Whistleblowers

A Place to respectfully discuss those topics that you should never discuss.
post

Should we keep whistleblower laws?

Yes, they serve a purpose to root out upper level illegal actions
18
95%
No, it's not fair to the accused.
1
5%
 
Total votes : 19

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby deltbucs » Fri Nov 08, 2019 7:38 pm

Ken Carson wrote:Are you trying to downplay how your post supports my notion that this guy doesn’t deserve protections? In a post where you distinguish him from “real whistleblowers?”

Maybe you need to step back and not worry about who is making what argument and just go on the principles you are clearly expressing, no matter who your allies are?

LOL!!

You really are too much of a fucktard to understand my post, huh?
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 6764
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 282 times
Been thanked: 399 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Ken Carson » Fri Nov 08, 2019 8:13 pm

deltbucs wrote:
Ken Carson wrote:Are you trying to downplay how your post supports my notion that this guy doesn’t deserve protections? In a post where you distinguish him from “real whistleblowers?”

Maybe you need to step back and not worry about who is making what argument and just go on the principles you are clearly expressing, no matter who your allies are?

LOL!!

You really are too much of a fucktard to understand my post, huh?

To understand that you differentiate what this guy did and what real whistleblowers do? I definitely understood that. What I don’t understand is why Clwy wants to treat real whistleblowers and this cat the same.
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 5597
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 369 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Brazen331 » Fri Nov 08, 2019 8:32 pm

It is pretty clear why people like Clewy and Delt are so protective of this cat. He will be destroyed on cross examination, absolutely obliterated and the case will fall apart even more than it already has. Support for Impeachment is dropping in case you haven't noticed. This needs to be a bipartisan process; Pelosi F'ed up, big time.
Brazen331
 
Posts: 3993
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 3:25 am
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 76 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby deltbucs » Fri Nov 08, 2019 8:47 pm

Ken Carson wrote:
deltbucs wrote:LOL!!

You really are too much of a fucktard to understand my post, huh?

To understand that you differentiate what this guy did and what real whistleblowers do? I definitely understood that. What I don’t understand is why Clwy wants to treat real whistleblowers and this cat the same.

"Yes" would have sufficed.
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 6764
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 282 times
Been thanked: 399 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby deltbucs » Fri Nov 08, 2019 8:48 pm

Speaking of fucktards....
Brazen331 wrote:It is pretty clear why people like Clewy and Delt are so protective of this cat. He will be destroyed on cross examination, absolutely obliterated and the case will fall apart even more than it already has. Support for Impeachment is dropping in case you haven't noticed. This needs to be a bipartisan process; Pelosi F'ed up, big time.

LOL!!
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 6764
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 282 times
Been thanked: 399 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Alpha » Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:22 am

Brazen331 wrote:It is pretty clear why people like Clewy and Delt are so protective of this cat. He will be destroyed on cross examination, absolutely obliterated and the case will fall apart even more than it already has. Support for Impeachment is dropping in case you haven't noticed. This needs to be a bipartisan process; Pelosi F'ed up, big time.


Man...it must suck when your boy is on the wrong side of things. You people still fail to understand how the worm turns. You are saying the EXACT SAME **** that the Dems were saying during the Clinton proceedings!

Don't worry, sunshine. He'll be impeached in the House and NOT convicted in the Senate. Much like the Clinton debacle.

Unless, of course, he pisses off enough Republican Senators to change their votes.

In the end...nothing of substance will happen. You nit-wits will defend Drumph to your dying breath and the rest of us will continue to laugh at your hypocrisy.

Whateves.
Alpha
 
Posts: 5618
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:51 am
Location: St. Pete
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 104 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Brazen331 » Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:30 am

Alpha wrote:
Brazen331 wrote:It is pretty clear why people like Clewy and Delt are so protective of this cat. He will be destroyed on cross examination, absolutely obliterated and the case will fall apart even more than it already has. Support for Impeachment is dropping in case you haven't noticed. This needs to be a bipartisan process; Pelosi F'ed up, big time.


