Reason Roundup

Trump Calls on 'American Patriots' to Defend Him From Impeachment

Plus: Tulsi Gabbard opposes impeachment, vaping panic in Massachusetts, California's "war on freelancers," and more...

|

It's happening. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.) has started impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump. The president has promised to release an unredacted transcript of his call with the Ukrainian president that triggered this impeachment inquiry. The White House has also promised to release to Congress the whistleblower complaint that first sparked interest in that call. The former should be out today and the latter by the end of the week.

The usual curmudgeonly crowd (for whom I have much fondness) has been pointing out that of all the potential things to launch impeachment proceedings over, this business hardly stands out. Then again, a bipartisan consensus props up most of the serious rights violations and abuses of power carried out by this president (and those that came before).

The most serious misstep Trump allegedly made this time was attempting to withhold military money for Ukraine. The Trump administration says it was simply trying to figure out if the new Ukrainian president could be trusted before forking over the funds. But Democrats say Trump deliberately timed this move to imply to Ukraine's leaders that funding was contingent on whether they took up Trump's demand to investigate the Bidens.

"If Trump did indeed try to use the aid funds as leverage, he not only engaged in improper self-dealing but also usurped Congress' power of the purse. That's an important constitutional issue that goes beyond Trump's many personal flaws," writes Ilya Somin at The Volokh Conspiracy (which is hosted at Reason).

But that's still a big if. And even supposing it turns out true, an implication is mighty hard to prove. Especially when White House transparency here might not be all it's cracked up to be…

Trump has been working to frame this whole business as a Russiagate redux, calling it "a total Witch Hunt." Rep. Justin Amash (I–Mich.) fired back:

Meanwhile, the Trump 2020 campaign is already using this for fundraising. An email from the campaign calls on "American Patriots" to join and help fund the "Official Impeachment Defense Task Force."

One reason Trump may seem so forthcoming about the call and transcript is that any real dirty work was carried out by Rudy Giuliani. That's been a big point of speculation.

"Rudy—he did all of this," one U.S. official told The Washington Post. "This s---show that we're in—it's him injecting himself into the process."

"Over the course of the past year," reports The Daily Beast, "Giuliani pressed the Ukrainian government to investigate so far unfounded allegations of corruption in the country involving" Joe Biden and his son Hunter. Giuliani insists that this has all been on the up-and-up and his overtures were part of sanctioned State Department work.

Indeed, two U.S. diplomats (Kurt Volker, special representative to Ukraine, and Gordon Sondland, ambassador to the European Union) were briefed by Giuliani on the situation. But the State Department has yet to officially confirm if and how extensively it was involved.

The existence of an official State Department inquiry into Biden/Ukraine things could be good for Trump and Giuliani, suggesting that there was nothing untoward about their own efforts. But it could also be very bad if evidence comes out that team Trump pressured State Department officials to get involved for the president's own personal political gain.


FREE MINDS

California's "war on freelancers." In the name of workers' rights, the state has made it much harder to make a living as a freelance journalist. Columbia Journalism Review explains:

California Assembly Bill 5, in its original language, seemed as though it could end freelance journalism in the state. The bill, which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law September 18, codifies and expands on a 2018 California Supreme Court decision that made it harder for companies to classify workers as freelancers rather than employees. As employees, workers are covered by state laws on the minimum wage, worker's compensation coverage, workplace discrimination and other protections. As freelancers, they are not.

When that court decision was first handed down, in March, "some publishers responded…by cutting ties with freelancers based in California," reports CJR. Under Assembly Bill 5, the state has clarified that freelance writers, editors, photographers, and editorial cartoonists can be hired for up to 35 "content submissions" per year without being labeled employees. But this is little comfort for those whose livelihood depends on high-volume freelancing for multiple outlets.

"It's not hard to find freelancers who say they will run into that limit," notes CJR. Steve Falk, CEO of Sonoma Media Investments, told the magazine that his publications depend on freelancers to write weekly columns on things like local restaurants and events:

They write 52 weeks a year, and that becomes a problem now. We will have to pick the 35 most important weeks for them to write. [It] just seems so arbitrary.

Freelance writer and editor Zac Estrada, who is based in Los Angeles, told CJR that in his experience, "it's been really easy to go over 35 bylines in less than a month." Already, one site he edited content for has stopped providing him with work. Estrada said:

I'm glad the state of California is looking out for workplace issues and benefit, but I don't see a way this bill helps me. A lot of people I know love freelancing and wouldn't take a full-time job even if it offered them more money.

Now, thanks to anti-gig economy crusaders, Californians can no longer make that choice for themselves.


FREE MARKETS

More vaping panic, this time in Massachusetts:

See also the latest from Reason's Jacob Sullum: "Why Is the CDC Still Fostering Potentially Deadly Confusion About Vaping and Lung Disease?"


ELECTION 2020

Tulsi Gabbard (D–Hawaii) has qualified to participate in the next Democratic presidential debate:

Gabbard yesterday expressed concern about Trump impeachment proceedings.


QUICK HITS

NEXT: U.K. Trial Court: Lying About Vasectomy Negates Consent to Sex

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.) has started impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump.

    POPCORN TIME

    1. Hello.

      I hate popcorn.

        1. But then you get “pouptine”
          Messy

      1. That’s why I always bring my own creamed corn to the movie theater – the creamed corn they sell there is too crunchy.

        1. I hate it when yahoos toss creamed corn around in theaters.

    2. It will run out by next week with trump releasing the transcript, complaint, and a second IG investigation into the bias of the “whistleblower” whose lawyers just happen to be a firm that seeks to leak documents from trumps admin with heavy dem ties.

      Then with Theissen showing in WaPo that Democrats literally sent a letter to Ukraine threatening to withhold funds if they shut down 4 investigations into Manafort and trump that could hurt Mueller.

      They dont have legal nor moral/political grounds to crow from.

      1. That won’t stop them, J. It’s SUPER outrage time!

        1. Can they just go ahead, impeach Trump, and be done with it? No way 2/3 of the senate will go along with it, unless there really is something there, in which case, he needs to go, then the progs will have to run on their God-awful policies, rather than simply being the anti-Trump

          1. I think they’ll try to delay it so that it lands close to the 2020 elections. So they’ll probably just continue bloviating about it as they have since 2017.

            1. This impeachment effort is going to backfire on the Democrats big time. They Dems are going to make claims like Amash’s:

              “It’s not about the transcript of a call. Don’t let President Trump or Republican officials distract you with a straw man. It’s about his continuing abuse of the office of the presidency. ”

              So exactly how did Trump “abuse the office” and it wasn’t about the call? It wasn’t about Russian collusion. It looks like the abuse of office is winning the election, and starting to expose the swamp of conspirators and corrupt politicians. There is no reason to impeach Trump. Every accusation the Democrats have made has blown back on them, this will be the big one: it shows they’re willing to destroy the country to get power back. It’s total disrespect for the voters who elected Trump, and the country.

              1. (laughing hysterically) Russian collusion is totally separate from the latest smoking gun (the zany phone call)

              2. It’s total disrespect for the voters who elected Trump,

                (Laughing harder) Nearly 10 million voted against him in the popular vote. He won the electoral vote by a mere 39,000 votes, in three states combined … and most of those voted against Hillary, NOT for Trump.

                Wow! What a mandate.

          2. That’s no fun.

      2. It doesn’t matter. This entire thing is the Democrats rubbing GOP noses in the fact that they can turn anything into a threat against the GOP. If you investigate us, it is a politically-motivated witch hunt. Even if there were crimes committed- if you pressure someone to investigate- INVESTIGATE- then it is an improper use of executive power.

        In fact the Dems will happily open the closet on likely shady dealings because they know they can. The papers will be full of detailed speculation about Trump, with a single line about “unfounded allegations” of what is at the center of this thing. And the media will happily follow those bullet points.

        1. So just read the transcript, it is barely worth media coverage. The most damning things about it were Trump talking badly about the EU and Merkel in Germany. That’s why these phone calls aren’t supposed to be released so the leaders can talk openly and honestly.

          There was zero pressure by Trump, in fact the Urkranian PM basically inferred he was already looking into the corruption issues and even asked Trump to send any information he had to the Ukraine. Trump offered up the AG as a resource! That wouldn’t be done if this was intended to be on the down low or a corrupt mind.

          So now we have proof of 5 people threatening to withhold aid from the Ukraine. Joe Biden and 4 Democratic Senators. Trump has never done so.

          1. The most damning things about it were Trump talking badly about the EU and Merkel in Germany.

            As if actually spying on their government during the Obama administration wasn’t as bad as shit-talking the wannabe One World Government and its de facto leader.

    3. I don’t know exactly what is going to happen, but I can say with 100% certainty that the impeachment proceedings will not flow perfectly smoothly from point A to point Z for the Democrats, giving them the results they hope for.

      1. I would add that impeachment of Trump won’t pass in the Senate anyway but might get the USA closer to Civil War 2.0

        If Trump’s administration investigating and prosecuting of Lefty illegal and unconstitutional behavior (Hillary’s mishandling of classified information, Joe Biden and his son in Ukraine, as well as a bunch of former Obama Administration officials attempting to coup a duly elected Trump) signals impeachment threat time, then the House trying to blackmail Trump by threatening impeachment signals Civil War 2.0

    4. Setting aside all Constitutional issues and whether Trump should be impeached, this will only bolster Trump with his base. Biden’s and Kerry’s sons’ business dealings look a lot like part of the “swamp” Trump is claiming to be draining, and withholding funds from a shady foreign nation is also a sympathetic move.

      1. Except Trump is the fucking swamp King. He put his kids into govt jobs. He lets foreign govts and special interest corrupt him by pouring money into his business ventures. His cabinet is full of lobbyists. You’d have be dumb as a brick to believe Trump is draining the swamp.

        1. You mistook Trump for the Clintons.

          1. Lefties are mad that they have not been able to stop Trump from rolling back government, even with threatening anyone considering working for Trump’s Cabinet.

        2. I don’t disagree, but I’m not part of Trump’s base, the Republican base or the Democrat base.

    5. Yes as she states it was her patriotic duty. I didn’t know she even had that term in her vocabulary.

  2. Nancy Pelosi on whether Trump’s decision to release the Ukrainian call transcript will cause Democrats to shift away from calls for impeachment: “No. This is about the constitution of the United States. We have many other candidates for impeachable offenses.”

    Are you serious? Are you serious?

    1. We’ll find an excuse somewhere, this Trump administration thing has gone on long enough.

    2. Like Democrats care about the damn Constitution. See their rants against the 1A and 2A.

      I can’t stand the progressive left in North America. An unprincipled bunch of whack jobs who believe Greta folklore tales.

