Has he really put on this much weight or has this photo been altered?
Login to view embedded media

Government permits expressly allow offshore wind developers to kill whales, porpoises, dolphins and seals.

Login to view embedded media

@amuse
Subscribe

PROJECT 2025 v AGENDA 47:

Democrats continue to spread the debunked lie that President Trump is somehow behind Project 2025.

Bookmark this post for responses to the most common lies pushed by Democrats.

Lie: Trump is mentioned 300 times in Project 2025
Truth: Trump is mentioned 45 times while Biden and Harris are mentioned 19 times.

Lie: Project 2025 author Skye L. Perryman, JD testified under oath to Rep Crockett that Trump's name was mentioned 312 times.
Truth: Skye L. Perryman, JD is a lawyer called by Democrats to testify about the dangers of Project 2025. Rep Crockett confused her with one of the authors and began grilling her about the number of times Trump's name was mentioned. Ms. Perryman testified she did not know - Rep Crockett made the false claim of 312 times.

Lie: JD Vance wrote the forward to Project 2025
Truth: JD Vance did not write the foreword to Project 2025. The foreword was written by Kevin D. Roberts, PhD, who is the president of The Heritage Foundation.
NOTE: JD Vance did write the forward to Dr. Robert's new book Dawn's Early Light which comes out in November. So his connection to Project 2025 is that he wrote the forward to an unpublished book for the guy that wrote the forward to Project 2025.

Lie: Trump based Agenda 47 on Project 2025
Truth: Trump's Agenda 47 was released December 2022 while Project 2025 wasn't released until April 2023.

Lie: Project 2025 was written by 150-200 former Trump officials.
Truth: Project 2025 was written by 34 authors and 29 contributors many of whom (but not all) served in one or more Republican administrations include Reagan's, Bush I's, Bush II's, and Trump's.

What drives me crazy is the fact that Democrats would hate President Trump's real platform - the so-called Agenda 47 just as much or more as they hate Project 2025. Here are a few key differences between Trump's platform and Project 2025 that might be helpful:

To identify policy differences between Project 2025 and Trump's Platform (from the second document), I've compared the key positions laid out in both. Here are the main areas where contradictions or differences might arise:

Energy Policy
- Project 2025: Advocates for a balanced energy policy, promoting the continued use of fossil fuels but also including nuclear energy and some focus on environmental regulation.
- Trump's Platform: A more aggressive stance on energy dominance, with a focus on oil, gas, and coal. The platform calls for the termination of the Green New Deal and emphasizes "Drill, Baby, Drill" to reduce costs and strengthen energy independence.
- Difference: Project 2025 supports some regulation and a diversified energy mix, while Trump's Platform appears to be much more aggressive in cutting environmental regulations and prioritizing fossil fuels above all else.

Immigration
- Project 2025: Seeks to reinstate most Trump-era immigration policies, including stricter visa control and merit-based systems. It also pushes to reduce overall immigration numbers, tighten asylum policies, and reorganize immigration agencies.
- Trump's Platform: In line with Trump’s previous policies, the platform prioritizes completing the border wall, deporting millions of illegal migrants, and conducting the largest deportation operation in U.S. history.
- Difference: Both support strong immigration control, but Project 2025's reorganization plans and some nuances (like "reducing guest worker visas" in Project 2025) are less emphasized in Trump's Platform, which is more focused on deportation and wall completion.

Education
- Project 2025: Advocates for school choice and some reduction of federal oversight, but includes a broader emphasis on career readiness and economic outcomes. Project 2025 also suggests working with local governments for educational outcomes.
- Trump's Platform: The platform includes a commitment to abolishing the Department of Education, returning all education control to the states, and banning Critical Race Theory (CRT) and "radical gender ideology" in schools. There’s a strong push for patriotic education and a return to traditional civics.
- Difference: Trump’s Platform’s call for completely eliminating the Department of Education goes further than Project 2025’s suggestions of reform, which do not include total elimination.

