DC Tom

Who cares if they haven't read it. That's not important. What's important is: they've had the ability to read the report, in full, outside of grand jury information, and they're throwing a hissy fit over Barr misrepresenting the report and withholding it from them. They held Barr in contempt for one of two things: withholding something he's not withholding, or withholding details that he's required by law to withhold.

You're right, you were. Apology accepted.

I'm sure you think you contributed to the discussion. But you didn't.

That still baffles me. Uber advertises their driver positions as "work on your own schedule." How is it a strike if you decide not to work for a day?

It was controversial because many people thought - and still think - the death penalty was excessive for an espionage case.

That's not the Constitution. It also provides a specific definition of "treason" that excludes anything that's happened with respect to Trump's election. And the Rosenberg's weren't convicted and executed for treason. Only espionage, which is one of the reasons it was so controversial.

No it wouldn't. The Constitution doesn't make treason and sedition a capital crime.

The comments on that NYT article are some of the dumbest things I've ever read. "He moved from California, so now we're subsidizing his diet!" "He deprived people of their civil right to see Avengers: Endgame!" Literally gatorman-level dumb.

But they chose the most popular lottery numbers!

I've never been to Mongolia, I don't know any Mongolians...but even I know that Mongolian folklore, going back a thousand years, includes the missive "DO NOT EAT MARMOTS OR YOU WILL DIE OF THE ***** PLAGUE."

C'mon...you're taking my replies to crayonz seriously?

I wouldn't worry. You, like I, are probably for the guillotine shortly after it happens.

It's what redneck androids dream of.

I wonder how many white power signs the Cubs' manager flashes during a game while signaling the base runners and batters...

It ends the next time the Democrats have the White House and Congress, and can outlaw the Republican Party as a hate group/terrorist organization. I suspect they think they might be able to do it next time. I'd sure as hell love to see AOC's opinion on the subject.

How does he equate "had citizens who finance terror" to "state sponsor of terrorism?"

I actually had to google that to be sure you were joking.

See: "We don't have to concede elections that are stolen from us" (Clinton/Abrams) and "I doubt Trump will leave office if he loses in 2020" (Pelosi).

It might be more effective to hire a Russian to kill him and blame Trump.

Just to be clear: the document was released to the public with redactions such as required by law, and that's "obscuration?" Someone tell me again pot is harmless...

The mere thought of that makes me very happy.

Explain to me how Starr was even authorized to look in to the President's sex life as part of a real estate investigation. That was a worse fishing expedition that the current one against Trump.

Insults are only the norm because of the proliferation of bloody idiots like you who do nothing but complain about insults being the norm.

Don't know...but I wouldn't be surprised if he has. And really, he does...if the film is all fogged-up from exposure to x-rays or something.