Jump to content

The House Oversight Committee 2019

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Pescado_Rojo
Pescado_Rojo

When your girl and her friends succeed in unlocking your phone. 

Rimbo
Rimbo

I told an old friend of mine a few months back that if she'd ever told me I'd be a single-party voter, I'd never have believed it, and if she'd told me that it'd be for the Democrats, I'd have laughed

Bama Chick
Bama Chick

BITCHES GET SHIT DONE

Keef

Keef 757

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Eggo said:

Also, people often forget that Nixon's downfall wasn't instantaneous. The Watergate break-in occurred in June 1972 and Nixon didn't resign until August 1974. Despite the fact that information travels faster these days, I think we've still got some time. 

Another important point - Nixon never would have gone down for Watergate if the moron hadn't recorded everything.  I think one of his cronies let it slip in an interview that Nixon had a tape recorder in the office and that was how Jaworski found out.  Even with all the evidence, if Nixon hadn't been caught on tape literally directing crimes, the Republicans wouldn't have turned on him.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17434

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Teddy KGB said:

I think it would be extremely hard to prove that Cohen "wanted" a job in the WH.  He can just say that he changed his mind after initially pursuing a position.

Horn under a Bad Sign is an idiot for negging this. You are correct. Lying about hard facts and your knowledge of them are the sorts of things that can result in a convictable perjury charge. Lying about your emotional state? Fat chance. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Teddy KGB

Teddy KGB 1

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Horn under a Bad Sign is an idiot for negging this. You are correct. Lying about hard facts and your knowledge of them are the sorts of things that can result in a convictable perjury charge. Lying about your emotional state? Fat chance. 

@Horn Under a Bad Sign is being a bitch and negging every post of mine he can find right now.

Edited by Teddy KGB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 9671

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Horn under a Bad Sign is an idiot for negging this. You are correct. Lying about hard facts and your knowledge of them are the sorts of things that can result in a convictable perjury charge. Lying about your emotional state? Fat chance. 

Unless Cohen bought the web site:  www.micheal-cohen-is-a-sexy-motherfucker-who-wants-a-job-at-the white-house.com,  there is zero chance you can prove this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jograves

Jograves 357

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

Unless Cohen bought the web site:  www.micheal-cohen-is-a-sexy-motherfucker-who-wants-a-job-at-the white-house.com,  there is zero chance you can prove this.

Really? These fuckers sent emails about every single one of their crimes. You don't think there is an email from Cohen to Chris Christie or whoever about a position in the WH? They're dumbasses.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 9671

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Jograves said:

Really? These fuckers sent emails about every single one of their crimes. You don't think there is an email from Cohen to Chris Christie or whoever about a position in the WH? They're dumbasses.

 

They are dumb asses, but so what if there is an email.  The question is what does he or did he want.   He can say he wrote that email cause he knows if Trump thinks he doesn't want a WH job then he will be ostracized.  He can say he changed his mind later.  You can't prove what his preference is or isn't beyond a reasonable doubt.  

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11360

Posted
Posted
Just now, Horn Dog said:

They are dumb asses, but so what if there is an email.  The question is what does he or did he want.   He can say he wrote that email cause he knows if Trump thinks he doesn't want a WH job then he will be ostracized.  He can say he changed his mind later.  You can't prove what his preference is or isn't beyond a reasonable doubt.  

Beside that, who fucking cares?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13409

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, hayden_horn said:

jordan and meadows decide they want to REALLY go after cohen:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/28/politics/house-criminal-referral-michael-cohen/index.html

is this REALLY what they want to try to catch him out on? these are the guys who were bemoaning the committee hearing being a waste of time, but here they want to spend resources and time on  catching cohen out on whether or not he wanted a white house position?

jesus herbert christ

I'm 100% onboard that the DOJ should investigate every claim that Cohen made yesterday.  Perhaps create a special counsel role to look into the allegations that Cohen lied about Trump. they will need to prove he lied by looking into Trump's financial records.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted
35 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

Hugo and others who are equivocating about the Clinton impeachment are no better than Trumpkins complaining about perjury traps.

 

Seriously, guys. Just ignore the R or D.

 

I wouldn’t give a shit if Trump, Bush, or Obama perjured himself over a blow job. 

Selling out the country to Putin is another matter.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rimbo

Rimbo 25769

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Both sides?