Man...it must suck when your boy is on the wrong side of things. You people still fail to understand how the worm turns. You are saying the EXACT SAME **** that the Dems were saying during the Clinton proceedings!

Don't worry, sunshine. He'll be impeached in the House and NOT convicted in the Senate. Much like the Clinton debacle.

Unless, of course, he pisses off enough Republican Senators to change their votes.

In the end...nothing of substance will happen. You nit-wits will defend Drumph to your dying breath and the rest of us will continue to laugh at your hypocrisy.

Whateves.


Are you afraid they will run out of things to try to Impeach him on? Drumpf still has 5 years to go.
Brazen331
 
Posts: 3993
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 3:25 am
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 76 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Alpha » Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:01 am

Brazen331 wrote:
Alpha wrote:
Man...it must suck when your boy is on the wrong side of things. You people still fail to understand how the worm turns. You are saying the EXACT SAME **** that the Dems were saying during the Clinton proceedings!

Don't worry, sunshine. He'll be impeached in the House and NOT convicted in the Senate. Much like the Clinton debacle.

Unless, of course, he pisses off enough Republican Senators to change their votes.

In the end...nothing of substance will happen. You nit-wits will defend Drumph to your dying breath and the rest of us will continue to laugh at your hypocrisy.

Whateves.


Are you afraid they will run out of things to try to Impeach him on? Drumpf still has 5 years to go.


You idiot. It doesn't MATTER what they do or don't have. The Dems control the House...just as the R's did during Clinton. It's a simple vote to impeach. Clinton was impeached for OBSTRUCTION. Drumph has clearly done AT LEAST that. The Dems have the votes to impeach, if they chose to. That's just a FACT.

Clinton wasn't CONVICTED in the Senate. There is a difference between being "impeached" and being "convicted". Jesus...you need to go back to high school and re-learn "civics". It's where they taught you about this process...

Drumph may or may not have 5 more years. We have no idea if that's a fact or not. You don't need "things" to impeach him on. You need "thinG" and the votes. The process for "Impeachment" is spelled out in the Constitution. It will be "bi-partisan" in the sense that both parties will participate. That doesn't change anything.

The fact is that Pelosi isn't stupid...even though you want that to be true. She hasn't fucked up thus far and she's LIKELY to get Drumph impeached. She's also not going to lose her seat in Congress.

So please explain to me how she's fucked up?

You're just so enamored with your boy and blind to the reality of the situation, that you're just content to grasp at straws and hope for the best. Again, in the end, nothing much will happen...unless some real shit-storm comes to light. The R's have the votes in the Senate to keep anything from becoming an issue. Calm your tits. Keep sucking your boys **** and see how it plays out in a year.
Alpha
 
Posts: 5618
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:51 am
Location: St. Pete
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 104 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Brazen331 » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:12 am

Alpha wrote:
Brazen331 wrote:
Are you afraid they will run out of things to try to Impeach him on? Drumpf still has 5 years to go.


You idiot. It doesn't MATTER what they do or don't have. The Dems control the House...just as the R's did during Clinton. It's a simple vote to impeach. Clinton was impeached for OBSTRUCTION. Drumph has clearly done AT LEAST that. The Dems have the votes to impeach, if they chose to. That's just a FACT.

Clinton wasn't CONVICTED in the Senate. There is a difference between being "impeached" and being "convicted". Jesus...you need to go back to high school and re-learn "civics". It's where they taught you about this process...

Drumph may or may not have 5 more years. We have no idea if that's a fact or not. You don't need "things" to impeach him on. You need "thinG" and the votes. The process for "Impeachment" is spelled out in the Constitution. It will be "bi-partisan" in the sense that both parties will participate. That doesn't change anything.

