Kari McElrea
@kemce.bsky.social
🇨🇦 A Canadian who is politically obsessed.
I am ideologically far left but politically
centre left. Compromise is not a dirty word.
🤞 For the next 4yrs 🇺🇲
🐾🐾 Bichon Lover 🐾🐾
I am ideologically far left but politically
centre left. Compromise is not a dirty word.
🤞 For the next 4yrs 🇺🇲
🐾🐾 Bichon Lover 🐾🐾
I too was hoping that @mariaressa.bsky.social would speak about Machodo's support of Trump. It would seem to me that she is a dissident but not for democracy. She may be worse than what she seeks to replace? I never wondered that about Navalny.
Or she's trying to use Trump and she'll regret it.
Or she's trying to use Trump and she'll regret it.
November 17, 2025 at 5:15 PM
I too was hoping that @mariaressa.bsky.social would speak about Machodo's support of Trump. It would seem to me that she is a dissident but not for democracy. She may be worse than what she seeks to replace? I never wondered that about Navalny.
Or she's trying to use Trump and she'll regret it.
Or she's trying to use Trump and she'll regret it.
How very typical.. You can't defend the original point so you choose a word and start a different discussion. I'm not sure, is it intellectual dishonesty or interrupted education?
Start your own post to discuss the horror of war.. I just might agree with you.
Start your own post to discuss the horror of war.. I just might agree with you.
March 26, 2025 at 7:46 PM
How very typical.. You can't defend the original point so you choose a word and start a different discussion. I'm not sure, is it intellectual dishonesty or interrupted education?
Start your own post to discuss the horror of war.. I just might agree with you.
Start your own post to discuss the horror of war.. I just might agree with you.
Military aren't the only consideration. You're arguing something that isn't the point but carry on.
March 26, 2025 at 9:55 AM
Military aren't the only consideration. You're arguing something that isn't the point but carry on.
Today several under oath declared not classified. So Goldberg just may defend himself and release more. He talked today about not releasing the name of an undercover CIA officer that was on the text chain.
I would expect Goldberg to continue upholding that standard.
I would expect Goldberg to continue upholding that standard.
March 26, 2025 at 6:12 AM
Today several under oath declared not classified. So Goldberg just may defend himself and release more. He talked today about not releasing the name of an undercover CIA officer that was on the text chain.
I would expect Goldberg to continue upholding that standard.
I would expect Goldberg to continue upholding that standard.
This isn't a debate about innocence and the horror of war.
The discussion is about protecting national security and not killing your own.
The discussion is about protecting national security and not killing your own.
March 26, 2025 at 6:06 AM
This isn't a debate about innocence and the horror of war.
The discussion is about protecting national security and not killing your own.
The discussion is about protecting national security and not killing your own.
Yes, this is the scenario the OP is about. This isn't a philosophical debate about innocence.
March 26, 2025 at 6:02 AM
Yes, this is the scenario the OP is about. This isn't a philosophical debate about innocence.
Well then I can only hope they continue war planning in the open.
March 26, 2025 at 5:59 AM
Well then I can only hope they continue war planning in the open.
If you're going to fight to uphold a standard you don't start by breaking it yourself.
Now if Goldberg needs to reveal things to defend himself and prove they are liars that's a different story.
The administration has had time to move sources to safety. Let's hope they did at least that much.
Now if Goldberg needs to reveal things to defend himself and prove they are liars that's a different story.
The administration has had time to move sources to safety. Let's hope they did at least that much.
March 26, 2025 at 3:36 AM
If you're going to fight to uphold a standard you don't start by breaking it yourself.
Now if Goldberg needs to reveal things to defend himself and prove they are liars that's a different story.
The administration has had time to move sources to safety. Let's hope they did at least that much.
Now if Goldberg needs to reveal things to defend himself and prove they are liars that's a different story.
The administration has had time to move sources to safety. Let's hope they did at least that much.
Ok F' the empire I could get behind that but not the potential loss of life from revealing war plans prior to action, endangering US Military lives or after action, endangering sources and methods.
Don't cut your nose off to spite your face.
Don't cut your nose off to spite your face.
March 26, 2025 at 3:23 AM
Ok F' the empire I could get behind that but not the potential loss of life from revealing war plans prior to action, endangering US Military lives or after action, endangering sources and methods.
Don't cut your nose off to spite your face.
Don't cut your nose off to spite your face.
who's identity are you referring to?
The US sailors and pilots that were on the mission that they were chatting about on Signal?
Or maybe the war plans they were chatting about would reveal to a bad actor an innocent source of information. Of course their identities should be secret.
The US sailors and pilots that were on the mission that they were chatting about on Signal?
Or maybe the war plans they were chatting about would reveal to a bad actor an innocent source of information. Of course their identities should be secret.
March 26, 2025 at 3:20 AM
who's identity are you referring to?
The US sailors and pilots that were on the mission that they were chatting about on Signal?
Or maybe the war plans they were chatting about would reveal to a bad actor an innocent source of information. Of course their identities should be secret.
The US sailors and pilots that were on the mission that they were chatting about on Signal?
Or maybe the war plans they were chatting about would reveal to a bad actor an innocent source of information. Of course their identities should be secret.
The Pentagon papers were an after action report not immediate war plans with ships and planes as sitting targets.
US soldiers follow orders. They put their lives on the line trusting their leaders to follow the rules that they themselves follow. I'd say they ARE innocents in this.
US soldiers follow orders. They put their lives on the line trusting their leaders to follow the rules that they themselves follow. I'd say they ARE innocents in this.
March 26, 2025 at 3:07 AM
The Pentagon papers were an after action report not immediate war plans with ships and planes as sitting targets.
US soldiers follow orders. They put their lives on the line trusting their leaders to follow the rules that they themselves follow. I'd say they ARE innocents in this.
US soldiers follow orders. They put their lives on the line trusting their leaders to follow the rules that they themselves follow. I'd say they ARE innocents in this.
You're having a different conversation. Good day.
March 26, 2025 at 2:48 AM
You're having a different conversation. Good day.