impeachment inquiry hearings thread

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Dubious.  Very dubious.

Naturally, but then you aren't one of the 53% who thinks Trump is better than Lincoln or the 12% that think Russia is friendly are you?

[Anastasis 23481]

7 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I guess I might be misunderstanding this market, but if not then you can guarantee yourself money by splitting evenly among the No buys (in terms of number of units purchased of each option, not dollars spent on each option). Guaranteed 1% profit. Example if you want to spend $10,000:

Purchase 2,020 units of each no option. You will end up with $1,757.40 No on 0; $1,959.40 No on 1; $1,515 No on 2; $1,131.20 No on 3; $1,757.40 No on 4; $1,878.60 No on 5+. That's a total of $9,999 invested. Now without doing detailed math, the basic idea is that no matter which one of those numbers is the actual  number of articles passed by 3/31, you will get 2,020 x 5 = $10,100 in return.

This all assumes, of course, that the website's cut is baked into those prices (which I assumed because each Yes/No pair adds up to more than $1).

Easy to spot because the no probabilities against the $1 payout add up to 4.95<5.

Of course the real problem is that you are guaranteeing yourself only a 1% return after nearly 4 months. Obviously plenty of better ways to invest money. But if those are still the prices on 3/30 then you could do a lot worse than a guaranteed 1% return in a single day.

$850 cap per position, predictit does some weird calculations in non-binary markets, and the fees are not baked in.  10% of winnings, 0% on losses. But if all you want is to pick up some low risk nickles and dimes, they are out there.  For example, there are still idiots selling shares on Hillary criminal charges by 12/31/19.

 

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26514]

1 hour ago, Tuco said:

The founders did not account for political parties when they formed the Constitution.  The whole concepts of "majority" and "minority" wouldn't make sense.  All of this - parties selecting committee chairs, whips, etc. - are later inventions. Hell, even the notion of the President naming his Vice President was an invention later. Can you imagine how much difference this would be if the GOP (and DNC) couldn't punish Congressman and Senators for following their conscience?  

Of course, the founders were wrong.  The structure of government led to the party system, and very quickly.  Washington was the last non-partisan to be elected, and he watched his fellow founders divide into camps.  He watched two of his brilliant advisors, Jefferson and Hamilton,  wage political battles which necessitated parties for strength. This was his warning in his farewell address. 

I don't consider Washington to be a visionary of political philosophy, like others were.  But, yeah, he hit the fucking nail on the head here. 

I might tweak your read just a bit.  Washington's real concern wasn't about parties as organizing vehicles per se, but that they "serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force". 
George Washington's Farewell address is very much pre-occupied with aftermath of the the French Revolution, and when he talks about faction and their relationship to party, he's talking in part about the split between the D-R and Federalist parties in the United States between support for the French and Great Britain in the Revolutionary War of 1794 as a proxy for conflict between American factions - economic, ideological, and regional. Of course the backdrop is the Reign of Terror and subsequently the Directory. We somehow managed to throw off the yoke of the British monarchy without a domestic bloodbath and he's suggesting that we should be mindful of what prevents one. 
Washington's view was fundamentally conservative; protecting the Government from becoming a instrument for the consolidation of power by one faction at the expense of others, because when that happens liberty goes out the window and people die, no matter what slogans were used to justify the violence. It's so important that it's the first thing he says once he gets through the pleasantries, to wit:
 

Quote

The unity of Government, which constitutes you one people, is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquillity at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty, which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee, that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment, that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion, that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.

 

[Degenerate Gardner 4085]

1 hour ago, Lat22 said:

I can assure you that most of America fully grasps what has been going on.

Your assurance notwithstanding, if they did fully grasp it we'd see mass marching in the streets. Unfortunately an individual's understanding is highly predicated upon whether they've been captured by propaganda outlets. Many of our fellow citizens are only too happy to abdicate their powers of perception and thought.

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2681]

Excellent analysis here: 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/trumps-supporters-are-displaying-the-will-to-win-democrats-are-not/ar-BBXOAWw

 

excerpt:

The House Intelligence Committee’s forceful report addressed two issues: Trump’s abuse of power to extort a bribe from Ukraine, and the subsequent obstruction of justice to conceal the extortion.

The Intelligence Committee’s hearings powerfully dramatized the first of these issues. The Judiciary Committee’s hearings should have dramatized the second.