I want to jump on this before this catches.

Feeling Clinton should've been impeached and convicted and that "R" or "D" doesn't matter, this doesn't mean both sides are equally bad. It means we hold both sides to a consistent standard. And Trump has clearly gone much further below that standard than Clinton did. Both fall short of the standard, but Trump falls much much shorter. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted
10 minutes ago, retread said:

It would be interesting to go back and see what would have happened if Clinton had been totally truthful about his infidelities. In his mind, I guess he felt like he had to lie to avoid political blowback.

The problem with Clinton is he lied about the women throughout his political career.  At that time and place he probably wouldn’t have sniffed the White House if he confessed to all his infidelities beforehand.  

With Lewinski, he probably thought he could get away with it just one more time without getting busted.  It was second nature to him to deny sexual allegations.   

Not excusing Bill Clinton, he’s a POS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 9671

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I'm 100% onboard that the DOJ should investigate every claim that Cohen made yesterday.  Perhaps create a special counsel role to look into the allegations that Cohen lied about Trump. they will need to prove he lied by looking into Trump's financial records.

Brilliant.  If the Dems were ruthless, they would call this bluff, hold a week long investigation on Jordan and Meadows concerns.  To answer this question, the entirety of the Trump organization, transition team, cabinet, lawyers, Don Jr, Eric, Kuchner, Ivanka and Trump himself would need to be subpoenaed and grilled over every single one of Cohen's accusations.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31260

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

I want to jump on this before this catches.

Feeling Clinton should've been impeached and convicted and that "R" or "D" doesn't matter, this doesn't mean both sides are equally bad. It means we hold both sides to a consistent standard. And Trump has clearly gone much further below that standard than Clinton did. Both fall short of the standard, but Trump falls much much shorter. 

Twas in jest, my dude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mdhorn

Mdhorn 5911

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, retread said:

It would be interesting to go back and see what would have happened if Clinton had been totally truthful about his infidelities. In his mind, I guess he felt like he had to lie to avoid political blowback.

They would have still gone after him.  They would have played the sanctimonious card because he was the President, regardless that several of the investigating Congressmen were having affairs of their own.  They went fishing for a long time and this is the only thing they caught--in no way were they going to throw it back. 

Edited by Mdhorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AUinHsv

AUinHsv 576

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Keef said:

Another important point - Nixon never would have gone down for Watergate if the moron hadn't recorded everything.  I think one of his cronies let it slip in an interview that Nixon had a tape recorder in the office and that was how Jaworski found out.  Even with all the evidence, if Nixon hadn't been caught on tape literally directing crimes, the Republicans wouldn't have turned on him.  

The crony was Alexander Butterfield and he did not let it slip, he was asked the question by the investigating committee and answered it correctly.  And I am pretty sure all the committee members did a double take when he said that. The game was changed dramatically

Edited by AUinHsv
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AUinHsv

AUinHsv 576

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Never mind the blank 18 minutes . . .

Let's toss Rosemary under the bus for that one.  The interesting part is that several people confirmed that Nixon was so uncoordinated that they felt he could not have figured out how to do this. IIRC the taping system was way more complicated that the reel to reel device you saw at the opening  of Mission Impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2951

Posted
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

They would have still gone after him.  They would have played the sanctimonious card because he was the President, regardless that several of the investigating Congressmen were having affairs of their own.  They went fishing for a long time and this is the only thing they caught--in no way were they going to throw it back. 

Yeah, interesting to consider. It was a different time where there was a significant stigma attached to infidelity. Hillary was both pilloried and praised for standing by her man.

Honestly, I don't see how he would have suffered any repercussions outside of bad press and maybe some D losses at the ballot box. You're right that the Rs were 100% invested in getting something.

