Deranged Rhino Posted December 9, 2019 Author Share Posted December 9, 2019 https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1204074322672988162 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albwan Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 46 minutes ago, keepthefaith said: Paging Tibs. What say you? He wouldn't know what to say he has to wait to get his talking point email first. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 9, 2019 Author Share Posted December 9, 2019 **************** Here's the Gaetz clip 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 9, 2019 Author Share Posted December 9, 2019 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: **************** Here's the Gaetz clip And the press conference was "Trump is obstructing justice" yada yada. rinse, repeat, recycle. I heard "treason" this weekend, but my guess is that didn't poll well. Now they are back to obstruction. ***** clowns. 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 9, 2019 Author Share Posted December 9, 2019 ************************* Important context: 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 WHEN YOU’VE LOST THE INTELLIGENT VOICES ON THE WASHINGTON POST’S OP-ED PAGE. . . In both its news and opinion sections, the Washington Post has been beating the drum for impeaching President Trump. However, two op-eds in today’s paper, both by writers with a strong aversion to Trump, are unimpressed with the case for impeachment. The op-eds are good evidence that the impeachment process isn’t playing out the way Democrats had hoped it would. Kathleen Parker, a moderate, argues with “disappointment” that the case for impeachment simply isn’t there. David Von Drehle, a liberal, doesn’t take a position on the merits. His concern is with the futility of impeachment proceedings, which he seems to believe will redound to President Trump’s advantage. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 Huh, wasn't she supposed to be one of the first "defectors in the coming senate trail ? Hmmm: Murkowski Dings House Democrats For Making Impeachment Process More Partisan Than It Needed To Be She seems to be choosing her words carefully here so let’s not presume too much about what it portends for impeachment vote. After all, one might read this as her way of trying to cover her right flank as she gets ready to join Schumer in supporting removal. E.g., “Republicans in my home state have every right to be angry at the one-sided nature of proceedings in the House. However, the weight of the evidence” yadda yadda. That’s now how I’m inclined to read her, though. This sounds to me like a senator who’s inclined to stick with her team on the big vote. Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she has not been impressed with the Democratic-led process in the House. “There has been little to no, I think, efforts to try to work with either the Republican House members on the committees, or to kind of come to some terms of rules of engagement,” she said in a telephone interview. “And so it has made this appear even more partisan than perhaps it might have otherwise,” she said. If she’s planning to vote for removal, she should be using this pre-trial moment to praise Democrats for how they’ve handled impeachment, not criticize them. What sort of juror would complain that the prosecution of a case was flawed — and then vote to convict? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 i think Castor is doing a very good job of summarizing the case against impeachment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 2 minutes ago, Foxx said: i think Castor is doing a very good job of summarizing the case against impeachment. Really? 'Cause he's putting me to sleep. I mean it is difficult to try and fill 45 minutes with "Trump didn't do anything wrong and you are a buncha partisan hacks", but still ... ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 (edited) i hope those who are listening are not glossing over the linguistics being used on the Democrats behalf. many caveats in there. 'finding of fact 9 says...' lol, in dem speak... 'we believe blah blah blaaaaaahhhhhhhh'. ********************************************** lol at Dems council questioning council. Edited December 9, 2019 by Foxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 LOL Nadler "You will NOT cast aspersions on members of staff!" The irony, it burns. 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 9, 2019 Author Share Posted December 9, 2019 This isn't ***** at all... pay no attention to this... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 ***** shitshow. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 9, 2019 Author Share Posted December 9, 2019 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: This isn't ***** at all... pay no attention to this... And the guy lied with a straight face the whole time!! 1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said: LOL Nadler "You will NOT cast aspersions on members of staff!" The irony, it burns. Just now, Deranged Rhino said: That was when Nadler was insulted with the "aspersions!" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said: And the guy lied with a straight face the whole time!! he doesn't care at all, he just reads a script and gets paid to do so 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 Dems Held Impeachment Hearings Rehearsals on Sunday; You’ll Get a Kick Out of Rule #1 Democratic lawmakers, attorneys and aides from the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees spent much of the weekend writing drafts of the articles of impeachment against President Trump. According to the New York Times, the Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on them by Friday, with a final vote on the floor of the House expected shortly before Christmas. Those who weren’t involved in writing the articles of impeachment were busy rehearsing for today’s hearing. The Times reports that “lawmakers have been encouraged to try to make Latin phrases like “quid pro quo” and concepts like the geopolitics of the former Soviet bloc seem more urgent and accessible to a fatigued public. Explain it in terms of a mayor, they are coached. Explain it in terms of your own experience.” One Democratic lawmaker described the rehearsals to the Times as “a great deal of tedium punctuated by five minutes of fire” and said that “another planned to bring a seat cushion and blanket.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has stressed that Democrats must avoid “fostering the impression that Democrats relish impeachment.” We’ve heard the Speaker and several of her allies tell us they are moving forward in this “solemn duty” with heavy hearts. Pelosi herself said she is acting “with love in her heart.” In her televised address last Thursday, she said “I commend our committee chairs and our members for their somber approach to actions, which I wish the president had not made necessary.” Anyway, the most important rule of all is this: “Never ask a question whose answer could not be readily anticipated.” They want to leave as little as possible to chance. Smart strategy actually. Not quite what one would expect from what is billed as an “inquiry” to search for evidence. To me, the advice sounds more like something you would expect from a defense attorney. This impeachment inquiry has been anything but a search for the truth. It has been a charade designed to reach a goal set by the Democratic Party on November 8, 2016. . 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 14 hours ago, DC Tom said: Read the article itself. I stopped at "so-called "resistance"". These people have been calling themselves the Resistance since before the inauguration. The whole article's a desperate attempt at reframing the past three years. You got that right... If the White House flips in 2020 I am going to go on ebay and buy up all the Resistance paraphernalia because then it will be my turn. Here -- this is from 2017... https://www.bustle.com/p/9-literary-holiday-gifts-that-are-perfect-for-the-resistance-reader-on-your-list-7530025 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 Aspersion #1: “How much do you have to donate to get to be a witness...” Nadler’s head snapped around at that. Now here comes the IG’s 434 page report! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts