Shes called him or connected with his people to say, we have to do something. And that resulted in the attack on the american base. It was largely a failure, and i think most of it fell outside of the grounds of the american airbase in the middle east. But they essentially said, we have to do something. We have to save face. Im just curious because we were told for 2 or 3 days ahead of time, something is coming, something is coming. Of course, intelligence could have picked that up, but do you think anything similar happened or could have happened here with iran calling the United States or israel and saying, we have to do something, and here is what that something was, something that amounted, yes, youre right. An unprecedented state action, but also a failed action. Im almost certain that there were back Channel Communications of some kind, and they basically openly said it was going to happen. So i think the same thing happened before the Biden Administration retaliated for the u. S
lower court in his tax case, he started attacking them. even though he is attacked them and they tried to buy a week or two at most by going there, in the meantime he is not going to get a say of the decision of this very conservative panel. so the case will go ahead and i would not even be surprised if, as a face saving move, judge irene cannon or to decide simply to follow the directive of the court of appeals before its words reached her courtroom and simply dismiss the case to show that she can do something right. she is not done anything else right yet in this case. so there is the potential of donald trump using a couple of weeks in one of those futile attempts to get a supreme court to rule, and then we get one of those responses from the supreme court unsigned, just throwing it away as they have done before when the same
the meantime he is not going to get a say of the decision of this very conservative panel. so the case will go ahead and i would not even be surprised if, as a face saving move, judge aileen cannon were to decide simply to follow the directive of the court of appeals before its words reached her courtroom and simply dismiss the case to show that she can do something right. she is not done anything else right yet in this case. so there is the potential of donald trump using a couple of weeks in one of those futile attempts to get a supreme court to rule, and then we get one of those responses from the supreme court unsigned, just throwing it away as they have done before when the same appeals court ruled against him in the same case. so we have traveled this road before, which is why i do not think we need to spend a lot of
they will get paid or not. this may portend a long shut down. it s unclear what he would take. i m not going to talk about it, but i will say this. we have been building a lot of wall. a lot of people don t know. i haven t been stressing it, frankly. he needs a face saving move. who gets bludgeoned to death in the shut down, that s who caves first. his base isn t bludgeoning him to death, but if there is no wall, the base will bludgeon him. they made it clear. they want that wall. that is important to them. he needs to get out of this and save face to look like he was strong and he stood up for principals and that s what republicans want to see. someone who is strong. that is going to put them in the
different sort back in 1993. i would guess this candid admission of how he operates his business and his mulling the consequences. he said if supply more heroi, meth and marijuana than anyone in the world. what a quote? the quote was obtained by an actor. he might have been performing an act of journalism or might not have been. what are the legal ramifications? maybe that s a face saving move because they weren t able to find el chapo but sean penn was able to. are there legal consequences? based on the facts available, i don t think there are any legal problems for sean penn or rolling stone. journalist interview bad people all the time. journalists are not obliged to