SkyDekker

They said in the above article (or I read it elsewhere) that it was limited to those who didn't provide it voluntarily. That still doesn't speak to whether it was only employees or also visitors, contractors, vendors or direct family members. The CNN article OP linked really is quite clear. it pertains to male staff who have not given their DNA voluntarily. What isn't clear is how many people this really is about, both voluntary and ordered group. To the poster who said judges make mistakes: I fully agree, hence why I mentioned I would be happy to revisit once more information becomes available, such as an appeal.

IMO, it is making the Ds look foolish, refusing to negotiate, and thereby reducing their power and influence. I believe negotiation requires each party to bring something to the table and then work out a compromise. When the Ds say no to the other side negotiations stop. President Trump is making Chuck and Nancy look bad. Their goal is to eliminate him and future Rs from the WH. They appear to be petulant. With good reason, their world of power elitism is crumbling. Enjoy the show [Mueller investigation is now to save Mueller] Sanctions coming Military tribunals Detention centers built or under construction What was in those 5 shocking envelopes? You continue to show what a simple one trick pony you are. When Ds are in power you believe the Rs should not negotiate and not compromise. When Rs are in power you believe Ds should negotiate and compromise. I guess you make your life pretty simple when you just believe everything an R does is good and everything a D does is bad. No thinking required.

Showing once again that you are a lover of the truly fake news. What was he referring to? There were fake nudes going around of her. Of course somebody like Rush would snicker about that. Women are to be debased and should not have any position of power.

Trump could be successfully impeached, subsequently arrested, tried and jailed and die hard Trump fans would maintain his innocence. They will dream up some imaginary entity to blame. Brought to you by the supporters of the party of personal responsibility.

From the CNN link in OP: Like I said, you are clearly wrong.

Considering a judge signed the warrants, you are clearly wrong. I will be happy to revisit when more information becomes available.

Bullshit. What if only 20 males are found to be most likely to have had access, with limited opportunity for other males. Do you still think that is the same as all males in New York City? Because Argumentum ad Absurdum is a logical fallacy unlikely to fly with any reasonable judge.

Yeah, pretty sure I did't say anything about "only suspects". That statement is entirely true though, so why not? Though more likely any male who had access to her in any way is suspect. Without knowing numbers or the operation of the facility, that might be a pretty small group.

US is spending $12 billion to help out farmers hurt by trade war. (some of which going to foreign held companies) Let up on some of that stupidity and you have your $5 billion.

Depending on the type of facility, it would be very reasonable to suggest that those who work there are suspects.

Like your president says: they knew what they signed up for.

Maybe this is a good place to start. I hear a lot of people saying this, but what does that mean? When would you consider the border to be secure? Can you give an example of any border in the world you would consider to be secure? There is no doubt that physical barriers can help reduce the flow of people. It would appear that in many areas that has already been accomplished. I am all for maintaining those barriers/walls or improving them if required. I haven't seen anything that would indicate a plan, something that shows where additional barriers would actually be effective. I doubt you would have been willing to give $5.7 billion to President Hillary Clinton for Healthcare, without a clear plan on what it would be spent on, but the union of nurses said the nurses are demanding it.

This is too funny: https://twitter.com/_AlexHirsch/status/1083140191362048000

It was an honest question, but you don't care about any answers cause you have made up your mind. lol....Trump supporter I take it?

Neither. He is posting to piss you off. He's admitted this in the past. Nope. You got it wrong this time. But then, that’s been happening a lot lately. So if neither is wrong, which one of the two options is right?

The NRA are big gun rights supporters until black people start carrying guns.

Just to make it even clearer what incredible bullshit this whole thing is: https://www.cato.org/blog/crime-along-mexican-border-lower-rest-country

Because it isn't Illegal for Mexicans to come to Canada. And yes, it is amazing that people from a warm climate struggle with winter in Canada. I mean, who would have thought? Should also note than more than 7,000 crossed the border illegally from the US into Canada in 2018, which would mean the net illegal migration is in the US' favour.

Isn't it incredible how we are able to be against illegal immigration and not call for a wall along the length of the border? We are even able to apprehend and detain illegal immigrants without a wall. Maybe Trump can send some of your people over for some lessons? But then, as much as I am not a fan of Trudeau, I don't think he needs a gimmick to try and remember to talk about immigration.

I wonder how many terrorists a $25 billion fence will catch? Wonder how many of the 09/11 terrorists entered the US through the southern border? We already know that the native-born population commit more crimes than those who have illegally crossed the southern border.

I think you mean Quiet Skies. But you are right, I didn't realize that TSA was involved with that aspect. Didn't think they did much beyond screening outbound passengers.

What does the TSA have to do with stopping people at point of entry? Were any of those people "known or suspected terrorists" stopped by the TSA?

Well, other than for instance the campaign giving polling data to a GRU officer. But, you have already said you don't care. You have made your claim, stated your opinion and you see it as a badge of honour that nothing can ever change that opinion. I see it as weakness. That claim isn't correct and requires more nuance than just that. You mean the mainstream media who decided not to televise an address from president Obama on immigration because it was considered too political and now has no problem televising Trump?

On a separate note: the US Supremem Court has rejected the appeal of the unidentified foreign state owned company who are trying to get out of a subpoena. The administrative stay has been lifted and they will have to comply. This case is widely believed to relate to the Mueller investigation. It also avoids any issues related to the possibility of a fully secret case in front of the Supreme Court.

The further interesting part is that Kilimnik (the spy) was in business with Sam Patten. Patton, Manafort and Kilimnik worked together on the Ukrainian "election" and the Cambridge Analytica role in that. Patten has plead guilty to illegally funneling money to Trump's inauguration fund and is cooperating with Mueller. But I am sure it is all a big nothingburger.....