    3. We have many other candidates for impeachable offenses.

      Named Biden, Warren, Sanders …

  3. The most serious misstep Trump allegedly made this time was attempting to withhold military money for Ukraine.

    If only the various building contractors he’s stiffed over the years knew that was an impeachable offense.

    1. This is certainly one of the most certain facts of the case, and leaves me much more concerned than I was before about the Trump administration, that is for sure.

      1. But it was NOT impeachable when Biden did it.

        To protect his son.

        1. Or democrats did it to threaten manafort.

          1. Well, that’s different.

            Because FYTW

        2. We know for certain that Biden’s dealings with Ukrainian prosecutors were motivated purely by America’s best interest.

          On the other hand, we know for certain that Trump’s handling of Ukrainian funds was purely motivated by his selfish political interests.

          Those are just the facts, Jack.

        3. Impeachment is a political process to remove an official from office. There are no standards for impeachment other then the nebulous “high crimes and misdemeanors” . Christ, Chaney shot a dude in office and their were no impeachment proceedings.

          And for the record, I think this is a stupid move by the Dems and that Trump shouldn’t be impeached. The only charge I’d support impeachment for is his tariff by EO. But the swamp won’t do that because they would then have to undue the executive regulatory state they have created and love.

          1. Wide delegation from congress is what allows tariffs by EO. Congress can fix it whenever they want.

          2. Armed insurrection is also a political process to remove ALL officials from office. Lefties trying to impeach trump without a good reason will signal that our system is so broken that even elections cannot solve our differences.

            We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

            1. Lefties trying to impeach trump without a good reason

              The proof was released by Trump himself. Have you not been following this?

              will signal that our system is so broken that even elections cannot solve our differences.

              Impeachment is in the Constitution, placed by founders, and ratified by all the states.

              Who are you to say that was stupid of them … and to also deny the Checks and Balances that were so critical to the Founders,

              And why did you post from a totally irrelevant (to this topic) document, while trashing the only relevant document, our Constitution (which totally disproves your attempted coverup)?

    2. As CIC of the military, shouldn’t he be able to withhold military funds to a foreign government? Or is this strictly a ‘power of the purse’ issue?

      1. “Show me where in the Constitution ….”

      2. Already, you are making better arguments than Trump’s actual personal lawyer.

        1. In all fairness to his personal lawyer, look who his client is,

      3. As CIC doesn’t he also get some protection under the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Civil Relief Act?
        /s

    3. How do you define “delay”? I am serious. Did the appropriations bill have a specific target date. or did it just fall back on end of fiscal year?

      Defense spending, for instance, is spent over the full fiscal year. Renovating the Washington Monument took several years; surely the contractor didn’t get one lump sum at the end of that period, and even more surely there was no specific single date to pay it.

  4. Vox Media, the company behind Vox, just bought New York magazine.

    the magazine behind new york?

    1. It’s a high capacity magazine, so it’s not actually available in New York.

    2. Nobody needs 27 kinds of magazines.

  5. Gabbard yesterday expressed concern about Trump impeachment proceedings.

    are you syrias, tulsi?

      1. Oman, that was terrible.

      2. Sorry, I was busy checking out her iraq.

      3. You think she’s russian to judgement?

      4. It’s OK if she doesn’t make a Korea out of it.

        1. Please don’t resort to ad homs arguments

          1. OK, this punning has gone South.

      5. Niger please!

    1. Shes more incredulous against IC and political abuse than libertarian icon Amash.

      1. She’s the singular exception that proves the left and libertarianism can inhabit a democratic body simultaneously and the fact that she exists makes their collective heads hurt.

    2. She’s trying to position herself as the practical, rational, and relatively not corrupt candidate. Polling at 2% indicates the rank and file want something else.

  6. The existence of an official State Department inquiry into Biden/Ukraine things could be good for Trump and Giuliani, suggesting that there was nothing untoward about their own efforts.

    Something tells me more will be reported about the Trump inquiry than the actual subject of the inquiry itself.

    1. The subject of the inquiry? “Discredited charges” that there was something improper in Biden’s much-applauded diplomatic move to purge corruption in Ukraine, and they weren’t investigating Hunter anyway, where are your family values, Republicans?

  7. @MassGovernor⁩ declares a public health emergency for vaping.

    it’s getting harder and harder to view marijuana decriminalization successes as a sign of any kind of positive trend

    1. [something, something] opposite reaction.

  8. In the name of workers’ rights, the state has made it much harder to make a living as a freelance journalist.

    The political power in California only hurts the ones it loves.

    1. If publishers can’t pay decent wages and benefits for articles, then maybe those articles don’t need to be written in the first place.

      1. So you want Reason to be one giant comment section?

        1. For Shikha articles, yes.

          1. Just her name and no article is enough to get a thousand daming comments

    2. The political power in California only hurts the ones not unionized

    3. Rolling Blackeyes?

  9. “Rudy—he did all of this,” one U.S. official told The Washington Post. “This s—show that we’re in—it’s him injecting himself into the process.”

    and really, who could possibly stop such a powerful and popular political force as rudy giuliani from doing whatever he wants

    1. Hey, being “America’s Mayor” opens many doors.

    2. Is he the new evil Koch overlord since one died?

      1. Just moving the goal post to ensnare anyone who works with Trump in order to scare away anyone qualified to actually help Trump

        1. …and to scare away Giuliani, too.

  10. .⁦@MassGovernor⁩ declares a public health emergency for vaping. Orders 4 month temporary ban on all sales of vaping related products & devices effective immediately

    Somehow it has the authority to do so.

    1. It’s a temporary ban-I think they can pull any product that is causing illness, like contaminated lettuce, but not tobacco cigarettes, lest they lose the $4/pack they haul in in taxes, and will get a boost from this. Meanwhile, NH vape shops are rejoicing.

      1. Sounds like vape smuggling is becoming a viable business model.

        1. The first one is free.

        2. How long until a cop chokes someone to death over it?

          1. It’s Mass., so the cop will probably demand a cut of the vape smuggling profits before he chokes you

  11. Gabbard yesterday expressed concern about Trump impeachment proceedings.

    Of course a Russia plant would have something to say about a political rival’s dealings with the Ukraine and how the president is leveraging that to…

    Okay, I’ve lost the plot on this one.

    1. Wait til it turns out the “whistleblowing” was at Rudy’s behest.

    2. It makes sense that Russia would have plants in both parties, though, right?

  12. “Not only would any so-called transcript be based on notes, but it would also likely be incomplete because the note-takers usually do not include issues that could be controversial if they became public.”

    Oh lovely. So Trump is going to troll everyone with this “transcript”. It will be the edited “notes” of the call (which conveniently doesn’t include anything incriminating), but it will be presented as if it were the literal transcription of the words spoken on the phone call.

    1. chemjeff sticking up for his lefty boos’ well-poisoning.

      1. umm wut? this doesn’t even make any sense

        1. First, there was a demand for the transcript. Then, when Trump said he would release the transcript, they demanded the whistleblower complaint.

          Now that Trump says he’s going to release both, the current narrative is that the transcript will be “incomplete,” the complaint will be doctored, and the Ukrainian president needs to release his version of it as well.

          You’d think lefties wouldn’t be built like such a bunch of malnourished soy addicts with all the goal-post shifting they’ve done in the last three days.

          1. If it’s goal post shifting, collectivist Jeffy is all for it.

          2. From what I read above, it does sound like it should be called “notes” rather than a “transcript”. So, it’s not a matter of narrative, but of what the document really is.

            1. Which is fine, but it speaks to their disingenuousness that they’re demanding a release of a transcript, and then shift their narrative that it’s just going to be notes of the call after Trump says he’ll release the transcript.

              If they already know that the transcript was just a “notes summary,” they should have said so ahead of time.

              1. They had to know what it said before they determined if it is important.

              2. I’m confused. How would the Democrats know whether it is a transcript or just notes, if the Republican White House are the ones in possession of the document?

            2. Its contemporary notes just like comey or any other call. They dont record it. this is akin to the transcripts leaked in trumps first year. Nobody cried out they were just notes for those.

            3. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transcribe

              Definition of transcribe
              transitive verb

              1a : to make a written copy of
              b : to make a copy of (dictated or recorded matter) in longhand or on a machine (such as a typewriter)
              c : to paraphrase or summarize in writing
              d : WRITE DOWN, RECORD

              “Mike Laursen
              September.25.2019 at 10:28 am
              From what I read above, it does sound like it should be called “notes” rather than a “transcript””

              From what I just posted for you, you’re mistaken.

              1. Huh? I clearly used “transcript” in accordance with your definition (b), which is the common understanding of what a “transcript” is.

          3. Well, they’ve got the goalposts mounted on well-greased wheels so shifting them doesn’t require much effort.

            1. Air bearings. Specifically, hot air bearings.

    2. You’ll get him, Jeff. Any day now.

      Wait til democrats find out about the drone strikes and illegal wars they helped start.

      1. It isn’t that Trump is the roadrunner, just the Dems are Wile E. Coyote.

    3. Yeah like who are we supposed to trust: the hearsay from an anonymous whistleblower second hand, or some notetaker I don’t even know?

      Clinton was impeached for less.

      1. Not having a dog in the race, and (as you point out) not knowing any of these people personally, don’t see why I would want to trust anybody’s word in this matter. Or why I should hold a strong opinion about what happened.

      2. Are you saying Clinton was impeached for having his whistle blown?

        1. If no one hears the whistle it didn’t happen.

    4. Jeff: We need to impeach Trump in spite of having no evidence for our claims!

      1. Mike: Nothing Trump could do or say would change my support for him one bit!

        1. You, Jeff, said he should be impeached over this but any evidence he could POSSIBLY present is not good enough.

          There are things you could impeach any President over. The Dems have attempted to impeach on exactly zero of those.

          1. You, Jeff, said he should be impeached over this

            And you can provide a quotation where I said that?

            Oh wait, no you can’t. Because you’re just making up shit about me again.

            1. You really aren’t fit for life

              1. No truer words have ever been written! If it’s not too much trouble for Your Awesomeness, can I be Your human shield?

                As brilliant as You so clearly must be, can You find any errors in the source codes to follow:
                Transubstantiate Scientological Logical-alloy, Deploy-Begin Auto_Integrate [ Bitwise_Magnetize ( Vector[31:0], Time_Domain[31:0], Frequency_Domain[31:0] ), Contents ( $RU$488 ) ] ; Loop_Count <= Loop_Count + 1'b1 ;
                Invoke DisplayModule "Your facts may be correct, but you are icky-poo, so your ideas are hereby dismissed!", end; end module ;

                If You'd only PLEASE apply Your Vast Skills here, to help in the debug effort, Your mom will finally find You attractive and worthy.

