Hey Judiciary Comm
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:03 pm
Get on with it. Le shit or off le pot.
Yes, they should put the DC swamp on trial. Its HQ is the White House.flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pmThere is some speculation some dems might vote no in order to save their seats, but probably not enough to make a difference. (In my opinion.)
When it gets to the senate, Graham wants to stop it in it's tracks. I dont agree.
In my opinion, not hannity's, breitbart's or anyone else's, trump should use this opportunity, given to him by the radical dems, to put the deep state resistance and the DC swamp on trial.
Subpoena everyone who the dems didn't allow to be heard. Get Schiff on the stand. Get one or both Bidens on the stand. Get Comey, Strzok, Brennan, McCabe and all the others up there and lets see what happens. Maybe even Hillary. I would even recommend they subpoena bob-tel. Why not? He is a perfect example of the "resistance". Let's have a right wing circus for a change. Make it interesting.
Does your everybody include Rudy, Pompeo, Barr, Mulvaney and Bolton that Trump refused to allow to testify? I mean McConnell has already announced the verdict, so why not get it all out there?flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pmThere is some speculation some dems might vote no in order to save their seats, but probably not enough to make a difference. (In my opinion.)
When it gets to the senate, Graham wants to stop it in it's tracks. I dont agree.
In my opinion, not hannity's, breitbart's or anyone else's, trump should use this opportunity, given to him by the radical dems, to put the deep state resistance and the DC swamp on trial.
Subpoena everyone who the dems didn't allow to be heard. Get Schiff on the stand. Get one or both Bidens on the stand. Get Comey, Strzok, Brennan, McCabe and all the others up there and lets see what happens. Maybe even Hillary. I would even recommend they subpoena bob-tel. Why not? He is a perfect example of the "resistance". Let's have a right wing circus for a change. Make it interesting.
It is awfully strange to complain about the fairness of a trial while at the same time openly coordinating your defense with the jurors. --Boba1mamacat wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 1:01 pmDoes your everybody include Rudy, Pompeo, Barr, Mulvaney and Bolton that Trump refused to allow to testify? I mean McConnell has already announced the verdict, so why not get it all out there?flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pmThere is some speculation some dems might vote no in order to save their seats, but probably not enough to make a difference. (In my opinion.)
When it gets to the senate, Graham wants to stop it in it's tracks. I dont agree.
In my opinion, not hannity's, breitbart's or anyone else's, trump should use this opportunity, given to him by the radical dems, to put the deep state resistance and the DC swamp on trial.
Subpoena everyone who the dems didn't allow to be heard. Get Schiff on the stand. Get one or both Bidens on the stand. Get Comey, Strzok, Brennan, McCabe and all the others up there and lets see what happens. Maybe even Hillary. I would even recommend they subpoena bob-tel. Why not? He is a perfect example of the "resistance". Let's have a right wing circus for a change. Make it interesting.
Yeah yeah, Canadian, I know.
Fairness? What the hell does that have to do with anything? The senate should use the precedent just set by their collegues in the house. Just put up their own circus tent and send in the clowns.Bob78164 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 1:10 pmIt is awfully strange to complain about the fairness of a trial while at the same time openly coordinating your defense with the jurors. --Boba1mamacat wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 1:01 pmDoes your everybody include Rudy, Pompeo, Barr, Mulvaney and Bolton that Trump refused to allow to testify? I mean McConnell has already announced the verdict, so why not get it all out there?flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pmThere is some speculation some dems might vote no in order to save their seats, but probably not enough to make a difference. (In my opinion.)
When it gets to the senate, Graham wants to stop it in it's tracks. I dont agree.
In my opinion, not hannity's, breitbart's or anyone else's, trump should use this opportunity, given to him by the radical dems, to put the deep state resistance and the DC swamp on trial.
Subpoena everyone who the dems didn't allow to be heard. Get Schiff on the stand. Get one or both Bidens on the stand. Get Comey, Strzok, Brennan, McCabe and all the others up there and lets see what happens. Maybe even Hillary. I would even recommend they subpoena bob-tel. Why not? He is a perfect example of the "resistance". Let's have a right wing circus for a change. Make it interesting.
Yeah yeah, Canadian, I know.
I wish the Senate would do that. Call witnesses like Bolton, Pompeo, Giuliani who have knowledge of the facts and question them under oath. Instead, they will probably emulate their colleagues in the House and bring up every irrelevant, nonsensical objection and conspiracy theory they can think of while yelling witch hunt every step of the way.flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:10 pmThe senate should use the precedent just set by their collegues in the house.
You don't know much about relevant evidence, do you?flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pmThere is some speculation some dems might vote no in order to save their seats, but probably not enough to make a difference. (In my opinion.)
