Yeah...no way Kamala could riff that long with Rogan on any topic. I'd like to see it though.
Joe Rogan Interview
- Thread starter stollcpa
- Start date
Guaranteed.I can name half my high school who went into the military. High school. Dropouts etc. what’s more go look at the gov’s own website. They can’t even get enough people. I guarantee you go down to the recruiting office with your ged and no mental issues you’re in
Eligibility & Requirements to Join
Learn more about what it takes to enlist as Soldier or be commissioned as an Officer. Find out the medical, educational, and physical requirements to be able to start a career in the Army.www.goarmy.com
Good let him talk. As for trump he should be renting a food truck to park in wherever the Puerto Rican community is concentrated in PA and spend a dinner dishing out empanadas. What a stupid fck. Why would risk that with little time to blow ever with some dolt comedian
Supposedly Harris is in talks with him, working on location and duration.
She will negotiate 30 minutes and show up 20 minutes late.
And then filibuster the first question 10 minutes.
Joe you probably didn’t know this but my Dougie is a big ufc fan!!! He orders all the pay per views. Cleans his guns while he watches. And walz. He told me to tell you that he was the first student at Gracie jiu jitsu.
The hold up is location. Joe wants her to come to Austin. She wants to do it on the road and for Joe to come to her. Both sides have been complimentary of each other about the process. If it works out it works out. If not it doesn't.
That's only for the optics. She can say "We tried, but it just didn't work out with our schedule". Why would she want to go on with him for 3 hours? That's not her strength and wouldn't advance her cause. The ticket is not built for anything long form, especially in a hostile or even neutral environment.
It’s too long. Honestly all either of them can do at this point is hurt themselves. She’ll go give her speech where the Jan 6 shit went down beating the fascist dead horse that doesn’t persuade anyone new and trump will carry on as we wait for him to step on his dick yet again with something stupid
Dual airbags
LOL. So the military is more educated than fast food workers and similar folks from that class that make up General US population. Getting brainwashed by Kamala's MK-Ultra mother is not an education. Nobody is down on the military. It's how the idiots in power are using them to push their war agenda. Maybe the US should spend more on educating the general population than wars.
It's not LOL, it's a fact. They also continue to get education and training while in the military. It's move up or move out.
Who or what is "Kamala's MK-Ultra mother" and what does it have to do with today's military?
She'd be stupid to do such an interview at this stage of the campaign. I know everyone wants to paint her as an idiot, but she's not dumb enough to do three hours with Rogan two weeks before the election. At this point in the campaign the result is decided. We don't yet know what it is, but the votes are essentially locked up for both sides. I refuse to believe there are a significant number of undecided voters who just can't decide between Trump and Harris. This isn't an issues campaign.
Only a huge faux pas would change anything. Why put yourself in a position to commit such a thing?
Not so sure about that. Rogan is very non confrontational and has said that he doesn't want to talk policy with her. I think she should do it. Walz too. They lose nothing and may gain a couple voters.
Walz is so Fing awful he should stay a million miles away from Rogan and that world. Covid rat etc. Harris on the other hand was bangin old Willie and montel and I suspect knows how to roll with the guys. Plus when she isn’t trying to sound smart she’s very likable. I think it’s a perfect platform for her. She’d do well
Maybe it has something to do with chemtrails, George Soros, space lasers, and lizard people
MAGA seems to be deep into that stuff.
You think George soros is made up? I know no one gets it wrong more than shitter but you can’t be this brainwashed. mr. conservative lol. this guy is as radical of a lefty on the planet
Last edited:
Follow the Money: Mapping Soros Prosecutor Funding - LELDF
Over the past decade, billionaire George Soros has spent at least $50 million to elect scores of “social justice” prosecutors across the country. These district attorneys, who represent over 70 million people or more than 1 in 5 Americans, often pursue pro-criminal and anti-police policies. This...
www.policedefense.org
Thomas Hogan
George Soros’s Bad Bet
The billionaire funded a series of experiments in the U.S. criminal-justice system—with disastrous results.As George Soros exits the public stage, handing over control of his central nonprofit operation, the Open Society Foundation, to his son, it’s a good time to examine the results of the experiments he funded in the American criminal-justice system.
Soros famously made his fortune by massively shorting the British pound, leading to more than $1 billion in profits for him and economic calamity for the United Kingdom’s central bank. With his riches, Soros eventually became politically active in America as a major donor. He funded high-profile Democratic candidates for national office, and then shifted gears to focus intently on criminal justice.
Soros gambled that he could swing district attorney elections by heavily funding candidates who favored his version of justice, which focuses on de-prosecution and decarceration in the name of racial equity. Prosecutors like Larry Krasner in Philadelphia, Kim Foxx in Chicago, George Gascón in Los Angeles, and Alvin Bragg in New York rode Soros’s funding to victory.
In pursuing this strategy, Soros made some successful calculations and some mistakes—both leading to ruinous consequences for American cities.