              2. I haven’t advocated for impeaching Trump over this, and that just irritates the shit out of you, doesn’t it? Because you would just LOVE to wave that quote around, wouldn’t you?

    5. I still haven’t ruled out the transcript being a scribbled note written on the back of a Big Mac wrapper with a Sharpie. But much more likely, there will be some technical issue preventing the release of the transcript today but Trump will promise to release the transcript “in a few days”, or approximately the day after he releases his tax returns.

      1. It’s already been released genius.

          1. Don’t worry. I’m sure there will be reasons why there is more info because a defense of Orange Man isn’t possible.

            That’s why Orange Man Bad.

            1. No no. It’s Orange Man Perfect.
              Or: Orange Man Playing 12-D Chess.
              Or: Orange Man Always Better Than Every Other Man

              But it’s never time to criticize Orange Man, at least on anything substantive. What would your rightie friends say about you if you were to do that? “What, are you crazy? Do you want the Democrats to win? Get back in line!”

              1. It’s amazing how ignorant you are.

                1. It’s amazing how much of a Trump bootlicker you are.

                  ANY criticism of Trump, by you or Mike or any of the other right-wingers around here, is either on unsubstantial issues, or is heavily preceded by “whataboutism” and “to be sures”.

                  Is there any issue whatsoever where you are willing to say “Trump is worse than Democrats on this substantive issue X”? Any at all?

                  Is there any issue whatsoever where you are willing to say “Trump is absolutely wrong on this substantive issue X, regardless of whatever Democrats happen to be saying about him”, without heavy does of hemming and hawing and trying to excuse the behavior nonetheless?

                  1. “Is there any issue whatsoever where you are willing to say “Trump is worse than Democrats on this substantive issue X”? Any at all?”

                    So far, honestly, no.

                    The Democrats are objectively worse on basically every issue imaginable. I’m shocked they are so bad, but that’s where we are.

                    “Is there any issue whatsoever where you are willing to say “Trump is absolutely wrong on this substantive issue X”

                    Lobbing missiles at Syria was bad. As is stationing troops in Arabia to protect their infrastructure.

                  2. Psychoticjeff can only make it through the day by way of insane amounts of projection and spewing hatred in order to avoid facing his own lack of existential worth

                    1. Wow! What erudition! And incredible citations to boot! As a grasshopper seeking wisdom, I beg of You, will You help me with my logic homework?

                      With Your intuitive and comprehensive mastery of everything, can You find any errors in the source codes to follow:
                      Instantiate VectrorSourceFile Quantum_Gravity Begin Auto_Integrate [ Bitwise_Magnetize ( Vector[31:0], Time_Domain[31:0], Frequency_Domain[31:0] ), Contents ( $RU$488 ) ] ; Loop_Count <= Loop_Count + 1'b1 ;
                      PrintF "Emergency Override! All clingers must give up your Bibles and guns NOW!", end; end module ;

                      If You'll please apply Your genius talents to help debug this code, The Google might buy us out!

                    2. You’re not funny, no matter the sock.

                    3. I deeply envy your utterly profound thoughts! Astonishing, astounding! As a grasshopper seeking wisdom, I beg of You, will You scratch me behind my ears?

                      Given Your Omniscience or Near-Omniscience, as the case may be, could You PLEASE help me debug the following codes:
                      Include Defend_Us_Kill_Ubermenschen Begin Estimate [ Escape_Velocity ( oxidizer[31:0], oxident[31:0], ignition_sorce[7:0] ), Contents ( $RU$12’hBAD ) ] ; Loop_Count <= Loop_Count + 1'b1 ;
                      DisplayModuleCall "Orange Man Bad.", end; end module ;

                      Master-Coder, PLEASE help me! If we can debug this code, we might get some stars on our homework!

                  3. “Is there any issue whatsoever where you are willing to say “Trump is worse than Democrats on this substantive issue X”? Any at all?”

                    Who

                    Fucking

                    Cares.

                    Trump is your boogeyman, not everyone thinks in terms of supporting their team like you do.

                  4. Jeff. I rely on facts. Nothing in the DNC platform outside of weed legislation is close to libertarian. And even there they want it highly regulated and taxed. Get back to me when you realize that every program in the DNC platform is socialism.

                    I’m sorry you’re too stupid to realize this.

                    By the way, I’ve readily admitted trump is awful at statesmanship. But I’ve also stated I look at actions, not words, because I’m not a child. How many con artists have you been swindled by dumbshit?

                    1. Jeff. I rely on facts.

                      As long as those “facts” are published at townhall.com, breitbart.com, dailywire.com, foxnews.com, or washingtonexaminer.com, sure you do!

              2. We get it. You finally decided to embrace your inner prog, and go full unhinged show trial and Gulag.

                1. No one can argue with any of your citations. Your reasoning astounds us all! After You are done with your Pulitzer Prize acceptance speech, can I adore You? HOW can I best Adore You?

                  Cosmologically speaking, I bet that You could debug the following codes in Your sleep:
                  EveryOne_Wrong Me-Uber-Correct Begin Simulate [ Calculate ( integral[31:0], subtrahend[31:0], subtitle[31:0] ), Contents ( $RU$12’hBAD ) ] ; Loop_Count <= Loop_Count + 1'b1 ;
                  PrintF "Your wife just declared herself un-attached on her Facebook account.", end; end module ;

                  Master-Coder, PLEASE help me! If we can debug this code, they might let us out ahead of time!

                  1. Jeff might actually fuck you since you appear to be his only friend.

              3. Don’ think I’ve said any of that.

                You, though, have said “Oh lovely. So Trump is going to troll everyone with this “transcript”. It will be the edited “notes” of the call (which conveniently doesn’t include anything incriminating), but it will be presented as if it were the literal transcription of the words spoken on the phone call.”

                So, how, exactly, would Trump defend himself to you with this standard?

                1. Well, Trump could, for example, not refer to these notes as a “transcript”, as he did in his fundraising letter cited above.

                  1. “Well, Trump could, for example, not refer to these notes as a “transcript”, as he did in his fundraising letter cited above.”

                    They ARE one. Hate to break it to you, the WH Situation Room does the transcript and it very much is a transcript.

                  2. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transcribe

                    Definition of transcribe
                    transitive verb

                    1a : to make a written copy of
                    b : to make a copy of (dictated or recorded matter) in longhand or on a machine (such as a typewriter)
                    c : to paraphrase or summarize in writing

                    Wrong again fuckwit.

                2. Is that too much to ask? For Trump to be clear in his description of what these notes actually are?

                  1. Jeff: IMPEACH BECAUSE I ARE CONFUSED!!!

                  2. He was. You just have a shitty vocabulary and are wrong about the definition.

                    1. I wish I could be as smart and as wise as you, oh Learned One! Not to impose, but, might I, can I, can I be Your human shield?

                      I bet your coding skills are Most Excellent! So, I bet that it would be a trivial task for You to perfect the following codes:
                      Transubstantiate Witches_Kill_them_all Begin Concatenate [ Hillary_Blob ( clingers[31:0], gun_clingers[31:0], bible_clingers[7:0], zinger_clingers[31:0], amygdala[31:0],), Contents ( $RU$12’hBAD ) ] ; Loop_Count <= Loop_Count + 1'b1 ;
                      Invoke DisplayModule "He who reads these lines of wit… (Auto-generate Nobel-Prize-worthy poety)", end; end module ;

                      Master-Coder, PLEASE help me! If we can debug this code, I promise to be a very sincere good-character witness at Your upcoming trial.

          2. This was hilarious:

            A transcript of the call was made public Wednesday by the Trump administration under pressure from Democrats who have launched a formal impeachment inquiry to determine whether the president sought the help of a foreign leader to boost his campaign.

            Biden’s not even the nominee yet. How on earth are the Ukrainians determining if he directly intervened in the prosecutor getting fired (and it’s not a stretch, considering the chain of events and Biden openly bragging about it) going to help Trump’s campaign? “Oh, look how corrupt these Democrats are, intervening in other countries’ legal affairs!”

            No shit, we already knew that.

            1. I love the Senate Dems openly pressuring Ukraine to not close their investigation of Trump a few years ago and indirectly threatening aid if they did so.

          3. Do you think Trump omitted the phone sex or do you think the phone sex never actually happened?
            All in all it doesn’t seem that bad to me. A US president asks another country about what a US citizen did and said he would have his lawyer call. What am I missing? I didn’t see any extortion. Is the president not allowed to ask the president of another country what someone in the US did over there? Their president is totally allowed to deny Trump’s request if he wants and he was in no way forced to comply. He seemed pretty chill with it. I imagine when they meet they’ll play Xbox and eat pizza rolls.

            1. This is about destroying Trump and his style of rolling back the Deep State and Political Class power.

        1. It’s amazing how some people are still so eager to touch the lit burner again and again and again.

          1. They won’t stop. So what if they have already burned off 4 of 10 fingers crying wolf to get Trump out of office.

    6. Jesus fucking christ Jeff. Just admit you’ve made up your idiot mind and dont need facts at all. You’re relying on a second hand account from a whistleblower that had no direct knowledge of the call but you wont believe the in time transcript. God you’re a fucking joke.

      1. You’re relying on a second hand account from a whistleblower that had no direct knowledge of the call

        You can point to where I’ve made any mention whatsoever of what this whistleblower said, right? Right? Oh of course not, you are as usual stuffing words into my mouth.

        And it’s not even a “transcript”, as even Trump’s people themselves admit. Stop being such Trump’s bitch. He is a big boy, he doesn’t need dingalings like you to give him free labor to push his narratives. Maybe start to engage the critical parts of your brain for a change. You can start by reading something outside of the right-wing bubble for a change.

        1. You spent about 50 comments deriding trump about the “facts” yesterday dumbass.

          I’m not even pushing his narrative im merely pointing out the facts you refuse to look at.

          Please tell us again how this prosecutor Biden got fired was the key to ukranian corruption.

          You have no capability of rational thought, you repeat whatever Vox, huffpost, or ratical.org tells you to think.

          1. I’m not even pushing his narrative

            You are exactly pushing the story that Trump wants to see discussed. He wants us all to be talking about Biden and Shokin and Burisma, and NOT about his own phone call and his alleged pressuring of the Ukrainian government. And you happily obliged. You’re just a mouthpiece for Trump Inc. at this point. If you’re going to do his bidding for him, the least you can do is get paid for it. Why don’t you become his press secretary?

            Please tell us again how this prosecutor Biden got fired was the key to ukranian corruption.

            I never claimed that. That is a pure invention by YOU.

            I never claimed that Shokin was THE KEY to Ukrainian corruption. That is a lie invented by you.

