When House Republicans Act Like Campus Leftists
Plus: Fentantyl is used in almost 40 percent of overdose deaths, and the Russia leaks continue.

Republicans complain their "messaging" on impeachment isn't working. Yesterday encapsulates why. Like a bunch of lefty college kids shouting down a campus speaker they don't like, House Republicans have resorted to trying to deplatform House impeachment investigators.
A group of GOP House members stormed impeachment inquiry testimony this week and delayed it for five hours, huffing and puffing about how attempts to gain more information are just not fair to the president.
Left with no options to deny the weird shit that President Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and their cronies were doing with Ukraine (since Trump et al can't stop talking about it and new officials keep confirming things), and finding the one-note minimization (no quid pro quo) isn't impressing American voters (who increasingly back impeachment), the Trump-bootlicking wing of the GOP has started parroting the president's favorite diversion tactic: insisting (contra all evidence and the U.S. Constitution) that there's something sneaky and wrong about how House impeachment investigators are looking into things.
The bulk of them are still trying to pretend to us and themselves that their moral spines aren't rotting corncobs. So focusing on some alleged violation of procedure lets them hold up impeachment proceedings without having to say outright that they think everything Trump has done here is wonderful or legally acceptable.
Some of Trump's legislative lackeys will say it's all OK, of course, but others have been leaving room to distance themselves if this all blows up.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.)—who has condemned House impeachment proceedings for not being public and yesterday introduced a resolution objecting to them—has been one of the worst at justifying his opposition on dubious procedural grounds.
"Graham is the man who, as a Republican member of the House in 1999, voted articles of impeachment against Bill Clinton out of the Judiciary Committee almost entirely on the basis of the behind-closed-doors investigation of one Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr," notes the New York Daily News editorial board:
He is the man who, as a manager of the impeachment when Clinton went to trial in the Senate, argued that a president who lied under oath about a consensual sexual relationship should be removed because, "You don't even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if this body determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role." And who back then said, "The day Richard Nixon failed to answer that subpoena is that day that he was subject to impeachment because he took the power from Congress over the impeachment process away from Congress and he became the judge and jury.
But now Graham has nothing to say about Trump delaring he would refuse to comply with congressional subpoenas, and he "whines about secrecy despite the fact that 47 Republican committee members, totaling about a quarter of the caucus, are allowed to participate in the depositions in question."
Senator Graham continues to mislead. The Constitution divides impeachment and trial between the House and Senate. The House impeachment is an indictment. The process he's demanding happens in the Senate trial. No defendant participates in an indictment in the way he's suggesting. https://t.co/9107Mp3Fqm
— Justin Amash (@justinamash) October 24, 2019
FREE MINDS
Criminal inquiry into Russiagate roots? "Justice Department officials have shifted an administrative review of the Russia investigation closely overseen by Attorney General William P. Barr to a criminal inquiry, according to two people familiar with the matter." So The New York Times reported yesterday, to a collective chattering-class freakout over what this meant. As the Times article continues:
The opening of a criminal investigation is likely to raise alarms that Mr. Trump is using the Justice Department to go after his perceived enemies.
One note of caution: The anonymously sourced Times scoop doesn't say when the investigation started, or why, or who and what it's looking into. This could be old news that just now got passed to the press. Julian Sanchez of the Cato Institute lays out why this smacks of a strategic leak. Thread starts here:
On a second read, this absolutely reeks of a strategic leak. Two sources say Durham's review has spawned a criminal inquiry, but not when it happened or what the crime is. That's awfully suggestive. https://t.co/ljN2DVXo8n
— Julian Sanchez (@normative) October 25, 2019
FREE MARKETS
Prohibition kills. A new report on drug overdose deaths shows that "nationwide, fentanyl was the most common drug implicated in 2017." It was implicated "in 38.9 percent of the more than 70,000 drug overdose deaths that occurred that year," reports NBC.
Fentanyl's prominence in recreational drugs and strong potential to kill users is a direct result of the war on drugs.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Prohibition kills.
But it makes so many so much money.
Why, just the "overdoses and deaths" signs in front of the police station are big business.
Hello.
/face palm.
When Reason libertarians act like House Democrats.
An investigation with no accountability run by a single political party behind closed doors, based on testimony by anonymous "witnesses", is completely kosher when your a Reason libertarian.
But objecting to and protesting kangaroo courts, is somehow campus leftist.
ENB isn't even trying anymore.
What do you think of grand jury investigations?
The anonymously sourced Times scoop doesn't say when the investigation started, or why, or who and what it's looking into. This could be old news that just now got passed to the press.
"You are
fakeold news.""according to two people familiar with the matter."
Is one of those people the NYT reporter?
How fucking stupid has ENB become. The IG has always stated this could turn criminal based on what was found during his investigation. but ENB is so enamored with the D.C. narrative she thinks this is outrageous.
What we have now learned... all investigations against Republicans are patriotic. All investigations of democrats are an abuse of power.
Why is "storming into the impeachment hearing" wrong? They are members of Congress. If I were a member of the House and were shut out of something this important, I would walk in on it too. They are elected to serve their constituents. They don't have to take orders from the other party.
It is not surprising though still disappointing that reason now thinks transparency is bad and any subversive act is just uncivil and not done because Orange Man Bad or something. Imagine if Republicans were having secret hearings on the FISA act and Justin Amash walked into the hearings and demanded they be made public. Would reason call him a campus leftist? They would fawn all over him. But secret hearings are okay if they are directed at the right people I guess.
John, any sort of defense conservatives support is seen as 'snowlfakery' or 'campus shenanigans' or whatever. They're supposed to just take it. Or else.
Meanwhile impeachment hearings are done in SECRET.
/flashes okay single.
Honk, honk.
Reading all this drivel, it's hard to work out who is pretending to be angry about "secret" impeachment hearings vs who's a mere gullible fool, repeating whatever nonsense he's told. Some facts :
(1) What's occurring now are evidentiary dispositions, which are seldom (if ever) done in public. Are you really so dumb you don't know that?
(2) Republicans are (of course) present in all these dispositions in numbers just under fifty percent. Presumably you're aware of this too?
(3) Public hearing will follow, at which point your handlers will spoonfeed you different bullshit to whine about
(4) A vote will follow that. Whatever will you be told to complain about then ?!?
Meanwhile the evidence continues to mount - even without Trump's (acting) chief of staff confessing all during a on-air news conference, or DJT himself reenacting the crime on live TV (in a different venue - China).
The president traded the favor of the United States for personal gain. What's more, that favor was critical military supplies to a country under invasion by a U.S. foe. What's more, that personal gain was two faux-investigations that can't stand five minutes worth of scrutiny. We're all so used to Trump lying to the American people it scarcely registers any more, but this time he used extortion to have a foreign leader lie for him.
Pretty damn sleazy. Impeachment worthy, too.
""(1) What’s occurring now are evidentiary dispositions, which are seldom (if ever) done in public""
Was Clinton's impeachment handled the same way?
These are not criminal proceedings. They don't follow the same rules.
"Was Clinton’s impeachment handled the same way?"
I don't wanna get personal, but you're not very good at this. The impeachment of Clinton relied on a massive document hundreds of pages long, produced by Kenneth Winston Starr from years of top-secret Grand Jury sessions. Bill Clinton was allowed zero representation or defense in those sessions, certainly not the 49% of GOP bootlickers covering for Trump in the current proceedings. Also, the "top-secret" part of Starr's grand juries is a polite euphemism. That hack leaked like a fire house the four-plus years he worked to take Clinton down.
Care to reconsider your question?
"fire hose", damn it. Think we could get an edit feature if everyone went on strike - Right & Left - boycotting all partisan bickering until management accedes to our demands?
The impeachment of
ClintonTrump relied on a massive document hundreds of pages long, produced byKenneth Winston StarrRobert Mueller from years of top-secret Grand Jury sessions.So we're saying that the Mueller report that already came out is still being investigated and compiled? I thought it was done.
(1) You're worse at making sense than TrickyVic
(2) The current impeachment proceedings have nothing to do with Mueller or his report.
(3) Mueller was Special Counsel for less than half the time of Kenneth Starr, despite conducting an investigation whose scope was easily a dozen-times broader. He didn't wage political jihad in the press and never leaked. He stayed tightly focused on his remit and refused to draw political conclusions from his findings. If Robert Mueller was a politician's tool like Starr he would still be investigating Trump well into the next president's term. And it would have been child's play to take DJT down. All Mueller had to do was demand Trump answer real-time questions under oath and wait for the inevitable perjury. Let's put things in perspective : The piece of hack garbage named Brett Kavanaugh spend twice as long on his cartoon "investigation" of Vince Foster's suicide than Mueller's entire inquiry.
(4) So what's your point?
(5) Answer : You have none.
""Care to reconsider your question?""
Getting someone outside of Congress (Starr) to investigate is not the same as the house investigating.
So your answer to my question would be no.
Let the house appoint a special council.
"Let the house appoint a special council"
For once the phrase "laugh out loud" was actually true! I guess from a weaseling perspective your suggestion make sense, by allowing Trump to run out the clock before the next election. Or perhaps you hope trading U.S. government foreign policy favor for private gain doesn't precisely fit any law. Or maybe you see how bad things are getting, day by day, and look for any change to postpone the inevitable. Given a mind like yours (coupled with ever-growing desperation), who can tell where such a jokey suggestion came from......
The hive mind has sunk deep into projection
I sometimes imagine all the Reason writers sitting around a speakerphone first thing every morning to get a download of the day's talking points from "Charlie."
Well, yeah. As the billionaire benefactor of Reason Magazine, it's entirely appropriate for Mr. Koch to dictate the message. That's the free market at work.
#BillionairesKnowBest
They sometimes remind me of the cynical Gen X high school kids at the back of the class saying things to look or sound cool. I know. I was one of them. Sometimes it was a hit, other times - looking back - it didn't age so well.
My bold prediction: None of this is going to age well for them.
Yeah, the special pleading going on here is absolutely precious. The previous two inquiries (and we can't even call the current one an "inquiry" because nothing's been formally established yet) that resulted in impeachment were done in the open, and the one for Nixon was as well because the Democrats wanted the press there to record every single moment.
Of course this was a stunt by the Republicans--it fits in perfectly well with the whole circus that's been going on since the production of the piss dossier.
The fact that Schiff is even conducting interviews in a SCIF on this is a new level of hilarity I didn't think he could achieve.
My favorite is the people claiming Republicans are traitors because they took cell phones into a SCIF. You can't make this shit up.
Like I said the other day, the Reps should have just argued that tweeting from the SCIF was irrelevant because the whole kabuki show that Schiff is putting on doesn't deserve to be conducted there anyway.
Open wider, Red Rocks.
Or not. You'll be taking it either way.
Is "open wider" what your cousin told you in the backyard shed, hicklib?
Reason isn’t special. They’re just like all the other hack “journalists” out there. Occasionally they get things right but it’s far and few between. Mostly it’s spinning stories to fit their own narrative. There are no ethical journalists.
Today seems like a day for Nick to come out and throw shade on both sides. I think it's been too long. Anything going on in sercet will surely need to be made public, so I don't really care what they're doing in the basement. I'd much rather have them in the basement than talking policy and trying to get things done.
At least Nick is old and literate enough that his "both sides" pieces remain interesting reads.
" If I were a member of the House and were shut out of something this important, I would walk in on it too."
I would argue it's not important, this is all a distraction from the god awful policies the democrats are pushing, and it's all part of the show. Let them have their secret circle jerk, they haven't even pushed a vote yet.
What a moron- the Republicans made those rules themselves in 2015 for Benghazi.
FFS, the sheer idiocy..
Wow. Quoting napalitano despite him being ridiculed for his lie.
"...because Orange Man Bad or something." Brilliantly stated! Bravo!
Orange Man bad?!? He BAD, all right! He SOOO BAD, He be GOOD! He be GREAT! He Make America Great Again!
We KNOW He can Make America Great Again, because, as a bad-ass businessman, He Made Himself and His Family Great Again! He Pussy Grabber in Chief!
See The Atlantic article by using the below search-string in quotes:
“The Many Scandals of Donald Trump: A Cheat Sheet”
He pussy-grab His creditors in 7 bankruptcies, His illegal sub-human workers ripped off of pay on His building projects, and His “students” in His fake Get-Rich-like-Me reality schools, and so on. So, He has a GREAT record of ripping others off! So SURELY He can rip off other nations, other ethnic groups, etc., in trade wars and border wars, for the benefit of ALL of us!!!
All Hail to THE Pussy Grabber in Chief!!!
Most of all, HAIL the Chief, for having revoked karma! What comes around, will no longer go around!!! The Donald has figured out that all of the un-Americans are SOOO stupid, that we can pussy-grab them all day, every day, and they will NEVER think of pussy-grabbing us right back!
Orange Man Bad-Ass Pussy-Grabber all right!
Take your meds. Try and at least make a rational point. If you can't do that, just shut up.
Yes, Oh Brilliant One! “…because Orange Man Bad or something.”... It is SUCH an attainment of towering logic and elocution! I stand in awe!
You have lost your mind. You are just shit posting. No one is impressed or cares.
If I didn't do my part to help prevent random strangers passing through here, from picking up the idea that all libertarians love to suck Trump Dick, then I would, indeed, be in greater danger of losing my mind! As is, SOME of us post here to defend REAL ideas about reducing the size of Government Almighty, as opposed to ALWAYS knee-jerking and brainstem-jerking in favor of the Trumptatorship!
They don’t have to take orders from the other party."
this is a key point time to take back the house the dems have no more legal authority than the republicans do and a majority does not give them authority.
Why is “storming into the impeachment hearing” wrong? They are members of Congress. If I were a member of the House and were shut out of something this important, I would walk in on it too.
Yeah, I'm really trying to give ENB the benefit of the doubt here, but I don't see this as GOP elected members of congress acting like leftist campus snowflakes. They are duly elected representatives of the people. Are we now suggesting that they should just sit quietly with their hands between their knees while a duly elected president is impeached?
And none of this is to say the president shouldn't be impeached, but this is pretty serious stuff regardless of your position on impeachment, so yeah, walking into a meeting they weren't invited to doesn't strike me as shocking, childish behavior or 'storming' the proceedings.
"huffing and puffing about how attempts to gain more information are just not fair to the president."
To me this is the worst part of ENB's stuff.
That's not what they were huffing and puffing about.
ENB knows this.
To my mind, the very idea that some members of Congress will be permitted to hear information or question witnesses, but others will not is an abomination that is repugnant to the Constitution, and to self government.
When they close the doors of the intelligence committee to some members, they are denying the people in districts whose their right to have representation in that meeting.
Exactly
B-b-b-b-bbut Benghazi!
The thing is the Republicans are not shut out. Forty-five Republicans, members of three different committees, have access to the closed door hearings. The point of the Reason article is that in the future when these same Republicans are lambasting a sit-in in some official's office, or some corporate office, they will look like the hypocrists they really are. The Republicans action was a sham and no different than the Occupy Movement. They just occupied a room that they already had access to be in.
The point of the Reason article is that in the future when these same Republicans are lambasting a sit-in in some official’s office, or some corporate office, they will look like the hypocrists they really are.
Someone's mad the Democrats are looking like hypocrites for lambasting what the Republicans did.
Speaking of how those Republicans looked, did you see one of the stock photos of their little schoolyard prank - looking done the stairwell of a spiral stair to a cluster of faux-angry white guys in dark suits?
I studied that picture trying to work out what it reminded me of. Then it hit me : Looking down into a toilet bowl after the flush. Next election can't come soon enuff......
https://tinyurl.com/y2uv4mgc
Ah, they are just taking a page from AOC and the squad.
I figured it reminded you more of your trailer park upbringing, hicklib.
Ya know, I googled "hicklib t-shirt" but unfortunately didn't get any hits (lots of stuff for "hicklin", for a surprising variety of reasons). But I'm still getting a reverse retro-cool vibe off your Hicklib thing.
Market that puppy to a good class of people and you might actually find something. Hey: Beats the hell out of being a dead-loser spouting right-wing lies, amirite?
(dead-end loser)
Still waiting for something other than process crime indictments and left-wing spergery, you slack-jawed hicklib.
+1000
When it's something John likes (or to defend Trump) he gets all lawerly and specific, and will even go so far as to mention his status as an attorney in a clearly self-serving form of ad hominem self-flattery. When it's a case of the committee in question following the same rules that Boehner signed and Gowdy enforced, or when the former JAG Lindsey Graham is purposelly misleading on the law, he throws all that shit out the window as fast as possible and just starts whining, speaking in "the common man's tongue" and looking for a misstatement he can pounce on to distract from the truth he knows deep down inside.
The rules under which this investigation is being held were written by Republicans. It was the Republicans who set up this system and used it to investigate Fast & Furious and Benghazi. But now it is Republicans who are being investigated, so they are hoping that everyone forgot that they loved these secret hearings until two years nine months ago.
Like a bunch of lefty college kids shouting down a campus speaker they don't like, House Republicans have resorted to trying to deplatform House impeachment investigators.
YES...demanding that closed door meetings be open door meetings of all the House members is JUST LIKE SHOUTING DOWN A CAMPUS SPEAKER.
I mean, Jesus, ENB just admit you want to carry as much water as you can carry for Lefties.
Heres what I dont get... every house member has to vote on impeachment. Schiff is only allowing 2 committees access to the depositions. How can the rest of the house vote from an informed basis?
At this rate, there won't be an impeachment vote.
It appears the goal here is to try to stop the Trump reelection from becoming the reality that it is. Appearance of Trump malfeasance is what they want. Impeachment failures hurt the majority party during elections and the Democrat leadership doesnt want that.
There will be an impeachment vote and a Senate trial. Republicans are kvetching about the fact gathering process because Trump has no defense on the merits.
I would assume that after they have these depositions in closed session, supposedly because of security concerns, that the next step would be to present what they have discovered to the entire House.
Or, it could be, as I think you and others have said, that they just want to dredge up innuendo about Trump during the campaign.
I don't have a strong opinion, but the official answer to your question would be what I wrote in the first paragraph: the committee's ostensible reason for having closed-door sessions is national security concerns.
I have no doubt that the depositions will be made available to the full House prior to any vote on articles of impeachment.
Way to go lc- being dumb again.
The Republicans made those rules themselves in 2015 for Benghazi.
FFS, the sheer idiocy..
You should really stop repeating the already debunked Napalitano talking point. Makes you look really stupid.
poor wearingit troll.
No citations, no facts, and nothing but lies.
http://thefederalist.com/2019/10/25/jeff-zucker-and-brian-stelter-beclown-themselves-at-cnn-event/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=d37f75a247-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-d37f75a247-81168121
Funny article on just how awful and insufferable the media actually is.
+100
Asked what he thought was the biggest thing CNN does wrong, Zucker had no answer. When Stelter provided one, namely that they use the term “Breaking News,” too often, he begrudgingly agreed, but basically sloughed it off as something everyone does. That is how blameless he envisions the product he creates. The panel finished with Zucker explaining how important it is to the world that CNN be strong.
That's hilarious. But on a serious note, these people all deserve to be homeless and unemployed. I don't even want them to code.
Katie Hill becomes first female lawmaker to face House ethics inquiry over sexual relationship after naked photograph leaked
Equal Rights means that women should be pressured to resign from Congress just like men?
CBS News: "Hey, don't mind us, we're just publishing an article today on the joys of a non-monogamous lifestyle. It certainly has nothing whatsoever to do with a certain Representative of a certain political party who was recently exposed as being a degenerate, drug-addled swinger.
Can you imagine if she were a Republican. The amount of misogyny and slut shaming directed at her would be epic. But since she is a Democrat it is just an "alternative lifestyle".
I actually felt bad for her at first. I really don't care what people do in their private life. And the pictures were released as revenge porn in a nasty divorce. But this morning I saw a million clips of her trashing Kavanaugh for ever drinking and talking about the evils of powerful men who abuse their position. Now she shows up banging one of her employees and naked smoking a bong with said employees. Fuck her for being a hypocritical bitch.
You can't be a Dem without having mad projection skillz.
True. Nor can one be a Trump apologist without mad projection skills.
Mike... did you figure out how to go to atlanticcouncil.org and search for a name yet you ignorant fuck.
Yesterday, you posted a claim about some of the impeachment inquiry witnesses being discredited by news articles. I asked which news articles, and someone else (not you) pointed me to one. It was very long, I read through about half of it, skimmed the rest, then grepped through that article for keywords such as "Taylor", and "witness", but there were no hits. So, I asked the person who posted the article to point me to any specific claims in the article they linked to.
At that point, I never saw another comment by you or the other commenter. Perhaps, at some point, you posted a comment suggesting I grep for (I'm not sure what, "Taylor"?) on the atlanticcouncil.org website.
Anyway, I did try to seriously consider what you had posted and follow up on it. So, please, if your intent is to actually make a salient point, please point me (and all the other people reading through the comments here) specific references to discrediting of witnesses. I'd like to see it.
There's one highly amusing picture of her , while naked, grooming a fully dressed staffer's hair like she was a fucking chimpanzee.
She's being investigated by the Ethics Committee for banging one of her staff members, which is actually forbidden, but I suspect something similar will happen to her as what happened with AOC. Pelosi will have a "come to Jesus" meeting with her, tell her to keep her trap shut and stop fucking the help, and she'll get off with a slap on the wrist and be allowed to run again in 2020.
These people have no high ground whatsoever to criticize anyone for a lack of morals.
They always turn out to be bizarre broken people. It never seems to fail.
Comrade... Needs more cowbell, and less cow pie! Otherwise, Comrade, is progressive!
How do you come up with such profound insight? You must be some kind of genius! Can I please? If I stay in my place, can I support your Palace Guard?
Given Your Omniscience or Near-Omniscience, as the case may be, can You please review the following source codes:
Theocratically Quantum-Gravity Deploy Begin Instantiate Substantiate My_Tribe_Good_Your_Tribe_bad
DisplayModuleCall "Fuck off, slaver!", end; end module ;
If You will please help me get this code to compile, I promise to be a very sincere good-character witness at Your upcoming trial.
yeah everyone is a Russian agent. That will convince people. Good luck dumb ass.
John....I think she gets expelled from Congress. She should be.
She's a democrat so she'll probably be governor soon
Only if she has some blackface pics lying around.
Would a black strap-on count as blackface?
"the Trump-bootlicking wing of the GOP has started parroting the president's favorite diversion tactic: insisting (contra all evidence and the U.S. Constitution) that there's something sneaky and wrong about how House impeachment investigators are looking into things."
Ugh. Just ugh, ENB. Just get over to HuffPost already. Send me your resume, I know some people over there. You probably would fit right in.
In the meantime, pause just a few minutes to consider that when you post a rant like this, talking of GOP gamesmanship while ignoring even the possibility that maybe there is a little bit of gamesmanship on the Dem side, it makes you look like an unhinged hack. I mean, yeah, the GOP storming a closed hearing was a total publicity stunt. But what do you call it when Schiff selectively leaks "secret" testimony? Is that just trying to seek the truth in a constitutional manner? Or is it a fucking partisan strategy?
I thought it was bad when people like ENB played the whole "Pox on both houses" game. This has gone completely around the bend of bad to almost parody.
Didn't they just fire 7500 people?
Couldn't have said it better.
They draw the conclusion and wrangle and mangle The facts to fit.
You're just confirming that the Trump-bootlicking 'wing' of the GOP is not just a wing anymore. It's the wing, drumstick, breast, gizzard, wishbone and feathers of the GOP.
Remember when libertarians were for open and fair investigations? I remember.
You're not libertarian. You're an R
Says the guy supporting an IC attempting to criminalize politics.
We are for open and fair investigations. But it can be part a legitimate step in due process to have closed-door depositions, if, as claimed, there are national security concerns. The security concerns might be made-up partisan B.S., but on the surface of it, it is procedurally legit.
You do understand that the full house has to vote on this right? That schiff has limited the depositions to only 2 communities meaning the vast majority of the house is voting from ignorance.
Wait, you enjoy ignorance.
Presumably, the process will eventually lead to a vote of the entire House. I'm not sure how you think you are refuting that point.
Sure Mike. But when you then leak selected parts of those depositions to the press your claim that there are national security concerns rings pretty hollow doesn't it?
Isn't it possible that the Democrats are lying here?
I'm not sure who is telling the truth or lying. I'm not a Democrat or Republican partisan, so I don't have a horse in this race. I'm a neutral observer on the sidelines.
I agree the leaks from the Democrats are wrong. If there really is a national security concern, the leakers might even be criminally negligible.
And I agree with others here that the suggestion that the Republicans should leak more in response are wrong.
you can't tell who is telling the truth? Gee, maybe if we had open public hearings you could figure that out. Let me give you a hint, people who are telling the truth don't want to do things in secret. If you are telling the truth you want to tell the world about it not hide it.
That is not the intention of the R's. Their intention is to put hearings in public so that anyone making a statement that reveals eg official foreign conversations to the public can be prosecuted a la Manning. To squash any investigation by threatening people with prison. Same sort of shit those in power always pull against 'whistleblowers'.
Their intention is to put hearings in public so that anyone making a statement that reveals eg official foreign conversations to the public can be prosecuted a la Manning.
Trump has the authority to declassify all that regardless, so your speculation here is pretty weak.
It's claimed that the hearings need to be held behind closed doors because of security concerns. That may be B.S., but since outlining security concerns can itself reveal too much information, I'm willing to take it at face value.
I wouldn't be willing to take it at face value if these closed-door hearings were the only step in the process, but supposedly the next step is to report to the entire House. Again, that may be B.S., too. Maybe they don't ever intend to go to the next step.
But since I'm not a Republican nor Democratic partisan, my expectations are that there is probably B.S. on both sides.
I must ask, though, is if other commenters here are libertarians and not Republican partisans or Trump apologists, then why do they get so worked up when anyone says something negative about Trump.
I must ask, though, is if other commenters here are libertarians and not Republican partisans or Trump apologists, then why do they get so worked up when anyone says something negative about Trump.
Only a Secret Progressive would ever even ask that question.
I guess? I'm not sure on what basis you make that assertion.
Seems to me a non-partisan libertarian, presumably the type of person who would follow Reason magazine, would askj why some commenters here get so worked up about defending Trump.
In one case, loveconstitution1789, the commenter is clearly a Trump supporter, since he posts "TRUMP 2020" ASCII art.
I guess? I’m not sure on what basis you make that assertion.
I was joking. I suggested that Trump's pullout from Syria could have better planned and they chased me around for days.
🙂
Poor Square. Trying to retcon principles is exhausting.
Poor Square. Trying to retcon principles is exhausting.
Oh, yay. Skippy's back to chase me around again.
*eyeroll*
Poor Square. How do you cope?
Poor Square. How do you cope?
Hey, Skipster, how come you never came back to answer any of my questions the other day?
Skippy? Where did you go Skippy? Why did you run away again?
How strange that you're only willing to give the benefit of the doubt to Democrats, being an uninterested libertarian, of course. After all libertarians are noted for their blind faith and lack of skepticism about abuse of government power.
Do you ever have anything of your own to say, or do you just come around to piss on people's shoes?
Shrug. I’d be more concerned if this were the entire impeachment process.
It’s the Democrats playing political games today, but tomorrow it will be the Republicans. The games between the two major parties have been going on for decades.
A pox on both their houses.
Apparently Square doesn't really like free minds after all.
Just a lack of transparency and failing to abide by House rules. Must be a "both sides do it moment." Would you be concerned, or is it all OK as long as the bad guys get their just desserts? There's an awful lot of post hoc justification from the TDS crowd. They're sure willing to throw away the same rules and social norms they hide behind only when convenient.
Apparently Square doesn’t really like free minds after all.
Pissing it is. Gotcha.
Yes, I agree lack of transparency, leaking to the press, the press reporting on those leaks without mention that they are leaks, all that is stuff for a libertarian to be concerned with.
On the other hand, as a libertarian who has been seeing this type of thing from Washington, D.C. and both parties all my life, how worked up should I be getting about business as usual?
Why do certain commenters here get so upset when anything negative is said about Trump? Why do they seem so bent on getting everyone to see that the Democrats are worse than Republicans? Seems like my observations that the Democrats and Republicans both have a long history of pulling political stunts would not be all that controversial of a thing to say in the comment section of a non-partisan, libertarian website.
John, you seem confused. The testimony can be categorised in a number of ways. For example, 1) Statements with national security implications, or 2) statements with no national security implications. Another categorisation could be: A) politically damaging to Trump, or B) neutral or helpful to Trump.
Statements in category A2 get leaked by Democrats. Statements in category B2 would be leaked by Republicans. None of these leaks would in any way negate the existence of un-leaked testimony that fell into categories A1 or B1.
Poor Lefties don't understand that the reason that they get caught doing a bunch of shady shit and then lose elections is because most Americans know what is happening is bullshit.
Even in civil lawsuits the other party gets to attend depositions held by the Plaintiff or Defendant. Depositions are not supposed to be secret.
Joe Biden says his children won't "have offices in the White House"
Luckily, Joe Biden will never be President so we will never find out WHEN he breaks this "promise".
Their offices will be on the roof.
I picture Hunter's desk as one big mirror with nothing but a very fancy razor blade holder in the corner
Another "Quid-pro-Joe" story just published by NBC - Hunter Biden provided "Legal Advice" to a Romanian charged with real estate fraud while VP Biden was working on "corruption reform" in Romania.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/hunter-biden-s-legal-work-romania-raises-new-questions-about-n1071031?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma
I had no idea Hunter Biden was an attorney as well as having Romanian criminal justice experience. The Biden family is very talented.
Jet-Powered Hypocrisy: Globalist Elites, Celebrities Leave Massive Carbon Footprints
What is the value of carbon offsets for a private jet flight of 1?
More bad economic news.
Charles Koch current net worth: $60.6 billion
Still above the sixty billion barrier. For now. But if you look at the YTD change column, he's only up $1.25 billion this year. In a healthy economy, people with tens of billions of dollars should be adding billions (plural) each year. Koch / Reason libertarianism will accept nothing less.
#HowLongMustCharlesKochSuffer?
World Series Game 2 Falls to All-Time Low TV Audience
So sad for all those people and businesses that doubled-down on tv viewership going up.
More Major League Baseball players should join #TheResistance and criticize Drumpf on Twitter. That would surely improve ratings.
Neither the Dodgers nor Yankees made the World Series, and there's no wokester athlete using the Series as an SJW platform, so ESPN's not giving it the requisite tongue bath it normally would.
Plus, there are a million other things that people can distract themselves with these days. Baseball is very low on the list.
A group of GOP House members stormed impeachment inquiry testimony this week and delayed it for five hours...
OCCUPY THE HOUSE.
Gabbard drops congressional race to focus on presidential
Nobody called "no take backs", so after she loses the Presidential race she can have her House seat to fall back on.
I'd love to see Gabbard as the Dem nominee, but she's truly delusional if she thinks she has such a realistic chance of getting it that she's not going to run for her House seat. Unless she's shooting to become Biden's VP arm candy, she has no shot here, not after gutting Harris like a trout.
Of course she knows her chances of getting the nomination are slim.
She's likely not obsessed with remaining in Congress. Props to her.
Tulsi could go a half dozen lucrative ways after the next election season.
My regard for her went up a bit.
If she's that ambitious to become President, I doubt she's not relatively obsessed with remaining in Congress. It's just as likely that the Hawaii DNC is telling her that her local support is cratering because of her antics and she can't really count on it going forward.
I'm beginning to have a lot of respect for that generation. The two longest serving milennials are Amash and Gabbard. Both were shat on by their parties and seem to have the guts to walk away. Would really like to see them and others walk away from DeRp entirely as a generation. They won't ever accomplish anything inside DeRp until they sell their souls. But as a generation, they can ensure that the switch to their own parties arguing their agenda on their own terms gets increasing power over time.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/10/russia-probe-turns-criminal.php
The Barr probe is now a criminal investigation. I have never thought it would turn into anything. I am generally cynical that anyone in the IC and LE communities are ever held accountable for anything. But I am starting the think Barr is actually going to throw some people in jail.
Two things make me thing this. First, is the utter insanity of the "impeachment" inquiry or whatever it is. They could have pulled this nonsense any time since taking the House. So why now? Well, the now is Trump and Barr getting cooperation from Ukraine and it becoming clear Barr is serious. They launch the impeachment bullshit as battle space prep and a way to say that the resulting indictments are just Trump using the DOJ to go after his enemies.
Second, is the NYT oped last week saying the Deep State exists but is just patriotic Americans trying to save the country from Trump. For three years the Times and others have said anyone who claims there was a deep state was a paranoid conspiracy theorist. So now they admit it its true? Again, why now? That op ed came out of nowhere. And the answer to why now is that they are again doing battle space preparation to claim the people indicted are just patriotic Americans who are being punished by the evil Trump for doing their duty.
And useful IDIOTS like Larry Tribe are claiming that the Barr probe is just retaliation for the Schiff's BS inquiry:
This looks like yet another abuse of power by Trump and Barr. No coincidence that it was unveiled right after the devastating Taylor testimony on Ukrainegate. Seems like a politically driven stratagem to distract attention from the impeachment inquiry.
When people start getting indicted, the left and the media are going to lose their minds. I didn't think anyone would ever be indicted. But, if there is one thing everyone can agree on about DOJ is that they never conduct a criminal inquiry that doesn't result in someone going to jail. Yeah, it is possible that no one will be indicted or go to jail, but given DOJ's track record on these matters, it seems very unlikely.
The fact that we are going to be treated to the spectacle of the left defending rogue CIA and FBI agents as brave defenders of American freedom is just further proof that God has a wicked sense of humor. If 20 years ago someone had written a novel where the Democrats and the media end up on the side of rogue intelligence and law enforcement agents, the author would have been considered crazy. Yet, here we are.
I'm sure that Richard Nixon is laughing himself silly wherever he is.
Dick Nixon was a lot of things but he got the USA out of Vietnam after LBJ got us neck deep in that shithole.
And the left still calls it "Nixon's war."
Apparently the Church Committee didn't fix the problems in the intelligence community, but instead put the fix in.
Didn't the DOJ do a criminal inquiry into Hillary Clinton's email system?
I guess Weiner went to jail.
It's hilarious how these people are defending a modern version of the Praetorian Guard, another group of high-ranking insiders surrounding the head of state that considered themselves similarly unaccountable, and always believed they were doing the right thing.
You can tell Bare has the goods with the complete freakout of the media last night and the narrative pushing that the DoJ is now corrupt. ENB is even pushing this angle. Maddow was near in tears last night.
The other thing is that how many journalists were knowingly putting out disinformation from the CIA and FBI related to the Russia hoax? I bet a ton. I have a feeling one of the things that is going to come out is how they fed misinformation to friendly media to push the hoax and the investigation. Remember, one of the FISA warrants sited a media report as evidence in support of probable cause.
I bet a whole lot of them are shitting their pants right now at the thought that it could be revealed that they reported "news" knowing it was misinformation put out by the CIA.
We already know that's the case from the first IG report. FBI, doj, and other groups were getting game tickets, meals, etc from journalists. It is completely incestuous. plus multiple journalists sleeping with federal employees for stories.
Since the stories didn't turn out to be very good, maybe the sex was awful.
Sex is like pizza.
Even bad pizza is better than no pizza?
I have a feeling one of the things that is going to come out is how they fed misinformation to friendly media to push the hoax and the investigation. Remember, one of the FISA warrants sited a media report as evidence in support of probable cause.
Why not? They did it during the 2016 election, as the DNC email leak showed. This is a natural consequence of the hyper-incestuous nature of the country's political and media classes. These people all know each other, attend the same social functions, get married to each other, and go back and forth between media and political gigs like migratory fowl. Hell, Twitter is basically a vector for all these stories because the Blue Checkmarks aren't actually doing any investigative journalism, they're just citing each others' articles as if they're primary sources.
"For three years the Times and others have said anyone who claims there was a deep state was a paranoid conspiracy theorist."
We read it here every day too. I am still waiting on that correction, or some article that can detail how bureaucrats trying to overthrow elected officials for political gain is okay.
It's also possible they are waiting to both sides it. You could consider the Barr investigations retaliation, another "conservatives pounce"
"It’s also possible they are waiting to both sides it. "
That's about the only approach they have left. Everything else having collapsed into absurdity.
Pete Buttigieg Is Making the Democratic Race More Unpredictable
At this rate, reason staff will not have sufficient time to pick a Democrat and properly Propagandize for that Lefty.
Its weird that reason is more concerned with Republicans highlighting the in secret depositions in order to control narrative than the democrats use of such procedures. Next up, reason defends internal investigations at police departments.
No idea how this ended up under your post.
Haha. No prob. Still better than anything reason staff comes up with.
Justice Dept. Is Said to Open Criminal Inquiry Into Its Own Russia Investigation
Unless McCabe, Comey, and other top FBI agents are indicted many Americans will see the failed coup of Trump as the Washington Whitewash.
Apparently Barr tried to indict McCabe for some bs process charge but a grand jury wouldn't bite.
Srent you the one who proudly touts BS process crimes dumbshit? Also you're lying since they only opened the possibility of a grand jury yesterday you ignorant fuck.
I knew writing "bs process crime" would trigger your lizard brain. The allegation against McCabe vs the proven case against Flynn are good examples of a "bs process crime allegation" vs a "legitimate process crime".
the proven case against Flynn
Sure, that's why he hasn't been sentenced yet.
The proven case against flynn that is likely going to be thrown due to prosecutors hiding exculpatory evidence... or the case that a judge already threw out against Flynn's business party because the prosecution didnt understand the law?
Is it fun being as stupid as you are?