Healthcare and Social Security
- Project 2025: Supports work requirements for Medicaid, reducing dependency on welfare, and restructuring health-related social programs to make them more sustainable.
- Trump's Platform: Pledges to protect Social Security and Medicare without cuts, with a focus on preventing Medicare abuse by illegal immigrants and rejecting any changes to the retirement age.
- Difference: Project 2025 includes more emphasis on restructuring welfare programs, while Trump's Platform promises to safeguard these programs without significant changes.

Defense and Foreign Policy
- Project 2025: Calls for a leaner military with a strong focus on protecting U.S. interests and reducing unnecessary foreign engagements. It also mentions reforming the Department of Defense to ensure efficiency.
- Trump's Platform: Calls for reviving and modernizing the military to be the strongest in the world, emphasizing peace through strength and advocating for an Iron Dome Missile Defense Shield across the U.S. It also emphasizes countering China and rebuilding alliances.
- Difference: Trump’s Platform is more focused on military expansion and dominance, while Project 2025 favors reorganization and efficiency.

Environmental and Climate Policies
- Project 2025: Does not prioritize environmental deregulation as strongly and is more moderate in its approach, seeking to balance energy independence with responsible stewardship of resources.
- Trump's Platform: Clearly rejects climate change policies like the Green New Deal and promotes a complete rollback of environmental regulations that hinder the production of oil, gas, and coal.
- Difference: Trump’s Platform is significantly more aggressive in rejecting climate policies, while Project 2025 is somewhat more measured in its environmental recommendations.

Tax and Economic Policies
- Project 2025: Supports simplifying the tax code with two tax brackets (15% and 30%) and lowering the corporate tax rate from 21% to 18%.
- Trump's Platform: Pledges to make the Trump tax cuts permanent and continue to cut taxes for workers. It also proposes eliminating taxes on tips for service workers.
- Difference: Trump’s Platform’s tax strategy is more aligned with making Trump-era cuts permanent, while Project 2025 suggests more structural reforms, including simplifying the tax system.

These differences highlight varying degrees of emphasis, with Project 2025 generally more focused on long-term bureaucratic reform and efficiency, while Trump’s Platform is bolder and more aggressive, particularly in energy, military, and immigration policies.

We really need to shake things up.

Yesterday was just embarrassing. We played poor fundamental football..offense just isn’t that good (I love GG and his effort but he psyches himself out).

Secondary is putrid

You see the football team sitting at 3-3.

The 3 losses are to teams without a loss:

1. Penn St - likely moving up to #3
2. Pitt - possibly into the top 15
3. Iowa St. - will be top 10

We were non-competitive against Penn St, but let’s face it, their program is leaps and bounds ahead of us at this point. We should have won at Pitt. And, last night’s game was there for the taking, but instead we gave it away.

The team isn’t terrible and the program itself isn’t dead, but I think it’s time for a spark and that means a new coaching staff. However, will the AD see it that way? From an outsider’s perspective, 3-3 is probably where our record should stand after 6 games and our schedule.

No freedom of speech in Dictator Trump's dark America under the threat of violence or jail time. He wants to instill fear in anyone who would dare oppose or criticize the New Reich.

'Totally illegal': Trump escalates rhetoric on outlawing political dissent and criticism

Donald Trump is ramping up his rhetoric depicting his political rivals and critics as criminals, while dropping a long trail of suggestions that he favors outlawing political speech that he deems misleading or challenges his claims to power.

In a speech Friday in Aurora, Colorado, the Republican presidential nominee blasted the immigration system and lobbed a rhetorical grenade at his Democratic rival, Vice President Kamala Harris.

“She’s a criminal. She’s a criminal,” said Trump, who was found guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in his New York hush money trial. “She really is, if you think about it.”


It’s a pattern of messaging that has long been part of Trump’s stump speeches but has escalated significantly in his 2024 candidacy. In the final stretch to the Nov. 5 election, the former president has developed a tendency to claim that speech he disapproves of is illegal, even if it is protected by the First Amendment.

A questionable cut of a “60 Minutes” Harris interview? “Totally illegal,” Trump wrote on X, saying it makes Harris look better and that CBS should have its broadcast license revoked.

