OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
Seen better, had worse...
Impeachment
- Thread starter mchammer
- Start date
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Right now, Pelosi is looking at a thin margin. Three interesting new names to add to the possible "no" vote are Luria, Cartwright and Stevens -- it's fluid, but if so then it looks like she is at 225 votes (needing 217)
Gabbard is still not commenting.
I haven't. At least I don't think I have.
Statalyzer
10,000+ Posts
I see why people think that, but unfortunately I think it's a typical example of the narrow, binary thinking that seems to pervade every issue these days.There's a gulf between "blurt out whatever you're thinking, even if what you are thinking is definitely not something like 'Hmm, is this an intelligent thing to say?'" and "Follow all the PC rules of the left". A gulf big enough to jam the combined egos of Trump, Jerry Jones, and Baker Mayfield into.
It definitely is an emotional response and not a logical one. It's also short-term thinking and it's one that will probably cost its adherents in the long-run. What the left doesn't seem to get is that it's an emotional response to them and to their transformation of extremists positions into mainstream. Largely the Trump phenomenon is one created and sustained by his enemies on the left, and not by his backers.
I see why people think that, but unfortunately I think it's a typical example of the narrow, binary thinking that seems to pervade every issue these days.There's a gulf between "blurt out whatever you're thinking, even if what you are thinking is definitely not something like 'Hmm, is this an intelligent thing to say?'" and "Follow all the PC rules of the left". A gulf big enough to jam the combined egos of Trump, Jerry Jones, and Baker Mayfield into.
It definitely is an emotional response and not a logical one. It's also short-term thinking and it's one that will probably cost its adherents in the long-run. What the left doesn't seem to get is that it's an emotional response to them and to their transformation of extremists positions into mainstream. Largely the Trump phenomenon is one created and sustained by his enemies on the left, and not by his backers.
One of the sharpest commentators on this board or any board.
Ok. Thanks. Just missed it.
Horn2RunAgain
2,500+ Posts
You want to know what a "bribe" sounds like?
"I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money."
That's what a bribe sounds like
Yeah but the Dems said Biden had broad international support to do that so its all good.
Apparently Biden is above the law to many on the left. Knowing if Biden is paid and bought by Ukraine is in the national interest. No harm in opening an investigation, the harm like we heard yesterday is not closing the investigation.
Of course they did. He's also a Dem. They will rationalize anything to protect one of their own, as long as they have something to lose if they chose to turn on them.
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
I see why people think that, but unfortunately I think it's a typical example of the narrow, binary thinking that seems to pervade every issue these days.There's a gulf between "blurt out whatever you're thinking, even if what you are thinking is definitely not something like 'Hmm, is this an intelligent thing to say?'" and "Follow all the PC rules of the left". A gulf big enough to jam the combined egos of Trump, Jerry Jones, and Baker Mayfield into.
It definitely is an emotional response and not a logical one. It's also short-term thinking and it's one that will probably cost its adherents in the long-run. What the left doesn't seem to get is that it's an emotional response to them and to their transformation of extremists positions into mainstream. Largely the Trump phenomenon is one created and sustained by his enemies on the left, and not by his backers.
This says everything you need to know about politics today. The Democrats push too far left, then the Republicans respond by pushing even further right. Back and forth, back and forth. Obama and company pushed us to the verge of (if not past) the point of lunacy. Trump and company are now pushing the country even further right, well beyond the point of lunacy. The next swing (whether in 2020 or some future date) will be even more extreme, and will probably result in a socialist in the Oval Office. Those of us in the middle are getting whiplash watching the pendulum swing back and forth.
Are you saying that the GOP today is further out on the right than the Dems are out on the left? I call total BS on that statement.
Trump is mild compared to the 70's and 80's conservatives. Blue laws, Jerry Falwell and his Moral Majority, sodomy laws, and attacks on things as innocent as Dungeons & Dragons are examples of far right lunacy I saw while growing up. We have nothing that resembles that nowadays.
I wish someone on that Committee would admit the truth> That Trump would love Biden to be his "political rival". Trump do nothing to stop Biden from becoming the Dem candidate. He would likely help Biden
maybe Gohmert could do it.
Is there any anti Trumper on here who thinks Trump would not ant Biden?
maybe Gohmert could do it.
Is there any anti Trumper on here who thinks Trump would not ant Biden?
Now that many RINOs are either leaving or being in control, the repubs are moving right. But saying further than the AOC dems is malarkey.
/endthread
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
It is in every American's interest to have US officials involved in corruption to meet harsh consequences.
All the talk by Dems of being against billionaire's and income inequality and then they actively protect their own who have made millions and billions from government corruption and conflict of interest.
All the talk by Dems of being against billionaire's and income inequality and then they actively protect their own who have made millions and billions from government corruption and conflict of interest.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Here is one of the reasons the Dems are in such a hurry. OMB withheld aid to Ukraine over corruption fears before Trump ever got onto it. It makes you wonder what other facts are on the way but haven't hit yet. The Dems are in a race.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...aa030e-1b95-11ea-826b-14ef38a0f45f_story.html
You can satisfy yourself by reading it here in its entirety (9 pages)
https://context-cdn.washingtonpost....note/112b1caa-763c-4c4c-a5bb-0a04f7962d2c.pdf
"The White House budget office asserts in a new legal memo that it withheld military aid to Ukraine as a temporary move to study whether the spending complied with U.S. policy — and not as a political effort to block Congress’s spending decisions.
