Jump to content

US Politics


Rich

Recommended Posts

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Remember when Justice Kennedy retired suddenly from the SCOTUS w/Brett Kavanaugh waiting in the wings for <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a>?<br><br>Guess who signed off on Trump’s suspicious loans <a href="https://twitter.com/DeutscheBank?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@DeutscheBank</a> when no other bank would? <br><br>Justin Kennedy. <br><br>Justice Kennedy’s son. <a href="https://t.co/w6Jcl77Ryt">https://t.co/w6Jcl77Ryt</a></p>&mdash; Fernand R. Amandi (@AmandiOnAir) <a href="https://twitter.com/AmandiOnAir/status/1130213118934753281?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 19, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Remember when Justice Kennedy retired suddenly from the SCOTUS w/Brett Kavanaugh waiting in the wings for <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a>?<br><br>Guess who signed off on Trump’s suspicious loans <a href="https://twitter.com/DeutscheBank?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@DeutscheBank</a> when no other bank would? <br><br>Justin Kennedy. <br><br>Justice Kennedy’s son. <a href="https://t.co/w6Jcl77Ryt">https://t.co/w6Jcl77Ryt</a></p>&mdash; Fernand R. Amandi (@AmandiOnAir) <a href="https://twitter.com/AmandiOnAir/status/1130213118934753281?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 19, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 Sorry, link failed. Basically NYTimes reporting that Justin Kennedy (The son of Anthony Kennedy, the justice who surprisingly stepped down to clear the way for Brett Kavanagh’s ascention to SCOTUS) signed off on Trump financial deals for Deutsche Bank when no other bank would touch him. 

Edited by TrueBlue4ever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, White House is directing former counsel Don McGhan to ignore his subpoena requiring him to testify before Congress, saying as a former employee of the President acting in an official capacity for the government, he is immune from testifying. 

So I guess when Bill and Hillary Clinton had to testify, those rules didn’t count?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

 Sorry, link failed. Basically NYTimes reporting that Justin Kennedy (The son of Anthony Kennedy, the justice who surprisingly stepped down to clear the way for Brett Kavanagh’s ascention to SCOTUS) signed off on Trump financial deals for Deutsche Bank when no other bank would touch him. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pressure growing on washout Pelosi. step up or step aside Nancy.

Trump is betting again on simple math, on Congress running out of time ahead of the 2020 election. That is, unless more Democrats like Rhode Island congressman David Cicilline run out of patience first.

 

Quote

 

If Don McGahn does not testify tomorrow, it will be time to begin an impeachment inquiry of @realDonaldTrump.

— David Cicilline (@davidcicilline) May 20, 2019

 

Edited by Mark F
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Mark F said:

Pressure growing on washout Pelosi. step up or step aside Nancy.

Trump is betting again on simple math, on Congress running out of time ahead of the 2020 election. That is, unless more Democrats like Rhode Island congressman David Cicilline run out of patience first.

 

Sadly... it's playing right into trump's hands... 

Impeach with no real threat of being removed from office by the GOP Senate. Then he will claim "TOTAL EXHONERATION" and coalesce his base by pointing at the "NEW WITCH HUNT" by "the trump hating dems".

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Sadly... it's playing right into trump's hands... 

Impeach with no real threat of being removed from office by the GOP Senate. Then he will claim "TOTAL EXHONERATION" and coalesce his base by pointing at the "NEW WITCH HUNT" by "the trump hating dems".

 

 

It won't work that way. What's happening now is that he can say total exoneration because there are zero repercussions. If he's impeached, all the evidence will be out there, again without the Barr whitewashing. Then, they can begin impeaching Barr, Nunes, etc. 

 

If Congress fails to begin an impeachment investigation, they've failed in their duties. It will hang on the Democrats for ages. Sure, Trump is lying criminal, white supremacist but the Dems have done nothing about it and they can. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump is done. He doesn't have a hand to play. Women will not vote for him. Blacks and Hispanics will not vote for him.

HIs "base" doesn't care about anything except one thing. They are beyond reach, racist, deeply ingorant, willing to put up with anything as long as blacks and hispanics are kept down.

Figuring out what to do based on what those scum want, is wrong in every way.

 what they think or do is irrelevant. Their party can have them. Calculating votes, and figuring out how to attract them is morally wrong, and politically stupid.

He's spitting on them, their voters, the American system of government.

Does he have to confess to murder, to get impeached?

