Jump to content

Nancy Pelosi is a badass MF and I want her to be Speaker


Hugo Stiglitz

Recommended Posts

I agree it shows weakness but the more I think about it, Nancy’s comments appear very calculated and deliberate.  Almost like she’s providing preemptive cover for all the shit that’s about to go down in the committees.   

Nancy be like, “Who is talking about impeachment?  We’re not talking about impeachment.  I don’t understand what the republicans’ problem is with oversight.”

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I agree it shows weakness but the more I think about it, Nancy’s comments appear very calculated and deliberate.  Almost like she’s providing preemptive cover for all the shit that’s about to go down in the committees.   

Nancy be like, “Who is talking about impeachment?  We’re not talking about impeachment.  I don’t understand what the republicans’ problem is with oversight.”

^ Exactly.

Impeachment is a political loser right now. It's a non-starter in the Senate and could increase the chances Trump is re-elected. 

Oversight of an administration that is increasingly being viewed as incompetent and corrupt is a political winner right now. It also might lead to enough evidence to make impeachment and removal viable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two things that are probably making impeachment impossible.

First, it’s probably impossible to snare Trump’s involvement in crimes. The whole collusion charge gets fuzzy fast when you start taking about opposition research. Same thing with obstruction of justice. It can be argued away. This isn’t the 1970’s. The charges have to be so clear and compelling that no one can refute them. I’ve also felt Trump would slip thru. He never writes anything down and never is caught talking about illegal activities.

Which leads to the second reason. Our politicians, and particularly the GOP, have lost all moral behavior. They don’t care if there were/are crimes. They just want to stay in power. Republicans today will never join with Democrats in going after Trump. Never. Look at what they did with Cohen’s testimony. They just try to muddy the water for voters.

Finally, our population is about 80% idiots. These people will believe whatever they’ve been told, watched or read.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dbeasy said:

There are two things that are probably making impeachment impossible.

First, it’s probably impossible to snare Trump’s involvement in crimes. The whole collusion charge gets fuzzy fast when you start taking about opposition research. Same thing with obstruction of justice. It can be argued away. This isn’t the 1970’s. The charges have to be so clear and compelling that no one can refute them. I’ve also felt Trump would slip thru. He never writes anything down and never is caught talking about illegal activities.

Which leads to the second reason. Our politicians, and particularly the GOP, have lost all moral behavior. They don’t care if there were/are crimes. They just want to stay in power. Republicans today will never join with Democrats in going after Trump. Never. Look at what they did with Cohen’s testimony. They just try to muddy the water for voters.

Finally, our population is about 80% idiots. These people will believe whatever they’ve been told, watched or read.

I agree with all of this except the obstruction part.  He admitted it on national television because he is a moron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh, the case for obstruction of justice is about as lock solid as it could possibly be and there's probably a mountain of evidence to support the case the public hasn't seen. 

Trump's subordinates even decided not to follow Trump's orders to fire Mueller because they didn't want to be part of a conspiracy to obstruct justice. 

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

There are two things that are probably making impeachment impossible.

First, it’s probably impossible to snare Trump’s involvement in crimes. The whole collusion charge gets fuzzy fast when you start taking about opposition research. Same thing with obstruction of justice. It can be argued away. This isn’t the 1970’s. The charges have to be so clear and compelling that no one can refute them. I’ve also felt Trump would slip thru. He never writes anything down and never is caught talking about illegal activities.

Which leads to the second reason. Our politicians, and particularly the GOP, have lost all moral behavior. They don’t care if there were/are crimes. They just want to stay in power. Republicans today will never join with Democrats in going after Trump. Never. Look at what they did with Cohen’s testimony. They just try to muddy the water for voters.

Finally, our population is about 80% idiots. These people will believe whatever they’ve been told, watched or read.

It’s all about re-election. The moment GOP seats are in jeopardy for supporting Trump, is the moment Senate Rs jump ship. I have enough faith in a majority of Republican voters that they do not want to support a criminal OR someone who is easily bribed by foreign officials. (whynotboth.gif) Granted, some people are lost forever. But I believe transparency and real oversight can have significant impact on GOP registered voter support. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there's plenty of people who think that obstruction isn't actually a crime.  it'd be like trying to get a conviction for the code violation of using an extension cord as permanent wiring.

clear quid pro quo with the emoluments clause is something more people think is wrong, but, again, lots think all politicians do it #bothsides so they'll shrug their shoulders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, elfenix said:

there's plenty of people who think that obstruction isn't actually a crime.  it'd be like trying to get a conviction for the code violation of using an extension cord as permanent wiring.