            I did claim, with substantive proof, that Shokin was a corrupt POS, and that plenty of world leaders agreed with this assessment, world leaders that had absolutely no connection to Hunter Biden or to Burisma.

            You claimed, WITHOUT EVIDENCE, that Biden somehow got this new prosecutor installed who then let off Burisma with a slap on the wrist. I even asked you to provide any sort of evidence for this. Did you? No.

            you repeat whatever Vox, huffpost, or ratical.org tells you to think.

            What do you repeat, Jesse? When you do post any links at all, it’s virtually always to right-wing sources. Hmm I wonder if you’re the one actually pushing a partisan narrative around here and not me.

            1. “it’s virtually always to right-wing sources”

              why do you keep posting this like it’s not a fallacy people are laughing at you for

            2. “I did claim, with substantive proof, that Shokin was a corrupt POS, and that plenty of world leaders agreed with this assessment”

              at which point I claimed with clearly demonstrative proof actually that those same world leaders were corrupt and you dismissed their own corruption as irrelevant so you can suck my ass

            3. Baby Jeffrey… I fucking linked to both the senate.gov account and the New York times yesterday. I posted the summary of thiessen from a wapo article yesterday.

              How fucking stupid are you? The sources you use are Vox, huffpost, and ratical.org. think about it dipshit.

              1. I posted the summary of thiessen from a wapo article yesterday.

                Oh, do forgive me. You’ll cite WaPo – as long as it’s a right-wing opinion piece, like from Thiessen. LOL. And then you disingenuously call it an “article”.

                You are comical, Jesse. You live in a right-wing bubble and spew only right-wing bubble nonsense as if it were fact, and then get all upset when people outside of the bubble don’t actually agree that your right-wing nonsense is equivalent to facts.

          2. Once again, Jesse, can you point to any quotation whatsoever where I cited the whistleblower as any sort of primary credible source? Anywhere at all?

            You can’t.

            Can you point to any quotation whatsoever where I claimed that Shokin was THE KEY TO CORRUPTION in the Ukraine? Anywhere?

            You can’t.

            You are simply lying about me. Fuck off with your right wing narrative pushing.

            1. “Can you point to any quotation whatsoever where I claimed that Shokin was THE KEY TO CORRUPTION in the Ukraine? Anywhere?”

              It’s in the same post where I claimed that Trump had permanent control over the funds

            2. Jeff, I hope you realize everyone here laughs at you. Except for sqrsly and his socks.

              1. You and your right-wing garbage poster friends laugh at me. I frankly don’t care about your opinion of me. You are going to call me a prog no matter what I say or do.

                When you want to actually have a conversation, maybe start by actually citing a source that is outside of right-wing fantasyland, that isn’t an opinion piece, and that has verifiable facts associated with it.

        2. “Oh of course not, you are as usual stuffing words into my mouth.”

          You mean like “permanently” you sad little hypocrite fuck?

  13. And good news for Tulsi for making the debate.

    1. You don’t get to speak on Tulsi, psychoticjeff

      1. Yeah, that’s not an endorsement anyone wants.

      2. You don’t get to speak for anyone with a moral compass.

        1. Why, was he convicted in a corruption probe like the head of the IMF? Oh wait, you don’t care about that because it doesn’t align with your bias.

          1. Collectivistjeff follows the moral compass provided to him by progressives, and can’t figure out why he keeps spinning in circles

            1. Well, for Jeff, making comments on the internet is reason to disqualify a person from discussing morality, but being convicted in a fraud/bribery/corruption scheme doesn’t. It doesn’t even disqualify her from discussing CORRUPTION in Jeff’s sad little mind.

            2. At least I have a functioning moral compass, which is more than I can say about you. Please, why don’t you tell me to go kill myself yet again.

              1. Kill yourself, psychoticjeff.
                It’ll help the environment, and save you further suffering from, well, being you.

        2. Jeffey is so insane that he believes people actually think he has any morals at all let alone a moral compass.

  14. Worth remembering tomorrow: “Not only would any so-called transcript be based on notes, but it would also likely be incomplete because the note-takers usually do not include issues that could be controversial if they became public.”

    Interesting, they didn’t appear to have these same concerns when it came out that the FBI didn’t even transcribe their interview with Hillary over her email server, nor Comey’s notes on his meeting with Trump before he got canned.

    1. Isnt that a strange thing…

      1. Hardly strange at all – – – – – – –
        Procedures were followed

  15. This whole Ukraine charade is sickening. Why does this bullshit get more coverage than the drone strike that killed 30 civilians in Afghanistan? Why not impeach him for that? Why can’t we actually “both sides” and impeach the past president for war crimes too?

    I know Reason needs clicks to pay the writers but it sucks coming to a place that’s supposed to be above the partisan fray to see such blanket coverage of fake outrage and political football.

    Sure, sometimes I come to shit talk, and goof around… But times like these really highlight the outrage-for-clicks culture that is American politics. It makes me hate the entire system and pushes me toward anarchism.

    1. American media has been notoriously parochial even before the Internet age. There could be famines in Africa and wars in Asia, but what received wall-to-wall coverage in America? The terrible issue of one ice skater clubbing another ice skater on the ice rink.

      Not very many people give a shit about civilians dying elsewhere. Why do you think there isn’t hardly anyone demanding that Trump be held accountable in any way for facilitating the starvation of Yemenis courtesy of the Saudis? Because they’re starving Yemenis, not starving Americans.

      1. Remember when Bill Clinton tried to help starving Somalis?
        That didn’t turn out too well.

        1. I thought Bush Sr started that bad idea.

          1. A truly bipartisan fuckup.

          2. bus Sr. did but it was Clinton who denied the troops the armoured personal carriers they requested. he sent them to death

      2. Yes jeff, let’s now impeach trump for not threatening to hold funds to SA until they feed Yemenis.

        God you’re an idiot.

        1. Maybe Trump could, you know, not explicitly fund the starvation of Yemenis. What a concept.

          Are you going to let Trump off the hook for that one too? “He had no choice but to send weapons to the Saudis in order to murder Yemenis! Stop being so hard on Orange Man!”

          1. So now you want intervention for your care about. Consistency Jeffrey.

            1. I wanted Trump to veto the Saudi war funding bill. Did you?

      3. Collectivist Jeffy blames Trump for a war that was already happening when he got elected. Rich.

        1. I blame Trump for CONTINUING a war that was in his power to reduce in intensity. Do try to keep up.

          Or are you going to let Trump off the hook too for sending weapons to the Saudis so that they can murder Yemenis?

          1. Poor little Jeffy doesn’t know how the world works.

            1. Pedo Jeffey didnt want or vote for Trump but wants Trump to do what Lefties want.

              Hilarious!

              1. Your wit and wisdom knows no bounds! Assuming that You would even consider stooping so low, can I be one of your litter bearers?

                With Your superb insights, henceforth, I bet if You could spare the time, You could help debug the following:
                Instantiate SourceFile Include {(Verilog || AHDL) && AHDL} OoogaBoogaPower Begin Sub-Smegmatroid Module_Call CallGirl WillYaBeMine {[(Exceeds if-not-else 32’hLove_Bytes $$ 32’hLove_Handles) || Dword_Wise_Booty_Call (Not_Me[31:00]) ^ D_Word_Mask[31:00]) && (Tired_of_Ya[31:00]) || Go_Away_Bird[31:00])]} else
                Invoke DisplayModule “And there stood the pig and the cow.”, end; end module ;

                If You would stoop so low as to help me, a mere grasshopper, debug this code, then I promise to totally forget about “that incident” with You, the hamsters, the ketsup, and the sump pump!

                  1. Your citations show that You are, indeed, Deeply Learned! If I can locate the proper permission forms, can I support your Palace Guard?

                    I bet your coding skills are Most Excellent! So, I bet if You could spare the time, You could help debug the following:
                    Include Hashtag (#Orange_Man_Bad_UberTruth) Begin Estimate [ Escape_Velocity ( oxidizer[31:0], oxident[31:0], ignition_sorce[7:0] ), Contents ( $RU$12’hBAD ) ] ; Loop_Count <= Loop_Count + 1'b1 ;
                    PrintF "In Soviet Russia, Putin Loves Donald", end; end module ;

                    If You'd only PLEASE apply Your Vast Skills here, to help in the debug effort, they might let us out of our stockades!

      4. “Why do you think there isn’t hardly anyone demanding that Trump be held accountable in any way for facilitating the starvation of Yemenis courtesy of the Saudis? Because they’re starving Yemenis, not starving Americans.”

        so…Trump should withhold previously passed funding to the Saudis until they do what he wants?

        CAN YOU BE FUCKING CONSISTENT FOR A MINUTE?

        1. You already know that.

          And be careful, because he’ll lie about what you said then blame you because he made everything up.

        2. He could have, you know, vetoed the bill that funded the Saudi war. But no, he didn’t.

          Oh it’s not exclusively Trump’s fault. Congress is of course to blame as well.

          But Trump deserves his fair share of the blame for perpetuating the starvation of Yemenis.

          It’s amazing what you will let Trump off the hook for. Actually, no it’s not.

          1. “He could have, you know, vetoed the bill that funded the Saudi war. But no, he didn’t.”

            Why should he? You’re advocating IMPEACHMENT over him not vetoing a bill? Seriously?

            “But Trump deserves his fair share of the blame for perpetuating the starvation of Yemenis.”

            So, if I give a homeless man a few bucks and he then goes out and kills people…I’m responsible for giving him the money. Intriguing.

            “It’s amazing what you will let Trump off the hook for. Actually, no it’s not.”

            You gave people I don’t like money and they did things I don’t like. IMPEACH!!!!

            1. Why should he?

              Because IT’S WRONG? Is that not reason enough to you?

              So, if I give a homeless man a few bucks and he then goes out and kills people…I’m responsible for giving him the money. Intriguing.

              If you see a homeless man currently in the process of murdering people, and instead of lifting a finger to stop the murder, you instead hand the homeless man some money, then yes, that just might make you culpable in the continued murder spree of the homeless man.

              Glad I could clear that up for you.

              And yes you will literally let Trump off the hook for everything. It’s disgusting and shameful.

              1. Your life, as evidenced by your posts, is disgusting and shameful.
                Don’t let that stop you though

              2. “Because IT’S WRONG? Is that not reason enough to you?”

                Saddam torturing his citizens was wrong. Stopping that was a mistake in hindsight.

  16. May be the first case thrown out over the #plainviewproject, a database of cops’ offensive Facebook posts that rocked the PPD

    Nice.

    Also, unrelated, Filthadepthsia sucks.