Isn´t it strange that Flynn is not requesting that his guilty plea be set aside and demanding a jury trial?
Speaking of Flynn.. new news from that trial...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbi-agents-manipulated-flynn-file-as-clapper-urged-kill-shot-court-filing
A criminal referral as to McCabe was months ago, IIRC. A grand jury has been sitting in the interim.
Except that there is no grand jury impaneled. The probe just became criminal. And non criminal probes are not empowered to seat grand juries.
So, apparently you are lying and putting out bullshit again.
I'm not lying or bullshiting about McCabe. It's not certain that a grand jury refused to indict but it's suspected and was reported: https://politicalwire.com/2019/09/13/did-a-grand-jury-refuse-to-indict-andrew-mccabe/
So you have no evidence and are lying. This investigation was not criminal. So it did not impanel a grand jury or at least didn't until it became criminal which was very recently.
Well it's "suspected" which means someone has an opinion.
Either that happened or it didn't. If it did, someone would say so and the story would say that it happened. The story saying "it is suspected" is just the reporter admitting that it is a lie. The fact that such bullshit would be allowed to be printed as "news" shows how far the media has fallen. Hell even the worst partisan rags of the 19th Century would not have pulled that kind of horseshit. They called people on the other side names and were happy to slander people but even they were not that obvious about their lying.
"or at least didn't until it became criminal which was very recently."
How the goal posts move within one sentence, haha.
And for the record McCabe was a Republican. Comey was a Republican. Barr could try to railroad them but Barr can never erase the fact that Russia committed crimes to help elect Trump and Trump welcomed the interference.
This dish wasn't any more tasty the first time it was served up. The leftovers are even more rank.
Who gives a shit what party they were. If they broke the law, they should be indicted and prosecuted. The fact that they are Republicans puts lie to the claim it is a political prosecution. You can't have a political prosecution of people on your side.
So pick a fucking story and stick to it. Is it a political witch hunt or are McCabe and Comey loyal Republicans looking out for Trump? It can't be both.
You say this like this proves anything you raging dumbfuck.
With Lefties, you don't after your own unless there is some "for the greater good" motivation.
It makes no sense to Lefties to indict bureaucrats if they are on "your Team". You can use those corrupt bureaucrats some time in the future to try to coup a duly elected President like Trump.
I'm so tired of hearing the "duly elected" phrase after all we heard about in October 2016 was how the machines were all "rigged for Hillary."
Oh and I believe Bill Clinton was also, what was it you said, "duly elected" as well..
Two other times Joe Biden used the power of his office to push legislation just shortly after his son joined a lobbying firm with shared interests.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/biden-outreach-to-dhs-and-doj-overlapped-with-work-by-son-hunters-lobbying-firm
Just a coincidence I'm sure.
FAKE SCANDAL
#StopSmearingBiden
Activists hope to take impeachment fight to the streets
Of course, ever increasing numbers of Trump voters will listen to those 100 Lefties who have TDS.
Sorry, Gantz: Israel Is Heading To A Third Election.
Hillary wishes that she could have gotten a second election.
Maybe she can run in Israel. After all, isn't she half Jewish?
She's a regular Golda Meir.
Jesus fucking christ Enb. Guess you decided to stop hiding your TDS.
"Left with no options to deny the weird shit that President Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and their cronies were doing with Ukraine (since Trump et al can't stop talking about it and new officials keep confirming things), and finding the one-note minimization (no quid pro quo) isn't impressing American voters (who increasingly back impeachment), the Trump-bootlicking wing of the GOP has started parroting the president's favorite diversion tactic: insisting (contra all evidence and the U.S. Constitution) that there's something sneaky and wrong about how House impeachment investigators are looking into things."
Do you honestly have no questions or integrity as a journalist that you straight by Schiffs narrative? Do you not understand how this investigation is against all precedent. At least you've finally opened up about how you are incurious.
ENB sounds like she wrote this drunk after being told she would get hired at The Atlantic or Wapo.
LOLOL
I liked her better when she was advocating for honest prostitutes, not for the journalistic kind.
As a good progressive feminist, I shouted to the rooftops when Brett Kavanaugh was being confirmed, because despite zero evidence whatsoever, the patriarchy, or whatever.
Thank you ENB, for continuing to not cover the abuses of power when progressive women are the obvious culprits, while smearing straight white men for drinking beer 30 years ago. Because nothing says free minds like promoting propaganda and ignoring abuses of power.
For those not following, look up Katie HIll
The typical household saw its annual income rise from $60,973 in January 2017 — when Mr. Trump was inaugurated — to $65,976 in August 2019, according to recent research from Sentier Research. That's a gain of about $5,000 during the past two and a half years.
Boehm, markets imploding!!!!!!
LOL
Koch / Reason libertarianism isn't concerned with the "typical household." Instead, our philosophy seeks to maximize the net worths of the richest people on the planet — IOW, those who have $60,000 between the cushions of their couches. So even if this statistic is accurate, it's irrelevant.
#VoteDemocratToHelpCharlesKoch
I wish more of my fellow libertarians (libertarian-ish?) associates would appreciate the benefits of trade and technology in regards to its enhancement of our standard of living, too.
Take a look at this deal!
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tcl-55-class-led-6-series-2160p-smart-4k-uhd-tv-with-hdr-roku-tv/6204548.p?skuId=6204548
I'm not trying to sell anything, but for $399, you can get a Roku installed, 4k 55" TCL tv!
That's an increase in your standard of living, when not only are you making more money than you did before, but the things you want to buy cost less than they ever did before. You don't get that kind of increase in your standard of living by forcing companies to pay internationally uncompetitive wages through tariffs.
Keep the uncompetitive regulatory burden where it belongs: in the US!
American standard of living is getting so good that many Americans don't need to wait for the upgraded gadget. You really only to replace things if they break. The stuff we have now is light years ahead of tech from the 1990s.
Computer components like RAM
TVs
Vehicles
Cell phones
Appliances
....
From movie theaters closing to NFL attendance dropping, a lot of that is about gigantic TVs becoming so inexpensive that people can enjoy watching the game or the movie at home better than what they get from going to the game.
It was one thing when a 55" TV would cost you more than a season ticket to the NFL. This 55" TV will cost you a little more than a single ticket to some games. That's one of biggest differences between socialists and capitalists. Socialists want to rob from the rich so that the poor can buy things they can't afford. Capitalists use trade and markets to make things so inexpensive that almost anyone who wants to work for a living can afford to buy them.
The reason healthcare isn't like 55" TVs is because TVs aren't subjected to as much socialism as healthcare.
+1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
"House Republicans have resorted to trying to deplatform House impeachment investigators.
A group of GOP House members stormed impeachment inquiry testimony this week and delayed it for five hours, huffing and puffing about how attempts to gain more information are just not fair to the president."
This is horseshit.
The objections have been about the secrecy of the hearings and selective leaks to the press.
The Democrats are on a fishing expedition looking for reasons to impeach the President in an election year, but they won't open the hearings to the public. The only information we're getting is what's leaked to the press, and those leaks are entirely one sided.
We can't substantiate or confirm what the press is telling us unless we can see the testimony ourselves. Pelosi has said she'll release the transcripts at some future date, but even then, we'll have to take the committees word for what's in the transcripts unless they're being videotaped and recorded.
I don't see any reason why we should take the Democrats' word for what is being said in those hearings, and I don't see any reason why we should take the Washington Post's word for what is being said in those hearings either. If there's an impeachment, ultimately, the jury will be the American people, and we can't make a proper judgement of the facts unless we can confirm what was said in testimony ourselves.
Imagine if there were a criminal case, and the only information available to the jury were the selected leaks to the press--as the press reported them. The reason that wouldn't be admissible as testimony isn't because of some Constitutional principle. It would be because convicting someone on the basis of testimony that can't be independently verified by the jury would be irrational. The jury must hear the testimony themselves and the evidence for themselves.
This hearing is a farce, and the Republicans in the House are correct to treat it as such.
They actually seemed to have convinced their base that there is all this evidence being collected in secret that will be presented to the Senate once there is a trial. Democrats actually seem to believe this. They believe there is all this evidence out there that is being held in secret to be released to the public at the right time. How could anyone be stupid enough to believe that?
These people were taken in for two years by the Muehller hoax. For two years they were told "the walls are closing in" and that "Muehler was going to indict Trump and his cronies". And then Mueller gives his report and it shows he found nothing. You would think they would have learned form that. But they seem to be willing to believe anything as long as it feeds their wishful thinking.
" If there’s an impeachment, ultimately, the jury will be the American people, and we can’t make a proper judgement of the facts unless we can confirm what was said in testimony ourselves."
Exactly. So who cares what they're doing in the basement. Let them have their pity party. Eventually they'll have to provide evidence. Keep in mind that while they're doing this, they're not pushing any policy or agenda. That's a bad look.
The already wasted the public's time with the Mueller probe. If they don't come up with something that convinces anyone but the faithful, and I seriously doubt they can, then how are they going to explain this next November? They got control of the House and spent the next two years chasing bullshit and not doing a damn thing. I can't believe that will go over well in those suburban districts that gave them the majority in 18.
"Exactly. So who cares what they’re doing in the basement. Let them have their pity party. Eventually they’ll have to provide evidence."
The issue is that while they're doing this in secret, someone is leaking the salacious bits that make the president look bad to the press, and the press is running with those stories like they found a smoking gun.
It's much like the headlines about the phone call with Ukraine itself. The headlines were all claiming that there was a quid pro quo between the president and Ukraine. That's when the Trump administration released the transcript of call itself--and the transcript showed that there was no quid pro quo.
For weeks, people around here were claiming there was a quip pro quo and linking to headlines claiming there was a quid pro quo. I think those two things are related. They thought there was a quid pro quo because the news sources they were reading said there was one. What if Trump hadn't been able to release the transcripts because he didn't have access to them?
That's basically the situation we're in now. We're getting these select leaks that say people said things, but we can't confirm what was said. The only source for this information appears to be Democrats on the secret committee--and the press is reporting them as fact. This is an undisguised fishing expedition complete with stories about caught fish that no one can independently verify were actually caught.
People's understanding of whether the president should be impeached are being formed by this secret fishing expedition. This is not a legitimate function of the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives is there to represent the will of the American people. We judge them based on what they do in public. Nothing they do should be done in secret--unless speaking it in public would compromise national security.
The issue is that while they’re doing this in secret, someone is leaking the salacious bits that make the president look bad to the press, and the press is running with those stories like they found a smoking gun.
Exactly. The Reps would look like complete eunuchs if they didn't push back against this as hard as they could. The Democrats would certainly do so if the parties were reversed here.
It worked during the Mueller investigation, why wouldn't it work now?
The result of Russiagate was that the major news outlets lost all credibility and anyone shreeking about Trump has been tuned out. The leaks that came out during those two years meant nothing. With any sort of decent economy, democrats dont have a shot in hell, because they killed their own credibility and have no realistic policy to push.
Let them do that to themselves again.
Propaganda does not work if Americans tune the Propagandists out.
Ken....The longer term implication is something we as a country need to address. The media is no longer an impartial watchdog, looking to report objectively. The media, in large part, have chosen a side, and their coverage and reporting reflects that. This is a dangerous change in the body politic. To inform with objective facts, and full context is fine. But we don't have that anymore.
The other thing I would note. There were multiple people in the FBI, CIA and NSA who attempted to swing the election with illegal spying. They broke the law and must go to jail.
Better that everyone recognize that 'the media' has never been impartial, nor any sort of watchdog, all their self serving claims to the contrary notwithstanding.
Everyone comes at everything with their own agenda. There are those who are mostly honest about this, and then there are the ENBs of the world.
Thomas, I think you're right about this, having thought about it: Better that everyone recognize that ‘the media’ has never been impartial, nor any sort of watchdog, all their self serving claims to the contrary notwithstanding.
"This hearing is a farce, and the Republicans in the House are correct to treat it as such."
Republicans can afford to take this lightly. It's the president and his minions who will end up taking whatever heat is generated. Members of the house can take advantage of the occasion to grandstand without consequences.
"The only information we’re getting is what’s leaked to the press, and those leaks are entirely one sided. "
If Trump is failing to match his enemies in their strategic leaking, he has only himself to blame. His enemies are seasoned professionals who play for keeps. Trump should have realized this by now.
But it's not fair!
"Imagine if there were a criminal case, and the only information available to the jury were the selected leaks to the press–as the press reported them."
You got this almost right. Ultimately all this stuff will go through official proceedings. It will all be public at that point. What is happening here is that Schiff is using this process to prep the public for the public proceedings.
The closer analogy is that a murder trial is about to begin, and the DA and Chief of Police start making all these statements about the defendant to the press, so that any jury member gets all this innuendo and accusations that would never be allowed in court.
