WWTBAM Bored

Get on with it. Le shit or off le pot.

I swear, we elect such assholes to represent us. They keep saying the same things over and over and over again. And no one listens to what the other side says, while all Nadler wants to do is take a nap. They mostly read their speeches written by their staff, which totally ignores anything that has already been said, or make pompous, melodramatic speeches that have nothing to do with anything. If any one if them had a brain, they'd say 'enough of this bullshit' and leave the room.

We know the dems aren't going to approve any amendments and they are going to vote it out of committee on a party line vote. No one is going to change their mind, because no one has one.

Go ahead and impeach the bastard already. And be careful what you wish for. Because the other side has control of the next chapter.

There 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.

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pm

There 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.

Yes, they should put the DC swamp on trial. Its HQ is the White House.

Nah. Enough is enough.

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pm

There 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?

Yeah yeah, Canadian, I know.

a1mamacat wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 1:01 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pm

There 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?

Yeah yeah, Canadian, I know.

It is awfully strange to complain about the fairness of a trial while at the same time openly coordinating your defense with the jurors. --Bob

Whatever. Coordinating? Snicker snort. Heart bless, blah blah

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 1:10 pm

a1mamacat wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 1:01 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pm

There 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?

Yeah yeah, Canadian, I know.

It is awfully strange to complain about the fairness of a trial while at the same time openly coordinating your defense with the jurors. --Bob

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.
Maybe they can call in some real circus clowns as subject matter experts to testify how Schiff is one of their own.

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:10 pm

The senate should use the precedent just set by their collegues in the house.

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.

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.

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pm

There 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 don't know much about relevant evidence, do you?

Beebs52 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 1:58 pm

Whatever. Coordinating? Snicker snort. Heart bless, blah blah

Are you claiming that Senator McConnell isn't coordinating with Donny's defense? Because McConnell himself says he is. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 3:08 pm

Beebs52 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 1:58 pm

Whatever. Coordinating? Snicker snort. Heart bless, blah blah

Are you claiming that Senator McConnell isn't coordinating with Donny's defense? Because McConnell himself says he is. --Bob

At least he is more honest than Schiff.

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:22 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:10 pm

The senate should use the precedent just set by their collegues in the house.

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.

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.

The Horowitz report is just the appetizer. Did you READ it, to emulate bob, instead of just parroting the left wing noise machine?
I don't do victory dances like you do or paraphrase what I hear from propagandists. I wait until I see what actually happens before I comment on it. Durham could turn out to be a senile placeholder who knows nothing, like mueller, for all I know, letting partisan hacks draw up whatever they want under the cover of his name. If he is, unlike you, I will take that into account when examining what he found out. Horowitz 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.

Oh, and BTW, Why aren't they using anything from mueller to impeach the bastard? 2-1/2 years for nothing?

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 3:08 pm

Beebs52 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 1:58 pm

Whatever. Coordinating? Snicker snort. Heart bless, blah blah

Are you claiming that Senator McConnell isn't coordinating with Donny's defense? Because McConnell himself says he is. --Bob

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 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pm

There 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 don't know much about relevant evidence, do you?

I see that you haven't answered my question yet.

wbtravis007 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 14, 2019 4:53 pm

wbtravis007 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:46 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pm

There 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 don't know much about relevant evidence, do you?

I see that you haven't answered my question yet.

You a funny man. Schiff Jr Jr.

wbtravis007 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 14, 2019 4:53 pm

wbtravis007 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:46 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:44 pm

There 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 don't know much about relevant evidence, do you?

I see that you haven't answered my question yet.

Oh,you were expecting a response?
In that case my answer would be one ounce of horseradish sauce on a blueberry muffin.

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 3:39 pm

Horowitz 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.

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.

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 14, 2019 8:55 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 3:39 pm

Horowitz 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.

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.

After lying to the American people about what the Report said. Let’s never forget (or forgive) that part. —Bob

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 14, 2019 9:12 pm

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 14, 2019 8:55 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 3:39 pm

Horowitz 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.

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.

After lying to the American people about what the Report said. Let’s never forget (or forgive) that part. —Bob

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.
But that's ok with you because your echo chamber says it is.
Let's just ignore that, shall we?

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 14, 2019 10:09 pm

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 14, 2019 9:12 pm

silverscreenselect 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.

After lying to the American people about what the Report said. Let’s never forget (or forgive) that part. —Bob

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.
But that's ok with you because your echo chamber says it is.
Let's just ignore that, shall we?

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. —Bob

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Sun Dec 15, 2019 1:40 am

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 14, 2019 10:09 pm

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 14, 2019 9:12 pm

After lying to the American people about what the Report said. Let’s never forget (or forgive) that part. —Bob

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.
But that's ok with you because your echo chamber says it is.
Let's just ignore that, shall we?

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. —Bob

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.

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Sun Dec 15, 2019 7:09 am

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.

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.

The question is whether these errors were unique to the Trump investigation because of some sort of anti-Trump bias, which is at the center of all the deep state conspiracy theories, and evidence for that was lacking. Where Horowitz found inaccuracies in the FBI presentation, you and other right-wingers find fraudulent intent at the time of the investigation. What's more, you would think that in an organization the size of the FBI, a substantial number of whose agents would be at the least impartial and possibly favoring Trump and other Republicans, someone would have said something about this "conspiracy." Instead, all we get is the same tired groundless speculation about the same half dozen or so names. You would think that people upset about what these "conspirators" were doing would document their dissatisfaction through memos or some way that Horowitz would certainly have found in a thorough investigation.

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 14, 2019 7:01 pm

wbtravis007 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 14, 2019 4:53 pm

wbtravis007 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:46 pm

You don't know much about relevant evidence, do you?

I see that you haven't answered my question yet.

Oh,you were expecting a response?
In that case my answer would be one ounce of horseradish sauce on a blueberry muffin.

You actually think that some people find you amusing, don't you?