The fact is that Pelosi isn't stupid...even though you want that to be true. She hasn't fucked up thus far and she's LIKELY to get Drumph impeached. She's also not going to lose her seat in Congress.

So please explain to me how she's fucked up?

You're just so enamored with your boy and blind to the reality of the situation, that you're just content to grasp at straws and hope for the best. Again, in the end, nothing much will happen...unless some real shit-storm comes to light. The R's have the votes in the Senate to keep anything from becoming an issue. Calm your tits. Keep sucking your boys **** and see how it plays out in a year.


She fucked up because it is not bipartisan, not a single Pub. She won’t lose her seat, But she could lose the House. If she didn’t Impeach, there would be zero chance she loses House. That’s how she fucked up. This is partisan and everyone knows it. And yes, she is stupid.

Nixon was bipartisan; Clinton Impeachment had some Dems cross over, this has no one but Dems and an Independent. Pelosi did exactly what she promised she would not do in January: tear the country apart by conducting an entirely partisan Impeachment process. She fucked up.
Brazen331
 
Posts: 3993
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 3:25 am
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 76 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Jason Bourne » Sat Nov 09, 2019 8:18 am

Brazen331 wrote:Eric Ciaramella seems to be the dude’s name. Media certainly kept a lid on it for a long time. They coordinate well with the Democrats.



Reported


Btw what does his political party have to do with Trump breaking the law ?
User avatar
Jason Bourne
 
Posts: 7804
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 7:47 am
Location: Clearwater
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 86 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Brazen331 » Sat Nov 09, 2019 9:16 am

Jason Bourne wrote:
Brazen331 wrote:Eric Ciaramella seems to be the dude’s name. Media certainly kept a lid on it for a long time. They coordinate well with the Democrats.



Reported


Btw what does his political party have to do with Trump breaking the law ?


Tell us what law Trump broke and why there are no criminal charges you little beeeatch.
Brazen331
 
Posts: 3993
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 3:25 am
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 76 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby HamBone » Sat Nov 09, 2019 9:29 am

Jason Bourne wrote:
Brazen331 wrote:Eric Ciaramella seems to be the dude’s name. Media certainly kept a lid on it for a long time. They coordinate well with the Democrats.



Reported


Btw what does his political party have to do with Trump breaking the law ?


Reported?
User avatar
HamBone
 
Posts: 3293
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby beardmcdoug » Sat Nov 09, 2019 9:34 am

Jason Bourne wrote:
Brazen331 wrote:Eric Ciaramella seems to be the dude’s name. Media certainly kept a lid on it for a long time. They coordinate well with the Democrats.



Reported


Btw what does his political party have to do with Trump breaking the law ?



Lmao! Reported! Hahahaha
User avatar
beardmcdoug
 
Posts: 5478
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:30 pm
Has thanked: 1145 times
Been thanked: 858 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Ken Carson » Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:23 pm

deltbucs wrote:
Ken Carson wrote:To understand that you differentiate what this guy did and what real whistleblowers do? I definitely understood that. What I don’t understand is why Clwy wants to treat real whistleblowers and this cat the same.

"Yes" would have sufficed.

Clear it up for me by answering some simple questions.

1. Do you think this whistleblower is a whistleblower in the same sense that Edward Snowden is?

2. If no, do you think that whistleblower statues were designed to protect guys like Snowden or guys like this dude?

3. If Snowden, does it offend you that someone would use whistleblower laws designed for guys like Snowden to push a partisan political objective?

4. If yes, do you think this whistleblower should benefit from full protection that goes above and beyond the actual statutes to keep his name secret (which in turn prevents legitimate discussion about his motivations)?

If you answer those questions, I’ll be much better able to have an understanding of where you are coming from.
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 5597
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 369 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Ken Carson » Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:29 pm

And I’ll just throw this out there... if you are in favor of whistleblower protections, as virtually all people in the thread seem to be in one way or another, then I would assume you would be offended by someone who uses them as a shield for a political operation instead of how they were intended to be used.

