Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[Hairy Lime]

There is a statute that defines whether or not a complaint goes to Congress, and the requirements of that statute are met here.

The statute covers members of the Intelligence Committee, not the President.
The statute has no bearing on the real issue, did Trump abuse his presidential powers?
He tweets(again) it is all a hoax pushed by the fake news and the democrats!
Adam Schiff cries (again) Impeachable! 
Point is the matter is in the hands of Congress and another political kerfuffle is on.
One additional addition to the “soup” this time is the presence of Joe Biden in the mix.

The statute only requires that the whistleblower be a member of the intelligence community. There is no restriction on the subject of the urgent concern in 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(A).  None.

Once the IG found the complaint credible, turning it over to the congressional intelligence committees is mandatory. There are no exceptions to 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(C).

Except, of course, The DNI has the final say, according to the statute.
But keep beating a dead horse if it pleases you.

No he does not. Allowing for my crappy thumb typing 50 USC 3033 (k) (5) (C) states:

"Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B) the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate."

The DNI does not have final say. He has no say at all on the transmittal, he can only make.additional comments. Shall... forward the transmittal. Shall.

I eagerly await your lol and refusal to admit that the statute says what it plainly says.

LOL
To repeat, the statute applies to intelligence activities by government officials acting under the authority of the DNI. The President is not one of them.

To repeat: only the whistleblower has to be under the DNI. Want me to type out subsection (A) too?

Here it is:

"An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employeeassigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employeeof a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General."

LOL
Section 3033 does not refer to the president. It only applies to intelligence-community officials. For good reason  since if doing so it would hinder the president’s great latitude of  authority to conduct foreign policy. Why this confuses you is beyond me since the matter is now before Congress.
The issue is whether Trump abused foreign-affairs powers.

Tbe language is there. All can see it and recogize your intellectual dishonesty.

[Hairy Lime]

https://www.businessinsider.com/mike-pence-car-free-mackinac-island-michiganders-react2019-9

If this is not an impeachable offense I do not know what is.

[REDSTATEWARD]

There is a statute that defines whether or not a complaint goes to Congress, and the requirements of that statute are met here.

The statute covers members of the Intelligence Committee, not the President.
The statute has no bearing on the real issue, did Trump abuse his presidential powers?
He tweets(again) it is all a hoax pushed by the fake news and the democrats!
Adam Schiff cries (again) Impeachable! 
Point is the matter is in the hands of Congress and another political kerfuffle is on.
One additional addition to the “soup” this time is the presence of Joe Biden in the mix.

The statute only requires that the whistleblower be a member of the intelligence community. There is no restriction on the subject of the urgent concern in 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(A).  None.

Once the IG found the complaint credible, turning it over to the congressional intelligence committees is mandatory. There are no exceptions to 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(C).

Except, of course, The DNI has the final say, according to the statute.
But keep beating a dead horse if it pleases you.

No he does not. Allowing for my crappy thumb typing 50 USC 3033 (k) (5) (C) states:

"Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B) the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate."

The DNI does not have final say. He has no say at all on the transmittal, he can only make.additional comments. Shall... forward the transmittal. Shall.

I eagerly await your lol and refusal to admit that the statute says what it plainly says.

LOL
To repeat, the statute applies to intelligence activities by government officials acting under the authority of the DNI. The President is not one of them.

To repeat: only the whistleblower has to be under the DNI. Want me to type out subsection (A) too?

Here it is:

"An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employeeassigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employeeof a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General."

LOL
Section 3033 does not refer to the president. It only applies to intelligence-community officials. For good reason  since if doing so it would hinder the president’s great latitude of  authority to conduct foreign policy. Why this confuses you is beyond me since the matter is now before Congress.
The issue is whether Trump abused foreign-affairs powers.

Tbe language is there. All can see it and recogize your intellectual dishonesty.

” Intellectual dishonesty”?
I can read a statute.
Why you insist on a moot point, though, is beyond me.

[barton]

https://www.businessinsider.com/mike-pence-car-free-mackinac-island-michiganders-react2019-9

If this is not an impeachable offense I do not know what is.

Thanks for Michigan in 2020, Mike.   Stop by South Dakota and urinate on Lincoln's head while you're traveling.   

