Mojo Hand

There is no validity to this. Schiff said he was going to talk about the essence of what Trump was saying, and then he did just that. That some very stupid people don't understand rhetorical devices doesn't make their misunderstanding valid.

It was like a parody when he got all fake serious about the decision to send Americans off to war, as if that had any relevance.

I think they really haven't read the source documents. If they had, McCarthy wouldn't have shat himself on 60 minutes last night. They are going on the WH talking points alone.

Don't forget the Ukraine side. They might have recorded the call. And chances are high that Russia is listening in on the Ukraine president's phone, so Putin might have one too.

Resigned.

Look, I know some of you are gun shy after years of Republicans making hay with every little thing that a Dem says that could possibly be construed in a negative way. But being bland and studiously uncontroversial isn't the solution. Republicans don't do that, and that's why they get away with much worse. Dems do, and that's why people fall asleep during their public statements and complain that they aren't more interesting. Anyone who watched Schiff knew exactly what he was doing and wasn't misled. Anyone who didn't and isn't already a Trump nut isn't going to give a shit about what Adam Schiff did. Worst case scenario is that some people hear the talking points and think this whole thing was made up by Schiff, and then they hear what the actual "transcript" says and realize the talking points are lies. Like Kevin McCarthy on 60 minutes. Just relax. Trump is dead to rights on this. The "transcript" refutes every misdirection to what Schiff or anyone else supposedly did.

It's not fantasy literature. It was a rhetorical device to make a point, and Schiff labeled as such. You know, the kind of thing you're doing when you exaggerate it as being "fantasy literature" or "an infallible strategy." And it's triggered Trump into calling for Schiff's arrest, which is furthering his spiral out of office. Stop being so scared of what Republicans will think. What Schiff did was fine.

Yeah, people having a different opinion than you means we are pretending, because your opinion is the only right one.

In his opening statement, Schiff went through the call and used some mob-speak and humor to explain why what Trump was saying was asking for a quid pro quo. He wasn't purporting to quote Trump when doing so and it was clear that he was paraphrasing to communicate the gist in understandable terms. He also said "this is the essence of what the president communicates" before diving in, and ended with "This is the sum and character of what the president was trying to communicate." I would say that it was unnecessary, and maybe a mistake, except it's thrown Trump even more off his rocker, so it was probably a good move.

Schiff and essentially paraphrased the call and used some mob-speak to convey what Trimp

Wow, Trump's threat of civil war was finally enough to get condemnation from a GOP House Member. Maybe there is hope for this country yet.

Let's be clear. Nobody is doing it to help Warren prepare. It's coming from supporters of other candidates, mainly Biden and Bernie, who are trying to resurrect an issue they know is bullshit to try to halt her momentum. But, as you say, it's fine. The primary is an adversarial process, and dealing with bullshit issues raised over and over again by desperate opponents is part of the deal.

The elopement story isn't a new discovery. I've heard it multiple times before. And it doesn't add anything new to the issue, which is that her parents told her some shit that she and her brothers believed. The only thing that would be new is if some evidence emerged that she sought an advantage on an application by falsely claiming legal status as a Native American.

Trumpians: Explain how what he said was in any way a quid pro quo!?! Everyone: Well, it's pretty self-explanatory, but if you need a reference point, it's like the classic mobster shakedown, "I need a favor, by the way, nice store, it would be a shame if someone destroyed it." Trumpians: OMG you're making up different words than he used, this is the real scandal!!!

Feel better now?

So, we were discussing whether someone should be prevented from living where they want based on face tattoos and prior felonies. And then you post about the government forcing the rich to live near the poor and giving face-tattoo felons free housing in River Oaks, even though nobody proposed such a thing. OK.

I didn't see that in her plan — where are you seeing this?

The thing about wanting to know the truth is that you need some reasonable basis to think there is something to investigate, let alone to spread in the media. Hammer would understand that pretty fast if someone in his community were to start telling everyone that he seems creepy and that we need to know the truth about whether he's a child molestor. Not only is there no evidence of wrongdoing here by Biden, there is substantial evidence that he did nothing wrong. If you have something else, forward it to the FBI. Otherwise shut the fuck up and focus on the overwhelming evidence of criminality, corruption, and abuse of power by the sitting president.

If that's what happens, so be it. What I can't handle is the Dems going down without a fight. This is an existential threat to our nation. Either a president is above the law and unrestrained from committing acts of criminality and corruption or he/she isn't. Either a president may betray our nation to a foreign country when backed by a vocal minority of traitors or he may not. Either a president may abuse the power of his office against his rivals in an election or he may not. There are many Republicans using every stretch of logic they can find to defend Trump, and plenty of Dems pointing out that they would have reacted differently if Obama did it. But if you are supporting Trump in this, the question you need to ask yourself is, am I okay with the precedent I am setting? If AOC becomes president a decade from now, am I okay with the notion that it will be entirely legal and unimpeachable for her to hold up military aid to a country and then say, "I have a favor, though," when the leader of that country brings up aid, and that favor is starting a criminal investigation into the GOP front-runner in the next election? Am I okay with her getting elected in the first place by welcoming help from an enemy nation to hack various aspects of our election system and then, in the Oval Office after winning, telling the enemy's leader that she has no problem with what they did, and then doing everything she can to help them do it again? Am I okay with her covering up this wrongdoing by hiding transcripts of the conversations? Am I okay with this being the new norm? If you wouldn't be okay with that, you need to question what the hell you are doing supporting Trump now. Because this is where the precedent is being decided. Here and now.

You're right, it's much better as a society to keep them as marginalized as possible for life because they made mistakes in the past. That won't encourage them to commit more crimes or anything.

Is this person significant to the race?

People like him are happy to play the game when it comes to lying about Democrats, but unwilling to recognize their own complicity in the consequences of that game, which is the lying, tribal defense of Trump. That was the refreshing thing about Joe Walsh recently. As awful as he is, he didn't just announce his opposition to Trump, but also acknowledged the wrongness of what he did under Obama and how it contributed to where we are today. Most Never-Trump Republicans won't do that.

China scandal on deck for the traitor-in-chief

It's just standard foreign policy! Oh wait