Do those people consider these things crimes:

witness tampering, suborning perjury, witness intimidation, retaliation against witnesses, retaliation against law enforcement personnel, destruction of evidence, falsification of records.

Because they are all crimes under the obstruction of justice umbrella. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do those people consider these things crimes:
witness tampering, suborning perjury, witness intimidation, retaliation against witnesses, retaliation against law enforcement personnel, destruction of evidence, falsification of records.
Because they are all crimes under the obstruction of justice umbrella. 


But can any of that be definitively tied to Trump? How did Trump word certain phrases? Why did he fire someone? He can just argue he said something different than what witnesses say. He’s bullet proof.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

It’s all about re-election. The moment GOP seats are in jeopardy for supporting Trump, is the moment Senate Rs jump ship. I have enough faith in a majority of Republican voters that they do not want to support a criminal OR someone who is easily bribed by foreign officials. (whynotboth.gif) Granted, some people are lost forever. But I believe transparency and real oversight can have significant impact on GOP registered voter support. 

Image result for bender laughing gif

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

It’s all about re-election. The moment GOP seats are in jeopardy for supporting Trump, is the moment Senate Rs jump ship. I have enough faith in a majority of Republican voters that they do not want to support a criminal OR someone who is easily bribed by foreign officials. 

Google "Hunter, Duncan"

Edited by Gil Bang
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

But can any of that be definitively tied to Trump? How did Trump word certain phrases? Why did he fire someone? He can just argue he said something different than what witnesses say. He’s bullet proof.

 

The bar is, “Can I convince a jury (the American people) beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump personally obstructed justice with corrupt intent to prevent him and/or his co-conspirators from being held accountable?”

There is an almost never ending pattern of evidence, testimony, and public statements to prove this.  

Trump has verbally attacked, intimidated, or threatened almost everyone that could hold him accountable or associated with the investigations. Comey, Sessions, Rosenstein, Mueller, the press, the FBI, the DOJ, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Ohr, Schiff, Warner, Cohen, democrats.  There’s a good reason you’re not supposed to comment on ongoing investigations. 

And that’s before we even get to the litany of actions he either took or directed to hamstring, hinder, or shutdown the Russia investigations. 

Just the observable evidence is overwhelming and too long to list.  I can’t imagine what went on behind the scenes that we don’t know about. 

On top of all this is the fact that the investigation was about a hostile foreign power maliciously trying to destabilize the United States.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

There are two things that are probably making impeachment impossible.

My two things about impeachment being impossible right now are:

  1. We haven’t seen the final reports from Mueller, the House Committees, etc. (not to mention the actions of the SDNY)
  2. We don’t know which Republicans in Congress are compromised and going down with Trump

This notion that impeachment can’t happen doesnt fly when we have seen very little in regards to Trump and his family.   When the report comes out, and when/if SDNY begins to dismantle Trump Org, and when/if we see the GOP being tainted (NRA, Russia, etc.), you will see plenty of Republicans turning.  

As the investigations have progressed, we have seen Trump and Republicans in Congress truly losing their shit on Twitter, or in comments to reporters (or Supreme Court confirmations).  

These people have not acted at all like people who are confident they will be found innocent.  

The Trumps, Graham, etc. all act like fucking cowards afraid they are going down.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

My two things about impeachment being impossible right now are:

  1. We haven’t seen the final reports from Mueller, the House Committees, etc. (not to mention the actions of the SDNY)
  2. We don’t know which Republicans in Congress are compromised and going down with Trump

This notion that impeachment can’t happen doesnt fly when we have seen very little in regards to Trump and his family.   When the report comes out, and when/if SDNY begins to dismantle Trump Org, and when/if we see the GOP being tainted (NRA, Russia, etc.), you will see plenty of Republicans turning.  

As the investigations have progressed, we have seen Trump and Republicans in Congress truly losing their shit on Twitter, or in comments to reporters (or Supreme Court confirmations).  

These people have not acted at all like people who are confident they will be found innocent.  

The Trumps, Graham, etc. all act like fucking cowards afraid they are going down.   

I just don't see it happening. If things are as blatant as the claims are, why has nothing been done in 2 years of investigations. Chuck Rhoades and crew have had 40 years to investigate the family business, why are they going to dismantle it now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DCA_HORN said:

I just don't see it happening. If things are as blatant as the claims are, why has nothing been done in 2 years of investigations. Chuck Rhoades and crew have had 40 years to investigate the family business, why are they going to dismantle it now?

Why are Trump, Graham, etc. scared shitless?

They do not act like men who are innocent.  They are doing everything possible to undermine any and all reports about their behavior.  

Edited by atomheartbevo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DCA_HORN said:

I just don't see it happening. If things are as blatant as the claims are, why has nothing been done in 2 years of investigations. Chuck Rhoades and crew have had 40 years to investigate the family business, why are they going to dismantle it now?

Depends on probable cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, elfenix said:

there's plenty of people who think that obstruction isn't actually a crime.  it'd be like trying to get a conviction for the code violation of using an extension cord as permanent wiring.

clear quid pro quo with the emoluments clause is something more people think is wrong, but, again, lots think all politicians do it #bothsides so they'll shrug their shoulders.

There’s plenty of people who think that. There’s plenty of people who are stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/12/702577175/speaker-pelosi-revokes-mike-pences-house-office-space

Quote

The speaker giveth, and the speaker taketh away.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has reclaimed office space her predecessor, Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., awarded to Vice President Pence.

Republicans gave Pence, a former House member, a first-floor bonus office in the U.S. Capitol shortly after President Trump was inaugurated in 2017. 

The vice president rarely used the space, but it was a symbolic gesture of the warm relationship Pence enjoyed with Ryan and the House GOP.

Quote

A placard above the door identifying it as Pence's House office was quietly removed in recent weeks. A House Democratic aide confirmed to NPR that the space will be reassigned. "Room assignments are reviewed and changed at the beginning of every Congress," the aide said. 

The speaker has sole authority to dole out office space in the Capitol, which is prized real estate for members of leadership and senior staff. While Pelosi revoked Pence's office privileges, the aide said she is providing new office space for the White House legislative affairs team that it did not previously enjoy under the GOP majority.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The obstruction case against the orange guy won’t stick and will get too complicated for the jury. The jury only needs 1-2 trump idiots on it or even a q believer and the case falls will never convict.  Don’t underestimate the stupidity of some voters 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Lulz, my new favorite comedy is watching Fozzz throw shit against the wall to try and get a rise out of people, only to be completely ignored again and again. Fozz, I think I'm the only one who doesn't have you on ignore.... 

I'm still there for Fozzz. I don't ignore or neg rep on principle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



It’s all about re-election. The moment GOP seats are in jeopardy for supporting Trump, is the moment Senate Rs jump ship. I have enough faith in a majority of Republican voters that they do not want to support a criminal OR someone who is easily bribed by foreign officials. (whynotboth.gif) Granted, some people are lost forever. But I believe transparency and real oversight can have significant impact on GOP registered voter support. 


Your point about seats being in jeopardy is correct. Your point about the Republican electorate has been proven incorrect, unfortunately. The ones that were ever going to be willing to vote country over party did so in 2018, resulting in a significant realignment of the house map. The ones still there have shown no signs of anything but holding one until the bitter end.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

She never wanted to go anywhere near impeachment.  She’s probably glad Barr made it easy for her.   Focusing on the issues is smart too.

They still need to Benghazi Trump in other corruption matters (emoluments, abuse of power, obstruction, security clearances) there’s plenty to work with. 

However, staying away from the Russia stuff is smart. 

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

She never wanted to go anywhere near impeachment.  She’s probably glad Barr made it easy for her.   Focusing on the issues is smart too.

They still need to Benghazi Trump in other corruption matters (emoluments, abuse of power, obstruction, security clearances) there’s plenty to work with. 

However, staying away from the Russia stuff is smart. 

< immediately goes back to posting about Russia >

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/25/2019 at 5:47 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

She never wanted to go anywhere near impeachment.  She’s probably glad Barr made it easy for her.   Focusing on the issues is smart too.

They still need to Benghazi Trump in other corruption matters (emoluments, abuse of power, obstruction, security clearances) there’s plenty to work with. 

However, staying away from the Russia stuff is smart. 

Narrator:  They won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...