Jumbo

Moose & Squirrel v Boris & Natasha: what's the deal with the rooskies and trumpland?

Recommended Posts

McGahn feels "obligated" to stand by Trump...........over country.  Sounds like another wonderful human being. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

Impeach the mother****er.

 

I was at a local Dem meeting this evening down in Raleigh and everyone wants impeachment. Pelosi is making a giant mistake and this alone is her legacy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypothetical:  

 

Assume that you believe that the results of impeachment will be:  

 

1)  Passage in the House.  

2)  Absolute stonewalling in the Senate.

3)  And a whole lot of voters who don't like the noise simply deciding (for whatever reason) to change the channel.

4)  Trump reelection, and maybe even GOP gains in congress.  

 

You still approve of "doing your duty", and pushing that button?  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, StillUnknown said:

full blown crisis and people still won't do ****

 

this country deserves exactly where its heading

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Larry said:

Hypothetical:  

 

Assume that you believe that the results of impeachment will be:  

 

1)  Passage in the House.  

2)  Absolute stonewalling in the Senate.

3)  And a whole lot of voters who don't like the noise simply deciding (for whatever reason) to change the channel.

4)  Trump reelection, and maybe even GOP gains in congress.  

 

You still approve of "doing your duty", and pushing that button?  

 

Seems like quite likely scenario, however I think for item 3, currently much of the US populace is like this in regards to all that has come out already:

 

giphy.gif

 

Impeachment hearings would be major news and would open the eyes of some people who generally just don't pay attention to political news.  Those that would change the channel who don't like the noise aren't the ones you're trying to enlighten.

 

EDIT:  Another possibility is that Pelosi is simply biding her time, knowing it will get stonewalled in the senate, and wants to cycle it so it is major news and damaging later in the election cycle.

Edited by China
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, China said:

Impeachment hearings would be major news and would open the eyes of some people who generally just don't pay attention to political news.  Those that would change the channel who don't like the noise aren't the ones you're trying to enlighten.

More eyeballs would be on impeachment hearings. Hard to avoid when all the networks are showing major hearings. Ratings would actually be a metric Trump understands. The Cohen hearing got like 16 million views. If Mueller is testifying about obstruction it would be ratings gold.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Pelosi is still holding onto hope that Mueller testifies before congress and wants to wait it out for that to happen first?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Larry said:

You still approve of "doing your duty", and pushing that button?  

 

Absolutely.

 

“You don't go into battle because you're sure of victory. You go into battle because it's the right thing to do.” 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Larry said:

Hypothetical:  

 

Assume that you believe that the results of impeachment will be:  

 

1)  Passage in the House.  

2)  Absolute stonewalling in the Senate.

3)  And a whole lot of voters who don't like the noise simply deciding (for whatever reason) to change the channel.

4)  Trump reelection, and maybe even GOP gains in congress.  

 

You still approve of "doing your duty", and pushing that button?  

You can't let a president do this and then not have any repercussions from it.  Beyond 2020, I would say a full and robust impeachment process is more important to the state of US democracy.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Larry said:

Hypothetical:  

 

Assume that you believe that the results of impeachment will be:  

 

1)  Passage in the House.  

2)  Absolute stonewalling in the Senate.

3)  And a whole lot of voters who don't like the noise simply deciding (for whatever reason) to change the channel.

4)  Trump reelection, and maybe even GOP gains in congress.  

 

You still approve of "doing your duty", and pushing that button?  

What kind of cowardice is this? They have a duty to the constitution that they swore to follow. 

Edited by BenningRoadSkin
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what exactly is the GOP argument here. Correct me if I am wrong but:

 

Mueller report says McGahn stated that Trump told him to fire Mueller, but he refused.  Trump says McGahn lied to Mueller about that.  

 

So why does it not seem reasonable to want McGahn to testify in front of congress to get to the bottom of McGahn's interview with Mueller and ask additional questions regarding what Trump told him to do etc etc.....?

 

Furthermore, the mere fact that Mueller left the obstruction question open, *ON PURPOSE* makes it pretty clear he is leaving it up to congress to investigate the issues raised in the report and then decide how to proceed.  So why does the GOP feel that they should skirt their job duties in investigating? (Other than being loyal to Trump over anything else?)

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

What kind of cowardice is this? They have a duty to the constitution that swore to follow. 

 

Why we have Trump to begin with. Replace Larry’s chicken**** post with the GOP antics since Clinton’s presidency. 

 

One side takes power to its to its absolute limits and continues winning elections. The other side has Larry saying that the House executing its duties of oversight will result in the people under investigation winning more elections.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

What kind of cowardice is this? They have a duty to the constitution that they swore to follow. 

Indeed.

 

If the outcome is as Larry put in the hypothetical, then America is already lost.

 

 

That being said, the theory that they are laying the groundwork has merit.  I want to see people dragged before committees in cuffs after defying subpoenas as much as anyone, but failing to follow proper procedure will only cost time in the long run when a judge says something wasn't done right.

 

All the more true with the number of landmine Trump appointees, any possible reason to stymie the Dems will be used to its fullest.  And courts will undoubtedly have to be involved, if not from Dems bringing challenges to GOP conduct, then from GOP challenging Dem conduct.

 

I just wish they'd lay out the roadmap a little more openly.  The slow roll plan looks like weakness whereas it may be the most effective strategy in the long run if they follow through.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

The other side has Larry saying that the House executing its duties of oversight will result in the people under investigation winning more elections.

 

Was the first word of my post too big or complicated for you?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

I want to see people dragged before committees in cuffs after defying subpoenas as much as anyone

 

I get pleasant thoughts from imagining that the House should start working on the FY2019 budget.  And every budget item will contain a clause stating that any federal agency which is in defiance of a congressional subpoena will be funded at 5% of whatever is in this budget, until it complies.  

 

Including White House travel.  

 

You really want to play "You can't make me, cause all the cops work for me" with the body that controls the bank account?   

 

I could see it really blowing up in their faces, politically.  But hey, it's an imaginary scenario, so I can imagine whatever result I want.  

 

 

9 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

 

Please tell me that's from some alt-right website that still thinks Pizzagate is real. 

Edited by Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

“You don't go into battle because you're sure of victory. You go into battle because it's the right thing to do.” 

 

~ Some Dead Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

 

~ Some Dead Guy

 

"Better to die on one's feet than to live on one's knees. "

 

~ Emiliano Zapata (also some dead guy)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
 

 

What's the point of punting this to congress or being the special counsel investigating the freaking President? Would really like to know where this source is coming from.

Edited by Cooked Crack
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.