Both sides gerrymander even if the Republicans do it the most at present. I'm against it.
Your posts indicate otherwise, evince.
ElaborateYour posts indicate otherwise, evince.
The idea in the 1990s was that we didn't need a military capable of going toe to toe with the Red Army in central Europe. The peace dividend was always an expectation in American history.Agreed. The Republicans made a similar mistake by letting a vocal minority push a bigoted, White Nationalist agenda.
Clinton, at the time, led the way to "turn guns into butter". He and the Democratic leadership effectively became isolationist by turning their eyes from outward into inward. Clinton's sex scandals followed by accusations of "Wag the Dog" prevented him from doing what was necessary to take out al-Qaeda after they attacked US embassies. A few cruise missiles was not an effective solution.
Operation Infinite Reach was the codename for American cruise missile strikes on al-Qaeda bases that were launched concurrently across two continents on 20 August 1998. Launched by the U.S. Navy, the strikes hit the al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum, Sudan, and a camp in Khost Province, Afghanistan, in retaliation for al-Qaeda's August 7 bombings of American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, which killed 224 people (including 12 Americans) and injured over 4,000 others.
Operation Infinite Reach - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
This man was a hero
John P. O'Neill - Wikipedia
He subsequently learned of al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, and investigated the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia and the 2000 USS Colebombing in Yemen. Partly due to personal friction he had within the FBI and federal government, O'Neill left the Bureau in August 2001.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._O'Neill#cite_note-pbs-1"><span>[</span>1<span>]</span></a> He became the head of security at the World Trade Center, where he died at age 49 while helping others to evacuate the South Tower during the September 11 attacks. O'Neill's life has been featured in a number of documentaries and books.
Got anything?Your posts indicate otherwise, evince.
Answer: When you continue to defend 100% of everything Trump does even when right-wing gun rights groups are complaining about Trump.
Gun rights groups and legal experts question Trump administration’s stance on the Second Amendment after shooting
Claims by Trump administration officials that the man fatally shot by a federal agent in Minneapolis lacked a right to possess a firearm and that his killing was justified are being dismissed by legal experts and assailed by gun rights groups ordinarily aligned with the president.
The rhetoric from Trump law enforcement officials, including his FBI director and the top Border Patrol agent, goes against the decadeslong GOP effort to throttle gun control rules.
“They’ve stood up in court and tried to push back against state laws that regulate firearms — access, use, carry — so it’s pretty shocking to me to see them now use an example of a lawful gun owner as justification for force,” Megan Walsh, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School who specializes in the Second Amendment, said of the Trump officials’ comments.
Gun rights groups and legal experts question Trump administration’s stance on the Second Amendment after shooting
Claims by Trump administration officials that the man fatally shot by a federal agent in Minneapolis lacked a right to possess a firearm and that his killing was justified are being dismissed by legal experts and assailed by gun rights groups ordinarily aligned with the president.www.yahoo.com
Then give ICE your guns or join ICE
there's no new stance on guns.Answer: When you continue to defend 100% of everything Trump does even when right-wing gun rights groups are complaining about Trump.
Gun rights groups and legal experts question Trump administration’s stance on the Second Amendment after shooting
Claims by Trump administration officials that the man fatally shot by a federal agent in Minneapolis lacked a right to possess a firearm and that his killing was justified are being dismissed by legal experts and assailed by gun rights groups ordinarily aligned with the president.
The rhetoric from Trump law enforcement officials, including his FBI director and the top Border Patrol agent, goes against the decadeslong GOP effort to throttle gun control rules.
“They’ve stood up in court and tried to push back against state laws that regulate firearms — access, use, carry — so it’s pretty shocking to me to see them now use an example of a lawful gun owner as justification for force,” Megan Walsh, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School who specializes in the Second Amendment, said of the Trump officials’ comments.
Gun rights groups and legal experts question Trump administration’s stance on the Second Amendment after shooting
Claims by Trump administration officials that the man fatally shot by a federal agent in Minneapolis lacked a right to possess a firearm and that his killing was justified are being dismissed by legal experts and assailed by gun rights groups ordinarily aligned with the president.