The minority complains that the American people have not heard from first-hand witnesses to the extortion. This is not true. Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman listened to the July call in which Trump delivered the extortion message directly to the president of Ukraine. Ambassador Gordon Sondland led the extortion project. Ambassador Bill Taylor witnessed the extortion in real time. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch was the extortion ring’s first target.

Still, important witnesses have heeded the president’s order not to testify. Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and the president’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani led the conspiracy; Energy Secretary Rick Perry participated in it; National-Security Adviser John Bolton tried to stop it. All refused to testify. The process of enforcing subpoenas upon them all will be slow.

At a minimum, however, the Judiciary Committee could have dramatized their refusal: Set the table. Arrange the chairs. Fold the name cards. Then read aloud the questions that should have been asked of them, if they had not obeyed the president’s order to obstruct justice.

 

[jimmyjazz 46004]

1 hour ago, Upgrayedd said:

More could quote what the rules are for advancing on The Voice.

If you think Chevel should HGave beaten Kennedy you are a traitor!r!!!

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2681]

3 hours ago, tantric superman said:

I enjoyed Lino as my con law prof.  Great guy on a personal level.  Standard issue, oversimplified Thomas Sowell type anti-affirmative action stance.

Best story he told was when he was woken up and congratulated on being nominated to the Supreme Court.   The caller had mixed up Lino Graglia with Nino Scalia.

eh I was not so keen on him as a person, when he'd make reference during class to "the blacks" as some monolithic group and other such crap, acting like a skinny I-talian Archie Bunker.

[Brisketexan 105187]

44 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I might tweak your read just a bit.  Washington's real concern wasn't about parties as organizing vehicles per se, but that they "serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force". 
George Washington's Farewell address is very much pre-occupied with aftermath of the the French Revolution, and when he talks about faction and their relationship to party, he's talking in part about the split between the D-R and Federalist parties in the United States between support for the French and Great Britain in the Revolutionary War of 1794 as a proxy for conflict between American factions - economic, ideological, and regional. Of course the backdrop is the Reign of Terror and subsequently the Directory. We somehow managed to throw off the yoke of the British monarchy without a domestic bloodbath and he's suggesting that we should be mindful of what prevents one. 
Washington's view was fundamentally conservative; protecting the Government from becoming a instrument for the consolidation of power by one faction at the expense of others, because when that happens liberty goes out the window and people die, no matter what slogans were used to justify the violence. It's so important that it's the first thing he says once he gets through the pleasantries, to wit:
 

 

Yep.  With respect to the office of POTUS, the right way can be summed up as "I am the president of all of the people."  The wrong way can be summed up as "I am the president of my supporters."  And, you know, treating those who don't support you as....hmmm...what words could I be looking for....oh, yes -- "human scum."

When you have a domestic political party that 1) holds power and 2) doesn't consider it's non-supporters to be simply "the opposition," but rather "enemies of the state" and "human scum"....well, that's how you flush a republic down the shitter.

[tantric superman 4667]

20 minutes ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

eh I was not so keen on him as a person, when he'd make reference during class to "the blacks" as some monolithic group and other such crap, acting like a skinny I-talian Archie Bunker.

I think the Italians do just find with their racism without bringing Archie Bunker into the picture. 

[Jive Turkey 12633]

everything i know about GW's Farewell Address i learned from Hamilton.

 

[Pig Bellmont 8719]

1 hour ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

Excellent analysis here: 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/trumps-supporters-are-displaying-the-will-to-win-democrats-are-not/ar-BBXOAWw

 

excerpt:

The House Intelligence Committee’s forceful report addressed two issues: Trump’s abuse of power to extort a bribe from Ukraine, and the subsequent obstruction of justice to conceal the extortion.

The Intelligence Committee’s hearings powerfully dramatized the first of these issues. The Judiciary Committee’s hearings should have dramatized the second.

The minority complains that the American people have not heard from first-hand witnesses to the extortion. This is not true. Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman listened to the July call in which Trump delivered the extortion message directly to the president of Ukraine. Ambassador Gordon Sondland led the extortion project. Ambassador Bill Taylor witnessed the extortion in real time. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch was the extortion ring’s first target.

Still, important witnesses have heeded the president’s order not to testify. Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and the president’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani led the conspiracy; Energy Secretary Rick Perry participated in it; National-Security Adviser John Bolton tried to stop it. All refused to testify. The process of enforcing subpoenas upon them all will be slow.

At a minimum, however, the Judiciary Committee could have dramatized their refusal: Set the table. Arrange the chairs. Fold the name cards. Then read aloud the questions that should have been asked of them, if they had not obeyed the president’s order to obstruct justice.

 

You know what’s better than asking questions to an empty chair? Jailing people for violating your subpoena. Congress is a coequal branch of government and the people voted in a Dem majority. If they had any balls, that’d be the real solution. Jail and fines every day for noncompliance 

[henrygandorf 29194]

1 hour ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

Excellent analysis here: 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/trumps-supporters-are-displaying-the-will-to-win-democrats-are-not/ar-BBXOAWw

 

excerpt:

The House Intelligence Committee’s forceful report addressed two issues: Trump’s abuse of power to extort a bribe from Ukraine, and the subsequent obstruction of justice to conceal the extortion.

The Intelligence Committee’s hearings powerfully dramatized the first of these issues. The Judiciary Committee’s hearings should have dramatized the second.

The minority complains that the American people have not heard from first-hand witnesses to the extortion. This is not true. Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman listened to the July call in which Trump delivered the extortion message directly to the president of Ukraine. Ambassador Gordon Sondland led the extortion project. Ambassador Bill Taylor witnessed the extortion in real time. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch was the extortion ring’s first target.

Still, important witnesses have heeded the president’s order not to testify. Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and the president’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani led the conspiracy; Energy Secretary Rick Perry participated in it; National-Security Adviser John Bolton tried to stop it. All refused to testify. The process of enforcing subpoenas upon them all will be slow.

At a minimum, however, the Judiciary Committee could have dramatized their refusal: Set the table. Arrange the chairs. Fold the name cards. Then read aloud the questions that should have been asked of them, if they had not obeyed the president’s order to obstruct justice.

 

agreed, and a good read. 

that said, i think the broader issue is that what trump/his supporters/this administration is currently doing is not even acknowledging the house's role in the entire checks-and-balances system.  everyone wants to compare this to clinton, nixon, johnson, but this has never ever happened before.  the stonewalling, the press conferences, the fox news spew - it's all basically saying the entire situation is a sham, and we're not going to play along, and we're basically going to pretend it's not there.

for all the bitching and moaning about things being unfair to the republicans (yawn), the deck is completely stacked against the dems here.  they're getting accused of not having fact witnesses, because none of them will testify.  anyone who does gets harrassed/intimidated/threatened.  the dems are moving slowly and methodically, yet being accused of moving too quickly.  if they're moving so quickly, why is trump insisting that it should move quicker?

i admit, it's a pretty genius move to ignore the entire thing, because:

1. the facts aren't on their side

2. congress has shown they're basically powerless against this type of defense

3. most of the public has already made up their mind anyway

4. like the end of wargames, there is no winning.  if they do nothing, trump will continue to abuse his office, and fuck with the election.  if they continue with this, well, he's still doing shit, rudy is in ukraine, and the senate will acquit anyway.

yesterday, someone on cnn was talking about rudy, and if he's actually being paid, and if so, by who?  and if not, is that an illegal contribution?  and if not, does he enjoy privilege?  the thing is, he'll claim privilege even if he doesn't have it.  they'll never show any type of transactions that shows what he's up to, because we can't even get the fucking financials or tax returns from trump.  there are holes in our system that trump has been abusing for decades, and now he's abusing them in the oval office.  he's appealing the shit out of everything, hoping the supreme court will bail him out, but it'll take months/years to even get that far.  and even then, i guarantee you he'll say fuck off.

and speaking of the courts, some people want to wait for the rulings on mcgahn, and bolton, and kupperman, and mulvaney, and who cares.  literally, who fucking cares?  i mean, i would like to hear what they have to say.  but people need to come to the realization that if all of the above actually sit down, testify, and tell the truth, that he will STILL GET FUCKING ACQUITTED IN THE SENATE AND BE ALLOWED TO MEDDLE IN THE FUCKING ELECTION.

sorry, i haven't capitalized a letter in over 3 years, but enough is enough.  i'm moving to positano.