I kinda get the same feeling whenever I see a cop use his lights to run a red light. Yes, you have the ability to put your lights on and make traffic part like the Red Sea. But it ain’t for that. That is for you to serve and protect people. Not run a red light that you’d ticket Joe Schmoe for running.
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 5597
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 369 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Jason Bourne » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:09 pm

It’s real Simple , if Trump broke the law he should be impeached .

All this BS about the whistleblower doesn’t matter . The truth will come out
User avatar
Jason Bourne
 
Posts: 7804
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 7:47 am
Location: Clearwater
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 86 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby HamBone » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:13 pm

Jason Bourne wrote:It’s real Simple , if Trump broke the law he should be impeached .

All this BS about the whistleblower doesn’t matter . The truth will come out


Which law? Any law? Or are you referring to a specific law?
User avatar
HamBone
 
Posts: 3293
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Jason Bourne » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:18 pm

HamBone wrote:
Jason Bourne wrote:It’s real Simple , if Trump broke the law he should be impeached .

All this BS about the whistleblower doesn’t matter . The truth will come out


Which law? Any law? Or are you referring to a specific law?


Multiple broken laws, could be At least 4 broken laws ...
And yes I know to some of you it doesn’t matter but thankfully you don’t matter .

guess Biden has him scared as hell , lol

“In all, former prosecutors told Insider, there are at least four areas where Trump could face legal jeopardy: violating federal campaign finance laws, bribery, misappropriation, and conspiracy.”
User avatar
Jason Bourne
 
Posts: 7804
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 7:47 am
Location: Clearwater
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 86 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Jason Bourne » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:20 pm

Or this one

The complaint accused Trump of "using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election" during the call.
User avatar
Jason Bourne
 
Posts: 7804
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 7:47 am
Location: Clearwater
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 86 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby HamBone » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:20 pm

Jason Bourne wrote:
HamBone wrote:
Which law? Any law? Or are you referring to a specific law?


Multiple broken laws, could be At least 4 broken laws ...
And yes I know to some of you it doesn’t matter but thankfully you don’t matter .

guess Biden has him scared as hell , lol

“In all, former prosecutors told Insider, there are at least four areas where Trump could face legal jeopardy: violating federal campaign finance laws, bribery, misappropriation, and conspiracy.”


So, any time a President breaks a law they should be impeached? Is that your opinion?
User avatar
HamBone
 
Posts: 3293
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Jason Bourne » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:28 pm

HamBone wrote:
Jason Bourne wrote:
Multiple broken laws, could be At least 4 broken laws ...
And yes I know to some of you it doesn’t matter but thankfully you don’t matter .

guess Biden has him scared as hell , lol

“In all, former prosecutors told Insider, there are at least four areas where Trump could face legal jeopardy: violating federal campaign finance laws, bribery, misappropriation, and conspiracy.”


So, any time a President breaks a law they should be impeached? Is that your opinion?


Yeah why not ?

So the President is above the law ? Is that your opinion ?
User avatar
Jason Bourne
 
Posts: 7804
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 7:47 am
Location: Clearwater
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 86 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby HamBone » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:39 pm

Jason Bourne wrote:
HamBone wrote:
So, any time a President breaks a law they should be impeached? Is that your opinion?


Yeah why not ?

So the President is above the law ? Is that your opinion ?


Where did you get that I believe the President is above the law?
User avatar
HamBone
 
Posts: 3293
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Jason Bourne » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:46 pm

HamBone wrote:
Jason Bourne wrote:
Yeah why not ?

So the President is above the law ? Is that your opinion ?


Where did you get that I believe the President is above the law?


I think Trump could kill a person and you would think it’s ok
User avatar
Jason Bourne
 
Posts: 7804
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 7:47 am
Location: Clearwater
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 86 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby HamBone » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:47 pm

Jason Bourne wrote:
HamBone wrote:
Where did you get that I believe the President is above the law?


