snafu

Hamilton with a broken leg is more mobile than Bogosian.

High level meetings, huh?

You've believed deep state lies before, haven't you? Why stop now?

Yes, and you also get the Rand Paul, or the Ted Cruz response, which amounts to: If there will be witnesses (new or old) then don't expect Democrats to be calling the shots. Just because Schiff is a manager doesn't make him immune from being questioned. We are in weird world here. This isn't normal court procedure. It is a true blend.

Sorry, I'm a couple days late on this response. I will give your questions a go. Then I've got a couple for you. 1. So, do you think that one of the major players in the Ukraine story (Parnas) should testify in the inquiry as to what happened in this whole story? Yes and no. He should have testified at the "investigation" level, in the House Committees. However, and probably because he's got serious credibility issues, Neither Schiff nor Nadler chose to have him testify. Parnas did give materials to the House, so it isn't like he was a stranger to them. Now, AFTER the Articles of Impeachment were deliberated and voted upon you want to hear from Parnas and you think he's important to the prosecution of the trial against the President. You do realize that Parnas cane forward before the House Managers walked the Articles to the Senate. They could have taken his testimony during Pelosi's delay. I think they really don't want to hear from Parnas. 2. Do you deny he has been interacting with Rudy in regards to Ukraine on behalf of Trump? It seems as though he may have been. However, who cares? The Aid was released to Ukraine. There was no abuse of power vis a vis the aid to Ukraine. There's no requirement that the President host anyone at the White House. There's nothing preventing any President from wanting to root out an appearance of impropriety of a former V.P. who now is seeking to become President. Don't you want to know if Joe Biden is a crook? 2. Why do you think the Republicans don't want witnesses? I can't say for sure (I think some Republicans DO want witnesses -- but Democrats better be careful what they wish for) but I do believe that after hearing nearly all the witnesses that the House put on, there's nothing to rebut with witnesses. There's no case and no proof. 3. If you were accused of a crime you did not commit, wouldn't you want someone who could prove your innocence to testify? (A) "prove your innocence"? There are a lot of countries in our world that require Defendants to prove their innocence. Thank God we don't live in one of those countries. (B) nobody has proved any guilt. (C) don't forget that this is a political process, not a judicial proceeding. Questions for you: (A) Why do you presume that Parnas is more credible than Trump? You responding "Trump lies all the time" won't cut it as an answer. (B) Do you want to hear from the whistleblower? You don't find it odd that the whistleblower won't come forward? (C) Do you want to hear from Schiff's staff -- or Schiff for that matter? It is pretty clear that there was a bit of coordination between the whistleblower and Schiff. (D) Do you discount the several times that Zelensky said that he wasn't pressured by Trump? (E) Impeachment is a purely political exercise. It seems that a great number of Politicians are staking their political futures on successfully being the ones to "bring down" the President for using hos power for political gain. Their official actions are blatantly undertaken for "political gain". There's no "high crime" here. There's no "misdemeanor" here. Why isn't this hypocritical bahavior on the part of Congressional Democrats? (F) Because of the flimsy nature of the two charges levied against the President, don't you find it uncomfortable that Congress is trying to disenfranchise the voters that put this President in office -- in an election year? Why not wait and see what the voters have to say? (G) Why do you only appear in PPP when you think someone's finally "got" the President? (H) Why did you call anyone who's questioning the House Democrats "stupid" or "evil" of both? WTF is wrong with you? (I) Why are you so sure of yourself? Shouldn't you be more skeptical since you've bitten on all the other "gotcha bait" in the past and nothing has come of any of them?

Cheaters are losers whether they win the game or not. That’s why cheaters never win.

I don’t want to speak for anyone else, but I AM a mouth breathing lunatic.

Or 2018, and I'm a Sox fan. I feel like sewing an * on my hat.

Aside from being interested in the job, I think it just would be really cool to get a phone call from Yzerman. He's my favorite non-Sabres player. I agree that there's going to be some long term pain with the Red Wings' rebuild. And I think that Yzerman has had his reputation assisted by good circumstances in Detroit and in Tampa Bay. I don't give him much credit for building Canadian National teams, I could do that with a hat and small slips of paper. Why is it, however, that I fear Detroit's rebuild will probably be faster than ours (insert sadface emoji here)!

He should have said “you ARE a liar”. Warren is the phoniest candidate remaining and that’s her anchor. She’s trying desperately to be perfect. That ship sailed. The best part of that clip was Steyer trying to shake Bernie’s hand and getting treated like a shitheel.

To me, aside from what they post and the impressions I get, everyone here is their screen name and their avatar. I’d prefer to know nothing personal about someone if they’re not offering it. I think that regulars around here expose themselves to be what/who they are just by virtue of what they say and how they say it. I honestly don’t think that knowing something specific about a poster is going to change that. Or put in a different way, I could say something real pithy with spinach stuck to my teeth. You’re only going to see the spinach and not hear what I have to say. Having anonymity allows the message to be heard without the visual to muck it up.

It’s my impression that a judge ruled on the disclosure of these recently disclosed Parnas materials after the impeachment vote. It was seized when he was arrested and he apparently didn’t have access to it without a court order. He gave some stuff to Congress earlier, but that doesn’t appear to be this batch.

I'd take the call from Yzerman.

Similar (except leaving him at the airport) to his getting canned from Florida. That team wasn’t half bad, either.

Talk about a quick hook! Maybe there's a good reason for this firing, but it doesn't appear so on the surface. Did ownership expect a Finals appearance every season?

It has certainly occurred to me. I’ve been a Sox fan for over 40 years and I’m seriously thinking of dumping them altogether. I thought that ‘18 WS run was legit. I was happy they finally won one without Ortiz. This absolutely sucks.

I hear this a lot: “buzz off, creep!” I’m tired of it.

Makin’ changes. All good! Let’s put the past behind us and welcome a new era where we don’t break the rules in order to spy on each other. The only way they should be allowed to contribute anything would be if they were strapped to chairs while people throw rotten produce at them, hissing and sneering. This is what #resist looks like.

Bub-bye Seattle!

Pack coach throws like a girl.

Playing some Rush on the way to the commercial break. Nice. Looks a lot like a fumble to me.

Well there’s still a kickoff upcoming.

JJ Watt is awesome, amirite?

I turned on the TV at the fake punt. Missed everything before that and it doesn’t seem to matter.

Wow! why did 34 stop running?