The Frankish Reich

What happened to Chef Jim here? Another shape-shifter with a new name?

Tarheel Tard now provides us with the same Julie Kelly tweets in 5 different threads. Not a single original thought.

It is interesting to watch Republicans (read: Trumpists) try to develop a response to this devastating blow to their impeachment case. Right now, it's all over the place. Try this one: "Of course informants are unreliable and in it for themselves; see Ray Epps. But even without the man we described as our key witness, there's still plenty of evidence of corruption." Or this one: "The informant was reliable, but when he pointed the finger at Hunter and Joe the FBI concocted a case against him! It's the Deep State again." What you will never hear: "Based on new information, we are suspending the impeachment inquiry until the evidence beyond that of Smirnov is reassessed." We are refocusing on the use and abuse of paid informants by federal law enforcement agencies." That would be a rational response. This isn't about rationality, it's about scoring political points. The way the right-wing opinion machine works, the official talking points/desperate attempts to save this impeachment "inquiry" will be out later today.

OMG, these kids are dying to read Ron DeSantis's campaign (RIP) book and they can't obtain it! Whatever are these poor innocents clamoring for the wit and wisdom of Uncle Ron to do? Meanwhile, over at Amazon: Used - Good $1.64 $3.99 delivery March 4 - 5. Details Add to Cart Condition Shipped to you from Goodwill of the Valleys, Roanoke VA. Thank you for your support! Valleys Books & More

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/alabama-frozen-embryo-ruling-ivf Yep, the logical conclusion. I think we should lock up all those 40 something women suddenly giving birth to twins.

He got Favre at age 39. I may be ok with him taking Josh in 2035.

As tone deaf as ever, Big Mollie.

Wasn't this supposed to be the smoking gun? The gun just backfired.

Yeah. Obviously the Republican Chair of the House Intel Committee saw plenty to be agitated about. It has come to this: unless Trump personally states "this is a problem," his mindless supporters will say it's all a manufactured problem somehow calculated to help Biden.

I don't like her. Her relationship with her special prosecutor (and their testimony about it) doesn't pass the smell test. But again ... so far, no smoking gun, and no solid basis for the judge to find her disqualified to prosecute this case. In other words, no showing that the defendants (including Trump) are prejudiced by her less than honorable conduct.

The other sides (there's Trump's lawyers, the fake elector's lawyer, etc.) have promised impeachment witnesses tomorrow, so maybe that will come. But right now, a hunch can't carry the day.

None of which explains why a REPUBLICAN called out BIDEN for NOT releasing information about this Russian space nuke scheme. If Biden wanted more "Russia = Evil" info out there, he would have publicized it. You've got it exactly bass ackwards. And leave Juan out of this.

We ain't done yet here, but after a really rough start for Fani (the friend testifying that there was a romantic relationship before she hired Nathan as a special prosecutor), the smoking gun ain't there. No photos of them sipping out of a 2-straw Pina colada in Belize. No proof that Fani didn't withdraw enough cash over time sufficient to "repay" him. No condo building neighbor to testify that they were spending the night together prior to him being retained. I'm not buying their story, but the evidence to corroborate the friends' story just isn't there.

She didn't melt down. She knows exactly what she is doing. It was a brushback pitch. Is it unfair to play the race card there? Sure. Did it kind of work? Yep.

You're right. Obama. And as I said, it was a "Kinsley Gaffe" - mistakenly telling the truth.

Trial set for March 26. Seat of the pants estimates: - Trump gets some higher court to intervene to slow it down: 10% - Trial goes forward more or less as scheduled: 90% - Trump gets convicted of at least one felony count: 75% Remember, the Presidential Immunity argument can't work here because the alleged criminal acts preceded his time as President. And these are state charges, so a lot of other defenses (ultimately including a self-pardon) won't be available.

You do realize the USA exports nearly $200 billion of agricultural commodities every year. I guess we should ban those? You'll be real popular in Iowa.

True, but now it's devolved into a he said/she said. More specifically Fani and Nathan vs. The Friend. And still, nobody's cracked Fani. She's belligerent, but she hasn't given in and there's no damning evidence (so far) to the contrary.

Amy Kremer posted this. Who? "Women For Trump." As with Julie, presumably not a lawyer. There's no jury here. Fani's demeanor is aggressive/assertive/indignant, but so far she hasn't cracked. Sorry folks, but she's actually making it hard for the judge to disqualify here.

Yes, that clever old fox. He mixes up names on purpose! Oh, the hilarity of mixing up the leaders of Hungary and Turkey, of Biden and Obama, of the former Speaker and his current opponent. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-says-when-he-mixes-up-names-it-is-purpose-2024-02-15/

In other words, they cling to their guns and religion because they've been left behind by the new economy. Hillary's gaffe was the classic Michael Kinsley gaffe: when a politician accidentally speaks the truth.

Fani's babe Nathan Wade just testified, and not very credibly. His testimony: he charged trips to his business credit card to allow Fani to preserve some level of anonymity when she traveled. But obviously she went through security with her own ID, etc. He says she would reimburse him half, but that there's no deposited checks etc. She paid him back in cash. One was a Belize trip. It must have been at least 5K ... she handed him 5K in cash? Was it under the mattress? I have a feeling she'll be disqualified from the case and very likely suspended from the practice of law or disbarred down the line.

Silly nonsequiturs. America was, and is, great. That greatness is found not in some imaginary memory of a Garden of Eden, but in our ability to continuously meet new challenges and to remain the most productive people in the world with the greatest capacity for rewarding hard work and innovation. It seems to me that the America Haters are the ones who deny that this country remains great. That's the whole point of Make America Great Again.

Margaret Thatcher, stating with remarkable clarity what conservative economics used to be all about: the other side "would rather the poor be poorer so that the rich can be less rich." That wisdom has been completely forgotten by today's so-called conservatives.

And what I'm saying is that they would be happy with that. I mean, at least they think they'd be happy with that - an America that is a lot more like their nostalgic vision of the 1950s. Consumer goods cost more. There's less disposable income. Etc, etc. In reality, as soon as that starts to happen and GDP numbers reflect it, they'd be on to another political fad.