I think Trump could kill a person and you would think it’s ok


Lol...what makes you think that?
User avatar
HamBone
 
Posts: 3293
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Jason Bourne » Sat Nov 09, 2019 4:17 pm

HamBone wrote:
Jason Bourne wrote:
I think Trump could kill a person and you would think it’s ok


Lol...what makes you think that?


You and others defend everything he does , it’s really all about politics and Republican Party .

I on the other hand think Trump is unfit and a danger to this Country . He shouldn’t be President and he won’t much longer .

I think any other Republican candidate would be much better and a real president . I just wouldn’t vote for them
User avatar
Jason Bourne
 
Posts: 7804
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 7:47 am
Location: Clearwater
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 86 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby HamBone » Sat Nov 09, 2019 5:28 pm

Jason Bourne wrote:
HamBone wrote:
Lol...what makes you think that?


You and others defend everything he does , it’s really all about politics and Republican Party .

I on the other hand think Trump is unfit and a danger to this Country . He shouldn’t be President and he won’t much longer .

I think any other Republican candidate would be much better and a real president . I just wouldn’t vote for them


I think you’re confusing me with a different poster...
User avatar
HamBone
 
Posts: 3293
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Selmon Rules » Sat Nov 09, 2019 5:44 pm

I'm having a hard time trying to figure out why this guy needs to be outed.... Everything he says he was told but didn't see has been corroborated by numerous witnesses who did see and hear it and participated in it.... He just made the anonymous call. The guy never claimed to have seen anything firsthand....

Everyone bitching about leftover people from Obama or whomever needs to understand that Obama likely had people working in the departments from Bush also but somehow didn't seem to have the same problems as Trump seems to have....

I'm starting to think Graham may be onto something when he says that the current administration is too incompetent to orchestrate this thing. They withheld the aid approved by Congress to get an investigation into some dumb ass conspiracy theories and managed to screw that up....

Rudy should have known how to do this with all of his experience locking up mafia yahoos back in his younger days....
Sig currently being held hostage by Photobucket, will return next fall
User avatar
Selmon Rules
 
Posts: 1768
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:27 pm
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 70 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Ken Carson » Sat Nov 09, 2019 6:45 pm

Selmon Rules wrote:I'm having a hard time trying to figure out why this guy needs to be outed.... Everything he says he was told but didn't see has been corroborated by numerous witnesses who did see and hear it and participated in it.... He just made the anonymous call. The guy never claimed to have seen anything firsthand....

Everyone bitching about leftover people from Obama or whomever needs to understand that Obama likely had people working in the departments from Bush also but somehow didn't seem to have the same problems as Trump seems to have....

I'm starting to think Graham may be onto something when he says that the current administration is too incompetent to orchestrate this thing. They withheld the aid approved by Congress to get an investigation into some dumb ass conspiracy theories and managed to screw that up....

Rudy should have known how to do this with all of his experience locking up mafia yahoos back in his younger days....

Honestly, Rudy hasn’t been playing with a full deck since about 2007. Putting him on TV is basically elder abuse. But at least he is nowhere near the levers of power...
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 5597
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 369 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby bucfanclw » Sun Nov 10, 2019 12:31 am

Ken Carson wrote:
Selmon Rules wrote:I'm having a hard time trying to figure out why this guy needs to be outed.... Everything he says he was told but didn't see has been corroborated by numerous witnesses who did see and hear it and participated in it.... He just made the anonymous call. The guy never claimed to have seen anything firsthand....

Everyone bitching about leftover people from Obama or whomever needs to understand that Obama likely had people working in the departments from Bush also but somehow didn't seem to have the same problems as Trump seems to have....

I'm starting to think Graham may be onto something when he says that the current administration is too incompetent to orchestrate this thing. They withheld the aid approved by Congress to get an investigation into some dumb ass conspiracy theories and managed to screw that up....