Edited by retread
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bat Guano

Bat Guano 359

Posted
Posted

So it's really neither here nor there, but now I'm kinda curious to see just how fucking bad Trump's grades at Fordham (LOfuckingL) and his SAT scores were. I mean, I've seen his tweets, so it's well known that he's a lazy, semi-literate baboon that can't be assed to correct obvious errors; it's equally well known that he is willfully oblivious to facts, in fact decidedly hostile to them, and stubbornly dedicated to outright misinformation; has the attention span of a fruit fly and the mental agility of a houseplant. None of that predicts a stellar academic career, and the cherry on top is that he had no reason to care whether he did well or not, because rich daddy. So I'm guessing he set some kind of record for abysmal performance, an academic career so wretchedly pathetic that its like shall never be seen again. And it's theoretically possible to get a negative score on the SATs; it would be interesting to see if he managed to pull that off. Maybe I'm easily amused, but I'm pretty sure I'd be entertained.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31260

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, retread said:

Yeah, interesting to consider. It was a different time where there was a significant stigma attached to infidelity. Hillary was both pilloried and praised for standing by her man.

Honestly, I don't see how he would have suffered any repercussions outside of bad press and maybe some D losses at the ballot box. You're right that the Rs were 100% invested in getting something.

Was it really a different time though?  AFAIK, infidelity is still frowned upon. A disqualifier from holding office, apparently not, as demonstrated then, and  . . .  more recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mdhorn

Mdhorn 5911

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Given the things he did for Trump, and knowing what he knows, a part of me thinks he would have realized that going to the WH and potentially undergoing a crazy-deep background check would be A Very Bad Thing.  

Cohen disarmed this line of Republican questioning when he said you don't have to believe, believe the documents.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32317

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

Gym Jordan is easily one of the stupidest motherfuckers in government.  He make SJL look like Thomas Jefferson.

its hard to fathom what it takes for someone to listen to that guy and go.... yeah I’m voting for that dude.  

Morons 

 

Well....R...white...male...gerrymandering.

It's a pretty simple formula.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thrillhammer

thrillhammer 683

Posted
Posted

here's what i don't get, and i didn't see a single conservative, in congress or in surly, connect the dots and comprehend the logic.  every single republican, all down the line, unanimously used their time to discredit cohen and make sure the American public understood what a sleazy, slimy, piece of shit, liar liar pants on fire lawyer he was.   yet, our president liked him, trusted him, confided in him, deemed him to be of sufficient character to carry his daily dealings.   this is a man our president trusted and paid for 10 yrs.   if he's such a piece of shit, what does that make the president?  he was the presidents personal attorney for 10 years, and they think he's a lowlife scum and a shitpoor lawyer, yet they blindly cant put two and two together and comprehend what this says about the president. 

do they think the president is an innocent, wise, all knowing, all powerful, pure as the driven snow gentleman, and didn't know for 10 yrs his shitass lawyer was a shitass lawyer?  is their take on this that cohen took advantage of the president?  that trump wasn't awarer of Cohen's character?  no man, that's not the way this went down.  the president is a lowlife scum, scheming, conniving, slimy, sleazy piece of shit, and he asked his attorney to carry sleazy, lowlife scum activities on his part.  checks cashed for 10 yrs to prove it. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45546

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, thrillhammer said:

here's what i don't get, and i didn't see a single conservative, in congress or in surly, connect the dots and comprehend the logic.  every single republican, all down the line, unanimously used their time to discredit cohen and make sure the American public understood what a sleazy, slimy, piece of shit, liar liar pants on fire lawyer he was.   yet, our president liked him, trusted him, confided in him, deemed him to be of sufficient character to carry his daily dealings.   this is a man our president trusted and paid for 10 yrs.   if he's such a piece of shit, what does that make the president?  he was the presidents personal attorney for 10 years, and they think he's a lowlife scum and a shitpoor lawyer, yet they blindly cant put two and two together and comprehend what this says about the president. 

do they think the president is an innocent, wise, all knowing, all powerful, pure as the driven snow gentleman, and didn't know for 10 yrs his shitass lawyer was a shitass lawyer?  is their take on this that cohen took advantage of the president?  that trump wasn't awarer of Cohen's character?  no man, that's not the way this went down.  the president is a lowlife scum, scheming, conniving, slimy, sleazy piece of shit, and he asked his attorney to carry sleazy, lowlife scum activities on his part.  checks cashed for 10 yrs to prove it. 

Authoritarianism 101.  Tell the rubes what they want to hear for long enough and soon they'll believe anything that comes out of your mouth.

LBJ hinted at one aspect of it:

Quote

“If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”

 

There is simply nothing that can be done to "rescue" these idiots from Trump's clutches.  They're too far gone.  If they have a shred of a real conscience left, anything that conflicts with the party line gets written off as fake news.  