The Harris campaign editing headlines in paid Google ads? “Totally Illegal,” he wrote, vowing that Google “will pay a big price” for it.

Democrats are trying to “illegally hide” part of his statement calling on rioters to be peaceful on Jan. 6, he claimed this month.

In August, Trump told a crowd in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, that criticisms of judges who have ruled in alignment with him should be banned. “I believe it’s illegal what they do,” Trump said. “I believe they are playing the ref. They’re constantly criticizing our great — some of our greatest justices and a lot of great judges. … Playing the ref with our judges and our justices should be punishable by very serious fines and beyond that.”

‘This is out of the autocratic playbook’​

An expert who studies authoritarianism and fascism said Trump’s rhetoric about criminalizing dissent is familiar, and could carry serious implications for the country if he’s elected president.

“This is out of the autocratic playbook. As autocrats consolidate their power once they’re in office, anything that threatens their power, or exposes their corruption, or releases information that’s harmful to them in any way becomes illegal,” said Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a historian and professor at New York University who wrote the 2020 book “Strongmen: From Mussolini to the Present.”

“He’s actually rehearsing, in a sense, what he would be doing as head of state, which is what Orban does, Modi is doing, Putin has long done,” she said, referring to the leaders of Hungary, India and Russia, respectively. “Just as there’s a divide now because of this brainwashing about who is a patriot and who is a criminal about Jan. 6, right? In the same way, telling the truth in any area — journalists, scientists, even people like me, anybody who is engaged in objective inquiry, prosecutors, of course — they become criminal elements and they need to be shut down.”

Some Harris voters say Trump is channeling dictators.

“He reminds me of Hitler and the rise to power,” said Dan Geiger, a retired Pittsburgh resident. “The more he lies the more it’s accepted by his faithful followers.”

Trump has suggested investigations involving his conduct are illegitimate under the law and vowed revenge against the prosecutors who oversee them. He has also claimed, with no evidence, that President Joe Biden directed those prosecutions, even the state indictments he has no authority over.

Upon early revelations of his New York indictment, Trump said the prosecutor “ILLEGALLY LEAKED” it. And the probe into his 2016 campaign’s ties to Russia? “They illegally spied on my campaign.”

Projecting Knicks' rotation for the 2024-25 NBA season​

New York's new starting five appears to be set in stone

With two preseason games in the books, Knicks fans got a promising first look at their new squad following the shocking trade for All-Star big man Karl-Anthony Towns.

While we've yet to see regular season play, which comes with further questions and adjustments, their expected opening night rotation is starting to take shape.

With that in mind, let’s project the lineups and players head coach Tom Thibodeau is expected to run with to start this new season.
The starting five appears set in stone. Jalen Brunson, Mikal Bridges, OG Anunoby, Josh Hart and Towns started the first two preseason games and will likely be the opening unit in Boston.

There are plenty of reasons to back these five. It arguably includes New York’s five best players, allows for seamless, stifling switching between the two and four spots, and pairs Brunson with two of his former Villanova teammates and Towns at center, spacing the floor.

Still, there could be modifications made down the line to watch out for if things don’t click like they’re supposed to. Miles McBride is the current sixth man, but he certainly has a case for taking Hart’s spot given his superior three-point shooting.

McBride can be switched around defensively, but inserting him could hurt the Knicks on the defensive boards -- and takes a primary screener out of the lineup. While some fans are calling for this change now after two quiet offensive outings from Hart, they shouldn’t expect one until a solid 10+ games into the regular season.

Another look could be sliding Towns to the four and putting a traditional rim-protector at center. But with Mitchell Robinson out until December or January and their next choices being Jericho Sims and Ariel Hukporti, this will likely remain a situational look more than any kind of permanent solution.
So with the first five in tow, McBride will be first off the bench after a breakout year and playoffs, which carried into a 22-point opener in the preseason. While he subbed in for Bridges the first game, Brunson was the first seated on Wednesday night. But with McBride sidelined due to an illness it was Cameron Payne who took his place.

