Buffalo_Gal

This cannot be true!! The WSJ and the NYT told me nothing was going to happen! The upcoming OIG report is a big nothing-burger, or so I heard from "well placed sources."

Depends on the "real world" job in those two years, I guess. And then they head back to school for reimmersion.

Hubby has a very "prestigious" education. When we first started dating, my family thought he was a condescending snob. LOL No one would call him that now. I think it is just what the Ivy League and "upper tier" graduate schools produce as it is so insular and moneyed. If you (generic "prestigious"-school -graduate "you") venture out into the real world, you mellow and expand. If you stay locked in an ivory tower away from deplorables, you don't grow, and pretty soon, you start believing your own bull####.

Over at the Hill there is a video clip of Mitch saying he'd go it with only Republican rules if necessary. The article says more (not sure how true the rest of the article is as the video clip and article don't exactly match-up). Anyhoooo worth the 30 second listen. Link to video.

Yeah, the "I'm sorry you didn't like what I said" apology. Always so sincere.

The real question is; how long does RBG have to live? This can't all be about the OIG report and the last administration's graft and spying as it will all come out in the Senate. There has to be more. A claim that a SC seat cannot be filled while a President is being impeached? Then, when the impeachment trial is over trying to say "election year so no SC seat can be filled"? The election year one I'd expect Mitch to say LOLGFY, but while under impeachment? Think he'd still go forward with a SC nomination?

Agreed. And, as a mother, I'd have ripped that lunatic a new one for mentioning my 13 year old son as part of an "impeachment hearing" to attempt to prove an #OrangeManBad point. Mama Bears are real. Melania was much more gracious than 99% of mother's would have been. Sorry, when "hands off the kids" was invoked to protect a 50 year old crack head with no job skills from the consequences of his actions, but does not apply to (even nebulously) smacking around a 13 year old during a Congressional hearing, people have truly jumped the shark.

Sure, why not impeach a guy for what his predecessor did. Seems smart. ?‍♀️ Meh, all the former administration's graft, pay-for-play, and spying will now come to light. Well played Democrats, well played.

Looks like Nancy is going full steam ahead with impeachment... "Today I am asking our chairman to proceed with articles of impeachment." Thelma and Louise ain't got nuthin' on today's Democrats.

By far. I actually learn stuff from Romo, he's entertaining, and very easy on the eyes.

</snip> The 6-foot-8, 238-pound Allen also has proven to be a running threat, and leads the NFL in yards after contact. </snip>

Nancy is set to babble in a few minutes:

Was this posted? If so, mea culpa

So he wrote this prequel just because?

This kook was thought to be a possible replacement for Scalia by some!? She did not make the short list, but for someone, anyone, to think she was an appropriate candidate for the Supreme Court ... Oy. And here's an article from 2009 with the hopin' and wishin' for her to replace Souter. Makes me wonder if she'd have been on Hillary's list?

Analysis Researchers Try to Craft the Perfect Boob Using Eye-Tracking Technology Researchers are using eye-tracking technology to see what people look at when they evaluate boobs in an attempt to create a "universal scale" for breast aesthetics and symmetry. </snip>

He's the "friendliest" one on the panel for the Republicans: Jonathan Turley (George Washington University Law) Anti-Trump guy thinks these proceedings are dangerous.

Trump's Wiretap Tweets Raise Risk of Impeachment - If the president has made false claims of a crime without proof, there's only one constitutional remedy. By Noah Feldman March 6, 2017, 1:42 PM EST </snip>

?

Michael Gerhardt (University of NC Law Professor) President is guilty of bribery, obstruction of justice, obstruction of congress. Another "impartial witness!!" Whoohooo!! Did Nadler put out a call for nutty, smug, partisan hacks? If so, he got some "good" ones.

People used to debate. They used to have reasons based on more than feelings for doing XYZ. None of these people are spring chickens, so there is little excuse except for living in a brain-washing bubble.

Yuppers... and people pay money to listen to this in class. No wonder reason and debate has gone the way of the dodo bird among our "betters".