Soros’s initial evaluation was that American chief prosecutors were almost completely unconstrained in their ability to decide not to prosecute cases. When a prosecutor charges a defendant with a crime, the U.S. Constitution and rules of criminal procedure establish a series of checks and balances that act to constrain the powers of the prosecutor (for example, indictment or preliminary-hearing requirements, the exclusionary rule for illegally obtained evidence, appeals, and so on). But virtually no limitations existed on decisions not to prosecute a defendant, regardless of the facts or the law. While prosecutors traditionally exercised this discretion on a narrow, case-by-case basis, no apparent legal reason prevented Soros-backed prosecutors from declining to charge entire categories of crimes.
Soros was correct in his assessment of the negative discretion of chief prosecutors. Indeed, he was almost a decade ahead of the general public in recognizing this potent de-prosecution tool. The political world is now trying to catch up by establishing some guardrails for prosecutorial decision-making.
Soros’s next calculation was that district attorney races could be won with a relatively modest investment. Most chief prosecutor elections were sleepy affairs, with district attorneys serving until they were ready to hand over authority to an experienced supervisor from within the office. Soros figured that a cash infusion for heavy media spending would allow previously unknown candidates that he favored to overwhelm any opposition in popular elections. Once again, he was right. For instance, in Philadelphia, Soros provided approximately $1.7 million in funding for the first campaign of then-unknown defense attorney Larry Krasner, who won the splintered Democratic primary for district attorney with 38 percent of the vote in an election where only 17 percent of eligible voters turned out. Because winning the primary almost ensures victory in heavily Democratic Philadelphia, Krasner effectively won with the approval of less than 7 percent of eligible voters, at a rough cost of $33 per vote—a canny targeted investment by Soros. In smaller jurisdictions, Soros-related entities might make donations of $20,000 or $100,000 to swing the elections. Consistent with his background as an investor, Soros had found a way to bet relatively small amounts of money and achieve outsize returns.
Soros’s ultimate calculation was that he could make enough of these investments in radical prosecutors that it would cause a major shift in law enforcement in American cities. Once again, he proved prescient. Soros-backed candidates won elections in Manhattan, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston, Portland, San Francisco, St. Louis, Dallas, Tampa, Denver, Orlando, the Northern Virginia suburbs surrounding the District of Columbia, and other population hubs. By one calculation, 20 percent of the population of the United States was covered by Soros-funded prosecutors, with an even heavier concentration in the urban cores. Critics may vehemently disagree with Soros’s policies, but they must concede that he has been extraordinarily successful in implementing his battle plan.
However, it was at the height of his influence that the errors in Soros’s reasoning began to appear. Soros’s publicly stated premise was that the de-prosecution and decarceration reforms ushered in by his prosecutors would not degrade but in fact improve safety in American cities. That belief was a major miscalculation. In poor cities, homicides have spiked, including the largest single-year increase in American history in 2020, continued escalation in 2021, and lingering high rates of murder clustered in cities with progressive prosecutors even after the end of Covid restrictions. (Apologists who blame Covid for homicide increases should note that murders were rising in cities with progressive prosecutors before the pandemic hit.) In wealthy cities with Soros-backed prosecutors, like San Francisco and Austin, property crimes rose dramatically. Once-idyllic cities like Portland, now under the jurisdiction of Soros-backed chief prosecutor Mike Schmidt, have suffered from rising violent crime and property crime. Several progressive American cities, including Baltimore, Chicago, Boston, and Philadelphia experienced mass shootings during Fourth of July celebrations. Cities under the influence of Soros-backed prosecutors are less safe than a decade ago. The promise of increased safety was an illusion.
Soros also premised his experiment in criminal justice on the belief that his preferred reforms would benefit minorities and disadvantaged people in American cities. However, the main victims of the rising homicide rates have been black Americans. Moreover, as businesses have fled increasingly lawless urban centers, the remaining residents have lost both their jobs and their local businesses.
Soros’s final error was in betting that his prosecutors would bring about permanent changes in the role of district attorneys. Instead, it now appears that the reality of crime in American cities has limited the shelf life of Soros-backed prosecutors generally to about two elected terms in office. Kim Foxx in Chicago has announced that she will not stand for reelection. Kimberly Gardner in St. Louis resigned. San Francisco voters recalled Chesa Boudin after less than one term. In Los Angeles, George Gascón would have been recalled if the organizers of that effort had paid attention to the technical requirements. Marilyn Mosby lost a primary election in Baltimore. Boston’s Rachel Rollins “fell upward” into an appointment as a United States Attorney for the Biden administration but then quickly resigned amid an ethics investigation. Aramis Ayala in Orlando declined to seek reelection. Tori Salazar in Stockton got knocked off in a primary. Tampa’s Andrew Warren was removed by Florida governor Ron DeSantis. More than a dozen Soros-backed prosecutors have been defeated, resigned, or otherwise removed from office in the past few years.
