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

[kiidcarter8]

Instead of competing for their party’s nomination, Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Amy Klobuchar, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and Michael Bennet will spend invaluable campaign time planted on Capitol Hill during the days that the Pelosi-Schiff Trump trial drones on. Sens. Sanders and Harris can’t call Mr. Trump the “most corrupt president” in the history of the country and then skip out on the trial of public enemy No. 1 to campaign in a downstate Iowa diner.


Likely just 2, maybe three will still be alive in the primary by then

[Hairy Lime]

Tim Ryan has stunningly dropped out of the race. Shock waves will reverberate for seconds.

[kiidcarter8]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/23/politics/house-opens-investigation-into-katie-hill/index.html

Movie alert!

[REDSTATEWARD]

If the evidence against Trump is so damning, then why not make it all public now ?

Didn't read Schiff's letter?

Adam Schiff has a big credibility problem.

For the record, not one of the Republicans on the relevant committees has taken issue with Schiff's description of the process.

Pelosi obviously has.

No she has not. Try reading and responding rationally rather than as if you were in a schoolyard.

That’s a question for Pelosi, not me.

[NeedsAdjustments]

"Did you bring up investigating the Bidens as part of the (trade)negotiations (with China?)" CNN's Jim Sciutto asked Navarro at the CITIZEN by CNN conference in New York.

"It's not an appropriate question in my judgment, OK," Navarro replied.

"It's an easy one for you to say no," Sciutto said, to which Navarro responded: "But you're asking me to violate a principle here."
"I'm not going to talk about that stuff. If I answer that question then you'll ask me another question," he added.

So, in other words, the answer to the question is "Yes."

[josh]

Last week we had the presidential spokesperson admit there was a q pro quo


Well, no.  He just said what occurred.

Well, yes.

He just said what occurred and what occurred was a deal: you give me this and I will give you that. And he was right that that happens all the time. What makes this different and illegal is the "you give me this" was for Trump, not for the US government.

He just said what occurred and what occurred was a quid pro quo, which he agreed was the case when asked, even when you deny it and he tries to say he didn't say it.

[josh]

Dude just fuck off already with the racism accusations

Please be done with it

If the foo shits, Kid, and it  does and has, repeatedly. You didn't and don't care what happens to the children whose parents were seeking asylum, coming up from Central America, and you didn't and don't care what happens to the Kurds. And you can pretend in one case that it was about laws and in the other that they were going to be removed and/or killed and our only other option was for our soldiers to die...

but the facts don't support your lies, but your track records supports your racist proclivities.

Or is it that you want us to be more PC and not use that term?!

[josh]

If the evidence against Trump is so damning, then why not make it all public now ?

Didn't read Schiff's letter?

Adam Schiff has a big credibility problem. Remember his boast he had seen “ evidence of Trump collusion with Russia? Turned out if he did he couldn’t remember it ( and Mueller couldn’t find it).

Irrelevant in terms of Schiff's letter or how the Contitution works.

Everything in Schiff's letter (already shared, not just linked) is true and undisputed. It is also supported by the Congressional Research Service's Impeachment Procedures, which has also been shared.
And whether we discuss you, Lindsey Graham, or Donald Trump, you all have credibility issues that make Adam Schiff look like Honest Abe by comparison.

[Hairy Lime]

If the evidence against Trump is so damning, then why not make it all public now ?

Didn't read Schiff's letter?

Adam Schiff has a big credibility problem.

For the record, not one of the Republicans on the relevant committees has taken issue with Schiff's description of the process.

Pelosi obviously has.

No she has not. Try reading and responding rationally rather than as if you were in a schoolyard.

That’s a question for Pelosi, not me.

It is not a question, dolt.

[josh]

Tim Ryan has stunningly dropped out of the race. Shock waves will reverberate for seconds.

Who?

[josh]

"Did you bring up investigating the Bidens as part of the (trade)negotiations (with China?)" CNN's Jim Sciutto asked Navarro at the CITIZEN by CNN conference in New York.

"It's not an appropriate question in my judgment, OK," Navarro replied.

"It's an easy one for you to say no," Sciutto said, to which Navarro responded: "But you're asking me to violate a principle here."
"I'm not going to talk about that stuff. If I answer that question then you'll ask me another question," he added.

So, in other words, the answer to the question is "Yes."

"Duh.

If you answer the question, then I will ask you another question. It's true.

If that is not what you are planning to do, then why did you agree to talk with me? It's what I always do and you know it!"

[josh]

If the evidence against Trump is so damning, then why not make it all public now ?

Didn't read Schiff's letter?

Adam Schiff has a big credibility problem.

For the record, not one of the Republicans on the relevant committees has taken issue with Schiff's description of the process.

Pelosi obviously has.

No she has not. Try reading and responding rationally rather than as if you were in a schoolyard.

That’s a question for Pelosi, not me.

It is not a question, dolt.

We're back to the whole "can Ward actually read? Or does he?"

It sure seems as if he doesn't, won't, or can't read and won't stop acting like the schoolyard kid described.

[REDSTATEWARD]

If the evidence against Trump is so damning, then why not make it all public now ?

Didn't read Schiff's letter?

Adam Schiff has a big credibility problem.

For the record, not one of the Republicans on the relevant committees has taken issue with Schiff's description of the process.

Pelosi obviously has.

No she has not. Try reading and responding rationally rather than as if you were in a schoolyard.

That’s a question for Pelosi, not me.

It is not a question, dolt.

As I mentioned it is a question for Nancy. She delayed a vote to open an Impeachment Inquiry. Seems she is not happy about Adam Schiff’s progress with the secret process.

[Hairy Lime]

If the evidence against Trump is so damning, then why not make it all public now ?

Didn't read Schiff's letter?

Adam Schiff has a big credibility problem.

For the record, not one of the Republicans on the relevant committees has taken issue with Schiff's description of the process.

Pelosi obviously has.

No she has not. Try reading and responding rationally rather than as if you were in a schoolyard.

That’s a question for Pelosi, not me.

It is not a question, dolt.

As I mentioned it is a question for Nancy. She delayed a vote to open an Impeachment Inquiry. Seems she is not happy about Adam Schiff’s progress with the secret process.

As I mentioned, that was not a question, dolt. And as I mentioned, try reading and responding rationally rather than as if you were in a schoolyard.

[NeedsAdjustments]

The GOP is flailing around significantly.
Trying to come up with exculpatory explanations for Trump's Ukraine policy/mess.
And trying to muddy the waters and discredit the House investigation however possible.

The process questions on their face are absurd.  Graham wants the House process to be exactly like it was for Clinton and Nixon, only both those cases had independent special counsels to do fact finding and Graham knows exactly why there won't be one on Ukraine, and it has nothing to do with Democrats in the House.

And now Graham is making an equally absurd argument to discredit Ambassador Taylor's testimony, calling it "hearsay."  The guy is the Ambassador of the United States to Ukraine.  He's not a fucking waiter who overheard two people talking over lunch.  If he was under the impression that this was a Quid Pro Quo the only way that can be is if there was.  And you can be damn sure that if Taylor had that impression, the Ukrainian's did too. 

Unless Taylor is just straight up lying, but unfortunately for the GOPers trying to defend Trump, and eventually Trump himself, there are contemporaneous texts and (reportedly) copious notes that Taylor can or already has provided.