Jump to content
3rdnlng

The Thread For Greg's Stashes

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Uncle Joe said:

Mueller Report 3.jpg

 

So now Barron is obstructing?

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

What the hell is he talking about?

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

What the hell is he talking about?

 

He's definitely NOT talking about the game.

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

He's definitely NOT talking about the game.

If you listen carefully it's hidden in the dialogue.

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

If you listen carefully it's hidden in the dialogue.

 

I'm still not sure.  I'm going to have to wait for QAnon to tweet about it.

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Ummm.... 

 

 

 

:lol: 

 

#CyclonicLowPressureVortexLivesMatter

#AllLowPressureVortexLivesMatter

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Ummm.... 

 

 

 

:lol: 

 

Sounds like a story with spin.

  • Haha (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Hedge said:

 

Sounds like a story with spin.

 

And in which direction do cyclones spin?  Left...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

(and yes, @catturd2 🤷‍♂️. I guess @SpeakerPelosi was already taken)

  • Haha (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hedge said:

 

 

(and yes, @catturd2 🤷‍♂️. I guess @SpeakerPelosi was already taken)

Apparently so was @catturd and @catturd1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DC Tom said:

 

#CyclonicLowPressureVortexLivesMatter

#AllLowPressureVortexLivesMatter

 

Windist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Hedge said:

 

 

(and yes, @catturd2 🤷‍♂️. I guess @SpeakerPelosi was already taken)

Trump was just channeling his inner Biden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hedge said:

 

 

(and yes, @catturd2 🤷‍♂️. I guess @SpeakerPelosi was already taken)

Don't let Jussie and Kim Foxx see this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hedge said:

🤣

 

 

 

lol. i just finished watching the first two seasons of 'Ozark' last night and i immediately was thinking the Navarro Cartel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Free Shrimp Cocktail with every T-Shirt !

 

 

 

 

.

  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought I would re-post this here.  If we do actually get into impeachment it might be interesting to see how the backpedaling from today's Repubs follows the Dems actions from the Clinton impeachment in the 90's.  Obviously the details are different but if we go down the path there will be similarities I would guess too.

 

The other day I found a 1999 email I wrote to a friend expressing frustration with the Dems and their constant backpedaling with respect to Bill Clinton's impeachment.  I recall too at that time my golf partner calling me the Raging Republican.  You may think I am now a Raging Democrat but I view myself as Independent and have voted for plenty of Dems and Repubs and will likely continue that pattern.  I wouldn't want anyone convicted of non-existent crimes but I also don't think we should ignore misdeeds just because of our party affiliation.  I think we citizens should be more like jurors and less like the lawyers I see around here.   Here is the 99 email:

 

>     I think I'm finally starting to put together some clues on this ...
>
>     Many Clinton supporters view all of the Republicans as the Religious
> Right Wing, therefor the enemy.  They feel that for many years the
> Religious Right has been trying to take away more and more personal
> freedoms in the name of morality.  They want the government to stay out of
> their personal lives.  That feeling is at the root of this Clinton
> support.  They see Ken Starr as one who has pried into the President's
> personal life.  They feel that the Republicans (aka Christian Coalition)
> now are trying to throw him out of office because of 'immoral behavior in
> his private life'.  Many have decided that regardless of the facts, they
> are not giving any more ground to this morality craze. 
>
>     Also, most people that liked Bill (before all of this) knew he had
> told lies in the past and they accepted him anyway.  Many of us that
> didn't like him because of his lying felt that his backers just couldn't
> see how dishonest the guy was.  In reality the backers saw the dishonesty
> and liked him for his other fine leadership qualities.  When he is finally
> caught red handed in these lies, his detractors say 'See, we told he was
> dishonest.  Look at the evidence we have on him.'  While his supporters
> say, 'What's the big deal?  He told a lie about sex.  The economy is
> great.  Get over it.'
>
>     This is the backstepping I've seen in protecting our buddy Bill.  It
> seems so many points have been conceded, yet there's always another
> position to fall back to ... 
>
>     1.     The story breaks...  He did not have an affair with this
> 'gold-digger'.  She is just trying to smear the President or just out to
> get a book deal for her self.  The Whitehouse says that she was stalking
> the President and that the FBI is investigating her.
>     2.     Talk of the stained dress surfaces.  Now the stance is 'I
> doubt he had any affair, but even if he did, so what if he committed
> adultery, it's strictly a personal matter between himself, his family, and
> his God.  The damn Republicans probably planted this woman in there to try
> to get Clinton'.
>     3.     He lied about sex, so what, everybody lies about sex.  Who
> hasn't lied about sex?  Obstruction of Justice!  Get real. 
>     4.     He didn't have any obligation to do the job of the Jones'
> attorneys.  He wasn't forthcoming and he was evasive.  He can be
> misleading without committing perjury.  There's nothing illegal just
> because he didn't offer up answers to questions he wasn't asked.  Besides
> he had to protect Hillary. 
>     5.     OK, maybe he lied, but it was a civil matter and the case
> was eventually thrown out.  Everybody lies in civil cases.  It's not a
> serious matter to commit perjury in a civil case.   Besides, that Ken
> Starr spent how many millions of dollars?  He was appointed to investigate
> Whitewater and then it became Travelgate and blah, blah, blah ... That
> Betty Curry thing?  He was just helping to refresh his memory, that's all.
>     6.     Well, he had to lie to the Grand Jury.  What was he going to
> do, admit to perjury in the Jones case - that would have been stupid.  He
> had to deny that he lied earlier or Ken Starr, that no good, rotten,
> bastard .... would be able to indict him for perjury when he leaves
> office.  He has to maintain that he never lied now, or Starr will get him.
>
>     7.     Look, perjury is just not that serious of a matter.  It's
> certainly not a 'high crime or misdemeanor like treason or bribery'.
> There's no way they could make any case for Obstruction of Justice.  The
> obstruction case is purely speculation.  He says- She says case - could
> never be proven.  Even if, for the purposes of argument, you suppose all
> allegations are true, these are not 'high crimes or misdemeanors'.
>     8.     The House prosecutors show that a few Federal Judges have
> been removed by the Senate for just such deeds (The Senate labeling the
> perjury a 'high crime or misdemeanor').  Ok, in some cases perjury could
> be grounds for removal, but not in this case.  This case is only about sex
> and lying about it and if that pervert Starr wasn't peeping into
> everybody's bedroom...  Would you want to be asked sexual questions under
> oath?
>     9.     The Senators are not just jurors, you know.  They are trying
> the case.  They need to consider more than just the facts, the rule of
> law, and the Constitution.  They also need to consider what's in the best
> interests of this country.  The House managers may have made a pretty good
> case, but it is not in our best interests to remove the president even if
> he committed perjury and obstruction of justice.
>     10.     And then the latest to my ears ... They had no business
> asking him personal, private questions in a grand jury setting where he
> couldn't plead the fifth (the protection from self incrimination).  That
> f***er Ken Starr.  It was a witch hunt.  Any evidence against Clinton has
> to be discounted because of the 'illegitimate' means that were used in
> acquiring it.  It doesn't really matter what they found out because of the
> way they went about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...