Lest Soros critics become too giddy, however, other cities have just elected their first Soros-backed progressive prosecutors (though the new Alameda County District Attorney Pam Price is already facing recall efforts). It may be that having a Soros prosecutor in your city is like getting chickenpox in the old days: everybody gets it once, but then you develop immunity.
Thus, George Soros’s legacy for American criminal justice will probably waver somewhere between that of a recession and a depression, to put it into the economic terms that have defined his career. If all his calculations had turned out to be true, he would have been hailed as a genius of criminal-justice reform. He believed that the role of the district attorney as an absorbing barrier for crime control was vastly overvalued. Like his bet on the English pound, Soros took a short position on the value of American prosecutors. He was right about their discretionary powers and right about the impact his donations would have on elections—but dead wrong that those reforms would improve safety. Now, American cities are paying the price for his bets.
Thomas Hogan, an adjunct fellow at the Manhattan Institute, has served as a federal prosecutor, local prosecutor, and elected district attorney. He currently is in private practice.
Photo by Drew Hallowell/Getty Images
House Oversight probes FCC's expedited approval of Soros purchase of 200+ radio stations ahead of election
The Federal Communications Commission expedited a decision to allow Democratic megadonor George Soros to obtain a major stake in more than 200 radio stations — a move the House Oversight Committee is investigating.
This FCC and FTC which has been the most anti-M&A in history for some reason saw fit to fast-pass this. Hmmmmmm.
he is an absolute cancer to his cities and has blood on his hands. guy can't die soon enough. and his kid appears to be just as cluelessHouse Oversight probes FCC's expedited approval of Soros purchase of 200+ radio stations ahead of election
The Federal Communications Commission expedited a decision to allow Democratic megadonor George Soros to obtain a major stake in more than 200 radio stations — a move the House Oversight Committee is investigating.www.foxnews.com
This FCC and FTC which has been the most anti-M&A in history for some reason saw fit to fast-pass this. Hmmmmmm.
I know MK-Ultra was a CIA brainwashing experiment or program but have no idea what Kamala's mother had to do with it or how it has anything to do with today's military. Just wondering how it all fits together.
No way.
Walz is a geek, and would sound like a geek, but at least he could riff for 3 hours with Rogan and sound somewhat competent...weak, but competent.
There is no way Kamala could just naturally riff on random topics like Trump (or even Walz) could. She's a puppet.
She could talk about that Hollywood scene. Rollin with montel and shit.
I don't think Walz could either. After some exposure to Vance, I think he'd do well in that format. The other 3 on the 2 big tickets would do better to stay away. Trump was barely passable from what I've been able to get through so far.
Sounds like Harris agreed to the Pod but terms were Joe would need to travel to her and it would only be for an hour.
Not the way it works honey. JD will be on this week. I expect him to crush. as he does.
Not the way it works honey. JD will be on this week. I expect him to crush. as he does.
Last edited:
Both parties have their share of crazy, greedy, and manipulative billionaires. I'm guessing you could find similar stories about many of them. Whether its stories like above or industrial tycoons knowingly and deliberately polluting or real estate barons buying up property and driving prices to high for the common man. It maybe could be countered that at least Soros seemed to have good intentions and didn't profit off the criminal justice reforms he sought? Still sounds like he really f-cked a lot of people and that's what matters.
I don't like any of them messing with politics through back channels and secret bags of cash that come with expectations. I think citizens United needs to be overturned, campaign donations need a hard cap that is scrutinized, and lobbyist should be outlawed. I just am not sure how or why Soros is the King Boogyman in a sea of boogymen. And I'm guessing that's also why Outside listed him amongst his other examples.
Because he influences so many local elections as an outsider by backing the dumbest most radical candidates that have dire public safety consequences. Stick to pollution and shit. Not prosecutors etc
Pretending he’s some fictional bogeyman is pathetic
I think Soros is working off a lot of the guilt he says he doesn't feel about watching his Nazi guardian put fellow jews on the train after taking their life's savings and possessions.
His son is worse. Look at this X account and all the photos he posts of the Dem politicians that he has purchased.
Do you think it's an exaggeration that the future of htis country is dependent upon a trump win?
I thought Trump came across as a regular guy. Maybe it's just me, but, other than rambling some, I thought he gave out some good insights and he certainly didn't come off as Hitler.
I know it's ridiculous to you and me, but look at the posters here who take it seriously.
Last edited:
The idea that there is serious concern about the military going door to door, asking to see proof of citizenship is astonishing to me. It's right up their with infowars level conspiracies like the UN sending troops to confiscate firearms.
People have had a few decades of gaslighting by their news outlet of choice and it shows.
Just watching a segment on The Five and they talked about Bezos telling the WaPo to not endorse a candidate.
Evidently he wrote an editorial that said something to the effect that, with all the false stories (Russian Collusion, Jesse Smollet, "there are fine people", etc.), people don't believe media anymore and they need to improve their credibility.
I thought that was pretty good self-analysis.