When it gets to the senate, Graham wants to stop it in it's tracks. I dont agree.
In my opinion, not hannity's, breitbart's or anyone else's, trump should use this opportunity, given to him by the radical dems, to put the deep state resistance and the DC swamp on trial.
Subpoena everyone who the dems didn't allow to be heard. Get Schiff on the stand. Get one or both Bidens on the stand. Get Comey, Strzok, Brennan, McCabe and all the others up there and lets see what happens. Maybe even Hillary. I would even recommend they subpoena bob-tel. Why not? He is a perfect example of the "resistance". Let's have a right wing circus for a change. Make it interesting.
At least he is more honest than Schiff.
The Horowitz report is just the appetizer. Did you READ it, to emulate bob, instead of just parroting the left wing noise machine?silverscreenselect wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:22 pmI wish the Senate would do that. Call witnesses like Bolton, Pompeo, Giuliani who have knowledge of the facts and question them under oath. Instead, they will probably emulate their colleagues in the House and bring up every irrelevant, nonsensical objection and conspiracy theory they can think of while yelling witch hunt every step of the way.flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:10 pmThe senate should use the precedent just set by their collegues in the house.
If you examine the actual questioning of witnesses that the Republicans did in the House proceedings, as opposed to whining, speech making, and complaining, you would find those questions were few and far between.
I noticed you hadn't commented on the Horowitz report. I guess that shoots another one of your conspiracy theories down. But right wingers are undeterred. If one conspiracy theory goes up in flames just invent a bigger one that includes the report debunking the first conspiracy.
As I said-Heart bless. Can't wait til it's finished. I probably won't be like my usual ladylike self. SNICKER. Really. Schiff Jr..
wbtravis007 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:46 pmYou don't know much about relevant evidence, do you?flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pmThere is some speculation some dems might vote no in order to save their seats, but probably not enough to make a difference. (In my opinion.)
When it gets to the senate, Graham wants to stop it in it's tracks. I dont agree.
In my opinion, not hannity's, breitbart's or anyone else's, trump should use this opportunity, given to him by the radical dems, to put the deep state resistance and the DC swamp on trial.
Subpoena everyone who the dems didn't allow to be heard. Get Schiff on the stand. Get one or both Bidens on the stand. Get Comey, Strzok, Brennan, McCabe and all the others up there and lets see what happens. Maybe even Hillary. I would even recommend they subpoena bob-tel. Why not? He is a perfect example of the "resistance". Let's have a right wing circus for a change. Make it interesting.
You a funny man. Schiff Jr Jr.wbtravis007 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2019 4:53 pmwbtravis007 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:46 pmYou don't know much about relevant evidence, do you?flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pmThere is some speculation some dems might vote no in order to save their seats, but probably not enough to make a difference. (In my opinion.)
When it gets to the senate, Graham wants to stop it in it's tracks. I dont agree.
In my opinion, not hannity's, breitbart's or anyone else's, trump should use this opportunity, given to him by the radical dems, to put the deep state resistance and the DC swamp on trial.
Subpoena everyone who the dems didn't allow to be heard. Get Schiff on the stand. Get one or both Bidens on the stand. Get Comey, Strzok, Brennan, McCabe and all the others up there and lets see what happens. Maybe even Hillary. I would even recommend they subpoena bob-tel. Why not? He is a perfect example of the "resistance". Let's have a right wing circus for a change. Make it interesting.
I see that you haven't answered my question yet.
Oh,you were expecting a response?wbtravis007 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2019 4:53 pmwbtravis007 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:46 pmYou don't know much about relevant evidence, do you?flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pmThere is some speculation some dems might vote no in order to save their seats, but probably not enough to make a difference. (In my opinion.)
When it gets to the senate, Graham wants to stop it in it's tracks. I dont agree.
In my opinion, not hannity's, breitbart's or anyone else's, trump should use this opportunity, given to him by the radical dems, to put the deep state resistance and the DC swamp on trial.
Subpoena everyone who the dems didn't allow to be heard. Get Schiff on the stand. Get one or both Bidens on the stand. Get Comey, Strzok, Brennan, McCabe and all the others up there and lets see what happens. Maybe even Hillary. I would even recommend they subpoena bob-tel. Why not? He is a perfect example of the "resistance". Let's have a right wing circus for a change. Make it interesting.
I see that you haven't answered my question yet.
Well, what Horowitz found was no evidence of a political bias in the FBI investigation. No evidence of any deep state conspiracy. A conspiracy that seems to exist solely in the minds of Trump and his various enablers.flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 3:39 pmHorowitz seemed to be in complete control of his faculties and was careful not to say anything the least controversial.
BTW, Horowitz says his report does not exonerate or charge anyone. That's not what it's for, Sherlock.
After lying to the American people about what the Report said. Let’s never forget (or forgive) that part. —Bobsilverscreenselect wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2019 8:55 pmWell, what Horowitz found was no evidence of a political bias in the FBI investigation. No evidence of any deep state conspiracy. A conspiracy that seems to exist solely in the minds of Trump and his various enablers.flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 3:39 pmHorowitz seemed to be in complete control of his faculties and was careful not to say anything the least controversial.
BTW, Horowitz says his report does not exonerate or charge anyone. That's not what it's for, Sherlock.
Mueller did find plenty of evidence that Trump obstructed justice. Barr just chose not to act on it.
He said he found no evidence of bias at the START of the investigation, (befire Strzok, Comey and the rest got involved), but plenty of wrong doing to keep it going. Like using the dirt gotten from a foreign source paid for by a presidential candidate that they knew was unverifiable to extend it. Leaving out information that would exonerate their target and falsifying emails to extend it. Not letting trump know they suspected there was a russian spy in his campaign, so they could continue to spy on him.Bob78164 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2019 9:12 pmAfter lying to the American people about what the Report said. Let’s never forget (or forgive) that part. —Bobsilverscreenselect wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2019 8:55 pmWell, what Horowitz found was no evidence of a political bias in the FBI investigation. No evidence of any deep state conspiracy. A conspiracy that seems to exist solely in the minds of Trump and his various enablers.flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 3:39 pmHorowitz seemed to be in complete control of his faculties and was careful not to say anything the least controversial.
BTW, Horowitz says his report does not exonerate or charge anyone. That's not what it's for, Sherlock.
Mueller did find plenty of evidence that Trump obstructed justice. Barr just chose not to act on it.
You have your facts so far wrong it’s obvious you rely on and implicitly trust Fox Propaganda for your information. And as long as that’s the case (as it is for far too much of the Republican Party), the only solution is to electorally steamroll your candidates. We’ll get back to you when and if you join us in the fact-based world. —Bobflockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2019 10:09 pmHe said he found no evidence of bias at the START of the investigation, (befire Strzok, Comey and the rest got involved), but plenty of wrong doing to keep it going. Like using the dirt gotten from a foreign source paid for by a presidential candidate that they knew was unverifiable to extend it. Leaving out information that would exonerate their target and falsifying emails to extend it. Not letting trump know they suspected there was a russian spy in his campaign, so they could continue to spy on him.Bob78164 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2019 9:12 pmAfter lying to the American people about what the Report said. Let’s never forget (or forgive) that part. —Bobsilverscreenselect wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2019 8:55 pm
Well, what Horowitz found was no evidence of a political bias in the FBI investigation. No evidence of any deep state conspiracy. A conspiracy that seems to exist solely in the minds of Trump and his various enablers.
Mueller did find plenty of evidence that Trump obstructed justice. Barr just chose not to act on it.
But that's ok with you because your echo chamber says it is.
Let's just ignore that, shall we?
I actually watched the Horowitz testimony. You didn't. CNN didn't find it newsworthy enough to present to it's dozen or so viewers. But they showed every second of the impeachment circus.Bob78164 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 1:40 amYou have your facts so far wrong it’s obvious you rely on and implicitly trust Fox Propaganda for your information. And as long as that’s the case (as it is for far too much of the Republican Party), the only solution is to electorally steamroll your candidates. We’ll get back to you when and if you join us in the fact-based world. —Bobflockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2019 10:09 pmHe said he found no evidence of bias at the START of the investigation, (befire Strzok, Comey and the rest got involved), but plenty of wrong doing to keep it going. Like using the dirt gotten from a foreign source paid for by a presidential candidate that they knew was unverifiable to extend it. Leaving out information that would exonerate their target and falsifying emails to extend it. Not letting trump know they suspected there was a russian spy in his campaign, so they could continue to spy on him.
But that's ok with you because your echo chamber says it is.
Let's just ignore that, shall we?
Flock, you're mixing up apples and oranges here to get the results you want. A lot of people have criticized the FISA process for years on civil liberties and due process grounds. That has nothing to do with who is being investigated. Horowitz found examples of these same types of mistakes. My feeling is that if he had launched an in-depth investigation into a lot FISA warrants over the years, he would have found similar mistakes.flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 7:09 amI actually watched the Horowitz testimony. You didn't. CNN didn't find it newsworthy enough to present to it's dozen or so viewers. But they showed every second of the impeachment circus.
flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2019 7:01 pmOh,you were expecting a response?
In that case my answer would be one ounce of horseradish sauce on a blueberry muffin.