 

 

Edited by Mark F
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, JCon said:

If Congress fails to begin an impeachment investigation, they've failed in their duties.

Thanks, that's what I was trying to say.

Not just their duties in general, the one that is specifically mentioned in their oath when they take office.

Edited by Mark F
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JCon said:

It won't work that way. What's happening now is that he can say total exoneration because there are zero repercussions. If he's impeached, all the evidence will be out there, again without the Barr whitewashing. Then, they can begin impeaching Barr, Nunes, etc. 

True, I totally hear and agree with you. The facts totally support your statement. I am just saying that he will claim total exoneration, while being completely guilty after all the evidence is paraded out and anyone with a hint of respect for facts would see that he is guilty, he will still claim total exoneration.

It. Is. Crazy. Making.

It's like arguing facts with an unrelenting child, that water is wet and they claim "no, it's not- it's burgundy", and this child is one of the most powerful men in the world with the nuke codes... 

 

 

1 minute ago, JCon said:

If Congress fails to begin an impeachment investigation, they've failed in their duties. It will hang on the Democrats for ages. Sure, Trump is lying criminal, white supremacist but the Dems have done nothing about it and they can. 

I agree with you here- **** political convenience, do your ******* duty to uphold the constitution. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mark F said:

Does he have to confess to murder, to get impeached?

Sadly... the current spineless and evil bunch of GOP'rs would even let that slide and would still vote along party lines to not remove him from office. 

 

I can honestly say-with a great degree of certainty- I can see, in the confession scenario you outlined above; cocaine mitch, jim jordan and matt gaetz would vote NOT to remove him from office. 

**** those guys.

Edited by wanna-b-fanboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mark F said:

Pressure growing on washout Pelosi. step up or step aside Nancy.

Trump is betting again on simple math, on Congress running out of time ahead of the 2020 election. That is, unless more Democrats like Rhode Island congressman David Cicilline run out of patience first.

 

Imagine all of the dead wood the US government could free itself of it they would institute a mandatory retirement age of 65 for all levels of government including the president.  It'd be a major paradigm shift in flushing away entrenched values and bringing in new blood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Imagine all of the dead wood the US government could free itself of it they would institute a mandatory retirement age of 65 for all levels of government including the president.  It'd be a major paradigm shift in flushing away entrenched values and bringing in new blood.

This woman, and Joe Biden want a "measured" approach to climate change. They really are over the hill.


 

Quote

 

After the Trump administration instructed former White House counsel Don McGahn to refuse to comply with a Judiciary Committee subpoena to testify, several members of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's leadership team privately confronted the Democratic leader late Monday and demanded impeachment proceedings against the president immediately in response to the latest attempt to stonewall congressional oversight.

According to the Washington Post, at least "five members of Pelosi's leadership team—four of whom also sit on the House Judiciary Committee, with jurisdiction over impeachment—pressed Pelosi (D-Calif.) in a closed-door leadership meeting to allow the panel to start an [impeachment] inquiry, which they argued would help investigators attain documents and testimony that Trump has blocked."

 

 Pelosi is more interested in getting campaign money, than in doing what's needed.

She should retire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Mark F said:

This woman, and Joe Biden want a "measured" approach to climate change. They really are over the hill.


 

 Pelosi is more interested in getting campaign money, than in doing what's needed.

She should retire.

I think 70 years old should be mandatory retirement. 

 

I am hoping she is just waiting for the opportune time to start impeachment proceedings for MAXIUM political fallout- that is the Nancy I want to see: The “She'll cut your head off and you won't even know you're bleeding,” Pelosi.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

House Democrats are worried about possible political blowback from an impeachment inquiry into a president whose crimes have already been laid out in detail by others and who currently has a pathetic 38% approval.

For comparison, Nixon had just been re-elected in a landslide and stood at 65% approval when Democrats launched the Senate Watergate inquiry in February 1973.

The full airing of evidence and testimony against Nixon quickly eroded his support, bringing it to 39% in July 1973.

 

https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Mark F said:

The only problem here... Nixon Resigned. I honest don't think trump would resign. The senate would give him a pass and trump would crow about it for all eternity. 

 

But there is hope!

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/new-york-lawmakers-pass-bill-aimed-weakening-trump-s-pardon-n1008381?cid=eml_nbn_20190521

 

No more double jeopardy law. State criminal charges can be levied against those who have been pardoned federally. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...