[GW Hayduke 1953]

5 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

agreed, and a good read. 

that said, i think the broader issue is that what trump/his supporters/this administration is currently doing is not even acknowledging the house's role in the entire checks-and-balances system.  everyone wants to compare this to clinton, nixon, johnson, but this has never ever happened before.  the stonewalling, the press conferences, the fox news spew - it's all basically saying the entire situation is a sham, and we're not going to play along, and we're basically going to pretend it's not there.

for all the bitching and moaning about things being unfair to the republicans (yawn), the deck is completely stacked against the dems here.  they're getting accused of not having fact witnesses, because none of them will testify.  anyone who does gets harrassed/intimidated/threatened.  the dems are moving slowly and methodically, yet being accused of moving too quickly.  if they're moving so quickly, why is trump insisting that it should move quicker?

i admit, it's a pretty genius move to ignore the entire thing, because:

1. the facts aren't on their side

2. congress has shown they're basically powerless against this type of defense

3. most of the public has already made up their mind anyway

4. like the end of wargames, there is no winning.  if they do nothing, trump will continue to abuse his office, and fuck with the election.  if they continue with this, well, he's still doing shit, rudy is in ukraine, and the senate will acquit anyway.

yesterday, someone on cnn was talking about rudy, and if he's actually being paid, and if so, by who?  and if not, is that an illegal contribution?  and if not, does he enjoy privilege?  the thing is, he'll claim privilege even if he doesn't have it.  they'll never show any type of transactions that shows what he's up to, because we can't even get the fucking financials or tax returns from trump.  there are holes in our system that trump has been abusing for decades, and now he's abusing them in the oval office.  he's appealing the shit out of everything, hoping the supreme court will bail him out, but it'll take months/years to even get that far.  and even then, i guarantee you he'll say fuck off.

and speaking of the courts, some people want to wait for the rulings on mcgahn, and bolton, and kupperman, and mulvaney, and who cares.  literally, who fucking cares?  i mean, i would like to hear what they have to say.  but people need to come to the realization that if all of the above actually sit down, testify, and tell the truth, that he will STILL GET FUCKING ACQUITTED IN THE SENATE AND BE ALLOWED TO MEDDLE IN THE FUCKING ELECTION.

sorry, i haven't capitalized a letter in over 3 years, but enough is enough.  i'm moving to positano.

The point of all of this isn’t to get the senate to remove him. That isn’t happening. It never was going to happen. The point of all of this is politik. The point is to maximize the potential Dems win both the White House and senate and push through fundamental changes to fix/strengthen our democracy. 

[DixonHur 11345]

1 hour ago, tantric superman said:

I think the Italians do just find with their racism without bringing Archie Bunker into the picture. 

I know, the nerve of those Italians having pictures of other Italians hanging on the wall of their Italian pizza joint 

[henrygandorf 29194]

5 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

The point of all of this isn’t to get the senate to remove him. That isn’t happening. It never was going to happen. The point of all of this is politik. The point is to maximize the potential Dems win both the White House and senate and push through fundamental changes to fix/strengthen our democracy. 

i understand this and have been saying it for months and months.  the real point is to make sure he's gone in a year, and go from there.

but i'm reacting to the media's critique of the messaging, and the possible paths and speeds and approaches, and who they need to get to testify and what is rudy doing and phone records and blah blah.  what i'm saying, is that none of that matters, it's all posturing. 

nobody cares about the message anymore.  the election will come down to 3-4 states, and we already know the gop doesn't play fair.  just text me directions to the ledge and i'll shut up for a while. 

brisket, drop a pin.

[TwiceHorn 31515]

2 hours ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

eh I was not so keen on him as a person, when he'd make reference during class to "the blacks" as some monolithic group and other such crap, acting like a skinny I-talian Archie Bunker.

His preferred nomenclature in the late 80s, early 90s was often "hoi polloi."

[Brisketexan 105187]

11 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

nobody cares about the message anymore.  the election will come down to 3-4 states, and we already know the gop doesn't play fair. 

In a post-facts world, the best liar wins.  And sweet Jesus, the GOP is world-champs at selling lies.  In terms of individual size, total volume, the whole shebang.  It's what they do.  "Stacking 'em deep and selling 'em cheep!"

Ledge is getting crowded.  Acceptance of reality is inevitable for the sane.