The con men in Congress get it.  They're just fully corrupted.  They have no choice but to fan the flames.  The alternative is prison, or worse.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28705

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, retread said:

Yeah, interesting to consider. It was a different time where there was a significant stigma attached to infidelity. Hillary was both pilloried and praised for standing by her man.

Honestly, I don't see how he would have suffered any repercussions outside of bad press and maybe some D losses at the ballot box. You're right that the Rs were 100% invested in getting something.

And if it wasn't that, they would've kept on fishing, looking for something, anything, to justify removing him from office. Failing that, they'd just keep trying to gin up scandals to cloud his presidency and hurt his polling numbers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28705

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Ted Lange said:

Gym Jordan is easily one of the stupidest motherfuckers in government.  He make SJL look like Thomas Jefferson.

its hard to fathom what it takes for someone to listen to that guy and go.... yeah I’m voting for that dude.  

Morons 

The Tea Party injected a whole lot of stupid into the GOP. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pyrohornIII

pyrohornIII 4808

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Horndog said:

The letter to his successor will be a national treasure.  

Hopefully there is a successor.

9 hours ago, Rimbo said:

I told an old friend of mine a few months back that if she'd ever told me I'd be a single-party voter, I'd never have believed it, and if she'd told me that it'd be for the Democrats, I'd have laughed at it. And yet, here we are.

I did so, so that Congress would do what they are supposed to do in this situation, and what they are doing now: Act as a check on presidential authority.

In the long run, I don't blame Trump for being Trump. I don't even blame the voters for Trump. I absolutely blame Mitch McConnell and the GOP members who are enabling him and refusing to assert the authority they have.

And if you're a Republican right now, you need to be as terrified of what's going on as the Democrats are: When a Democrat is elected president, do you want that person wielding, unchecked, the power that Trump is attempting to wield right now? Trump's efforts must fail, because if they do not, there is nothing preventing a Democrat president from, say, taking away all of your guns, locking up churches, doing whatever he wants because of made-up "Emergency Powers."

Like Cohen said: Trump's not in this for you, he's in it 100% for himself. He doesn't care what he destroys along the way. Congress opposing him successfully is ultimately going to protect your interests as well as mine.

I didn't stop being Conservative. The GOP did.

This started with Gingrich. 

8 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

In Garry Wills' Cincinnatus, a nice book about George Washington, he writes of how Washington was maybe the most popular man in the Western World. The statues memorializing him almost always show him extending a rolled up scroll.

Washington+Resigning+Commission+web.jpg

As with Cincinnatus of Ancient Rome, after saving the nation and being offered permanent dictatorship, he returned power to the state and returned to his farm. Washington was admired greatly for his humility and dedication to the principles of democracy.

He, to me, remains the greatest American. It's a shame that he has been turned into an unreachable grim marble statue of a man. 

 

I would have TR as his runner up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 29774

Posted
Posted

I guess I'd go with the obvious choice of Lincoln. Without Washington, there likely never is a USA. Without Lincoln, there'd be more than one USA. The southern version of the USA would have been a plague on the entire hemisphere. The Confederacy and rich southerners envisioned a slave nation that included S. America.

I don't know who I'd choose after those two.  I'm not a scholar of the presidents. Interesting discussion though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 9671

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I guess I'd go with the obvious choice of Lincoln. Without Washington, there likely never is a USA. Without Lincoln, there'd be more than one USA. The southern version of the USA would have been a plague on the entire hemisphere. The Confederacy and rich southerners envisioned a slave nation that included S. America.

I don't know who I'd choose after those two.  I'm not a scholar of the presidents. Interesting discussion though.

The Confederacy may have lost the war, but the Confederate mindset lives on as the GOP.  They are still a plague on the hemisphere.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael Knight

Michael Knight 12887

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I guess I'd go with the obvious choice of Lincoln. Without Washington, there likely never is a USA. Without Lincoln, there'd be more than one USA. The southern version of the USA would have been a plague on the entire hemisphere. The Confederacy and rich southerners envisioned a slave nation that included S. America.

I don't know who I'd choose after those two.  I'm not a scholar of the presidents. Interesting discussion though.

It's Lincoln , Teddy, FDR. America has only had 3 great presidents, some good many average and a few really really bad.

Edited by Michael Knight
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...