    1. Cops testilying is hardly news.

  17. Outside of a few crazies on the internet most people could care less if Trump is impeached. That’s where that poll saying people dislike Trump comes into play. Personally I like the drama of it all and putting the heat on Trump. I want that fucker in handcuffs and I think it will eventually happen for the tax and mortgage fraud Trump’s lawyer exposed and if not that then for the campaign finance conspiracy. You have to remember that inflating your assets to get a loan is a federal offense. It’s what that Michael Avenatti dude is charged with and it’s exactly what Trump’s lawyer alleges occurred multiple times with Trump. When your lawyer is calling you a criminal the indictment is generally just around the corner.

    1. You’re still assmad about Muller Claus leaving you that stocking of coal, aren’t you?

      “THE WALLS ARE CLOSING IN!!”

      1. Presidents are above the law in a sense while in office because according to William Barr and Robert Mueller they cannot be indicted and barely investigated. That immunity ends 2020 or god forbid 2024.

        1. Excuses are lies you tell yourself to avoid responsibility.

        2. “They cannot be indicted and barely investigated.”

          Explains the first several years of his administration. Barely investigated. Sure.

          And I’m shocked to hear that Jeff Sessions created that DoJ rule out of thin air.

          Also…can you name exactly what Trump should’ve been indicted FOR?

          1. Trump should be indicted for using his public office to obstruct criminal investigations into his associates. Trump should be indicted for his leading part in the campaign finance conspiracy for which his lawyer was convicted. Trump could be indicted for inflating his assets in order to get loans if the there is proof of that beyond the testimony of Cohen. I suspect Trump has also used the presidency to line his pockets in other illicit ways that we will uncover once we have a new executive in office who will allow the FBI to comb through the records from Trump’s administration.

            1. I’m guessing you took your name from fulfilling the “tide pod challenge” more times than most others

            2. “Trump should be indicted for using his public office to obstruct criminal investigations into his associates.”

              So he should be indicted for something he never did. Or is this that definition of “obstruction” that accepts any action on Trumps part, like the definition of “pressuring” you’re using?

            3. “Trump should be indicted for using his public office to obstruct criminal investigations into his associates.”

              You’re aware the DoJ is a part of the Executive Branch, right? Unless you want an FBI with zero oversight by anybody, you might want to think about what your goals lead to.

              And how, precisely, did he impede the investigation?

              “Trump should be indicted for his leading part in the campaign finance conspiracy for which his lawyer was convicted.”

              Why do people hire lawyers? To advise them on what is and what is not legal. If Cohen cannot do that, c’est la vie.

              “Trump could be indicted for inflating his assets in order to get loans if the there is proof of that beyond the testimony of Cohen.”

              IF there is proof…which, mind you, has never turned up.

              “I suspect”

              Solid indictment reason….

            4. Thanks OBL. I liked your prior work but good to see you getting after it a little harder.

        3. Pod is wrong again, who knew! They can be indicted. In fact mueller has told congress twice that OLC guidance didnt factor into his decision to not indict. They can not be tried in office, indictments can occur. Funny you’re ignorant about that too.

    2. “ When your lawyer is calling you a criminal the indictment is generally just around the corner.”

      You misspelled “disbarment.”

    3. “When your lawyer is calling you a criminal the indictment is generally just around the corner.”

      Isn’t his lawyer in jail as we speak? Not sure how much good his claims are worth given how little he had when he was free.

      He cooperated, heavily, with Mueller and they turned up, you know, squat.

      1. A lawyer, and fixer, fighting to stay out of prison, because of his own misdealings, is totally trustworthy. It is known.

    4. Something tells me you have no idea how the real estate market or investment markets work.

    5. Pod
      September.25.2019 at 9:45 am

      ‘TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!! TRUMP!!!’
      And TRUMP, dammit!!!!

      And you think that 15YO girl is obsessed?

    6. “Outside of a few crazies on the internet most people could care less if Trump is impeached.”

      Are you suggesting that most people are OK with a President Mike Pence? Most dumbfucks probably are.

    1. “It’s not extortion when we do it!” That was the excuse for Biden, as well.

      1. If Trump uses his power to go after Hunter, that’s meddling in politics.

        If Biden uses his power to protect Hunter, that’s just statecraft.

    2. We had four Senate Democrats trying to compel the Ukrainians into doing their bidding, threatening their support for US aid to the country if they didn’t get their way.

      1. We even have them trying to blackmail the Supreme Court with court-packing if they don’t rule in favor of gun-grabbing.

        Trump’s actual policies have been pretty much irrelevant to me, because his carny act has compelled these assholes to rip their authoritarian masks off and reveal that it’s all about gaining power and steamrolling their agenda, while laughably claiming that Trump “is not what this country is about.”

    3. Yup boyz and girlz, the Lefties would be doing shit like this behind closed doors if Hillary had won.

      Now all their ridiculous attacks going after Trump are public record and just sad at this point.

      You really think they would be doing all of this to make themselves look so bad publicly, if Democrats knew that they would win Election 2020?

  18. Vox Media, the company behind Vox, just bought New York magazine.

    Fools and their money are soon parted.

  19. “It’s not about the transcript of a call.”

    MUST. MOVE. GOAL. POSTS. FURTHER

    1. It’s about the concept of trump doing anything.

    2. I’ve just now read a bit of that transcript and it’s worse then I imagined.

      1. Is THIS the new talking point?

        Feel free to quote the part worse than you imagined.

        1. It’s vomit inducing to say the least. I need to finish reading it.

          1. If you don’t want to vomit, stop eating detergent

          2. Get back to us in a day or two after you’ve sounded out the first few syllables.

          3. Just one quote. Not asking for much.

          4. It’s 5 pages long. You’re not done YET? It’s been over an hour and 45 minutes since your post on how bad it was.

            1. I think maybe Shreek was lying about reading it.

  20. “ Worth remembering tomorrow: “Not only would any so-called transcript be based on notes, but it would also likely be incomplete because the note-takers usually do not include issues that could be controversial if they became public.””

    Also, context matters.

  21. Coincidentally, I’m releasing my own transcript of Biden bragging about forcing the Ukrainian president to shut down the investigation into his son–in exchange for money from the Obama administration.

    Joe Biden: “If the prosecutor’s not fired, you’re not getting the money”.

    I hate to link to YouTube even more than I hate link to something by RussiaToday. Still, facts are facts, no matter where you find them, and the fact appears to be that Biden admits to withholding funds from the Ukrainians if they don’t fire the prosecutor that’s investigating his son at 1:30 in the following video.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCF9My1vBP4

    Is there any way to interpret Biden’s statements in that video that isn’t damning?

    1. Sure, he is good old Uncle Joe, the Lightbringer’s sidekick, not OrangeManBad.

    2. Hmmm. Who would have an interest in taking out both Biden and Trump?? Warren, Warrrren?

      1. Yep. Lizzie’s practically a shoo-in at this point.

      2. Lizzie’s a power-monger, but she’s not that politically Machiavellian. She knows as well as anyone that the DNC treats the nomination as a selection, not election, process, and they’ve already done their part to ensure that she’s gained whatever advantages they can leverage to her. It’s not an accident that she was the sole nominee with any major name recognition during the second night in the first round of debates.

        I don’t think the DNC actually wants Biden, but they’re indulging him for now because of his Q-factor in the upper Midwest and for being a loyal party soldier for so long. But Castro didn’t imply that he was acting senile in the last debate for no good reason, along with all the media stories about him forgetting names and having memory gaffes on the campaign trail.

        1. I don’t think the DNC is doing much of anything for Biden, but he keeps polling at the top because half the registered Ds are desperate for anyone who’s not completely batshit insane.
          I’ve run into multiple registered Democrats, mostly women, and when I ask who they want their answer is a resigned “Biden – I hate Bernie, Warren, Harris, etc”
          Biden is the desperate plea from habitual, but not completely insane, dems

          1. I wouldn’t be surprised if this is the last election cycle for the Dems before they change their name and become the Democratic Socialist Party. Not necessarily because the rank and file would support it, but because the political activists, like the shithead radicals on college campuses, are loud enough to force it that way.

            Most people actually hate their guts because they’re so obnoxious, but they’re the ones who are actually driving the agenda, particularly upper middle class white liberals.

            1. ^ THIS.

              I think the same thing. The Democrat Party has so tarnished its brand that even the crazy SJWs don’t want that name. It’s hard to run on Social Justice with the Party of slavery (Democrat party).

    3. “That’s just Joe being Joe!”

    4. The claim by idiots like Jeff and tony are that this prosecutor was the linchpin to ending all corruption in the Ukraine so naturally Joe singled him and only him out. They actually believe this.

      1. To be fair I don’t think they actually believe anything, they just try to win.

  22. The constitution says a president can be impeached for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Misdemeanors are whatever Congress wants them to be. The Senate will be more forgiving. The idea is, of course, to convince the court of last resort…the 2020 voters.

    1. I’m pretty sure the 2020 voters stopped listening several months ago. A lunatic ranting on the street corner about how the end is nigh is only entertaining for about 5 minutes and after that he’s just a sad and pathetic lunatic. Pelosi might still be able to talk the Dems down off the ledge, but there are a lot of them too far gone to see that this is not going to end well for them.

      1. I thought there might be a chance that Democrats keep the House based on Election 2020 results and depending on Census 2020 results.

        The House impeaching Trump would simply lead to a 99% chance Trump wins reelection and very high percentage that Democrats lose control of the House.

  23. Company that is hemorrhaging money and has blown through 100 million in investment equity buys failing magazine.

  24. There won’t be an impeachment. Democrats will get mileage out of talk of impeachment, get mileage out of keeping the level of outrage high. But Democrats get even more benefit out of keeping Trump in office. He’s been a godsend to them. So they’re not going to risk his removal from office

    1. Problem is it every Democrat is as OCD as greta is and will run out of steam over 4 years.

      1. That’s okay. The Dems only need to keep their base fired up until after the 2020 election.

    2. It’s not up to Democrats if Trump stays or goes. The Republicans will decide that question. The Democrats will decide what gets investigated and uncovered.

      1. Last three years with the “impeccably qualified and totally honest and straight shooting” Mueller (hey, that how the Dems described him) and nothing turned up.

        I bet Nadler will do a much better job. Especially with Trump’s people just mocking him as a fat tub of goo with an IQ below room temperature

        …as they should, mind you. Nadler deserves scorn. And feel free to hold them in contempt. As with Obama’s people, that will work well.

        1. Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Papadopoulos would disagree with your belief that nothing turned up. Trump would be on that list if he wasn’t protected by Barr and the supposed opinion that president may be indicted while in office.

          1. “Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Papadopoulos would disagree with your belief that nothing turned up.”

            That was 3 unpaid parking tickets, one 35-in-a-25, and one guy who pulled some tax shenanigans years before he worked for Trump, you fucking ignoramus.