[GW Hayduke 1953]

9 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i understand this and have been saying it for months and months.  the real point is to make sure he's gone in a year, and go from there.

but i'm reacting to the media's critique of the messaging, and the possible paths and speeds and approaches, and who they need to get to testify and what is rudy doing and phone records and blah blah.  what i'm saying, is that none of that matters, it's all posturing. 

nobody cares about the message anymore.  the election will come down to 3-4 states, and we already know the gop doesn't play fair.  just text me directions to the ledge and i'll shut up for a while. 

brisket, drop a pin.

I understand why folks feel that way. Shit is crazy.

I would say that things still matter. I think a lot more folks are going to be sent to prison. I think trump is a one term president. The next AG is going to fuck his shit up. I think the senate is a coin flip unfortunately, which makes me the most nervous

[TwiceHorn 31515]

3 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

I understand why folks feel that way. Shit is crazy.

I would say that things still matter. I think a lot more folks are going to be sent to prison. I think trump is a one term president. The next AG is going to fuck his shit up. I think the senate is a coin flip unfortunately, which makes me the most nervous

One thing for sure, the quest for executive power is now or should be fully under the public microscope.

[Mo Horn 8853]

If I never hear her again it'll be too soon. 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11819]

2 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

If I never hear her again it'll be too soon. 

Curious choice of words, since she actually looks like somebody went to work on her with a file, a lawn mower, a jackhammer and a welding machine.  All at once.

[David Dennison 18940]

15 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

If I never hear her again it'll be too soon. 

The irony is that Kellyanne and her boss look down on the very same people.

[Pescado_Rojo 19427]

20 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i understand this and have been saying it for months and months.  the real point is to make sure he's gone in a year, and go from there.

but i'm reacting to the media's critique of the messaging, and the possible paths and speeds and approaches, and who they need to get to testify and what is rudy doing and phone records and blah blah.  what i'm saying, is that none of that matters, it's all posturing. 

nobody cares about the message anymore.  the election will come down to 3-4 states, and we already know the gop doesn't play fair.  just text me directions to the ledge and i'll shut up for a while. 

brisket, drop a pin.

I was listening to Michael Isikoff's "Skullduggery" podcast this morning on my bike ride. He had Former Congressman Steve Israel, who is very close to Adam Schiff, on as his guest. He of course said what we've all said, that it's highly unlikely the senate would convict. (I think he said 99% chance they won't) Then he made the point that if you want to assess Trump's reelection chances, looking at national impeachment polls is relatively useless because the election is really going to come down to about 20 total counties in 7 states. If you want an idea of the likelihood of Trump getting reelected, that's where you should be looking at impeachment polling. 

[babysdaddy 2725]

16 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

If I never hear her again it'll be too soon. 

I really don't understand how her and George are still married.  

[Sbbruin 21865]

18 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

If I never hear her again it'll be too soon. 

What in the ever-loving fuck is she blathering about?

[Doc Sam Beckett 5797]

4 minutes ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

I was listening to Michael Isikoff's "Skullduggery" podcast this morning on my bike ride. He had Former Congressman Steve Israel, who is very close to Adam Schiff, on as his guest. He of course said what we've all said, that it's highly unlikely the senate would convict. (I think he said 99% chance they won't) Then he made the point that if you want to assess Trump's reelection chances, looking at national impeachment polls is relatively useless because the election is really going to come down to about 20 total counties in 7 states. If you want an idea of the likelihood of Trump getting reelected, that's where you should be looking at impeachment polling. 

This makes so much more sense than a popular vote! 

[Mo Horn 8853]

Just now, babysdaddy said:

I really don't understand how her and George are still married.  

She got all indignant when Wolfe Blitzer said something about not wanting to get into her "troubled marriage".  At the time I thought he sounded like someone with common knowledge among insiders that's not known to the general public. Like everyone in the media knows the marriage is over, or they're separated, or something like that. It's the only thing that makes sense. The only other option is that she is "anonymous" and she is one helluvan actress and they're in it together.

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2681]

6 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

What in the ever-loving fuck is she blathering about?

I'm sure it's the well-tested trope that anyone in the academic field who isn't on the R team is an elitist, ivory tower snob, looking down on us regular working folks rabble rabble 

[GRHorn 105]

Nancy lost her cool here for a few minutes. Why? I wonder if she’s concerned about how things are progressing. 

