Pelosi blinks. Must be the botox. Pelosi caves on articles of impeachment because she has no leveragehttps://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/pelosi-caves-on-articles-of-impeachment-because-she-had-no-leverage
60+ of your countrymen, plus ten Swedes and others. The crash video looked horrendous. I can't imagine what thoughts the passengers must of had. My niece Lisa was on Flt 77 on 9-11 that the terrorists crashed into the Pentagon. I can't get that thought out of my head what terror she went through.
Typical right wing spin from the Washington Examiner.
I see nothing in the article that is inaccurate.
That's no surprise.
And yet you cant point out anything that is inaccurate. Thanks.
Here's irony. So an American Navy ship accidentally shoots down Iranian commercial jet years ago during tensions between the two countries thinking it was an Iranian fighter that was going to attack. So now Iran shoots down a Ukrainian jet, everyone says by mistake. But what if the truth is that they thought it was an American bomber, that it just wasn't a misfiring or whatever? WHy else would they fire? Why isn't anyone talking about this?
It's not that it's inaccurate, it's that it's full of cherry-picked stats and loud conclusions. It's the kind of thing that's headlined, "Expert Author DECIMATES Nancy Pelosi" on social media, and then turns out to be an opinion piece with "evidence" picked to support a preconceived conclusion.
Alan, you should know me better by now. At one time you commented that my posts were sarcastic. Although the ME situation has changed, I did not, and I did not justify that "accident" in any way. It wasn't meant in that way, more like an anticipation how the Iranian government would describe it. Nothing would justify such a stupid and irresponsible action. None of the available yellow emoticons appended to my post would have been appropriate. I am very sorry about your niece and all people on board of that plane.
Well duh...it IS an opinion piece. They call that out right at the top of the page. It's how opinion gets written these days on both sides. Welcome the the world.
This is a very typical right-wing "argument." If a group of experts says something that does not jibe with your pre-conceived notions, first try to discredit the group (the psychiatric association) and then try to discredit the messenger (me). Of course changing what you think is out of the question.
Right. So don’t promote it as meaningful.
So, since you won't answer the question, Peter, we'll have to conclude that you're neither a psychiatrist nor an MD with psychiatric training, and that your "diagnosis" of Mr. Trump is pure bullshit based on Trump derangement syndrome.
No, Fab, my diagnosis is "pure bullshit." I'm no psychiatrist, but I'm an expert bullshit detector.
So then why do you say your diagnosis is "based on Trump derangement syndrome"?
I was just showing that we had a good relation with Iran
here you go again - not with Iran (country) but with a puppet regime (Shah) installed in coup organized by US & UK