Red Mosquito

Anyone else see his brain short circuit at his Klan rally last night? The Fox clip I saw cut away from him amid audible laughs from the talking heads. It's pretty sick how they are covering up his sundowning like it's some joke.

verb_to_trust wrote:Anyone else see his brain short circuit at his Klan rally last night? The Fox clip I saw cut away from him amid audible laughs from the talking heads. It's pretty sick how they are covering up his sundowning like it's some joke.

Why can't he just have a stroke and make it easy for everybody?

I enjoyed this. Pompeo is super bad at his job.

verb_to_trust wrote:Anyone else see his brain short circuit at his Klan rally last night? The Fox clip I saw cut away from him amid audible laughs from the talking heads. It's pretty sick how they are covering up his sundowning like it's some joke.

which talking heads were laughing?

edit: never mind, this was the top post when I switched to twitter.
is the White House prone to issuing 'formal' threats or is this new?

bune wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Anyone else see his brain short circuit at his Klan rally last night? The Fox clip I saw cut away from him amid audible laughs from the talking heads. It's pretty sick how they are covering up his sundowning like it's some joke.

which talking heads were laughing?

edit: never mind, this was the top post when I switched to twitter.

is the White House prone to issuing 'formal' threats or is this new?

That black chick strategically placed right above his right shoulder doesn't cheer or clap for anything he says.

there's only so much money can buy.

alternate post: that one phrase about paying money for sex and not kissing.

“The only way that would make a quid pro quo unlawful is if the quo were in some way illegal,” Dershowitz says.

"If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment," he says.

Tom Del Beccaro: Trump impeachment illustrates serious danger of criminalization of politics

opinion pieces always make me laugh. notice me, senpai!

Sure but how many pizzas and in how many days

i wasn't alive hundreds of years ago but i think congressional politics was pretty gangster then too

people used to shoot each other with pistols they got so mad at each other

and slap each other with white gloves

so what the republicans are doing here is no different than some other circumstances that happened hundreds of years ago that i can't specifically name because i don't know of any but am kind of certain could possibly exist

so quit being so naive

crybabies

96583UP wrote:i wasn't alive hundreds of years ago but i think congressional politics was pretty gangster then too

people used to shoot each other with pistols they got so mad at each other

and slap each other with white gloves

so what the republicans are doing here is no different than some other circumstances that happened hundreds of years ago that i can't specifically name because i don't know of any but am kind of certain could possibly exist

so quit being so naive

crybabies

Stfu

Sen. Manchin growing a spine for some reason

it's fleeting, I'm sure.

oh God there's another dress!

Jesus, we are governed by children.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/480 ... stleblower

A Senate page brought the question from Paul to Roberts, who appeared to pause to read it.
"The presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted,” Roberts said.

Roberts then sat the slip of paper with Paul's query aside and the Senate moved on to the next question.

Paul argued during a brief press conference after the floor drama that his question "made no reference to any whistleblower" and that Roberts's decision was an "incorrect finding.

....................

Paul then read his question, which names both a staff member for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and the individual who has been reported in conservative media as the possible whistleblower, and asks about their contacts.

Paul added that he wanted to ask the House managers if they know whether the two individuals named in the question were working together "to plot impeaching the president before there were formal House impeachment proceedings."

Rand Paul is the type of guy who gets his ass kicked by his neighbor, keep in mind.

The wildest thing about this trial is that it’s long past being a debate over whether or not Donald Trump solicited foreign election assistance, and has more or less moved on to whether or not American population dispersement has empowered Republicans to protect and sanction exactly that conduct by any future Republican President.

A group of states containing just 17% of the population is capable of electing a senate majority. Collectively, those states trend older, whiter, and more evangelical than the rest of the country. They are, on average, significantly more likely to rate disprovable conspiracy theories as true. TWO THIRDS rated pizzagate as at least partially true. Far more than that get most or all of their news from a combination of Fox, Sinclair, and Facebook.

The question being answered now is whether or not the Senate chamber grip provided to Republicans by those demographics means that Republican presidents are impervious to impeachment. Assuming that the answer to that question is what we all assume it’s going to be, the next question will be: given that sort of open pass, how far is this president willing to go in order to remain in power?

McParadigm wrote:A group of states containing just 17% of the population is capable of electing a senate majority.

Is your issue with Republicans or the form of government and checks and balances in that government?

surfndestroy wrote:

McParadigm wrote:A group of states containing just 17% of the population is capable of electing a senate majority.

Is your issue with Republicans or the form of government and checks and balances in that government?

I’m talking about the real world impact of this situation, wherein the organization of our republic and its demographic disbursement have created conditions in which a minority party can effectively hold the Senate while openly using its power to circumvent any.....any......checks on the president. Specifically, on his ability to weaponize the government against his domestic enemies. Where a minority of citizens inundated with propaganda can effectively empower a party which chooses not to adhere to those constructs of the republic that become inconvenient for it.

And I’m not talking about it to argue an issue or register a complaint. I’m summarizing the situation that we find ourselves in, and I’m wondering what happens next.

McParadigm wrote:

surfndestroy wrote:

McParadigm wrote:A group of states containing just 17% of the population is capable of electing a senate majority.

Is your issue with Republicans or the form of government and checks and balances in that government?

I’m talking about the real world impact of this situation, wherein the organization of our republic and its demographic disbursement have created conditions in which a minority party can effectively hold the Senate while openly using its power to circumvent any.....any......checks on the president. Specifically, on his ability to weaponize the government against his domestic enemies. Where a minority of citizens inundated with propaganda can effectively empower a party which chooses not to adhere to those constructs of the republic that become inconvenient for it.

And I’m not talking about it to argue an issue or register a complaint. I’m summarizing the situation that we find ourselves in, and I’m wondering what happens next.

And it's a situation will get worse over the next 30 years, correct? What are some possible solutions?

We could have people wanting to move to more liberal, urban areas have to spend two election cycles in a state like Wyoming, Kansas or South Dakota. Oh, you want to move to Portland? Well, we need you to spend the next five years in Pierre.