[Lat22 4015]

4 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

i can assure you that you are incorrect.  an alarmingly high number of americans still think "impeachment" means removal.

they don't understand how the senate works, or that they've all made up their mind.  people hear "trial" and assume the "jury" might actually listen to the facts before they decide.

i also heard someone just last week bemoan the fact that the gop held the majority in the senate, otherwise trump would be gonzo.  i had to inform them that it's a 2/3 vote to remove, which is why it's never happened.  even if the senate was 60-40 dems, it wouldn't happen.

you'll never go broke underestimating what america fully grasps.

100% agree with you on that. Guess I didn’t fully grasp your post. What I meant to say is that most of America grasps what the left has been trying to do for three years. When Pelosi gets up there and invokes her Catholicism, talks about their hearts being full of love, prayerful, somber, yada yada yada, they see right through it. I’ll show myself out and y’all can continue your insanity. 

[Chuckie Finster 22704]

1 minute ago, GRHorn said:

Nancy lost her cool here for a few minutes. Why? I wonder if she’s concerned about how things are progressing. 

Now apply that same logic to the actions of literally any Republican who has appeared in front of a camera in the last 2 years.

[David Dennison 18940]

2 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Nancy lost her cool here for a few minutes. Why? I wonder if she’s concerned about how things are progressing. 

Things are progressing just fine in the House. The president is going to be impeached.

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2681]

what has the left been "trying to do for three years?"  Call the Pres out on his repeated lawlessness and corruption?

[GRHorn 105]

1 minute ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Now apply that same logic to the actions of literally any Republican who has appeared in front of a camera in the last 2 years.

Who like Gaetz or Jordan? They’re always yelling. Nancy is an old pro. Always has her shit together. Maybe it’s something personal, but acting out like that is out of character.

[GRHorn 105]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Things are progressing just fine in the House. The president is going to be impeached.

Things are going so well that Nance is flipping out on reporters?

Like I said, maybe it’s something personal, but she’s obviously out of sorts today. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 minute ago, GRHorn said:

Who like Gaetz or Jordan? They’re always yelling. Nancy is an old pro. Always has her shit together. Maybe it’s something personal, but acting out like that is out of character.

She’s pissed because the president is a complete criminal scumbug and she’s being forced to do her job and start the process of removing a complete criminal scumbag from holding the office of the president of the United States. 

Guys like you would have no problem doing that but apparently she does. 

[David Dennison 18940]

1 minute ago, GRHorn said:

Things are going so well that Nance is flipping out on reporters?

Like I said, maybe it’s something personal, but she’s obviously out of sorts today. 

Consider who the reporter is. 

[triplehorn 2664]

bold strategy:

Also, about that SCOTUS conference on Friday the 13th of December:

 

[wildcat09 29360]

19 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

The irony is that Kellyanne and her boss look down on the very same people.

Nobody has anything remotely close to the level of contempt for Republican voters that Republican politicians have.

[David Dennison 18940]

Just now, wildcat09 said:

Nobody has anything remotely close to the level of contempt for Republican voters that Republican politicians have.

Truth.

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

Nobody has anything remotely close to the level of contempt for Republican voters that Republican politicians have.

True but it’s well earned. When you feed someone a shit sandwich and they keep voting for you to continue to feed the shit sandwiches it’s hard to have respect for that particular shit sandwich eating voter. 

[triplehorn 2664]

4 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Things are going so well that Nance is flipping out on reporters?

Like I said, maybe it’s something personal, but she’s obviously out of sorts today. 

Good on her for not letting that shit stick.  Guy was trying to make this about a personal vendetta.  Instead he gave her an alley-oop to hammer down the fact this is about upholding the Constitution and rule of law, plain and simple.  More of that please.

[RomaVicta 29953]

11 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Nancy lost her cool here for a few minutes. Why? I wonder if she’s concerned about how things are progressing. 

She spit out the notion that both sides are the same when a reporter tried to project conservative/Trumpist motivations onto to her. The hate engine wasn't created on the left. Plenty of worthless shit has been created on the left, but not that malign engine that now runs out of control.

As said above, look at the performance of the GOPs on the House Committees. No attempt at real argument. Nothing but cheap gas light theater. I doubt one minute of their ranting carried a scintilla of the genuine passion Pelosi showed here at having argument over a Constitutional issue reduced to a mere grudge.

Do you claim not to back Trump? I don't see you post much about non-Dems acting strange.

[GRHorn 105]

7 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

She’s pissed because the president is a complete criminal scumbug and she’s being forced to do her job and start the process of removing a complete criminal scumbag from holding the office of the president of the United States. 