It will be interesting to see which starters Thibodeau decides to play heavily with the bench unit. He would commonly let one of Brunson or Julius Randle play out the entire first quarter last season, saving the other for an early second quarter substitution and minimizing minutes played without either star.
New York has a bit more optionality this year with Bridges, Anunoby, and Towns being capable of lifting backup units for stretches. Towns got his taste when Thibodeau played him for the entirety of the third quarter last game.

Their two wings aren’t going to have their usual scoring volumes next to Brunson and Towns, so expect them to get solid opportunities with the bench. Bridges is the NBA’s iron man and Thibodeau won’t be afraid to utilize him as such.

Smart money would be on Brunson or Bridges playing the entire first quarter and the back half of the second. Then Towns or one of the other starters would do the same in the second half.

Depending on if Thibodeau wants to run an eight or nine-man rotation, Hart could see a chunk of minutes in filling in gaps with both units. That will also determine how many reserves we’ll actually see on game night.

After McBride, Precious Achiuwa looks to be the go-to big man, able to play either the four or five. Thibodeau can opt for size and a more traditional center in Sims, but Achiuwa is the more developed piece at the moment, and units with both will look clunky.

With two all-but-locked-in bench players, it will be either or both of Payne and Landry Shamet filling out the lineup. Thibodeau spoke highly of both veterans coming out of training camp and he gave them major minutes in two preseason games.

Tyler Kolek is complicating matters after a couple of notable performances, though. His play is reminiscent of a rookie Immanuel Quickley sneaking up and stealing a rotation spot in 2020-21 -- something Kolek is capable of doing if this keeps up.

The answer to this bench rotation may just end up being who’s rolling and who the Knicks are playing in a given matchup. They have the optionality to go big with Achiuwa and Sims, or small with the former and three bench guards.

Preseason and training camp are the only samples available thus far, but the real weight will be on the regular season. If a reserve isn’t playing up to par, Thibodeau won’t hesitate to nix them from the rotation in favor of someone who might.

Of course, injuries start to make an impact, too. So even if there’s a preferred rotation already in mind, anything can upend it at a moment’s notice. This is a projection, though, so here is the best guess off what we’ve seen so far:

PG: Brunson 35 | Payne 13
SG: Bridges 22 | McBride 26
SF: Anunoby 27 | Bridges 13 | Shamet 8
PF: Hart 35 | Anunoby 8 | Achiuwa 5
C: Towns 35 | Achiuwa 13

We’ll ultimately see what the Knicks go with, but this much is clear: their starting five is one of the best in the league, and they have some optionality around them. The pieces are there, but can Thibodeau maximize them to become a championship-winning team?

FEMA is in FL NC TN SC helping with hurricane relieve
No one is eating cats or dogs in ohio
He did lose the 2020 election
He is backing project 2025 and will make us a theocracy
He will be a dictator
He will help Russia defeat Ukraine and will do Putins bidding

To dangerous to be President

Says program’s rep is can’t win the big game. Fans were all in and once again Brown falls flat.

Navy is ranked, NAVY! How does that make you feel Mountaineer fans!

fire him

I am not savvy enough to know how to start a Crowd Source or another type fund raising account, but if some of you could set one up, it would be interesting to see how much money we could raise to buyout NB by the end of season

About time we dig up some old Champion sets from Kmart Distribution.

We’re coddling these guys.

Our country. If this comes to pass. Bad bad for the US. Keep church and state separate and the religious right are a problem and can’t be trusted.

He seemed past is prime, right? Yeesh!

We used annually to play for a trophy in Eastern football with Pitt and PSU. The winner of the "series" among the 3 would win the Old Ironsides Trophy. Syracuse was also on the periphery of this when Gentle Ben Schwatzwalder was their coach.

It died when PSU left the eastern indies.

However right now among PSU, Pitt and Syracuse they have a combined 1 loss. My how we have fallen off since HCNB came to Morgantown.

Scheduling teams like Penn State and Alabama at the beginning of the season is crazy. We have a hard enough Big 12 schedule without scheduling nonconference nationally ranked teams.

Kicked the shit out of Bean and WVU