The office first began discussing the aid on June 19, the day President Trump learned of the aid from an article in the Washington Examiner and questioned the wisdom of the spending. That move sent aides scrambling, according to a senior administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share internal conversations.
The Office of Management and Budget extended the temporary hold on the aid eight times in August and September, the last time being Sept. 10. Almost immediately after that hold, the money was released, according to the new memo, which was reviewed by The Washington Post.
The memo details the White House’s latest legal rationale for freezing foreign aid to Ukraine over the summer. OMB general counsel Mark Paoletta wrote the memo to respond to a request from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, which had asked why the aid had been delayed...."
The office first began discussing the aid on June 19, the day President Trump learned of the aid from an article in the Washington Examiner and questioned the wisdom of the spending. That move sent aides scrambling, according to a senior administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share internal conversations.
The Office of Management and Budget extended the temporary hold on the aid eight times in August and September, the last time being Sept. 10. Almost immediately after that hold, the money was released, according to the new memo, which was reviewed by The Washington Post.
The memo details the White House’s latest legal rationale for freezing foreign aid to Ukraine over the summer. OMB general counsel Mark Paoletta wrote the memo to respond to a request from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, which had asked why the aid had been delayed...."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...aa030e-1b95-11ea-826b-14ef38a0f45f_story.html
You can satisfy yourself by reading it here in its entirety (9 pages)
https://context-cdn.washingtonpost....note/112b1caa-763c-4c4c-a5bb-0a04f7962d2c.pdf
Last edited:
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Agree with Phil. I thinks its just the opposite. Name another Republican not named Lincoln who has ever pulled in this many minorities. Then answer why is this happening? Trump is shifting the entire party in a somewhat different direction.
I think this is why quid pro quo was dropped and the focus shifted to abuse (Biden investigation).
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
The details of that memo show OMB was on the aid issue 5 weeks (I think) before the Trump phone call with the President of Ukraine. Throughout this whole affairs, the facts have been on Trump's side. Every drill down into the details has favored his version. This is why Dems so often talk in sweeping generalities, offering no specifics -- just vague ideas. Backed by emotion and bias.
So here is one more factoid they are rushing to hope the people dont have time to notice. Right now, this very second, the IMF itself is withholding promised aid to Ukraine. Why? Over worries of corruption! They say they cant tell where the money would go. E&Y says Ukraine is the 3rd most corrupt country in the entire world. So it's prudent to go slow, be careful and withhold if you cant be sure.
This is something Trump has done that none of Bush I or II, or Clinton, or Obama ever did, or ever even cared about. But it was something Trump ran on. Why do we send out so much foreign aid money? Who is getting it? Why are they getting it? What are they doing with it? And .... would we be better off spending that money in the US instead? Or not at all? It is our money after all. Dont we have the right to demand answers to these questions? There are alot of people in and around the DC-NYC corridor who do not like this level of scrutiny. They dont even like that someone finally had the guts and sense of duty to ask the questions.
What are they still debating? Its almost 11pm on the east coast. Good grief...
I think there's truth to what you're all saying. I don't think the GOP has moved Right on policy. If anything they've moved somewhat Left. They've pitched entitlement reform to the trash bin. They've pretty much accepted gay marriage. They've become favorable to economic protectionism. To a great extent, they have become similar to the Democrats in the 1990s.
I think the Democrats have certainly moved Left on social and environmental issues. They've gone from "safe, legal, and rare" to what's essentially a view that the government should guarantee not only the right but the ability of everybody (even some dudes) to have abortions without any financial limitations. They've moved from "don't ask, don't tell" to "sue anybody who isn't pro-gay in how they conduct their lives." However, on economic policy, I'm not sure that they've moved that far Left. They are pitching some pretty radical ideas, but many of them are ideas that they've been pitching for years. For example, a national healthcare system of one form or another has been a major priority for a lot of Democrats since the Truman Administration.
What I think has really changed in both parties is a reduction in tolerance for dissent. It was much easier to be a pro-choice Republican 20 or 30 years ago than it is today. They could actually win a primary election and a general election. It was also much easier to be a pro-life Democrat. In fact, lots of Democrats in the '90s were pro-life. They represented rural and union-friendly suburbs in the Midwest. Obviously, on immigration, the shift has been even more stark. If you're a Republican who is libertarian on immigration or a Democrat who isn't effectively for open borders, you're in a very narrow political box.
There has also been a weakening in the political parties. They have far less control over who will be their nominees, and so electability has been less of a priority. Filling the void has been outside groups, who are more radical and simply more belligerent. It's not enough to be generally supportive of gun rights. If you're not pro-open carry, some group of wingnuts will come after you. It's not enough to be pro-choice on abortion. You have to be for taxpayer-funded abortion, and you can't lament abortion. You have to celebrate it. If you're a Democrat who won't go along, some band of freaks will be on your ***.
And of course, all of this has led to a no-compromise, **** everybody else attitude all the way around. If you want to play ball and get some things done with some help from moderates on the other side, you'll get the hell beaten out of you and primaried. And of course, this is why Congress is dysfunctional and why undemocratic courts and bureaucrats are filling the void. It's not good.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
So it now looks like White House Counsel Pat Cipollone will appear before the Senate. He's a good attorney
White House counsel Pat Cipollone expected to defend Trump in Senate impeachment trial
White House counsel Pat Cipollone expected to defend Trump in Senate impeachment trial
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