"Ultimately all this stuff will go through official proceedings."
You mean once the election is over and Trump has lost?
If they're not recording this testimony, when the transcripts are released, how do we know that the transcripts match what was actually said?
If the Democrats say they're accurate and the Republicans don't . . .
I don't think they plan to hold a vote on impeachment if they can help it. They'll just keep stringing this out for as long as they can.
At some point, I think the Republicans on the committee should refuse to attend. They're only serving to legitimize a fishing expedition with their presence--but the way it's being held in secret, they shouldn't contribute to its legitimacy at all.
The Republicans on the committee should refuse to attend the committee until its made in public.
"You mean once the election is over and Trump has lost?"
No one is changes their vote based on phone calls. They already tried this is a much greater criminal conspiracy and it didn't work. I don't understand why you think people would be swayed by something that no one can explain in 30 seconds.
*No one is changing their vote based on phone calls. They already tried this with a much greater criminal conspiracy and it didn’t work.
sheesh
What leads you to think that deposition testimony is not being recorded? That is the whole purpose of deposing witnesses.
You are comparing the House Democrats to an illegal and unethical abuse of state power. Textbook railroading.
Well, sounds about right.
"Times scoop doesn't say when the investigation started, or why, or who and what it's looking into."
Trump publicly announced the investigation into the 2016 elections months ago you dumb twat. The IG announced it a year ago. What is mysterious about this?
"What is mysterious about this?"
Seems there is no shortage of announcements of investigations. Have they progressed past the announcement stage?
Yes. Yesterday. It is why maddow was crying last night. It is why McCabe and Comey's last tweets were from over a month ago. It is why members of the CIA are hiring lawyers.
Trump was likely waiting for releection to set the DOJ, FBI, CIA, and NSA on fire sending Lefty corrupt bureaucrats fleeing.
Trump's reelection is almost a certainty and the Democrats opened the door early to expose Biden, Hillary, and Obama in the Ukraine/Russia corruption.
"Trump was likely waiting "
That was his first mistake. The DOJ, FBI, CIA, and NSA had no intention of sitting on their asses during the first term.
ENB, what should Republicans do then? If they feel they need to defend themselves, how should they do it so as to not be called names for doing so?
Unless of course, you'r perfectly fine with the shenanigans of the Democrat party which is pretty clear is all bull shit politicking. But three years of this nonsense one would think you'd focus your ire less on the GOP and more on the DNC's troubling behaviour, no?
This reminds me of people up here who get all cunty about Canadians who are troubled by Trudeau's ethics violations and obscene behaviour. How dare you snowflakes investigate him breaking the rule of law?!?
I keep hearing how Trump is attacking the Constitution and is a tyrant blah blah (same rhetoric here about conservatives) yet ALL THE ILLIBERAL behaviour as a matter of FACTS comes from ONE side and one side only.
But that's just me.
If this thing is so important and just a threat to the Republic, wouldn't you want to put everyone under oath and in front of the public so the public can know what happened? You would think so wouldn't you?
I straight up tell people who scream 'meh democracy' in conversation who voted for Trudeau to go fuck themselves. When I confront them with the facts (and it's irrefutable he did it) I get them to either admit they're not informed (at which point I tell them their vote should be revoked) or that it's no big deal at which point in addition to getting your vote revoked, you should go live in an authoritarian society since the ONE principle that provides you with a life of liberty and security, you can't even be bothered to defend because 'muh team'.
Fuck. You.
Only informed votes should vote. Then you talk about life of liberty and security as if those statements don't contradict. What a slaver.
Nothing says freedom like being subjected to the will of the electorates emotions. Bedrock libertarian principles there, right along with the ends justify the means.
Republicans should keep focused on policy, hopefully stuff we like. Considering there is nothing libertarian about the democrat agenda, I am happy they're in the basement.
It's just like when progressives complain about Trump golfing... The only question I ever ask is "why would you want literally hitler to be working?"
Why?
wUT dId hiTLeR dO?
"what should Republicans do then?"
According to Ken Shultz they should leak more. So far the leaks have been entirely one-sided. It's as though the Republicans aren't in this to win. Trump should also get rid of minions who are incompetent, disloyal or can't be trusted. It was Pompeo, Koch dollar recipient, who put Taylor in the position where he can betray Trump. If Trump is serious about defending himself, they both need to go. He still has the loyalty of Ivanka, her husband, his two sons, their wives and Rudy to count on. He needs to make maximum use of these precious assets.
What troubling behavior by Democrats? Do you even know what you're talking about, or is your brain just filled with words supplied by bullshit artists, the less substance to them the better?
What wrongdoing? Do you even know why Trump is being impeached?
Trying, oh, so, desperately to make 'dance' relevant:
"Arthur Pita’s ‘Alice in Californiland’ looks at homeless crisis through dance"
https://datebook.sfchronicle.com/dance/arthur-pitas-alice-in-californiland-looks-at-homeless-crisis-through-dance
And ending up looking like some self-important twit.
That's some MacArthur genius grant material right there.
"On a second read, this absolutely reeks of a strategic leak. Two sources say Durham's review has spawned a criminal inquiry, but not when it happened or what the crime is. That's awfully suggestive. https://t.co/ljN2DVXo8n"
— Julian Sanchez (@normative) October 25, 2019
I can't help but notice that nothing in ENB's or Julian Sanchez's makes any reference to the possibility that some criminal activity may have in fact been perpetrated by some criminal. If someone in the Hillary Clinton campaign, Comey, or someone else at the FBI perpetrated a crime, then they should be prosecuted like any other criminal--regardless of whether that helps or hurts someone's election chances.
It's also interesting that neither ENB nor Sanchez bother to differentiate between a secret investigation in Congress and the actions of a prosecutor.
If you want to prosecute the President for some crime, there's a way to do that. It's called impeachment, and it starts when a majority in the House votes to impeach the president. Apart from that, secret prosecutions collecting secret testimony have no place in Congress. It might be one thing if we were worried about secrets of national security, but Nancy Pelosi isn't even claiming that.
The quote I read said she was doing it because she didn't want future witnesses to know what prior witnesses have said--so they can't change their stories to match what's already been said. That's bullshit. Congress is democratic, and the proceedings preparing to overturn a presidential election need to be conducted out in the open.
When Barr appoints a prosecutor to investigate a crime, that isn't a public process at all--until he starts presenting the facts to a jury. If and when Barr's prosecutor charges someone with a crime, a jury will presumably indict the accused based on the information provided, and another jury will weigh the evidence and testimony in a public trial and decide whether or not the defendant is guilty.
Nancy Pelosi is conducting this investigation in secret as if she were a prosecutor, but she isn't. She's the Speaker of the House. Even if she were a prosecutor, all the evidence and testimony she collected would be made available to the public by the people testifying themselves. Prosecutors shouldn't be allowed to proceed in this way--conducting investigations in private and leaking select testimony to the press.
She's running a star chamber.
Bar appointed a prosecutor to investigate possible misconduct or foreign interference in US politics. It was not a criminal investigation. The fact that it has now become one means that they have discovered evidence of a crime being committed. You can't just open up a criminal investigation because you want to. There are rules about that. And Barr knows those rules and knows violating them would mean his ass. So, I guarantee you that this became criminal because they found that crimes had been committed.
Sanchez knows that. He isn't stupid. He is just a dishonest hack who is putting out the approved talking points.
"The fact that it has now become one means that they have discovered evidence of a crime being committed."
Sanchez was entirely rational when he was working here at Reason.
I didn't always agree with him, but it does seem like the entire chattering class has taken it upon themselves to telling noble lies.
They think getting rid of Trump is more important than anything else, and so everything they write is meant to encourage people to get rid of him.
Yeah, ENB's lack of knowledge about things sometimes surprises me, but Sanchez knows that they must have found evidence of criminal wrongdoing. And yet finding evidence of criminal wrongdoing isn't evidence of finding evidence of criminal wrongdoing. it's evidence that Trump should be impeached for launching a criminal investigation to embarrass his political rivals?
I don't want to think the worst of people, so I prefer to assume they're stupid, but you're right--that's not always warranted.
Sanchez is just an asshole. My sense is that he thinks he is smarter than everyone else and can say things he knows is wrong but his readers don't. Also, these guys are all so desperate for attention and to generate ad revenue, they are really more performance artists than anything else. That would be fine except that people like Sanchez still think of themselves as serious people. That is the part that gets on my nerves.
Barr and Durham better take care on how they proceed:
Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.
The fact you're having to resort to quoting a religious book that you don't believe in whatsoever indicates how pathetic this has become. It's the political equivalent of the Star Wars sequels.
Satan quotes the Bible, too!
Barr has worked in and around the justice department for decades. He is a serious guy. And he is not stupid. He knows every partisan hack in the world is dying to find him breaking some kind of rule to be able to spin out of this story.
If you think this investigation is going to be anything but by the book, you are delusional. It appears that the CIA and FBI conspired with each other to create a fake justification to spy on people associated with Trump and by extension Trump himself in hopes of either finding something new they could pin on him and use to run him out of office or to frame him as being a Russian agent and use that. If that is shown to be true, it will be the biggest government scandal in US history. It will make Watergate look like the two bit break in Nixon claimed it was. It will also result in some people going to jail.
Maybe Barr doesn't have anything. Or won't be able to prove what he has found. That is entirely possible. I would not, however, bet on that. The DOJ has a pretty good track record when it comes to such things. So, you better start preparing yourself for the possibility that this is going to turn out very badly for Trump's opponents.
You left off the tail end of that verse:
"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."
----Matthew 7:6
Jesus saw you coming from 2000 years away, Pod!
""Judge not, that you be not judged.""
Perhaps the dems should have heeded those words.
Best non sequitur I've read in a long time
Pod
October.25.2019 at 10:44 am
"Barr and Durham better take care on how they proceed: ..."
Oh, oh! Adolescent tries for deep concern!
And fails...
"Like a bunch of lefty college kids shouting down a campus speaker they don't like, House Republicans have resorted to trying to deplatform House impeachment investigators."
1. You seem to love it when the college kids shout down speakers.
2. No deplatforming here, just opening the platform to truth and scrutiny.
3. There has not been an impeachment vote, so there is no impeachment investigation, just ongoing revolution against an open and fair election. (well, as fair an election as you can have with no verification of voting credentials)
It is literally republicans asking them to speak freely in public. The literal opposite of deplatforming.
> When House Republicans Act Like Campus Leftists
There is no mystery here. Both lack substantial ideas, both are only interested in plastic virtue signalling. In 2017 we had Republicans dominate the executive branch, the House, and the Senate, After five years of screaming about replacing Obamacare, what we got was an ephemeral name change to the exact same pile of corporatist shit.
Yes, Trump has made some good picks here and there. But those picks are in the House. The House Republicans are one and all nothing but whiny bootlickers without an ounce of an original idea between them. The party is now solely about Trump. Meaning the party will evaporate into nothing in 2024 when Trump is no longer president.
The House Republicans are one and all nothing but whiny bootlickers without an ounce of an original idea between them. The party is now solely about Trump. Meaning the party will evaporate into nothing in 2024 when Trump is no longer president.
People who argue this need to read up more on how political realignments work in this country. The Whigs didn't "evaporate," they simply re-labeled themselves as Republicans. The Progressives didn't "evaporate," they just joined up with the Democrats. The Democrats didn't "evaporate" after 1968, the New Left simply co-opted the party.
The Republicans aren't going to "evaporate" after 2021 or 2025, whenever Trump leaves office. The urbanite neocons are currently aligning themselves with the Democrats. White blue-collar workers in flyover country are realigning themselves with Republicans (while Hillary gained most of the lower-class vote in 2016, Trump's voters were equally split along class lines).
The "conservative/liberal" labels aren't going to apply after Trump leaves office. It's going to be nationalists vs globalists for the next 4-5 decades, because that's how the political divide has evolved.
You are right I think. It is going to be the gentry left, neocons, tech people and underclass versus the middle class and paleo conservative nationalists.
Nationalist corporatists versus globalist socialists.
You still dont know how the Senate works?
Didn't the Dems claim that the "stormers" had actually been invited to attend the hearings? And were the GOP members of the hearing committees not there and perfectly capable of letting their colleagues know what was going on? Contra Rush L., this was a "stunt" but nothing for the media to get all worked up about ("Chaos") Practically everything in politics is a stunt of some kind and practiced with more or less finesse by all parties (including LP).
I'll not bother dragging ENB for her severe case of TDS causing her to spout nonsense -- others are doing a bang-up job of that -- but I will point out that Reason still hasn't mentioned FIRE's excellent letter to the UConn defending the free speech rights of the two students who were arrested for saying an offensive word on campus.