          2. BTW, still waiting for the smoking gun from the transcript.

          3. “Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Papadopoulos would disagree with your belief that nothing turned up.”

            They wouldn’t disagree that nothing involving Trump turned up. And, several of those are being appealed. Hell at least one of them definitely got railroaded.

            Because nothing involving Trump turned up.

            Are you really that desperate?

          4. “Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Papadopoulos would disagree with your belief that nothing turned up.”

            Flynn was railroaded for making a call ANY incoming cabinet member would.
            Manafort had, literally, nothing to do with Trump. That was done years before Trump.
            Papadapoulos has been proven to have been railroaded.
            Gates was also years before Trump.
            What, exactly, did Stone allegedly do?

            “Trump would be on that list if he wasn’t protected by Barr and the supposed opinion that president may be indicted while in office.”

            What…and be precise here…would Trump be indicted for?

    3. Damb, brandy, you’re extremely stupid

  25. Continuing the conversation from yesterday about whether there are any meaningful restrictions on what constitutes an impeachable offense, I’d weigh in with the following observations.

    1) The framers were careful about restricting things from consideration by Congress if they’re outside the proper purview of democracy. See the First Amendment for one list of things that specifically mentioned as being outside the reach of Congress. For another list of examples, like convicting people of felonies, see the stipulation by the Constitution that people be tried by the courts rather than by way of a general popularity contest.

    If the framers wanted the standard for impeaching a president to be “beyond a reasonable doubt”, they’d have sent impeachment proceedings to the courts rather than Congress.

    2) We aren’t talking about putting the president in prison. We’re just talking about removing the president from office.

    Impeachment, thus, is like a vote of no confidence in the UK parliament, the standards for which are not criminal but also be just political. Sure, there’s a difference between a parliamentary system and a presidential one in that presidents are perfectly capable of running the government without the support of a majority in the legislature, but when we’re talking about removing a president from power with an act of Congress, we’re talking about when an executive should removed from power–like in a vote of no confidence–not why he should stay when he doesn’t have a majority in the legislature.

    3) The biggest brake on what constitutes an impeachable offense is public opinion. If more than half of the House of Representatives are willing to indict a sitting president and two-thirds of the Senate are willing to vote him out of office, there must be an overwhelming majority of Americans–all over the country–who want him removed from office. Why shouldn’t the American people be able to remove such an unpopular president–regardless of whether he’s committed a crime?

    1. Not sure who you are arguing with. It doesnt make this Ukraine shit any less insane.

      1. “Continuing the conversation from yesterday . . . “

        There was a discussion in yesterday’s thread about whether one had to commit a crime in order to be impeached according to the Constitution.

        And the answer to those questions are the same regardless of whether we’re talking about current situation and President Trump, past proceedings against Bill Clinton, or future proceedings against President Warren.

        1. “or future proceedings against President Warren.”

          President Warren? I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.

          1. She’s not going away after 2020.

            Even if she doesn’t win this time, she’ll be the Senator from Massachusetts until she doesn’t want to be the Senator from Massachusetts anymore.

            Like herpes, she’ll just keep comin’ back.

            1. If it has to be, let it be in Massachusetts.

            2. Or she might get primaried by a Kennedy.

        2. “There was a discussion in yesterday’s thread about whether one had to commit a crime in order to be impeached according to the Constitution.”

          No, actually, there wasn’t. You just suck at getting points.

          1. https://reason.com/2019/09/24/nancy-pelosi-announces-trump-impeachment-inquiry-over-ukraine-scandal/#comment-7943054

            Is your dad one of those guys that “wins” arguments at the dinner table, “Because I said so”?

    2. I might have added to number 3), there, that the fear of public opinion has made Pelosi reluctant to pursue impeachment against Trump right up until now. She was afraid that if they impeached Trump, the Democrats might lose their control of the House in 2020 as public opinion galvanized behind Trump in his defense–much like what happened to Bill Clinton in 1990s.

      However, there’s more than one way for Pelosi to lose the Speaker’s chair. The Democrats losing control through the polls is one way–the Democrats in the House voting Pelosi out of the leadership and replacing her with someone who will impeach Trump is another threat to her leadership, and my first guess is that it became apparent to her in the Democrat meeting yesterday that if she didn’t initiate impeachment proceedings against Trump, the party would probably vote in someone else to replace her as Speaker.

      In other words, she appears to fear being replaced as Speaker for not impeaching Trump more than she fears the Democrats losing control of the House in 2020. I don’t believe that’s because she’s confident that the Democrats will hold the House in 2020. I suspect it’s just because the desire to impeach Trump by her fellow Democrats is so great that it presents a big threat to her leadership.

      1. Still hasn’t held a vote.
        Ol’ Nancy is trying have her cake and gum it too

        1. She’s got a big problem in that the things that make progressives popular in California and New York are the things that make them unpopular in Peoria.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_it_play_in_Peoria%3F

          AoC and company want to make even more of a national brand for themselves by making big plays on television during the impeachment Superbowl in an election year.

          I only support Republicans to the extent that doing so furthers the interests of libertarian capitalism, but watching AoC talk about Trump even makes me want to support Trump on a personal level.

          What makes AoC even more popular in New York City makes the Democrats even less popular in swing districts, and Nancy Pelosi knows it. It really says something about the state of the Democratic Party when Nancy Pelosi is the moderate!

          The Democrats have hated on the white, blue collar, middle class for so long, they have few people who need to fear losing their seats for bashing them even further.

          1. She’s got a big problem in that the things that make progressives popular in California and New York are the things that make them unpopular in Peoria.

            True, but if it weren’t for that racist electoral college, all they’d need to care about is California and New York.

            1. They are true believers in elitism.

              Denouncing them as “elitists” is like denouncing Marx for being a Marxist.

    3. *** meekly raises hand ***

      Do the workings of Congress generally reflect the views of the overwhelming majority of Americans?

      1. The way representative democracy works, we don’t get what we want from government. We get what we want by shopping online.

        What we get with representative democracy is the ability to kick our representatives out of office in the next election for their bad choices, and that can be quite an effective deterrent.

        Go ask all the Republicans who were kicked out of office by Republican primary voters if they’re glad they voted for TARP.

        John Boehner ultimately lost the Speaker’s chair because his actions on TARP (and other things) sparked a grass roots surge against him, his policies, and the Republicans who supported them.

        It’s like throwing people in prison for perpetrating an armed robbery. No, that doesn’t do anything to prevent the robbery in question from happening, but it can and does give would-be armed robbers pause in the future. Letting armed robbers off the hook doesn’t do anything to deter future armed robberies at all.

        1. TARP was FAR less destructive than the GOP’s New Deal,
          a) Medicare Prescriptions, “paid for” by LOOTING the income tax. b) The Bush tax cuts.

          Today, over 20% of the personal income tax subsidizes Medicare — over $300 billion per year. That’s MORE than the Medicare Trust Fund!!!

          The income tax pays a LOT more than just the Prescriptions — 45% of ALL Medicare spending … but they needed Democrat votes so they got ROLLED.

          So, it was REPUBLICANS who bailed out socialized medicine. TWICE!

          They fucked up health care AGAIN, under Obama! By rejecting Obama’s original BIPARTISAN deal — that would have killed single-payer forever. How fucking stupid was THAT?

          This forced Obama to need his far left. Under Kennedy, when Republicans still had brains, they worked with Kennedy on his tax cuts (later copied by Reagan). Kennedy’s tax cuts did not need his far left, and were STRONGLY opposed by the AFL-CIO. Back when Republicans had brains. (The same Republicans who FUCKED Reagan’s fiscal agenda, totally).

          ANOTHER middle-class subsidy — the Bush tax cuts. 85% of the dollars went to taxpayers UNDER $200,000 – who were paying only 45% of the tax!

          So Bush’s New Deal borrowed trillions — to buy middle-class votes … then lost the White House and BOTH houses of Congress ,.. the massive failure that presaged Trump’s fiscal insanity.

          LOSERS! But not the only ones.
          To be fair, both parties are morally corrupt and totally useless.
          A growing majority of Americans now agree with what we libertarians have been saying for over 50 years.

          Left – Right = Zero.
          One side borrows trillions to pay for free stuff.
          The other side borrows trillions to pay for free tax cuts. (Shame on Rand Paul’s moral hypocrisy)

          There’s nobody home.

    4. It’s supposed to be for high crimes and misdemeanors, but when loitering is a misdemeanor, it can essentially be for anything. And proof of wrongdoing is NOT needed before impeachment can begin. Impeachment is not legal judgement.

      Don’t know why so many people think the president has to be objectively proven to be guilty of a crime before the proceedings can begin. That’s certainly not what the Constitution says. It’s not what we started to do with Nixon, and it’s not what we did do with Clinton. Sheesh.

      1. I suspect a lot of it’s about needing to justify it to the voters.

        It’s sort of like a cause for war.

        There’s nothing in the Constitution that says wars can only be declared as an act of self-defense, but it goes down with the American people much smoother if there’s a sinking of the Maine, a sinking of the Lusitania, a Gulf of Tonkin incident, etc.

        If the ultimate check on impeachment is what the American people will buy–and hence our representatives’ fear of the electorate–the American people will buy impeachment a whole lot easier if you can find evidence of a crime.

        1. Ken….Have enjoyed (and learned) following your comment thread.

          The ultimate check on impeachment, as I follow your reasoning, is the ballot box. If there is a huge consensus in the House (50%+1) and the Senate (67), one would think there would be little to no electoral consequence for removal from office. OTOH, if it is partisan bullshit, the electoral consequences would be severe (as I believe it has been, historically).

          My fear is ‘the day after’. I am watching as my country is getting torn apart. I do not exaggerate when I say it will take at least a generation to heal the acrimony of the political divisions we have today. Perhaps several.

          The greatest fear is an actual US Civil War 2. There will be riots in the streets if the House impeaches POTUS Trump and the Senate votes to remove from office.

          1. The ultimate check on impeachment, as I follow your reasoning, is the ballot box.

            Your own “reasoning’ has no idea what a “check” means. A ballot box is NOT a way to block an impeachment.

            And, trust me on this, the Founders knew we’d have elections, when they adopted (and ratified) the impeachment clause!

            There will be riots in the streets if the House impeaches POTUS Trump and the Senate votes to remove from office.

            Even wackier, since you have no clue, none at all, what the grounds for impeachment would be! And … a REPUBLICAN Senate!

  26. NPR was protecting the Dems again this morning. The Dem Party Public Relations officer employed by NPR asserted Trump’s accusation Biden improperly pressured the Ukraine over a prosecutor is unsupported by evidence. Apparently Biden’s public admission he did pressure the UKR over the prosecutor and the public knowledge the prosecutor was investigating his son’s company is not evidence.

    1. I love that Biden bragging on camera isn’t proof or evidence. But a whistleblower who didn’t even hear the call is.

      1. Welcome to Reason where everything’s made up and the points don’t matter.

    2. “Apparently Biden’s public admission he did pressure the UKR over the prosecutor and the public knowledge the prosecutor was investigating his son’s company is not evidence.”

      Well, it’s evidence of the wrong thing.

    3. They were making the same claim on the drive home yesterday.

    4. I stopped listening to NPR and it’s to the point where I don’t know that I’d consider violence in response to honest NPR virtue signals unjustified:

      “And, because it’s [China] not a democracy, the leaders who make climate promises can’t be voted out of office.” – NPR

      “And what I think is really encouraging about China is that the leadership is really committed to something they can really follow through.” – Angel Hsu

      They went to a lot of effort in the story to avoid saying that China is the No. 1 emitter and still rising while the US is the No. 2 emitter and our emissions have been falling for the better part of a decade.

      They’re openly advocating communism in blatant opposition to their own supposed interests. Slightly greater demonstrations of aggression would decidedly put them in a ‘hazardous to themselves and others’ category.

      1. Sorry, the associated story (quotes from around the 2:11 mark).

        Seriously, National Radio in the USA broadcasting the propaganda of a communist dictatorship just makes me feel ill on all kinds of different physical, psychological, logical, ethical, and moral levels.

      2. To me, the proper response is to defund it. Let them survive on private contributions. If NPR is just Leftist trash, it will die off like all the other Left-tard radio stations.

    5. National Propaganda Radio said what?

      Shocking!

      1. Trumptards DENY that China is taking positive action on climate change … the goobers … count how many … INSIST that stating a well-known fact about China is … wait for it … DEFENDING COMMUNISM. (snort)

        If true, then their orange god is defending communism by dealing with Xi! (Yes, just as crazy as Bernies and Elizabeth’s puppets on strings)

  27. I’m glad the state of California is looking out for workplace issues and benefit, but I don’t see a way this bill helps me.

    If only Comrade Stalin knew!

    If you’re going to support the general principle of the commissars deciding what’s best for everybody, you’ve got no standing to complain when they decide fucking you in the ass is what’s best.

  28. This is how dictatorships happen. Be careful when you abandon any semblance of fair governance to assassinate your political opposition when they’re trying to play by the rules you espouse. Push your luck enough and you might just make someone really not care about the rules.

    1. No, it’s how people find themselves in serious trouble with the law. They get away with it until they don’t.

      1. “No, it’s how people find themselves in serious trouble with the law. They get away with it until they don’t.”

        You keep bullshitting, but never once provided any specifics. It’s almost like you are full of shit.

        1. Vomit inducing but he hasn’t read it.

          I guess he got tired of posting kiddie porn.

    2. Yeah, the most dangerous outcome for civil society right now is the one where the Republican establishment suddenly grows some balls and removes Trump from office.

      If they convince a large chunk of the American people that their voices can never be heard–not even if they elect a president–then the legitimacy of classically liberal government goes into the toilet.

      In the short run, their reaction might be violent.

      Over the long run, if they can’t get what they want through democracy and the rule of law, then they’ll turn to something else.

      1. If the republicans turn on Trump for no real reason the next election republicans just won’t show up. thats not good but it becomes the choice one has to make

        1. I don’t think most conservative Americans will simply lie down and take a Democrat sweep of political offices.

          All you need is a few million Americans who see that the Party of slavery and the Republican Party are working together to deprive them of any real representation and that is a Civil War that is over in a matter of months with Lefties and RINOs losing.

      2. Or, more to the point, if the opposition shows that they’re determined to run roughshod over them, irrespective of the rules in place, and openly brag about changing the rules solely to benefit their own agenda, then violent reactions to that power-mongering are not out of the realm of probability.

  29. Drumpf’s Presidency is over. As I predicted, he will be impeached by the #BlueWave Congress — whose emergence I also correctly predicted throughout 2018.

    #Impeach
    #TrumpUkraine

    1. Already, 30 Republican Senators would vote to convict in impeachment … only if the vote is secret. Moral cowardice?

  30. It’s not about the transcript of a call. Don’t let President Trump or Republican officials distract you with a straw man.

    The issue is not the issue, the issue is the revolution! Don’t let yourself be distracted by the facts, comrades!

    Just when you thought Reason’s favorite refugee couldn’t descend any further into self parody.

    1. The issue is simple: He’s TRUMP. That’s an impeachable offense right there.

      1. I think the full legal description is this; “he’s not Hillary”.

        1. No, it’s always “ORANGE MAN BAD!”

          1. You’re a Fart Smeller ***AND*** a Smart Feller; THAT, no one can deny! If I get my hair done up really nice, can I have a second helping of cat food?

            With Your Profound Insights, I bet if You were so inclined as to be so kind, You could help me debug this source code:
            EveryOne_Wrong Me-Uber-Correct Begin Auto_Synthesize [ Interpolate ( Anode[31:0], Cathode[31:0], Elbow[31:0] ), Function ( $RU$12’hBAD ) ] ; Loop_Count <= Loop_Count + 1'b1 ;
            Invoke DisplayModule "Have you been seeing another computer?!? Do you think that I am a FOOL?!?!", end; end module ;

            Master-Coder, PLEASE help me! If we can debug this code, I'll hold your beer for You when You say, "Here, hold my beer and watch THIS!!!"

            1. Must be a Trumptard. Posts a totally irrelevant and cowardly diversion. Waits for his cookie from Trump.

    2. Shorter Amash” Me, or your lying eyes…”

  31. I learned everything I need to know about the Democrat party with their behaviour during the Vietnam war. They’re the enemy within.

    Wake up America.

    1. +10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

  32. More bad economic news.

    Charles Koch lost $332 million yesterday.

    It’s clear that Drumpf’s tariffs are not merely bad in theory. They are causing real harm to real people. Fortunately Drumpf will be removed from office soon. Then we’ll have a better economic environment in which our billionaire benefactor can push his net worth above $60 billion where it belongs.

    #DrumpfRecession
    #VoteDemocratToHelpCharlesKoch

  33. “”Over the course of the past year,” reports The Daily Beast, “Giuliani pressed the Ukrainian government to investigate so far unfounded allegations of corruption in the country involving” Joe Biden and his son Hunter.”

    And, of course, if you never investigate them, they will forever remain “unfounded”.

    1. So far, the non-investigation has turned up recorded video of a full confession. That is much more than the multi-million, multi-year Mueller witch hunt did.

      1. “recorded video of a full confession.”

        Or, what the MSMDNC call “no smoking gun.” Because it literally does not involve a gun still leaking smoke.

  34. Fact checks:
    It is not impeachment proceedings, it is “an impeachment investigation”. Sort of like “military style assault rifle”, that character string has no meaning, but the dems think it sounds like they are actually doing something.
    The alleged person is not a whistleblower, that description has a specific legal meaning that it does not meet. It is a “purveyor of unsubstantiated rumor”.

    Just for the record: Trump did actually win the 2016 election. Deal with it. Oh, wait. that is what the dems think they are doing.

    1. Technically, impeachment can happen if enough congressmen want it to happen. It’s not a criminal trial, it’s a political proceeding. Transcripts are not needed, stained dresses are not needed, smoking guns are not needed. All that is needed is the political will to start the process. The Constitution suggests that it’s for high crimes and misdemeanors, but when even jaywalking is considered a misdemeanor is some jurisdictions, the distinction is meaningless. Practically speaking, a president can be impeached over anything. So long as there is the political will to do so.

      That’s why this is an “impeachment investigation”. Pelosi and gang are just trying to figure out if it’s in their best interest to actually move forward with an impeachment, or if an impeachment would backfire and harm them in 2020.

      As I said earlier, it’s in their best interest to keep Trump in office because he’s so good at riling up the Democrat base. The Dems make their money by having an outraged based. And Trump outrages them. He’s more useful to the Democrat leaderhip in office than out.

      1. Swing and a miss, brandy.
        Maybe this site needs more moderation to prevent comments like yours?
        But, sure, you’re probably right – having Trump in office constantly making fools of them and provoking the out front dominance of the avowed socialist wing must be really, really helpful to the Ds.
        They’re not even imploding at all, right?

        1. You’re especially fragile today, aren’t you?

          1. No, just following your lead on begging for censorship

            1. Might save some readers from coming across your rather unintelligent, yet wishful, “analysis”

      2. Practically speaking, a president can be impeached over anything.

        Practically speaking, it would seem that he can’t. Hypothetically speaking you may be correct but it’s not entirely clear that it’s true hypothetically. It’s conceivable he can’t be impeached for actions that are Constitutionally protected.

        As I said earlier, it’s in their best interest to keep Trump in office because he’s so good at riling up the Democrat base.

        But, after 8 years of painting the GOP as the useless contrarian party, they can’t allow themselves to be framed similarly under the reign of Literally Hitler.

        1. Modern politics about about voting against the other guy as much as it is about voting for your own. Assuming that the Democrats are going to follow orders and vote for who the DNC tells them to, the only thing left is to make sure they actually get out to the polls.

          It won’t guarantee an electoral win, but you have to start with getting your own team out on the field before you have any hope of scoring.

        2. It’s conceivable he can’t be impeached for actions that are Constitutionally protected.

          Which has nothing to do with Trump’s many impeachable offenses, especially THIS smoking gun.

  35. Things we learned from the Daleiden Hearings Reason isn’t covering
    1. Beating hearts are harvested from live fetuses to be sold for research
    2. Planned Parenthood will increase the risk to the mother to obtain intact fetuses or attached heads to be sold
    3. PP doctors will declare a baby dead simply because it’s limbs have been removed, not because it has died

    1. 3. PP doctors will declare a baby dead simply because it’s limbs have been removed, not because it has died

      Holy Jesus! Fuck! How do these people not shoot themselves in the head at every opportunity? How do people knowingly participate without slitting their throats? Surely it’s an abstract *if this were to happen* scenario, right…

      He said one Planned Parenthood abortionist who previously testified, Doe 9, “is having live births although she doesn’t know.” Doe 9 was relying on “lack of pulsation of the fetal cord” and “that’s not fetal demise,” he said.

      While I appreciate Doe 9’s testimony, I’m not entirely sure that drawing and quartering would be cruel and unusual punishment for such behavior.

      1. …How do these people not shoot themselves in the head at every opportunity? How do people knowingly participate without slitting their throats? Surely it’s an abstract *if this were to happen* scenario, right…

        Dr. Kermit Gosnell actually existed. Think he was unique?

    2. 2. StemExpress Admitted to Selling Whole Fetuses And Attached Baby Heads

      Whole fetuses! Getcha whole fetuses here! Heads attached!

  36. “The most serious misstep Trump allegedly made this time was attempting to withhold military money for Ukraine. ”

    #libertariansformoremilitaryspending

    1. #libertariansformore*foreign*militaryspending

      You can put asterisks in a hashtag, right?

      1. We spend billions on our military, to defend us from OURSELVES?
        Oh, it’s you ….

        1. Oh, it’s you ….

          I’m gonna be honest, I can’t tell you from all the other dishonest shitbags that hang out around here but if you want to trumpet our domestic military spending you might want to go somewhere else.
          This is a libertarian board and while we don’t exactly support domestic military spending, mostly because it’s funded with ill-gotten tax dollars, we *really* don’t like spending military money on foreign armies because it rubs non-interventionist sensibilities the wrong way too. You’re totally entitled to your love of domestic military spending *and* spending money on foreign ones but, around here, it will get you correctly labeled as a state-worshipping cocksucker.

          1. here but if you want to trumpet our domestic military spending you might want to go somewhere else.

            STILL says we spend billions to defend against OURSELVES

            This is a libertarian board and while we don’t exactly support domestic military spending, mostly because it’s funded with ill-gotten tax dollars, we *really* don’t like spending military money on foreign armies because it rubs non-interventionist sensibilities the wrong way too. You’re totally entitled to your love of domestic military spending *and* spending money on foreign ones but, around here, it will get you correctly labeled as a state-worshipping cocksucker.

            WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH!
            Denies he was ridiculed? Or illiterate?

            You’re totally entitled to your love of domestic military spending

            AND A TOTAL FUCKING ILLITERATE WHEN HIS WACKINESS IS RIDICULED
            Now learn what Posse Commitatus means! (snicker)

  37. >>a bipartisan consensus

    still on the Two-Party Bullshit train eh?

    1. Severe denial is a mental affliction.
      The Senate voted UNANIMOUSLY to demand the whistleblower report. Even McConnell is backing away, saying he could never get an answer to his questions. on why the aide to Ukraine was ILLEGALLY delayed,

      We now see more coverups of more coverups.

      1. Severe denial is a mental affliction.

        Dumbfuck Hihnsano is the expert in this.

        1. Severe denial is a mental affliction.
          Senate votes 100-0 to release Trump whistleblower complaint.

          Umm, 100-0 IS “voted unanimously.”

          1. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mcconnell-i-was-not-given-an-explanation-for-ukraine-aid-delay/ar-AAHMEll?li=BBnbcA1
            Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said he was not provided an explanation for why the Trump administration held up aid to Ukraine when he pressed senior officials on the matter over the summer.

            That makes you 0 for 2.
            So far.
            Anything else? (lol)

  38. “Trump Calls on ‘American Patriots’ to Defend Him From Impeachment”

    If there’s a mass shooting between now and the end of the witch hunt, the Democrats will blame Trump for having said this–as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow.

    1. But he didn’t actually order us to defend him. Which is good, because I am not a lawyer and if he expects me to defend him before a senate committee, then he’s fucked.

      1. Nobody expects you to defend them, brandy.
        Indeed, I doubt anybody expects you to even defend yourself.
        Oh, did you think that crying for moderation on a comments board counted?
        Not so

    2. If there’s a mass shooting between now and the end of the witch hunt, the Democrats will blame Trump for having said this–as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow.

      I sort of expect one to happen in the next week or so, as this whistleblower scandal lacks legs, other than to cut Biden’s out from under him.

      I expect the shooter to be yet another 18-22 yr old white guy, with either no social media history or a bunch of links to far-right wing material. And I expect the shooter to use weapons that are controversially legal, firearms made with 80% lowers, homemade suppressors, mail ordered ammo: stuff like that. Have him blast up a school using OTC binary explosives like tannerite, or using things like smokeless powder pipe bombs.

      Pure coincidence when it happens.

  39. Now that the memo is out. we see that Trump was suckered by yet another wacko conspiracy theory! This one will be swallowed whole, on blind tribal faith, by the same cult who still says Obama is a Kenyan.

    Left – Right = Zero.
    BOTH now collapsing into shameless obedience to the ruling elites.

    1. Ah, so you didn’t read it. Well, you’re Hihn, no one is surprised.

      1. Is a Hihn, one of those dingleberry things?

      2. (Boldface in defense of infantile aggressions. And cowardly diversiob))

        Ah, so you didn’t read it.

        Here’s the full transcript (sneer)
        https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-transcript-read-ukraine-president-phone-call-transcript-pdf-released-today-joe-biden-crowdstrike-2019-09-25/

        The wacko conspiracy theory … per the White House. My emphasis added.

        There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about … Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution

        Now that I’ve made a monkey out of you … and hateconstitution1789 … wipe the egg from your puss. (smirk)

        (Will he now stick his tongue out?)

  40. “.⁦@MassGovernor⁩ declares a public health emergency for vaping. Orders 4 month temporary ban on all sales of vaping related products & devices effective immediately”

    Oh no! What will vapers do? It’s not like they can order online from China and have it delivered in under a week! Good to see Massachusetts looking out for it’s citizens.

    1. It’ll be interesting to see if Trump takes them up on their offer. It’ll be even more interesting to see the specifics on the offer, and God is definitely in the details when it comes to arms control and nuclear nonproliferation. I think you can trust the IRGC even less in this regard than you could the Soviets, and the Soviets cheated their ass off.

      I don’t think you could have an inspection regime with sufficient safeguards to reassure the rest of the region that Iran could not develop nuclear weapons, without sufficiently controlling the area that it would be like Iran were actually invaded.

    2. IRAN AGREES … THE SAME THING THEY ACCEPTED FROM OBAMA!!!

  41. Cato event: Fuel to the Fire: How Trump Made America’s Broken Foreign Policy Even Worse (and How We Can Recover)

  42. I’ll just say this: the current crop of young Democrat legislators are too young to recall Bill Clinton and what happened to the Republican party when they impeached him for actual honest-to-god proven perjury.

    Nancy remembers, and tried to clue them in, but clearly she has given up and is pivoting to using the impeachment as a wedge issue for the elections. That’s her only move left, and I don’t think it was a move she wanted to make since she’s fairly certain it’s a losing proposition.

    1. And if the trade wars don’t pay off Trump can blame the economy on uncertainty due to the impeachment.
      Why are people still electing these democrats? They fail to take it an extra step ahead in their minds every time.

  43. The democrats don’t have any evidence that is worth of impeachment of Trump.
    But that’s not the point.
    This is a witch hunt to waste taxpayers money, show the world just how desperate the democrats are and how just how good the democrats are at wasting time and resources.
    Democrats have more important issues to face than engaging in grandstanding bullshit.

  44. Umm, the evidence you cannot deal with is the topic of this article (and more). Trump lied, abused his office , used taxpayer dollars for a political witch hunt, and ILLEGALLY blocked congressionally-approved funding.

    Plus,
    1) the whistle -blower report is now released.
    2) The acting head of National Intelligence threatens to quit if the White House tries to ILLEGALLY censor the whistleblower report. 3) All AFTER McConnell CAVED and allowed a UNANIMOUS Senate demand for the FULL whistleblower report.

    FOX NEWS: Pelosi nailed it on Trump and impeachment – Here’s why

    That’s just one whistle-blower. Another one now claims Trump tried to cripple the IRS audit of his tax returns — the tax returns he’s so terrified of publicizing.

    So, I understand how you’d deal with so much pain, by denying so much of reality, and repeating Trump’s latest crazy conspiracy. You people are as easily suckered as Bernie’s and Elizabeth’s!

    As a growing majority of Americans now agrees with what libertarians have said for over 50 years: Left – Right = Zero.
    Two sides of the same corrupt coin.

    1. Chortle mother fucker, chortle.

      1. Chortle mother fucker, chortle.

        It’s never my intention to PROVE that R Mac is a typical wacko Trumptard, but … he keeps insisting! So …. MORE PROOF!

        From the transcript … which is NOT a “transcript” that Trump FALSELY promised.
        https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-transcript-read-ukraine-president-phone-call-transcript-pdf-released-today-joe-biden-crowdstrike-2019-09-25/

        The smoking gun. Zelensky thanks Trump for US support on defense, so he can buy our missiles … obviously ignorant that Trump has ILLEGALLY blocked the funding support.

        ZELENSKY:
        I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the the next steps, specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United· States for defense purposes.

        Now Trump’s shameful bribe. My emphasis (vomit)

        TRUMP:
        I would like you to do us a favor though
        , because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike… I guess you have one of your wealthy people… The server, they say Ukraine has it

        The other thing.There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you ·can look into it..

        Black and white PROOF. Released by TRUMP’S White House, but, THEY STILL REFUSE TO ACCEPT IT!!!

        TWO sycho lies. Biden’s bragging and Crowdstrike.

        Crowdstrike is yet another wacky Trump conspiracy, even crazier than Pizzzagate and Birtherism. Crowdstrike is a MAJOR AMERICAN security firm, hired by the DNC, who concluded it was Russians who had hacked the DNC server less than 12 hours after Trump publicly asked Russia to find Hillary’s emails. FBI later confirmed the hacking was by Russians … but THAT is part of the Deep State Conspiracy … so … Trump NEEDS the fucking lie that Crowdstrike was yet another foreign conspiracy AGAINST him. That Trump mentions Crowdstrike HERE proves … the crazy psycho BELIEVES IT!

        Anything else, chump?

  45. But look on the bright side. If this charge does not stick just stick around a few months at the most and there will be another impeachment charge against. Then if that one fails there will be another right up to when the democrats lose the election.

    1. THIS one is a smoking gun, as PROVEN directly above you.
      You forgot to say “Fake News.” (lol)

  46. Gabung sekarang juga untuk menjadi bagian dari situs poker terbesar di asia. Sebuah website judi online umumnya memiliki kerjasama dengan bank lokal ternama untuk proses transaksi, begitu juga dengan http://www.dominobet88.asia dan tidak hanya 1 atau 2 bank melainkan ada 7 bank lokal yang bekerja sama.

  47. Hi There, 
    Thank you for sharing knowledgeable blog with us I hope that you will post many more blog with us : 
    We are providing best online medical products which are having best quality our product in whole USA like as Cannabis Oil & Vape Cartridges Online with 710 King Pen Cartridges, brass knuckles, cereal carts, dank vapes carts, dankwoods, exotic cartridges.
    Click here for more information:- https://vapedankcarts.com/

  48. Get ready for months of foaming, flailing, falling, freaking, “faking”, fantasy, format and verbal fiat of flatulence from the left. The guaranteed circus for the decade.

    1. Laughing at lame denial.

Please to post comments