Comparing Biden's mental troubles with Reagan is such a joke. Here is Reagan at the end of his first term -- no list, just calling on reporters and coherently and succinctly answering questions.
Here is Reagan's final press conference -- where he recalls questions that reporters had asked him 8 earlier, as well other specific, historic and policy information.
Hey, remember that time Obama was trying to cut a sweetheart deal with Islamists in Iran and his allies at the New York Times created a handy online chart so that readers could track down all the Jewish politicians who opposed the president?
Echo chamber nitwits mimicked Obama's false choice re deal or war. "Though more Jewish members of Congress support the deal than oppose it, the Democrats against the deal are more likely to be Jewish or represent Jewish constituencies," it explained.
The chart listed all Democrats who opposed the deal with corresponding question: “Jewish?” Then it listed the estimated Jewish population of the constituency.
Using this standard, no individual funder of issue campaigns "backs" any candidate or cause. It's more semantic bs and Calvinball.
Kessler also claims that calling someone Soros-backed -- when they are Soros-backed-- is anti-Semitic. It's very convenient that no one is allowed to be critical of the top individual political donor in the nation. thefederalist.com/2023/03/31/lef…
So, Biden's lawyers didn't just accidentally trip over some classified documents when innocently packing boxes for a move. Some agency or law enforcement probably asked for missing document. And only then did Biden's people begin "cooperating."
This story is being leaked in small doses to mitigate the political damage. But the fact is that Biden probably knew he was possession of many classified documents, some for a decade or more, even when he dinging Trump and even as his admin was ordering a raid.
It's going to be interesting to find out what the feds were looking for. If we ever find out.
I've read the thread 3x and I can't any quote undermining the notion that MLK's dream was an America where ppl were judged not by the "color of their skin but by the content of their character." Legum seems to think MLK's criticism of racism is itself a form of identitarianism.
Of course, the entire thread is a giant strawman. Because the argument isn't that we should IGNORE race, or the history of race, but rather that the ideal is that people should not be judged -- legally and societally -- by their immutable qualities, but rather by their deeds.
It says a lot about the modern left that they're annoyed by this ideal.