Rudy should have known how to do this with all of his experience locking up mafia yahoos back in his younger days....

Honestly, Rudy hasn’t been playing with a full deck since about 2007. Putting him on TV is basically elder abuse. But at least he is nowhere near the levers of power...

Yep. He's only the personal attorney to the POTUS. Not anything significant.
User avatar
bucfanclw
 
Posts: 6443
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: I'm told Clewiston
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 343 times

Re: Whistleblowers

Postby Alpha » Sun Nov 10, 2019 2:05 am

Brazen331 wrote:
Alpha wrote:
You idiot. It doesn't MATTER what they do or don't have. The Dems control the House...just as the R's did during Clinton. It's a simple vote to impeach. Clinton was impeached for OBSTRUCTION. Drumph has clearly done AT LEAST that. The Dems have the votes to impeach, if they chose to. That's just a FACT.

Clinton wasn't CONVICTED in the Senate. There is a difference between being "impeached" and being "convicted". Jesus...you need to go back to high school and re-learn "civics". It's where they taught you about this process...

Drumph may or may not have 5 more years. We have no idea if that's a fact or not. You don't need "things" to impeach him on. You need "thinG" and the votes. The process for "Impeachment" is spelled out in the Constitution. It will be "bi-partisan" in the sense that both parties will participate. That doesn't change anything.

The fact is that Pelosi isn't stupid...even though you want that to be true. She hasn't fucked up thus far and she's LIKELY to get Drumph impeached. She's also not going to lose her seat in Congress.

So please explain to me how she's fucked up?

You're just so enamored with your boy and blind to the reality of the situation, that you're just content to grasp at straws and hope for the best. Again, in the end, nothing much will happen...unless some real shit-storm comes to light. The R's have the votes in the Senate to keep anything from becoming an issue. Calm your tits. Keep sucking your boys **** and see how it plays out in a year.


She fucked up because it is not bipartisan, not a single Pub. She won’t lose her seat, But she could lose the House. If she didn’t Impeach, there would be zero chance she loses House. That’s how she fucked up. This is partisan and everyone knows it. And yes, she is stupid.

Nixon was bipartisan; Clinton Impeachment had some Dems cross over, this has no one but Dems and an Independent. Pelosi did exactly what she promised she would not do in January: tear the country apart by conducting an entirely partisan Impeachment process. She fucked up.


You really need to get his nutsack out of your mouth and understand what you're being told.

IT DOESN"T MATTER. THE DEMS HAVE THE VOTES TO IMPEACH. They only need a SINGLE reason. What about this statement do you not understand? Being "bi-partisan" means diddly-poo. That is something you and your kind "want" to be a thing. It isn't. Any more than a conviction vote is in the Senate (where the R's have the votes). You really are ****ing stupid.

Whether or not the Dems lose the House or the R's lose the Senate will be determined. You have no idea what is likely to happen...only what you HOPE AND PRAY will happen. You see red whenever anyone says something that you disagree with. You are TOTALLY INCAPABLE of seeing what is staring you right in the face. ****, son...you aren't even remotely capable of seeing the POSSIBILITY that you're just ****ing WRONG.

Personally, I can't stand Pelosi. That said, she's far from stupid. She's a career politician and has played this brilliantly thus far. To deny that is willful ignorance. Hell...she really hasn't done much of anything. She doesn't need to. She's letting Trump bury HIMSELF. You might think that's fake news or just pure bullshit...but you'll see soon how right I am.

And I'll gloat. Simply because I want to say, "I told you so". And you'll come up with some lame, "life isn't fair" rebuttal. And I'll laugh at your pain because that's what I do.

Enjoy the next 8 weeks, kid. Don't give yourself an aneurism.
Your panties are so bunched, it'd take the Jaws of Life to get 'em loosened.
Alpha
 
Posts: 5618
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:51 am
Location: St. Pete
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 104 times

PreviousNext

post

Return to Politics and Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests