Nanker Posted December 22, 2019 Author Share Posted December 22, 2019 On 12/20/2019 at 3:07 PM, TakeYouToTasker said: Religious Jews tend to vote Republican, secular Jews tend to vote Democrat. Given the yarmulkes, I’m guessing these folks are religious. I can’t even begin to tell you how pleased I was that these folks broke out into the PPP dancing Hasidic Jew meme. We even got to do it without any rabid anti-Semitism. Ahh yes! The JewBeeDancing! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 10 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 Van Drew left the Democratic party due to calls telling him that they would make sure he was never elected to any office as a Democrat again. (1:40) 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 18 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Van Drew left the Democratic party due to calls telling him that they would make sure he was never elected to any office as a Democrat again. (1:40) With that suit he's sure to get selected for the GOP's House Clown Committee. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Van Drew left the Democratic party due to calls telling him that they would make sure he was never elected to any office as a Democrat again. (1:40) i don't know a whole lot about this guy but it's too bad that there are not more of our representatives who feel and act as he does. i set the video below to pick it up where they get into his voting record in case anyone didn't watch the whole thing. https://youtu.be/OB_l9wb0dz0?t=333 Edited December 23, 2019 by Foxx 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albwan Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 On 12/21/2019 at 12:34 PM, /dev/null said: THE meme of the year. That thing is awesome for so many different topics 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 11 minutes ago, B-Man said: . they couldn't organize a two car funeral 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 McConnell needs to wait her out. Just sit there....and wait. Get back to the people's business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 10 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: McConnell needs to wait her out. Just sit there....and wait. Get back to the people's business. He just needs to traffic cocaine and confirm judges... all while being out of cocaine. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 13 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: McConnell needs to wait her out. Just sit there....and wait. Get back to the people's business. ....and Photo Op Chuckie wants the Senate to "adopt a bi-partisan impeachment process"....guess we should use the House Model then................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albwan Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 1 hour ago, B-Man said: . What's next she going to demand we call her President Pelosi ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 Sounds like it's about time for Mitch to cite Pelosi for....."Obstruction of Congress"! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said: Sounds like it's about time for Mitch to cite Pelosi for....."Obstruction of Congress"! i suggest we bring a resolution to the floor of the House for a vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 10 minutes ago, Albwan said: What's next she going to demand we call her President Pelosi ? You can't spell "Maximilien Robespierre" without P-E-L-O-S-I. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 8 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Sounds like it's about time for Mitch to cite Pelosi for....."Obstruction of Congress"! Well...no. The House and Senate have exclusive domain over their chambers' rules, including how they impeach. So if the House decides their procedure is to not send the articles to the senate in the absence of a defined Senate impeachment process, that's entirely with in their purview. On the other hand, if the Senate decides not to define their procedure until the articles are received, that's entirely within their purview as well. It's a ridiculous and rather viciously stupid cycle of childishness...but it's entirely Constitutional and legal. (Side note: there's no Constitutional requirement for the House to send "impeachment managers" to the Senate. Personally, I'd argue that they're unconstitutional, and I can't find a legal basis beyond "That's how we impeached Clinton" for McConnell accepting them.) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: Well...no. The House and Senate have exclusive domain over their chambers' rules, including how they impeach. So if the House decides their procedure is to not send the articles to the senate in the absence of a defined Senate impeachment process, that's entirely with in their purview. On the other hand, if the Senate decides not to define their procedure until the articles are received, that's entirely within their purview as well. It's a ridiculous and rather viciously stupid cycle of childishness...but it's entirely Constitutional and legal. (Side note: there's no Constitutional requirement for the House to send "impeachment managers" to the Senate. Personally, I'd argue that they're unconstitutional, and I can't find a legal basis beyond "That's how we impeached Clinton" for McConnell accepting them.) Tom? I was kidding. Don't let this stuff get to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said: Tom? I was kidding. Don't let this stuff get to you. I don't care. It was a chance to pontificate. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 8 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Well...no. The House and Senate have exclusive domain over their chambers' rules, including how they impeach. So if the House decides their procedure is to not send the articles to the senate in the absence of a defined Senate impeachment process, that's entirely with in their purview. On the other hand, if the Senate decides not to define their procedure until the articles are received, that's entirely within their purview as well. It's a ridiculous and rather viciously stupid cycle of childishness...but it's entirely Constitutional and legal. (Side note: there's no Constitutional requirement for the House to send "impeachment managers" to the Senate. Personally, I'd argue that they're unconstitutional, and I can't find a legal basis beyond "That's how we impeached Clinton" for McConnell accepting them.) the Senate began its investigation on Nixon before the House even finished the impeachment vote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts