Tucker with the reach
Good.
Go get him ducks.
Meanwhile...
Those people are the swamp!
Republicans in office will not do anything if trump poll numbers do not dip much
His base is solid
Biden, son could be forced to testify in Trump impeachment trial
Not only could Mr. Biden be forced to be in D.C. at a critical moment in the presidential campaign, but so could many of his chief rivals — the half-dozen senators also vying for Democrats’ presidential nomination, impeachment experts said.
https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2...d-testify-don/
Mr. Trump could even be present for the entire spectacle. Experts said the Senate would have a hard time refusing him if he demanded to confront the witnesses against him
“I don’t think the Dems have thought this through at all,” one staffer told The Washington Times.
You know ducks, you're not often right (because you're historically re ed), but you're right on this.
Republicans have created such a beast with Trump and his fringe asshat followers that they can't do even basic things that remotely acknowledge this country's values or show a shred of compassion. They can't give oversight to the Executive Office even though every single one of them knows this Presidency is a disaster.
But at some point, Trump will no longer be President, the GOP will nominate a more traditional Republican, and the Trump s will revolt and leave the party, splitting conservatives and ending conservative power for some time.
Can Donald Trump possibly win 45 states in 2020?
https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/10/07/pol...www.cnn.com%2F
The assessment they gave when they pre-empted the release of the report with a press conference calling it a nothingburger.
A day later you still haven't given any indication that you even know what's in the report. Predictably.
Meh, I watched Mueller's full testimony. Kick rocks
Those two posts are not related to the same investigation.
You may have watched the testimony to give your endorphins a tickle when your hero GOP members challenged Dear Leader's enemy, but you have no clue what was in the report or the significance of its findings. You probably didn't understand what was even going on during the testimony, you were there for fireworks and score.
Keep parroting the company line, useful idiot.
Keyword(s): "meh"
User Name: DarrinS
151 results, each one a refusal to elaborate or rationalize his "convictions."
What a monumental coward.
Maybe you should just post less.
Or you could just IM the password to Adam Lambert.
Why don't you just have one of your 8chan buddies hack it?
Funny I use the phrase "monumental coward" and within 5 minutes TSA and Chris are posting. Found your mating call?
Andrew Johnson says
It is a good read (thanks for sharing), and particularly dead on when it comes to whistleblowers. However:
1) It doesn't make excuses for the POTUS or even make any claims that the allegations are not true and accurate (it actually points out how dumb the current POTUS is)
2) Doesn't really advance any conspiracy theory either. It's just notes the disparity of treatment between this whistleblower and others.
3) IMO, obviates the direct involvement of POTUS here, and the fact that unlike the other alleged crimes, which were done under the mantra of national security, this is an outright corrupt personal/political advance.
It's true that the CIA, NSA, etc have had historically much more la ude into what can only be described as criminal behavior. We can debate if that's right or wrong, but there are legal reasons why they have that role and not the President.
I'm certainly no fan of the paralegal they pull off, and stated so many times, but I also understand that Congress, in it's many approvals of laws like the Patriot Act, has given them the authorization to do what they do.
And frankly, when dubya was caught with the massive surveillance program, torture and suspension of habeas corpus, they eventually had the courts and Congress review and approve or dismiss them. Same when Snowden/Manning revealed a number of programs that were still ongoing during the Obama administration.
Disagree with you here.
Taibbi goes further than noting the disparity. He reflexively holds it against the Ukraine whistleblower that he(she) went through the House committee and lawyered up instead of going to Wikileaks or some other en y. Perhaps this person has seen what happens to others if they're not careful.
And again, we're not really talking about national secrets or security here, so there's not really a national security risk to revealing that the President is using his office to strike deals with foreign governments to blunt his political rivals. So disparity should probably be expected, even if not condoned.
Last edited by Spurminator; 10-07-2019 at 11:55 PM.
I wouldn't necessary describe that as a conspiracy theory. The Democratic Party and commercial press in general have been pretty much chomping at the bit of anything to discredit the president (and they've had a good amount of material, thanks largely to the President's own stupidity).
There's apparently two whistleblowers now, besides the texts provided by a third person, and the IG generally had the back of them from the get go.
IMVHO, that doesn't either excuses or changes anything of what was alleged (now corroborated through the transcript).
Taibbi is right to point out the disparity of the treatment of whistleblowers. However, I think it overlooks what the alleged crime is. In all the other cases you could point to a national security interest worth protecting (very debatable), but there's no excuses in this case.
Donald J. Trump Retweeted
Sean Davis Seanmdav
Lawmakers in both chambers have demanded that IC IG Michael Atkinson explain why he backdated to August secret changes he made to whistleblower rules in September. Atkinson is stonewalling them, which is a weird thing to do if there's nothing to hide
Know more then you
You forgot Republican
Honestly I'm pretty sure you have no idea what I'm talking what I'm talking about but I'll leave it at that.
But muh pledge
Honestly
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)