I love the smell of electoral votes in the evening! 

[josh]

https://www.chicagotribune.com/columns/heidi-stevens/ct-heidi-stevens-monday-greta-thunberg-propoganda-16-year-olds-0923-20190923-pegccse2djdl3enj5avbgsttnm-story.html?fbclid=IwAR0-RK3e9Vf--2cy-sdgjpdZPxms7YcxUkB7oUAdLu3AfF4B9ecryjR78pw

Column: To critics who call Greta Thunberg a propaganda tool for leftist adults: Have you met a 16-year-old lately?

Today’s teenagers know we have handed them a mess. A crumbling planet. Endless mass shootings. Gaping wealth inequity. Skyrocketing education costs that threaten their collective financial future. And they're done waiting for us to solve any of it.

A number years ago, a teen was wreaking havok in a Texas high school with her speech about refusing to take their high stakes test. One of the school administrators wanted to know why she was letting her daughter do this.

"Letting her? How do you propose I get her to stop?!"

3 years later, the Supt. summoned the teen to tell her the time had come stop. "If you don't take the test, I can't give you a diploma and you cannot go to college."

Without so much as a blink, the kid explained to him that she would not starve and if that was his best argument and his best way of dealing with the situation, he was out of luck.

She walked out.

Two months later, she walked back in with two offers of full ride scholarships to top colleges, based on her leadership. She told him, "You'd best find a different approach than threatening your students to get them to obey. This way isn't working anymore."

And walked out again.

[josh]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/04/22/2020-presidential-race-harvard-youth-vote/3538944002/?fbclid=IwAR3gqrImAqy-Z_FTOL9zqHrv8HP5g3zxnlN7smUsJ7Hr1xYESckqQegRVPc

Higher percentage of youth vote expected in 2020 than 2016, based on poll. (Youth to youth, not youth as a part of the whole, though likely that, as well.)

[josh]

https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/how-to-talk-to-your-aging-parent-about-colluding-with-foreign-governments?fbclid=IwAR0XYDSsJcX0r0iLasCdheRYifD0Ga1fd4PAUYHMJJYIakZwv1hnhS0CXT0

[josh]

http://showercapblog.com/instead-of-godot-were-waiting-for-decent-republicans-wholl-put-country-before-party-with-similar-results/?fbclid=IwAR2agr8nBeoUyIqx15exLL4OoSYnXfOc00ThDvYzV_ZC0CMQIlXbbD9wGqI

[LarryBnDC]

Conservatives and Trump supporters are Suckers...


https://popular.info/p/massive-i-love-america-facebook-page

[Hairy Lime]

There is a statute that defines whether or not a complaint goes to Congress, and the requirements of that statute are met here.

The statute covers members of the Intelligence Committee, not the President.
The statute has no bearing on the real issue, did Trump abuse his presidential powers?
He tweets(again) it is all a hoax pushed by the fake news and the democrats!
Adam Schiff cries (again) Impeachable! 
Point is the matter is in the hands of Congress and another political kerfuffle is on.
One additional addition to the “soup” this time is the presence of Joe Biden in the mix.

The statute only requires that the whistleblower be a member of the intelligence community. There is no restriction on the subject of the urgent concern in 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(A).  None.

Once the IG found the complaint credible, turning it over to the congressional intelligence committees is mandatory. There are no exceptions to 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(C).

Except, of course, The DNI has the final say, according to the statute.
But keep beating a dead horse if it pleases you.

No he does not. Allowing for my crappy thumb typing 50 USC 3033 (k) (5) (C) states:

"Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B) the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate."

The DNI does not have final say. He has no say at all on the transmittal, he can only make.additional comments. Shall... forward the transmittal. Shall.

I eagerly await your lol and refusal to admit that the statute says what it plainly says.

LOL
To repeat, the statute applies to intelligence activities by government officials acting under the authority of the DNI. The President is not one of them.

To repeat: only the whistleblower has to be under the DNI. Want me to type out subsection (A) too?

Here it is:

"An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employeeassigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employeeof a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General."

LOL
Section 3033 does not refer to the president. It only applies to intelligence-community officials. For good reason  since if doing so it would hinder the president’s great latitude of  authority to conduct foreign policy. Why this confuses you is beyond me since the matter is now before Congress.
The issue is whether Trump abused foreign-affairs powers.

