Jump to content

The Sham Impeachment Inquiry & Whistleblower Saga: A Race to Get Ahead of the OIG


Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

We all know that the impeachment hearings are being rushed to overshadow the OIG Report and/or Huber's indictments. 

 

Read the comments under Bertrand's tweet. They think we're all stupid, because of morons like those buying any line of crap people like Bertrand spit out.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 


How is Nadler dropping classified documents? Or, are these documents the House committee classified earlier, and is now unclassifying them at the last second in a document dump? (I'm trying to understand what is going on here.)

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


How is Nadler dropping classified documents? Or, are these documents the House committee classified earlier, and is now unclassifying them at the last second in a document dump? (I'm trying to understand what is going on here.)

 

 

I believe its the latter -- but I'm still trying to sort it myself.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Koko78 said:

 

Read the comments under Bertrand's tweet. They think we're all stupid, because of morons like those buying any line of crap people like Bertrand spit out.

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.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

KURT SCHLICHTER: The Democrats’ Massive Impeachment Fail. 

 

“To the surprise of no one who isn’t a blue city pol, a media hack, or an insufferable Fredocon sissy, the American people are not particularly impressed by the genius idea of replacing our president a year before an election because he allegedly expressed curiosity about why the coke-sniffing, stripper-impregnating, dead brother’s wife-trifling, Navy-rejected loser son of Vice President Gropey O’Definitelynotsenile scored a $50K+ a month gig on a Ukrainian gas board. And it’s just dawning on some of them they maybe this impeachment brainstorm was not the bestest idea there ever was.”

 
 
 
 
 
.
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


How is Nadler dropping classified documents? Or, are these documents the House committee classified earlier, and is now unclassifying them at the last second in a document dump? (I'm trying to understand what is going on here.)

 

 

8 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I believe its the latter -- but I'm still trying to sort it myself.

i could be wrong but i believe them to be mostly from the Intelligence Committee's, 'investigation'.

 

Collins demands Democrats postpone hearing after last-minute document transmission

 

 

Edited by Foxx
  • Like (+1) 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

0d8e946b-bc70-4c71-a4cd-9ed259d98e89.jpe

 

 

 

Impeach Trump Because of…Slavery?

by Paul Hinderaker

 

Original Article

 

Congressman Al Green has become one of the Democratic Party’s top spokesmen.

 

Which is a good thing, because Green is generally unfiltered, and therefore gives us a glimpse into his party’s id. This, for example, is revealing: Rep. Al Green (D-TX) said on Saturday during an interview on MSNBC that President Donald Trump needed to be impeached “to deal with slavery.” Green, who has previously stated that Trump must be impeached or else “he will get reelected,” said this week that there is “no limit” to the number of times that Democrats can try to impeach the president. But wait!

 

 

.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

0d8e946b-bc70-4c71-a4cd-9ed259d98e89.jpe

 

 

 

Impeach Trump Because of…Slavery?

by Paul Hinderaker

 

Original Article

 

Congressman Al Green has become one of the Democratic Party’s top spokesmen.

 

Which is a good thing, because Green is generally unfiltered, and therefore gives us a glimpse into his party’s id. This, for example, is revealing: Rep. Al Green (D-TX) said on Saturday during an interview on MSNBC that President Donald Trump needed to be impeached “to deal with slavery.” Green, who has previously stated that Trump must be impeached or else “he will get reelected,” said this week that there is “no limit” to the number of times that Democrats can try to impeach the president. But wait!

 

 

.

 

How do people like him continue to be elected? 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, keepthefaith said:

 

How do people like him continue to be elected? 

Out of Swalwell, Schiff, Watters, Hank Johnson and Al Green, Green seems to be the least messed up. Read that again and then reflect how messed up the dems are. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

 

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

03-bumper-sticker-li-600.jpg

 

 

 

 

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.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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  ...  ?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by Foxx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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!" 
 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

×
×
  • Create New...