Foxx

https://twitter.com/jsolomonReports/status/1232024477606780928

https://twitter.com/TheBabylonBee/status/1231979658851295235

well, we might have been in the running to take Burrow so it wouldn't have been all bad.

https://twitter.com/davelevinthal/status/1231418233846145024

https://twitter.com/rising_serpent/status/1231649683732357120

while true, i am just not wired to watch and enjoy public embarrassment. put him in jail for atrocities committed, fine. no need for the public humiliation.

the dichotomy here is very clear. "Though intelligence officials have disputed that the officer who delivered the main briefing said Russia was actively aiding the president's re-election, people in the room said that intelligence officers' responses to law makers follow-up questions made clear that Russia was trying to get Mr. Trump re-elected." so...."intelligence officials" have, apparently, clearly disputed the claims that the officer who delivered the briefing made any such statements stating that Russia was aiding the president's campaign, isn't enough to dissuade the lawmakers contentions that follow-up questions could not have proved anything of the sort. clearly Adam Schiffty was the lawmaker in question here. every word before the "comma" negates everything after it. https://twitter.com/hughhewitt/status/1231694271608229898

letting this continue is just cruel and unusual punishment at this point. they need to put Joe out to pasture where he can graze peacefully. https://twitter.com/FrancisBrennan/status/1231688930040385543

you'll have to explain just how exactly is it moving the goal posts? i owned the delegate numbers and subsequently posted the actual voter numbers that backed up what i initially said. then i dug up numbers for '16 which also included numbers for '08 and went on to bolster my argument with emphasis. so, again, please explain how that is moving the goalposts. not lost here is the fact that you omitted the last post of mine in this series that essentially stated that we would have to wait and see what the final numbers were. additionally, i saw your prior post where you say that you saw where some 70k early votes cast and that the final tally may rival the '08 numbers (117k). i saw that number as well but that was from a vox article, so i tend to take those numbers with a grain of salt. my numbers are being reported pretty consistently across many sites and as such, the extrapolation just does not add up to what you want to believe in the vox numbers. it may ultimately prove that they do but at current with the numbers we do have being actually reported, the numbers are not in your favor. lastly, i did notice that you avoided my question about Sander's policies versus Trump's policies. i will assume that you can not answer it and that is okay because there is no logical defense.

now you know.

if one hadn't noticed the similarities in these two before now, the fact that they have the same handlers should expose it.

nothing listed on the calendar.

i wonder if there is a list of times for depositions and public testimonies at this point.

i would not be opposed this. 2020 NFL Free Agency: Predicting landing spots for every PFF top-50 free agent 26. EDGE YANNICK NGAKOUE – BUFFALO BILLS Projected contract: 4 years, $19.5 million per year ($57 million guaranteed) Considering the Jaguars are currently over the cap, seeing Yannick Ngakoue on another squad in 2020 seems likely. Things could change with cuts, but for now, Buffalo, which owns the third-most cap space, would be the likeliest landing spot for Ngakoue. With Shaq Lawson set to hit free agency and Lorenzo Alexander retiring, Buffalo has nearly half of its total edge pressures to replace this offseason. Ngakoue has produced top-20 pass-rush grades in each of the past three seasons and could play the 6/7-tech role Lawson played.

yes, exactly... the article is from 2016. which buttresses my contention that this years totals will be along the same lines of '16... down 30% from '08. however, we shall see what the final numbers are in the days ahead.

i run a couple forums and as such have been collecting them for years. i have a ton of 'em. they are easy to save, just right click and save 'em to a folder.

took me quite awhile to find the actual voter numbers from '16 (stupid delegate reporting only on most sites (wonder why that is)). in '16 they had a turnout of 84k voters, so it appears that the numbers are on par with the last election caucus. again though, with the DNC/MSM fever of #orangemanbad, one would think that the turnout would be much higher. and if one were to compare these numbers to the turnout to elect Obama and shun the Bushista era, the numbers are way down, in the neighborhood of 30%. personally, i just don't see the MSM narrative of there being this massive voter sentiment to unseat Trump as ringing anywhere near being true. rather it is just their made up fantasy. Nevada Democratic caucus turnout lower than in 2008

it appears you are correct and i was prettys sure that those weren't the actual vote(r) totals. however, i *think i might have found actual voter totals and to be honest, they are still somewhat underwhelming, again, if these numbers are the actual voter turnout. less then 60k with 60% reporting which would mean less than 100k in toto when all accounted for. Nevada Caucuses 2020: Live Results

is this right? 50% of precincts reporting and the totals are under 8,000 votes? if that is true, then Democrats turnout has to be a large red flag for the establishment, as well as being quite laughable. 2020 Nevada caucus election results

https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1231499953224048641