Tbe language is there. All can see it and recogize your intellectual dishonesty.

” Intellectual dishonesty”?
I can read a statute.
Why you insist on a moot point, though, is beyond me.

Everyone here can read it. Which is why your brazen lying about what it says is so ridiculous. Everyone can see what a dishonest joke you are.

[REDSTATEWARD]

There is a statute that defines whether or not a complaint goes to Congress, and the requirements of that statute are met here.

The statute covers members of the Intelligence Committee, not the President.
The statute has no bearing on the real issue, did Trump abuse his presidential powers?
He tweets(again) it is all a hoax pushed by the fake news and the democrats!
Adam Schiff cries (again) Impeachable! 
Point is the matter is in the hands of Congress and another political kerfuffle is on.
One additional addition to the “soup” this time is the presence of Joe Biden in the mix.

The statute only requires that the whistleblower be a member of the intelligence community. There is no restriction on the subject of the urgent concern in 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(A).  None.

Once the IG found the complaint credible, turning it over to the congressional intelligence committees is mandatory. There are no exceptions to 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(C).

Except, of course, The DNI has the final say, according to the statute.
But keep beating a dead horse if it pleases you.

No he does not. Allowing for my crappy thumb typing 50 USC 3033 (k) (5) (C) states:

"Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B) the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate."

The DNI does not have final say. He has no say at all on the transmittal, he can only make.additional comments. Shall... forward the transmittal. Shall.

I eagerly await your lol and refusal to admit that the statute says what it plainly says.

LOL
To repeat, the statute applies to intelligence activities by government officials acting under the authority of the DNI. The President is not one of them.

To repeat: only the whistleblower has to be under the DNI. Want me to type out subsection (A) too?

Here it is:

"An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employeeassigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employeeof a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General."

LOL
Section 3033 does not refer to the president. It only applies to intelligence-community officials. For good reason  since if doing so it would hinder the president’s great latitude of  authority to conduct foreign policy. Why this confuses you is beyond me since the matter is now before Congress.
The issue is whether Trump abused foreign-affairs powers.

Tbe language is there. All can see it and recogize your intellectual dishonesty.

” Intellectual dishonesty”?
I can read a statute.
Why you insist on a moot point, though, is beyond me.

Everyone here can read it. Which is why your brazen lying about what it says is so ridiculous. Everyone can see what a dishonest joke you are.

LOL
Really?
Certainly you can do better than cheap insults.

[bambu.]

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/how-dare-you-greta-thunberg-asks-world-leaders-at-un/ar-AAHJhEp?li=AAgfYrC&OCID=AVRES000

A visibly angry Greta Thunberg berated world leaders as she addressed a UN climate summit on Monday, accusing them of betraying her generation by failing to tackle greenhouse gas emissions and asking "How dare you?"

#####

Gotta love these kids...have never struck a blow in the real world of workforces, mortgages, power bills, survival, overpopulation, transport etc, but they're telling adults what to do.

As she said, she shouldn't have to, Bambi.

But since the adults are not heeding the scientists, somebody has to tell them what to do!

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/video-of-greta-thunberg-crossing-paths-with-trump-at-un-goes-viral/ar-AAHJPi8?li=AAgfYrC&OCID=AVRES000

#####

Oh the anger.
This is what I mean, worked up into a frenzy...by others I might suggest.
She should be in school learning the three Rs, not at the UN glaring daggers at Presidents.

I'd love to see her answers to what she's accusing Sco-Mo, Trump, and others of not doing to combat 'climate change'.

She has a lot to say, love to see her solutions.

[josh]

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/how-dare-you-greta-thunberg-asks-world-leaders-at-un/ar-AAHJhEp?li=AAgfYrC&OCID=AVRES000

A visibly angry Greta Thunberg berated world leaders as she addressed a UN climate summit on Monday, accusing them of betraying her generation by failing to tackle greenhouse gas emissions and asking "How dare you?"

#####

Gotta love these kids...have never struck a blow in the real world of workforces, mortgages, power bills, survival, overpopulation, transport etc, but they're telling adults what to do.

As she said, she shouldn't have to, Bambi.