Guys like you would have no problem doing that but apparently she does. 

Um, ok. 

 

[staboner 4984]

28 minutes ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

I was listening to Michael Isikoff's "Skullduggery" podcast this morning on my bike ride. He had Former Congressman Steve Israel, who is very close to Adam Schiff, on as his guest. He of course said what we've all said, that it's highly unlikely the senate would convict. (I think he said 99% chance they won't) Then he made the point that if you want to assess Trump's reelection chances, looking at national impeachment polls is relatively useless because the election is really going to come down to about 20 total counties in 7 states. If you want an idea of the likelihood of Trump getting reelected, that's where you should be looking at impeachment polling. 

Its the reverse pendulum my friends. It doesn't even move anymore, it just vibrates if you are lucky. At what point does the society realize that is not how we should elect the POTUS?  

Idle nukes are also good. Have a good Thursday night my friends.

[Brisketexan 105187]

2 minutes ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

what has the left been "trying to do for three years?"  Call the Pres out on his repeated lawlessness and corruption?

No, see, when the GOP says at the very beginning of a presidential administration that their goal is to block everything, and spends 8 years investigating, well, everything, that's just sound government by people who love America.

But when anyone else does it, based on glaring, obvious, and shameful criminal activity, resulting in [checks notes] at least 89 indictments and 24 criminal convictions....including people utterly unconnected to Trump like [checks notes again] his campaign manager....well, that's a "partisan witch hunt!  The libs are out to get him!"

Lies are truth these days.  And lies are winning.  It ain't even close.

[GRHorn 105]

2 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

She spit out the notion that both sides are the same when a reporter tried to project conservative/Trumpist motivations onto to her. The hate engine wasn't created on the left. Plenty of worthless shit has been created on the left, but not that malign engine that now runs out of control.

As said above, look at the performance of the GOPs on the House Committees. No attempt at real argument. Nothing but cheap gas light theater. I doubt one minute of their ranting carried a scintilla of the genuine passion Pelosi showed here at having argument over a Constitutional issue reduced to a mere grudge.

Do you claim not to back Trump? I don't see you post much about non-Dems acting strange.

I think a lot of the over the top behavior of Republicans comes from two things.

1- First trying to cause a stir, get trending on Twitter etc. 

2- Emulating behavior that they think Trump appreciates. Everyone in Washington is trying to move on up the ladder. 
 

Neither of those things is really new or noteworthy, so I don’t comment on them. Plus, people here do it constantly. Nance flipping out is noticeably different.

I’ll retire now from my brief psychoanalyst career. Carry on. 

[RomaVicta 29953]

8 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Nobody has anything remotely close to the level of contempt for Republican voters that Republican politicians have.

[Brisketexan 105187]

1 minute ago, GRHorn said:

I think a lot of the over the top behavior of Republicans comes from two things.

1- First trying to cause a stir, get trending on Twitter etc. 

2- Emulating behavior that they think Trump appreciates. Everyone in Washington is trying to move on up the ladder. 
 

Neither of those things is really new or noteworthy, so I don’t comment on them. Plus, people here do it constantly. Nance flipping out is noticeably different.

I’ll retire now from my brief psychoanalyst career. Carry on. 

Let me translate this for sane people:

Republicans acting like unhinged assholes doesn't merit any mention, because "unhinged assholes" is their brand.

A Dem acting like an unhinged asshole is "new and noteworthy."

Which (and hold on, this is the cool punchline) means that Democrats are the problem with American society and government.

[RomaVicta 29953]

6 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I think a lot of the over the top behavior of Republicans comes from two things.

1- First trying to cause a stir, get trending on Twitter etc. 

2- Emulating behavior that they think Trump appreciates. Everyone in Washington is trying to move on up the ladder. 
 

Neither of those things is really new or noteworthy, so I don’t comment on them. Plus, people here do it constantly. Nance flipping out is noticeably different.

I’ll retire now from my brief psychoanalyst career. Carry on. 

It's not just another ordinary day in DC, my friend. To what end are the GOPs doing as you say? They protect a criminal in the White House and, as far as I'm concerned, they try to keep their own sorry asses out of the hoosegow.

They'd all be in the iron cage on the North Atlantic bound freighter if I could be autocrat for a day. They care not a whit for the US and anyone prevaricating for them is equally worthless as far as I'm concerned just not as criminal.