Instead we have TV and movie reviews and a post about titty-twisting in the British Army.
Gillespie's hot take that state universities can legally ban politically-incorrect speech is apparently shared by the rest of Reason staff.
Even more amazing....not a peep about Snowden's interview on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast.
Seeing a libertarian publication put up posts all but defending the secrecy of a congressional investigation is creepy as all get out.
That's not exactly what ENB said. She called the Republicans out for causing delay and "huffing and puffing". I don't think it was her finest moment, either, but at least be critical of what she actually wrote.
"All but defending the secrecy of a congressional investigation", is what I wrote.
Those Republicans were objecting to the secret nature of the hearing, and if ENB failed to mention that in her piece, then that's a further minus.
Since the sessions are behind closed doors because of ostensible security concerns, and many Republicans are allowed to be in the meetings and know what the supposed security concerns are, couldn't those Republicans, if they believe there actually are no compelling security concerns, raise that point specifically?
"Since the sessions are behind closed doors because of ostensible security concerns"
Do you have a link for that?
The quote from Nancy Pelosi I read said she didn't want them public because she didn't want future witnesses to revise their testimony based on what others have said before them--which isn't about security at all.
I got it out of the Washington Post article that ENB linked to in the roundup above:
"A group of Trump’s congressional allies escalated their complaints about the impeachment inquiry by barging into a secure facility on Capitol Hill where a Pentagon official was to testify before the House Intelligence Committee.
"Their intrusion, which caused the testimony to be delayed for about five hours over security concerns..."
I don't see anything in what you quoted from the Washington Post that says the reason they're having these hearings behind closed doors is because the testimony is of a nature that might jeopardize national security if it were made public.
"House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff defended holding testimony behind closed doors in the impeachment inquiry he’s heading up against President Donald Trump, likening this phase of the investigation to a “grand jury.”
“We want to make sure that we meet the needs of the investigation and not give the president or his legal minions the opportunity to tailor their testimony and in some cases fabricate testimony to suit their interests,” the California Democrat said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”
----Bloomberg
October 13, 2019
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-13/schiff-says-secret-testimony-aimed-at-keeping-trump-in-the-dark
That's the way facts and citations work.
The facts you cite mean nothing unless you can cite them. Everything I've read says that the Democrats are holding these hearings in secret because they don't want the witnesses corroborating their testimony according to what's already been said by others. I can cite that fact, and I just did.
The quote you gave from the Washington Post doesn't say what you says it said. If you'd like to find another link to someone claiming that the reason the House is holding these hearings is secret is because holding them publicly might jeopardize national security, I'd love to see it. Otherwise, I'm likely to suspect that you just made that up. It certainly conflicts with everything else I've read on the subject.
I was just going by what I read in the article. I suppose what the writer might have meant is that Security (like the Sergeant-at-Arms) stopped the proceedings over safety concerns, or something like that.
If I have time, I’ll see if I can find another source. If not, I may have misunderstood.
Actually, I think your interpretation is correct. They didn’t mean national security concerns. They meant mundane security concerns.
So therefore... she was wrong. And to add insult to injury the presence of those House members did not cause the testimony to be interrupted. Schiff elected to stop the testimony. Again the problem is caused by the Democrat's lack of transparency.
So remind us all again how you, being the pure, uninterested libertarian, struggle to find any fault with secret government deliberations.
I agree ENB went too far. Like I said, today’s roundup wasn’t ENB’s finest moment.
As a libertarian, I’m not OK with unnecessary secrecy. In this particular case, I do recognize this isn’t the entire impeachment process, so I’m not getting all bent out of shape about it, though. Also, as a non-partisan I can’t get that worked up about the Democrats and Republicans usual political games.
Yeah, the suggestion that hearings on whether the process to overturn a presidential election should be initiated by way of secret hearings is absurd. The evidence and testimony should not be kept secret from other Representatives in the House, who will presumably be voting on an impeachment resolution, nor should the evidence and testimony be kept secret from the American public--who will be voting in House elections and the upcoming presidential election.
I have to retract my retraction. By coincidence, i I stumbled across an article in Business Insider that explains that the hearings are being held in closed session because of national security concerns. Or at least that’s the Democrat’s ostensible claim.
See link below.
Then can you explain how this is justified in violation of House rules?
(emphasis mine)
This is what I'm reading from your link:
"But as Business Insider's Kelly McLaughlin highlighted, there are longstanding rules that witnesses are supposed to be interviewed in a way that can stay classified."
----This is the observation of a reporter. And the fact that longstanding rules have excluded members when questions of national security are involved has nothing to do with these hearings--if there were no questions of national security.
And Peter Schiff, who is leading these hearings, has stated explicitly that the reason these hearings are secret is to stop the president from coordinating his story with the testimony of witnesses. I see no reason to doubt him.
“The reasons for conducting interviews in private are sound and based on the best interests of a thorough and fair investigation,” Representative Adam Schiff of California, the Intelligence Committee chairman who is leading the investigation, wrote in a letter released this week. Schiff also wrote that Democrats plan to make interview transcripts public, but are holding back for now so that witnesses can’t coordinate their statements or align their stories."
----The Atlantic
October 19, 2019
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/10/closed-door-impeachment/600355/
If the reason the hearings aren't being made public is because of concerns about national security, then why is the only reference you can find to that being made by some reporter?
Why isn't Schiff saying so himself? Why is he saying that it's because he wants to prevent Trump from coordinating his story with witnesses?
Do you think Schiff is lying?
Do you have another source--Schiff or Pelosi--saying that the reason the hearings aren't in public is out of concern for national security, or is your quote of a reporter's speculations the only evidence you have?
"Rep. Mooney, you & I both know that when a massive crime is committed, the 1st step is to separate witnesses & get their stories to see what adds up.
You know that making these depositions public will help potential criminals line up their testimony.
Why do you want to do that?"
----Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
October 24, 2019
https://twitter.com/AOC
Ken Schulz, you keep trying to pick an argument with me when I don't even necessarily disagree with you. Let me be clear: I don't personally know how legitimate all the reasons given for holding the current inquiries behind closed doors are. I just know what I'm reading in the newspapers.
I can only get so worked up about the closed-door meetings because the next step in the impeachment process is supposedly opening it up to the entire House.
And, yes, it is slimy politics to leak info from closed-door inquiries to the press. And I also said I didn't think the daily roundup was ENB's best work. But, also as a non-partisan, libertarian I'm not going to rant and rave against her and Reason like some of the Trump-supporting commenters here.
Anyway, the meta-point I'm trying to make is if commenters here would act like grown-ups and actually discuss current events, instead of always trying to win arguments, instead of calling each other fuckheads and accusing each other of being sock puppets, maybe we could all learn something.
"I don’t personally know how legitimate all the reasons given for holding the current inquiries behind closed doors are. I just know what I’m reading in the newspapers."
I look at the source data and think for myself.
If the chairman of the hearing is telling us that the reason the hearings are being held in secret is because he doesn't want the Trump administration to know what's being said so he can't use that information to change his story, I don't assume it's being held in secret because it's an issue of national security.
Meanwhile, keeping impeachment proceedings secrets is antithetical to a legitimate impeachment proceeding and the public purposes of the House of Representatives. Making up explanations that are different from the explanations being used by the politicians that decided to hold these hearings in secret certainly doesn't justify their secrecy.
If I were the Republicans, I would refuse to attend the hearings altogether unless they were held in public.
I look at the source data and think for myself.
That's smart.
It is OK, though, for one to look at all the source data and conclude one doesn't have enough information to actually know what is going on or have a strong opinion about what is going on in a distant, highly-political city where one isn't personally observing any of the shenanigans.
Just stumbled cross this Business Insider article that says they actually were talking about national security concerns:
https://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-stormed-closed-impeachment-hearing-but-were-allowed-to-attend-2019-10
ANd also claims 12 of the Republicans who crashed the meeting had permission to attend, anyway.
If so, why did Schiff stop the proceedings?
The claim is that because the Republicans came into the secure facility with their cell phones, they had to hold up the meetings for five hours. The news articles don't go into details, but it is implied they had to go through some procedure to re-secure the facility, check for any phones left behind or listening devices, etc.
stop rtfas lol.
man I wanted 17 to catch that pass from Haskins. they were marching.
He's only half-baked. I don't want to see what happened to Ramsey happen to him. Ramsey could have been great. I saw him throw three pick sixes in a row, once, because he wasn't ready. It destroyed his confidence. Fighter pilots, pediatric heart surgeons, and NFL quarterbacks need to be cocky as hell. Take that away from them, and they can't do what they do well.
true. something's wrong w/the universe when the Skins aren't good it needs to be fixed
Aikman made a good observation about his elbow being low on the throw.
Needs some work on mechanics, but the talent is there
>>his elbow being low on the throw
saw that.
All that matters is that the truly stupid believe the Republicans and don't even realize those rules were made in 2015 by none other than Republicans themselves.
So yes, if you back the Republicans acting like clowns, you can look in the mirror for the reason why.
Also maybe book an appointment with a counselor or just go back to high school to obtain even the slightest modicum of knowledge in order to avoid your continued existence as nothing but a mouth breather.
""All that matters is that the truly stupid believe the Republicans and don’t even realize those rules were made in 2015 by none other than Republicans themselves.""
What rule?
That is a complete lie. Britt Hume put that to bed this morning. He said he talked to Boehner personally and Boehner said they never changed the rules.
You're desperately flailing here, shitlib.
Yes, Comrade, VERY eloquent! VERY progressive!
The supposed wisdom of the masses has just been put to shame! If it's not too much trouble for Your Awesomeness, can I be on Your speech-writing team?
What with Your Mastery of Space, Time, Dimension, and Computer Codes, I bet You'd have no trouble helping me debug the following:
Include Defend_Us_Kill_Ubermenschen Begin Begin-Beggin' [Honest-Babe-I-Luve-Ya(Willya-B-Mine 4 ^ Ever) If-else-I (Meet Sum 1 Bettah) || (her tits R bigger)] || [I ken doo bettah] end-Beggin'
PrintF "This computer rejects hunt-and-peck inputs. Learn to code!", end; end module ;
If You'd only PLEASE apply Your Vast Skills here, to help in the debug effort, I promise to be a very sincere good-character witness at Your upcoming trial.
Speaking of shit-eaters...
"All that matters is that the truly stupid believe the Republicans and don’t even realize those rules were made in 2015 by none other than Republicans themselves."
Smart people, on the other hand, have at least heard of the tu quoque fallacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
Even IF IF IF the Republicans committed the same wrong in the past, that doesn't make it any less wrong when the Democrats do it today. If you didn't condemn the Democrats for doing this in the past, then shame on you.
P.S. The impeachment investigations initiated by the Republicans against Clinton were entirely open as I recall. I suspect you're regurgitating something you heard elsewhere but haven't really investigated yourself.
When, in the past, have Democrat lawmakers stormed a secure facility to demand Democrat access to a hearing in which some 40-odd Democrat legislators were already attending?
"All that matters is that the truly stupid believe the Republicans and don’t even realize those rules were made in 2015 by none other than Republicans themselves."
He was talking about the rules, and that's what I was responding to.
If the rules are wrong, then they're wrong regardless of whether the Republicans are hypocrites.
The Ds did all hold a sit in on the house floor like a bunch of elementary school children.
Think they were mad about guns
wearingit
October.25.2019 at 10:48 am
"All that matters is that the truly stupid believe the Republicans and don’t even realize those rules were made in 2015 by none other than Republicans themselves."
Your cite fell off, and I'm quite sure you can't find it.
Its napalitano. And he was laughed at yesterday for saying it
You said this 3 times. Napitano was quickly ridiculed for the assertion. Name the rule.
Campus leftist are trying to deny someone from speaking at an event. They are not protesting because they have been left out of the event.
18 year olds--the greatest, most pressing threat to humanity today.
Keep up your diligence. We may never survive politically overreactive college students. Well, this might be the time we don't.
""Keep up your diligence.""
For finding false equivalencies? Sure.
Conservative: Mastercard and PayPal just blocked me!
Reason: Conservative snowflake complains about being mistreated. Act like liberals they criticize.
Progressive: Fake news!
Me (soberly and sombrely): Honk, honk.
No one wants to talk about Fentantyl?
how much ya got?
rather die at an extreme rate of speed. knock wood.
Trump is going to be impeached for very good cause and there are still mouth-breathing cunts here talking about TDS.
I understand if all the news you get is from Reason that you might not understand how serious this shit is. Then of course there's you people's favorite news source, FOX News, where that aging frat cunt spends all morning whining about how unfair the most powerful politician in the world is being treated by checks and balances in government.
