Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
7 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

What I don't get is why he didn't just say 'seeya' and walk out the first few times she stated you're free to leave.

 

Guessing that there is some sort of Contempt of Congress charge that can be levied if a person called before a committee leaves prior to the hearing being dismissed / recessed.

 

Which would explain why Waters was trying to get him to walk out without ending the hearing.  If not that, no clue.

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
Just now, Taro T said:

 

Guessing that there is some sort of Contempt of Congress charge that can be levied if a person called before a committee leaves prior to the hearing being dismissed / recessed.

 

Which would explain why Waters was trying to get him to walk out without ending the hearing.  If not that, no clue.

 

That's exactly what Mnuchin tried to mansplain to her.  She needed to hit the gavel to dismiss him.  Of course when you point out something obvious in a direct way to a woman, it's called mansplaining.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Guessing that there is some sort of Contempt of Congress charge that can be levied if a person called before a committee leaves prior to the hearing being dismissed / recessed.

 

Which would explain why Waters was trying to get him to walk out without ending the hearing.  If not that, no clue.

 

but he could have claimed that her rhetorical flourish "you're free to leave" constitutes being dismissed as a witness

Posted
2 minutes ago, GG said:

 

That's exactly what Mnuchin tried to mansplain to her.  She needed to hit the gavel to dismiss him.  Of course when you point out something obvious in a direct way to a woman, it's called mansplaining.


Yeah, right.  ?The reality is when you try to explain something to a dumb ***** like Max Maxine who thinks they know everything... it is called banging your head against the wall.  :wallbash:

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

 

but he could have claimed that her rhetorical flourish "you're free to leave" constitutes being dismissed as a witness

 

But that wouldn't have kept him from having to deal with actually getting such a charge dismissed.  Nor would it have kept her from having a nice meme/ CNN talking point of how the Treasury secretary is a misogynistic/racist/senior citizen hating post-neo Nazi who has no respect for the rule of law nor the separation of powers.

Posted (edited)

Lots of Clinton Foundation ties to the area, so I'll drop this here:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hedge
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Foxx said:

Prevent Extreme Negligence  with Classified Information Licenses. :lol:

Need Everyone Cooperating Keenly.

 

There. Ow it is the Pencilneck act.

Edited by 4merper4mer
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TPS said:


So the question is... now what? 
 



They took him into custody on a bench warrant for a now-closed rape inquiry in Sweden.  
 



“I requested Great Britain to guarantee that Mr Assange would not be extradited to a country where he could face torture or the death penalty," Moreno added. "The British government has confirmed it in writing, in accordance with its own rules."

The Democrats cannot possibly want him testifying to anything.  

Posted

I would think that anyone who believes there is a corrupt deep state not only within the US but also connected to other nation-states would view this as a take down of those who are trying to expose the group. It's not a good day for those trying to shed light on a corrupt world...

  • Like (+1) 5
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


So the question is... now what? 
 



They took him into custody on a bench warrant for a now-closed rape inquiry in Sweden.  
 



“I requested Great Britain to guarantee that Mr Assange would not be extradited to a country where he could face torture or the death penalty," Moreno added. "The British government has confirmed it in writing, in accordance with its own rules."

The Democrats cannot possibly want him testifying to anything.  

 

 

Do you think the Ecuadorians are having a staff meeting today to discuss what to convert his room into?  I’d vote for a wet bar and pool table. 

 

 

 

Posted
5 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

 

Do you think the Ecuadorians are having a staff meeting today to discuss what to convert his room into?  I’d vote for a wet bar and pool table. 

 

 

 

A new suite for the refugee from the US seeking asylum - Adam Schiff, perhaps?

Posted
2 minutes ago, Nanker said:

A new suite for the refugee from the US seeking asylum - Adam Schiff, perhaps?

 

Well, they need to be careful with their choices — they’re on the “rebound”. 

It might be better to back away from the scene for awhile. 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...