But since the adults are not heeding the scientists, somebody has to tell them what to do!

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/video-of-greta-thunberg-crossing-paths-with-trump-at-un-goes-viral/ar-AAHJPi8?li=AAgfYrC&OCID=AVRES000

#####

Oh the anger.
This is what I mean, worked up into a frenzy...by others I might suggest.
She should be in school learning the three Rs, not at the UN glaring daggers at Presidents.

I'd love to see her answers to what she's accusing Sco-Mo, Trump, and others of not doing to combat 'climate change'.

She has a lot to say, love to see her solutions.

It's like you aren't listening to what she said.

1) She agrees with you. She should be in school. It is society's failure that has her out here.

2) Her solution is "listen to the scientists, you irresponsible politicians." Duh.

[LarryBnDC]

There is a statute that defines whether or not a complaint goes to Congress, and the requirements of that statute are met here.

The statute covers members of the Intelligence Committee, not the President.
The statute has no bearing on the real issue, did Trump abuse his presidential powers?
He tweets(again) it is all a hoax pushed by the fake news and the democrats!
Adam Schiff cries (again) Impeachable! 
Point is the matter is in the hands of Congress and another political kerfuffle is on.
One additional addition to the “soup” this time is the presence of Joe Biden in the mix.

The statute only requires that the whistleblower be a member of the intelligence community. There is no restriction on the subject of the urgent concern in 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(A).  None.

Once the IG found the complaint credible, turning it over to the congressional intelligence committees is mandatory. There are no exceptions to 50 USC 3033 (k)(5)(C).

Except, of course, The DNI has the final say, according to the statute.
But keep beating a dead horse if it pleases you.

No he does not. Allowing for my crappy thumb typing 50 USC 3033 (k) (5) (C) states:

"Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B) the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate."

The DNI does not have final say. He has no say at all on the transmittal, he can only make.additional comments. Shall... forward the transmittal. Shall.

I eagerly await your lol and refusal to admit that the statute says what it plainly says.

LOL
To repeat, the statute applies to intelligence activities by government officials acting under the authority of the DNI. The President is not one of them.

To repeat: only the whistleblower has to be under the DNI. Want me to type out subsection (A) too?

Here it is:

"An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employeeassigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employeeof a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General."

LOL
Section 3033 does not refer to the president. It only applies to intelligence-community officials. For good reason  since if doing so it would hinder the president’s great latitude of  authority to conduct foreign policy. Why this confuses you is beyond me since the matter is now before Congress.
The issue is whether Trump abused foreign-affairs powers.

Tbe language is there. All can see it and recogize your intellectual dishonesty.

” Intellectual dishonesty”?
I can read a statute.
Why you insist on a moot point, though, is beyond me.

Everyone here can read it. Which is why your brazen lying about what it says is so ridiculous. Everyone can see what a dishonest joke you are.

LOL
Really?
Certainly you can do better than cheap insults.

Why should anyone waste expensive insults on the likes of you?

[LarryBnDC]

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/how-dare-you-greta-thunberg-asks-world-leaders-at-un/ar-AAHJhEp?li=AAgfYrC&OCID=AVRES000

A visibly angry Greta Thunberg berated world leaders as she addressed a UN climate summit on Monday, accusing them of betraying her generation by failing to tackle greenhouse gas emissions and asking "How dare you?"

#####

Gotta love these kids...have never struck a blow in the real world of workforces, mortgages, power bills, survival, overpopulation, transport etc, but they're telling adults what to do.

As she said, she shouldn't have to, Bambi.

But since the adults are not heeding the scientists, somebody has to tell them what to do!

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/video-of-greta-thunberg-crossing-paths-with-trump-at-un-goes-viral/ar-AAHJPi8?li=AAgfYrC&OCID=AVRES000

#####

Oh the anger.
This is what I mean, worked up into a frenzy...by others I might suggest.
She should be in school learning the three Rs, not at the UN glaring daggers at Presidents.

I'd love to see her answers to what she's accusing Sco-Mo, Trump, and others of not doing to combat 'climate change'.

She has a lot to say, love to see her solutions.

Sir David Attenborough thinks you’re an idiot.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/24/david-attenborough-attacks-australian-pm-on-climate-record-and-support-for-coal