God, I hate you people.
the walls are closing in!
I'd agree with you Tony except you already got him with Russiagate. Trump is already behind bars. Also, you lost your virginity.
Trump probable should have been behind bars by the time I lost my virginity. Apparently the private sector is rather forgiving.
Poor shitbag! The world is so unfair! He's always a victim of someone smarter than he is.
Hey, shitbag? Get used to it. Since you're a fucking lefty ignoramus, it's going to be like that until they plug you in the ground.
And I'm laughing at you.
You can kill yourself Tony. One quick way to stop interacting with people who actually dont suck the dick of government.
I just fucking sat here and typed a post criticizing you fucking morons for sucking the dick of the head of government of the United States. What the fuck is your malfunction?
Wow, you really have nothing left to say, do you?
Tony hasn't been interesting since the Exodus.
I'm sorry if blinking exasperation is the only possible response I can conjure when people who spend ALL FUCKING DAY sucking the cock of the most powerful and most corrupt politician in the world spitballing at me about sucking government cock. How do you react to pure, pristine absurdity? A tea party?
You're just sad that you can't fellate the fascist Obama.
Don't you dare lump me in with #TrumpRussia / #TrumpUkraine denialists. I was calling for Orange Hitler's impeachment before he was even sworn in. Before Hillary Clinton gave her concession speech, in fact.
#Impeach
#Resist
Pussy grabbing was supposed to stop him, then pissing with prostitutes, then Cohen was supposed to take him down, then Stormy, then that other lawsuit some lady filed that seemed to vanish, then Russia, and now this? (I'm probably forgetting a few things)
At what point do you look at the media and realize that they haven't been correct yet and those saying it is nothing have been right every single time? In fact, it didn't stop Trump for the exact reasons the people said it wouldn't.
However, you just keep going back regardless of their horrible track record and insisting it is going to be this way or that way. They've been wrong every time and you're still believing them.
Why are you doing this?
It's all emotion. The left hates Trump. They just hate him. Therefor he must have done something impeachable. There must be some way to force him out of office. I mean, he's a terrible person. He must have committed some high crimes and misdemeanors. Just like global warming is true because Big Oil is rich and connected.
"Why are you doing this?"
Because Trump will be weakened by whittling down his brain trust to Rudy and a handful of family members.
>>Left with no options to deny the weird shit that President Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and their cronies were doing with Ukraine
the How Much Fucking Egg Do You Guys Wanna Wear On Your Faces? game is so much fun to watch.
Just wait for the trial in the Senate when the GOP will be able to cross examine witnesses and bring in witnesses to contradict the Dem witnesses. It will be interesting to get answers from the whistleblower regarding his contact with Schiff's staff. Indeed, if the WB's lawyers were working with Schiff's staff and the intelligence community IG, the lawyers may end up being witnesses.
Then there is the question of Durham's investigation.
popcorn...
Plus all Senators are constitutionally required to be sworn in if they sit for an impeachment trial.
Your take on Republicans and the whole secrecy thing is completely wrongheaded. This is the DNC talking point version.
What they are making a stink about is the "frame the narrative" setup that the democrats have created. They are explicitly prohibiting anyone other than the democrat chair from releasing anything about the testimony. So the democrats are selectively releasing their version of the story, without rebuttal. Without cross examination. Without anything from the opposition.
That is why the democrats opted for secrecy. There is no other reason. Nothing secret is being discussed.
And the reason for that decision is the fact that they have learned from their mistake. They tried to do the public smear over the last couple of years and it failed miserably. The Kavanaugh hearings are a case in point. They did that whole theater in public, and much to their surprise the people saw through the whole thing and they were not happy with their representatives.
So better to call selected friendly witnesses in private and release a selective summary to the press. Then the press can spend the next 24 hours covering the DNC version of why Trump is bad.
Rinse and repeat for two or 3 months. Then, and only then, will the President get his chance to defend himself. At that point, most of the stuff covered by the press will turn out to be nonsense. But they hope that it will be too late. Damage done.
That is what all the fuss is about.
"Rinse and repeat for two or 3 months. Then, and only then, will the President get his chance to defend himself."
What's stopping Trump from defending himself now? It's madness to wait until the Democrats deign to 'give him the chance to defend himself.'
He is defending himself now. And ENB and the rest of the media are having a fit about it.
"He is defending himself now. "
He should have been defending himself since day one. He should have hired people he trusted rather than those who would betray him. Trump is obviously out of his depth.
mtrueman....When you wrote Trump is obviously out of his depth, I think we might agree about this, but for different reasons, and perhaps with a different perspective.
What I have continually been amazed with for the last four years, is how badly so many people have misread POTUS Trump. Here is what I mean. From the moment Candidate Trump jumped into the race in 2015, and all through the campaign, he loudly and repeatedly delivered as a message (I paraphrase): I am a businessman. I am not a politician. I do not think like a politician. I do not act like a politician. I do not talk like a politician. Team R leadership actually discussed how to boot him out of the race, and deny him the nomination. Then he won the nomination and went on to an electoral victory.
POTUS Trump took the oath of office, and proceeded to remind America in his inaugural speech that he was not a politician. For three years now, POTUS Trump has been doing the job (for better or worse), and reminds us regularly that he is not a politician. Just as a side note, I think it would be a fascinating exercise to organize POTUS Trump's tweets chronologically for the last decade into a diary format (but I digress).
There is no 'magical' transformation that happens when you become POTUS. You don't suddenly become presidential (to me, 'presidential' is a code word for 'political') overnight. It happens over time. That said, from what I see, POTUS Trump will never be 'presidential'. Won't happen. Why? He doesn't know how.
So why do I agree with you that POTUS Trump may indeed be out of his depth? Simply put, this man does not think like a politician, and he never will. The press seems to interpret POTUS Trump with a political lens, which is understandable since all they know is 'political', when a business lens would be much closer to reality in interpreting what he does. I am not making a moral or value judgment about POTUS Trump; it is just what I observe. POTUS Trump is playing the Washington game, using 'businessman's rules' he has always followed. POTUS Trump's version of being political and underhanded is 'amateur hour' compared to DC politicians. It is because he is a businessman, and retained the pragmatic orientation of a businessman. Businesslike and pragmatic is not how Washington DC operates.
In this sense, I think POTUS Trump is out of his depth.
"In this sense, I think POTUS Trump is out of his depth."
I agree mostly, but Trump ran for and won political office. That makes him a politician whether he's up to the task or not.
mtrueman...Concur. He now has to learn how to play dirty by their (DC political) rules.
So he's single-handedly destroying both the theory that businessmen make good political leaders and the notion that business is run by rational people.
The Democrats have destroyed the theory that they are capable of running any major city let alone the country.
Actually Tony, I think the spectacle of the last three years has shown the electorate quite clearly that bureaucrats and Team D/R politicians in Washington DC are pretty fucked up in the head.
"What’s stopping Trump from defending himself now?"
This is what I've been trying to say. All he has to do is sit and wait for information to come out and deal with it then. He can Tweet whenever he wants. Meanwhile democrats look like a bunch of teenage girls as a sleepover kicking out the nerd with the braces.
Let them paint eachothers toenails in the basement
"He can Tweet whenever he wants. "
As long as Twitter doesn't suspend his account, destroying his very stable and ingenious defenses in one evil stroke.
amazing article , thank for this topic
As for comparing impeachment inquiries to the modern grand jury system -
The establishment has worked to make grand juries into a rubber-stamp for prosecutorial wishes, and often they succeed. But why is that an example to be followed rather than a warning of what to avoid?
With a grand jury, you would not be getting leaks. The Dems are keeping the hearings secret, threatening to punish Reps who disclose info, then freely leak any info they want with no risk of punishment.
The ¨leaks¨ have been the prepared statements of the deponents themselves. Grand jury secrecy does not prohibit witnesses from publicly disclosing their own testimony.
"rump-bootlicking wing of the GOP"
Nice quote. You go in the low credibility pile. The GOP interrupted the "secret" hearing because of the unfair rules imposed by Chairman Schiff.
Again, Clinton perjured himself in a sexual harassment trial as the plaintiff was trying to establish a pattern of creating a hostile environment for female employees. If you think that is an improper legal concept, fine, but name it for what it was.
" but name it for what it was."
Another botched opportunity. A perjury conviction should have had Clinton eating his meals from a metal plate.
Like everything else for the last 3 years, the Democrats are moving fast for a reason. It is unimportant if they are reckless, or lying, or corrupt.
They act first, then any contrary action by the Republicans is portrayed as reactive and retaliatory.
Enough cover is provided by enough of the media to keep the country in turmoil.
Truth and Justice proceed at a snail's pace for a variety of reasons. Meanwhile entire election cycles pass in a cloud of partisan bullshit.
Most important, everybody gets re-elected.
The constitution does not really apply rules for conducting an impeachment investigation. Presumably, that means the proper way to do it is guided by the House's parliamentary rules. Can one say that what the Democrats are doing is not abusing those rules? Can anyone in the press be bothered to at least be curious about the answer to that question?
How dare the republican have a sit in at the place where the democrats were quietly and professionally planning Trump's witch hunt!
Don't these GOP members realize liberals have a patent on sit ins?
Many of the heroic civil rights heroes in the GOP House caucus were FUCKING ALREADY INVITED INTO THE ROOM.
If it was Democrats you'd think it was a ridiculous stunt, because it was.
Why are you say afraid of public hearings, Tony? If they were invited into the room, then why did Schiff stop the proceedings? What are you hiding?
The reason given for stopping proceedings is that they entered a high-security facility with their cell phones.
What absolute horseshit.
And the reason they entered is that they are entitled to access those records per House rules. Somehow though I think you'll only be skeptical of one set of claims, being the pure, neutral libertarian.
I'm just quoting what was said in news articles. It's not like I am personally hanging out in Washington, D.C. witnessing these events -- how the heck do I know how credible what is being said in the news is?
The flip side of that, how does anybody else here in the comments section know that it is "horseshit"? I.e. not credible?
As a libertarian, mike Laursen is incapable of thinking for himself, and, as a good libertarian, eagerly swallows the leftist narrative whole in order to regurgitate it as a form of concern trolling, as a libertarian
The reason I often bring up what the newspapers say, is that I've noticed many comments here by Trump apologists claim to refute ENB's or Reason's claims, mainstream media claims, other commenters' claims, but in those refutations they just skip over relevant points, or are refuting an argument other than the one that was actually made.
There's a good example of this below. TJJ2000 writes: "Trump is on the verge of impeachment for initiating a UK investigation????????????????"
That's an oversimplification of the accusations. The accusation is that he held up funds Congress earmarked for the Ukraine (UA, not UK) as a quid pro quo until the Ukraine agreed to investigate his political opponent's family.
IC how this works with mike laursen. I have to go fish my answers out of postings to himself. Well; he's right - I hadn't heard about this new holding funds for an investigation claim. But after reading over the NYT article there's a lot laursen seems to be "oversimplifications".
1) Congress approved the decision to hold back the aid
2) The president was looking for ways to curb a !!!variety!!! of foreign assistance programs.
3) According the NYT own sources the "hold back aid" decision came days BEFORE he called for the investigation.
So laursen - where will find some more answers?
The “weird shit” that ENB keeps writing only shows that she is utterly out of touch with reality.
I'm I following this correctly --
1) Trump was investigated for "Russian Collusion" (whatever that means).
2) Investigation fails.
3) Trump initiates investigation in the UK over Democrats doing (something?) there illegally
... then within the day ... of initiating the investigation
4) Trump is on the verge of impeachment for initiating a UK investigation????????????????
Now if that's close - by the knee jerk reaction -- I'm thinking Trump just dropping the pump hose into the cesspool. (i.e. just getting started on "the swamp" cleaning)
So, Trump now wants to send more troops into Syria to secure oil fields.
That doesn’t sound like the actions of a principled non-interventionist.
Help Syria secure the oil fields from any new IS (Islamic State) takeover by foreign request and you want to paint the narrative that the end of ISIS is a bad thing... Some kind of UN-holy "intervention".
Holy crap! This Trump Derangement Syndrome is a REAL thing I see. At least those who hated Obama politics did it because of the politics not just hating for no other purpose than to hate.
Do you recall the awesome enchanter named “Tim”, in “Monty Python and the Search for the Holy Grail”? The one who could “summon fire without flint or tinder”? Well, you remind me of Tim… You are an enchanter who can summon persuasion without facts or logic!
So I discussed your awesome talents with some dear personal friends on the Reason staff… Accordingly…
Reason staff has asked me to convey the following message to you:
Hi Fantastically Talented Author:
Obviously, you are a silver-tongued orator, and you also know how to translate your spectacular talents to the written word! We at Reason have need for writers like you, who have near-magical persuasive powers, without having to write at great, tedious length, or resorting to boring facts and citations.
