it out. He got rid of the border altogether. Now he's flying in illegals directly. News you have to get from British papers, smh. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/galleries/article-13155983/Biden-administration-admits-illegal-migrant-secret-flying-program.html

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1225 In Title 8, U.S. Code (which is where the immigration laws are), sec. 1225(b)(1)(B)(IV) states:

No, he hasn't. The law is unambiguous. Anyone claiming asylum should be detained until their hearing.

Well, if the tournament started tomorrow, we would not like the brackets. We'd be seeded 5th with a play in game to face Kentucky. Ugg. 1) Tennessee 2)South Carolina 3)Bama 4)Kentucky 5)Auburn Fortunately, other teams have some tough games and we will at least be a heavy favorite in both of our games. There are only 4 games left that matter, assuming no huge upsets. Mid-week: Bama 87 @ Florida 105 Tennessee 66 @SC 59 Saturday SC @ Miss State Kentucky @ Tennessee Best case for us is for Florida to knock off Bama and Tennessee to beat South Carolina. That will place us in a 4 way tie for 2nd and Tennessee clinches the title. Kentucky and SC have a chance to knock themselves out of the tie by losing on Saturday. If it winds up in a 4 way tie, the tiebreaker is the record against the other tied teams. That would be Kentucky 2-1, Bama 2-2, Auburn 2-2, and SC 1-2. We would win over Bama on the 2nd tiebreaker of record against conference champ. 0-1 vs 0-2.(I think). Tennessee would do us a huge favor by knocking off Kentucky. If SC beats Tennesse, they would be 2-0 against them and own the tiebreaker. They would be the conference champ by beating Miss. State on Saturday. Even if Bama beats Florida, there would be a 3 way tie for first, with SC having the tiebreak. Confusing, yes, but we'll have some clarity after Wednesday. Realistically, the best we can do is 3rd. I'd really like to avoid 4th or 5th and facing Kentucky in the quarterfinals. For the next two games, I'm a Tennessee fan. Update: 5 way tie for first is still possible if all of the games fall this way: SC beats Tennessee, Florida beats Bama, Miss State beats SC, and Kentucky beats Tennessee. That doesn't help us that much in the seedings. South Carolina and Kentucky would be 3-2, Tennessee 4-3, Auburn 2-3, with Bama the 5th seed at 2-4. I'd be ok with that though. Regular season co-champions and I'd rather play Bama in the quarterfinals than Kentucky.

"legitimate investigation" If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Irony!

This testimony is really a problem for Fani: From Red State: The AAF says that's a violation of Georgia campaign finance law, "Nothing in this Code section shall permit or authorize a candidate to utilize campaign funds for the purpose of making gifts, loans, or investments directly to: (A) The candidate…" The complaint document continues: The statute is unambiguous – and the facts are not in dispute – as Ms. Willis described in her testimony, she placed the money that was intended for her campaign into a "fungible" slush fund with other moneys that she would use for various other purposes, including reimbursing her boyfriend for leisure travel.

This explains a lot about the left's continuing belief in the Russian collusion hoax.

Texas has outlawed abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected. Practically, that means no abortion providers are left in the state. But IVF is not a problem.

Bruce is right. The Alabama court decision was awful. There is no planned dismantling of IVF however, and even the Alabama legislature is likely to pass some laws protecting it.

Trump's not a strong social conservative which doesn't bother me. He does have common sense when it comes to social issues. He's not a fiscal conservative either and that bothers me a lot. But since fiscal conservative isn't available from either party, I'll settle for Trump. He's better on the border and foreign policy and just about everything else. BTW, why the hell is the left for open borders? I don't get that one. It sure isn't helping the poor or middle class in America. And why are you for decriminalizing shoplifting? You're just making more of it and driving up prices for everyone.

It means she's a RINO who will always bend to the will of the Washington establishment. We've been voting for candidates like her for decades with zero results, and we're done with them.

She's a tool of the Uniparty.

Well, wrong decision, but right time for it.

Trump's gang had a plan. Get the governor to call a special session of the state legislature. Have the legislature pass legislation voiding the results of the election. Pass an additional piece of legislation appointing the Trump delegate slate. Is it a crime to lobby the governor to call a special session to examine election results? It sounds like ordinary politics to me.

Probably pretty much what you said with regards to BB facility and Nike. Give him what he needs to succeed, but I wouldn't make any major changes to his contract. NIL money as needed. Hope that's not a sticking point.

I get your point. But the toughest job in sports is to take a school that is a complete non-contender and make them relevant. How many other coaches can you name besides Pearl that have accomplished that? Damn few.

That bolded part is an almost exact quote from Putin talking about Alexei Navalny. That's what tyrants always say when they jail their political opponents. And if they still feel threatened, they take the next step.

even if they were liars and used cigars in unusual ways..

I think we get Obama's hand picked Biden successor at the democrat convention. Nice end run on democracy. Biden is just no longer viable.

I think it may be more of a minutes thing. With JW out, there are minutes available. Regardless, I think Broome and Cardwell on the floor together is a real positive and gives us some more intriguing possible lineups.

It's been a mystery to me why we haven't done more of this, especially when we are getting out-rebounded. I'd like to see a lot of it.

Here's the comments from an actual real estate investor-Kevin O'Leary: “If you're a developer and you've got a building on the block, anywhere in America, and it's worth, let's say, $500 million, and you want to build a building right beside it, you go to the bank and say, ‘This building is worth $500 million. I'd like to borrow a construction finance loan against this asset, and I want you to tell me it's worth $500 million, too,’” he said. However, the bank might not agree with the valuation — it might value the property at $400 million. This would lead to negotiations. According to O’Leary, developers aim to present their assets “in the brightest light” possible to maximize their valuation since loans are typically 40% to 50% of the asset’s value. O’Leary notes that this practice is very common in the real estate industry. “Forget about Trump, every single real estate developer everywhere on earth does this. They always talk about their asset being worth a lot and the bank says no. That's just the way it is,” he stated. He then points out that this practice does not result in financial harm to any party involved. “Who lost money? Nobody. The bank got paid back the construction finance loan, and a new building was built,” he said. The ubiquity of the practice highlighted by O’Leary suggests that this is a broader industry issue rather than an isolated incident. “If you're going to sue this case and win, you've got to sue every real estate developer everywhere,” O’Leary remarked. A few additional points: It's a feature of 3rd world judicial systems to investigate people instead of crimes. Are you really comfortable with that coming to America with DA's running on a platform of "getting" a politician. Does anybody think selective prosecution is a good idea? Raise your hand if you think this case would be prosecuted if Trump wasn't running for President. Does a judge have the power to nullify a clause in a contract? Trump is being pursued under a law meant to protect consumers, not sophisticated large banks. It is clearly stated and well understood in the industry that banks make loans based on their own appraisals of the value of real estate. This case will be overturned on appeal, and James and the "judge" understand that but don't care. This case is all about crippling a political opponent.

Lol, you are are parody of yourself. The damage done to the legal system is entirely self-inflicted. Only 3rd world countries go after political opponents. Almost every case is a novel interpretation of the law or a law that has never been used before. You have DA's run for office under the premise of "getting" a political opponent and charge that opponent in ways that nobody has ever been charged before, tried in a venue with a jury composed entirely of supporters of his political opponents, and you are surprised that people lose respect for the judicial system. You are truly blind, Homer.

Steps to jury guiltification for sexual abuse: 1) Find a woman willing to spin a fairy tale about being raped 30 years ago, even though conveniently not remembering the date, the year, or even the season, so it is impossible for the defendant to refute on an evidentiary basis. Make sure it is a venue where the jury pool is 80% or more Biden supporters 2) Do it as a civil trial so preponderance of the evidence is the standard. 3) A biased democrat judge is a nice addition. 4) Depend on the jury to believe the fairy tale, once you have weeded out all republicans during jury selection. 5) Continue to sue for defamation when the defendant continues to maintain his innocence after the verdict.