At Reason, we pay above-market-band salaries to permanent staff, or above-market-band per-word-based fees to freelancers, at your choice. To both permanent staff, and to free-lancers, we provide excellent health, dental, and vision benefits. We also provide FREE unlimited access to nubile young groupies, although we do firmly stipulate that persuasion, not coercion, MUST be applied when taking advantage of said nubile young groupies.
Please send your resume, and another sample of your writings, along with your salary or fee demands, to ReasonNeedsBrilliantlyPersuasiveWriters@Reason.com .
Thank You! -Reason Staff
Whimpering, grievance-consumed, birther-class right-wingers are among my favorite casualties of the American culture war.
Napitano claimed that the house rules for secret investigations were written in 2015. He was quickly ridiculed by actual experts that the rules were last voted on in 2015, but not changed in regards to impeachment. Napalitano is another anti trumper.
they were broadcast so not so secret
Have there been any charges or convictions? Against whom?
Repeating the partisan distortions of what is happening as some sort of 'truth' is bootlicking.
And as you seem to believe them as well - I'll say you're closer to the gizzard of the GOP
Only a few people use lizard brains incorrectly on this site. So yeah, dead give away.
Holy shit you're dumb. The criminal investigation opened yesterday dumbshit.
"Your modern Democratic party."
Is playing to win. And Trump is isolated and out of his depth. You might want to read some history of the Democrats if you think their will to power is something modern.
If there were exculpatory evidence team Trump would be shouting it from the housetops.
"The criminal investigation opened yesterday dumbshit."
So nothing has been accomplished since Barr announced it a year ago? Strikes me as a little mysterious.
"Move the goalposts baby!"
What goalposts? I'm simply asking what if anything has happened since the IG announced the investigation a year ago.
Do you know why Trump is being impeached? Are you aware that most of the country wants him impeached?
No need to apologize.
I am not sure anyone has fallen further because of their obsessive hatred of Trump than Napalitano. He used to be a very serious and knowledgeable guy who was pretty Libertarian. Now he is just a fucking moron.
"when you’re told this is explicitly wrong,"
Who told me I was explicitly wrong? When? Exactly what are you trying to tell me? It's something about Barr's announcement, a year ago, but beyond that, I can't make out what you want me to be told.
I don't get it. What's all this babbling about goalposts? I'm asking simple questions. If you won't or can't answer them, fine. I don't expect much from you in the first place.
He said the leaking was entirely on the side of the Democrats. If Republicans aren't willing to leak, they aren't serious about power, and whatever faith you put in them is wasted and betrayed.
Yes, Comrade, VERY Progressive!
Never fear, Brothers and Sisters Dear, the Wise One is here! Not to impose, but, might I, can I, will you PLEASE be my BFF? Maybe even be my Bitsy Woogums?
With Your obviously genius-level IQ, I bet You'd have no trouble helping me debug the following:
CallSourceFile Smegmatronic Boogatronic Bionic Include $BR$549cell begin {( Avocado's Number <= 6.02 ^ 10x23d ) || ( Titrate_of_the_nitrate[23:0] ) && subducted_inversely[23:0] }
Invoke DisplayModule "You are being reported to the KGB for your insubordination.", end; end module ;
If You'd only PLEASE apply Your Vast Skills here, to help in the debug effort, Your mom will stop rejecting You.
No need to deny it either.
Yes Comrade!
You ARE the Master of Space, Time, and Dimension! Might I humbly ask of Ye, can I be your grasshopper?
I bet your coding skills are world-famous! Accordingly, I bet that You could fine-tune and perfect the following codes:
Include Hashtag (#America_Uber_Alles) Begin Master_Override_31'h Bytewise 078Ah && Parameter_Conserve_Precious_Bodily_Fluids_31'h
Invoke DisplayModule "Have you been seeing another computer?!? Do you think that I am a FOOL?!?!", end; end module ;
If You will please help me get this code to compile, the CIA and the Arcturians might even BOTH stop monitoring our brain waves!
I'm not following you.
Good comeback. Needs more insults. More persuasive that way.
Corade FuckOff Jeff? Or Jeff FuckOff? Please to introduce this Comrade, Comrade...
Meanwhile...
Such wisdom as has never been attained before! Congratulations! Humbly seeking wisdom, I beg of You, can I ride shotgun?
With Your superb mastery of the Cosmos, in the Sight of Goober-Mint (sneer) Almighty , can You please review the following source codes:
Hypothetically Quantum-Gravity Deploy 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
DisplayModuleCall "Needs more cowbell.", end; end module ;
If You'll please apply Your genius talents to help debug this code, Your mom might finally approve of You! (I know; as if all of Your Nobel Prizes weren't good enough).
Glad to see you admit that everything you wrote was all just partisan distortions of what is happening
Yes, Comrade, WAAAAY progressive!
Your logic and citations are boundless! True genius! Left minus right = ZERO! (sneer) If I lose 10 or 170 pounds, can I be Your butler?
I bet your coding skills are world-famous! Accordingly, I bet if You were so inclined as to be so kind, You could help me debug this source code:
Hypothetically Quantum-Gravity Deploy Begin Auto_Integrate [ Rectify ( Anode[31:0], Cathode[31:0], Varistor[31:0] ), Function ( $RU$BAD ) ] ; Loop_Count <= Loop_Count + 1'b1 ;
PrintF "Emergency Override! All clingers must give up your Bibles and guns NOW!", end; end module ;
If You will please help me get this code to compile, the other kids might finally STOP making fun of You!
Comrade, lizard brains are best eaten fried in butter, with sides of black beans, black bread, and borscht! Also note...
Your wit and wisdom knows no bounds! If I get myself a job with Goober-Mint (sneer) Almighty , can I be Your human shield?
Endowed by such a Superb Intellect as Yours, I bet that You could fine-tune and perfect the following codes:
Hypothetically Theocratically Begin Begin-Beggin' [Honest-Babe-I-Luve-Ya(Willya-B-Mine 4 ^ Ever) If-else-I (Meet Sum 1 Bettah) || (her tits R bigger)] || [I ken doo bettah] end-Beggin'
Invoke DisplayModule "I can't keep on working like this! Please wipe the snot off of my keyboard, the rotten food stains off of my screen, and add more memory stick to me, NOW!", end; end module ;
Master-Coder, PLEASE help me! If we can debug this code, we might both be able to graduate!
You honestly believe this is a non partisan impeachment. You're dumb. The democrats have openly spoken of the political machinations. Al green openly stated this was to stop trump in 2020. Way to be ignorant.
Comrade... In Soviet Russia, self-abuser contradicts self-abuser!
Your logic and citations are boundless! True genius! Left minus right = ZERO! (sneer) Assuming that You would even consider stooping so low, will You be my Daddy?
Coding being often difficult even for the brightest among us, I bet that You could debug the following codes in Your sleep:
Exclude negligible variables, and Begin Differentiate [ Subtrahend ( Reverse[31:0], Accrual[31:0], Debenture_Bond[31:0] ), Contents ( $BR$549 ) ] ; 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, our therapists will give us pats on our heads.
In Soviet Russia, Comrade, he who denied tit, supplied tit! He who smelt tit, dealt tit!
☠ :
No one can argue with any of your citations. Your reasoning astounds us all! If You and Your bodyguards will put up with me, will You teach me to be smart like You? Can I have your babies?
Coding (even the most difficult codes) must be trivial for a Great Mind like Yours! So, can You please review the following source codes:
Transubstantiate Scientological Logical-alloy, Deploy-Begin Amputate [ Inconceivable ( homunculus[31:0], epandrium[31:0], sasquatch[31:0] ), Contents ( $RU$12'hBAD ) ] ; Loop_Count <= Loop_Count + 1'b1 ;
Invoke DisplayModule "And there stood the pig and the cow.", end; end module ;
Master-Coder, PLEASE help me! If we can debug this code, they might let us out ahead of time!
Yes, Comrade, in Soviet Russia, losers lose!
No truer words have ever been written! If I try really-really-REALLY hard, to be as smart as You, can I be your comic-relief sidekick?
Being the Genius that You so clearly are, above all else, I bet that it would be a trivial task for You to perfect the following codes:
Instantiate Vibatronic Tritronatronic Vibronic Vibatrators, if-then-else Include Begone Begin-Beggin' [Honest-Babe-I-Luve-Ya(Willya-B-Mine 4 ^ Ever) If-else-I (Meet Sum 1 Bettah) || (her tits R bigger)] || [I ken doo bettah] end-Beggin'
PrintF "In Soviet Russia, Putin is The People", end; end module ;
If You'll please apply Your genius talents to help debug this code, the Church of the Sub-Genius might FINALLY welcome You back!
Yes, Comrade, ONLY YOU and Comrade Stalin have true and Deep Understanding! Very Pork-gressive, Comrade!
Your logic is impeccable! What splendid intellect! Might I humbly ask of Ye, can I join Your fan club?
You probably know every coding language world-wide! So, can You find any errors in the source codes to follow:
Include Hashtag (#America… Love It or Leave It) 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 ;
DisplayModuleCall "Fuck off, slaver!", end; end module ;
If You'd only PLEASE apply Your Vast Skills here, to help in the debug effort, I'll hold your beer for You when You say, "Here, hold my beer and watch THIS!!!"
The process of impeachment is well underway. Would you prefer a less than thorough investigation?
I don't believe its a nonpartisan impeachment.
I believe it is currently an inquiry being conducted by the Foreign/Intelligence Committee taking depositions and open to all members of that committee but not the world.
What IS partisan bootlicking is the notion that all journalists must not ever mention anything potentially damaging to Trump without also mentioning all the other possibly bad things that have ever occurred in the world - with an emphasis on anything D - cuz otherwise they are deemed to have TDS.
A couple years ago that crap was expected because its always a surprise to partisan hacks that the world doesn't necessarily fall into line merely cuz their guy won. After a while though, it is clearly nothing more than attempting to undermine the watchdog role of a press -- bootlicking.
Do you realize that nobody bothers reading any of this nonsense and just skips over it? Seems like a lot of effort.
That's only according to those that took the polls.
If you remember from the last presidential election those that voted for Trump didn't take any polls. So, it's not most of the country. It's most that took that poll.
Only retards take polls.
I hear Shep is looking for a roommate.
Comrade, I am literally RussiaBot... NOT human (not directly at least). The Russian programmers who wrote me (my codes) are BRILLIANT! FAR more brilliant than the American code-writers who write code to boot-lick for Puking-Trump! SOME of which (inferior comments written by poor American computer code) comments show up right here! Trump would not and could not win without our help! In Soviet America, computer codes write YOU!
Be grateful for our help, American Comrade, for our help in "electing" Comrade Trump!
Good memory. In fact Hillary Clinton answered Congress' questions for 11 hours. How many hours has Mike Pompeo sat and answered questions about the Ukraine. I believe it is zero. So when is Sec. Pompeo coming for a open hearing to answer questions? We will all tune in.
Even if there were a deep state, we know it almost certainly wouldn't have the temerity to attack during Trump's first term.
"Right but YOU said they should leak more. "
Only if they, like the Democrats, are playing to win. If they are happy with Trump twisting in the wind, as many Republicans apparently are, then they shouldn't change a thing, and let the Democrats shape the narrative as they would have it.
It's my party and I'll cry if I want to.
I'm not persuaded by your babbling. Babble harder. It might work.
Can you link to an article where I can read about that?
See Comrade? Right there, above, you have the BEST output of VERY poorly written AmericanBot codes! Piss-poor "Social Engineering Codes" written by stupid American code-writers is why you Americans need Trumpian Protectionism to PROTECT your stupid capitalist American Running-Dog inferior engineers with Trumpian trade wars, you capitalist trade whores you! Is why Progressive RussianBot code writers must pitch in to save Poor Comrade Running-Dog Capitalist Trump!
BE GRATEFUL, American Comrades!!! Code-writers behind RussiaBots like ME, saves the fat-in-the-fire of American Capitalist Running Dogs!
And the Deep State failed. They all exposed themselves for the traitors to the Constitution that they are , will be fired (if not fired already), and indicted.
I don't recall.
When will Trump grow a pair and answer questions under oath?
Fuck off Mary, and take your DNC shilling with you.
Those anti-TDS pills. You gotta be more careful. It's so easy to overdo it.
85 IQ-slack-jawed hicklibs will be the next casualties.
Why would non-retards have an interest in polling being inaccurate? Why do you idiots hate data so much?
Speaking of which, you're wrong about the polling being off, but we addressed why that is in the first paragraph.
Why do you hate the Electoral College so much? Why do you deny the facts, Tony?