ALF Posted February 2, 2021 Posted February 2, 2021 Without a power-sharing agreement, Senate GOP wields power in the minority Senate Judiciary committee chairman Lindsey Graham has declined to schedule a confirmation hearing for attorney general nominee Merrick Garland until after the impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump, the latest example of Republicans wielding power in the Senate despite being in the minority. Sen. Dick Durbin, the incoming chair of the Judiciary committee, urged Graham yesterday to proceed with Garland’s nomination hearing on Feb. 8, but Graham refused. In a letter released last night, Graham said that a “one-day hearing” starting the day before the trial was “insufficient,” arguing that previous attorney general nominees received two-day hearings. What happens now? Graham could delay the hearing for weeks until the party leaders strike a power-sharing agreement that would give Democrats control of committees in the 50-50 Senate. Democrats hold the majority because Vice President Kamala Harris has the power to break tie votes in the Senate. https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/biden-presidency-trump-impeachment-2-02-21/h_0066fc9894ed43bf8f41d59b319e8519
BillStime Posted February 2, 2021 Author Posted February 2, 2021 5 hours ago, Doc said: Yes, get it all out in the open. Nail anyone who acted criminally. Everyone. 1
BillStime Posted February 2, 2021 Author Posted February 2, 2021 Donald Trump’s Attorney Thinks Video of the Insurrection is ‘Too Divisive for Trial’ I love all these demands and threats from Trump's lawyers and Lindsey Graham... lmao The weird threats Lindsey Graham and Trump’s lawyer are making about calling impeachment witnesses
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted February 2, 2021 Posted February 2, 2021 7 hours ago, Doc said: Ask Lindsay. If you think he's scared of calling witnesses, it follows that the Dems would be scared of him calling the FBI. 100% agree. Let's get this all out in the open. 4 hours ago, ALF said: Without a power-sharing agreement, Senate GOP wields power in the minority Senate Judiciary committee chairman Lindsey Graham has declined to schedule a confirmation hearing for attorney general nominee Merrick Garland until after the impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump, the latest example of Republicans wielding power in the Senate despite being in the minority. Sen. Dick Durbin, the incoming chair of the Judiciary committee, urged Graham yesterday to proceed with Garland’s nomination hearing on Feb. 8, but Graham refused. In a letter released last night, Graham said that a “one-day hearing” starting the day before the trial was “insufficient,” arguing that previous attorney general nominees received two-day hearings. What happens now? Graham could delay the hearing for weeks until the party leaders strike a power-sharing agreement that would give Democrats control of committees in the 50-50 Senate. Democrats hold the majority because Vice President Kamala Harris has the power to break tie votes in the Senate. https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/biden-presidency-trump-impeachment-2-02-21/h_0066fc9894ed43bf8f41d59b319e8519 Excellent. Let's follow the rules of political combat and see it through. The impeachment can proceed, then the Garland hearings can begin. We don't want the senate bogged down in the meantime. Garland will be fine until then. 1 1
Doc Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 6 hours ago, Warcodered said: So have we moved on from the FBI bein a partisan apparatus of the Left out to get Trump now or what? Again, you'd have to ask Lindsay.
ALF Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 (edited) 16 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: 100% agree. Let's get this all out in the open. Excellent. Let's follow the rules of political combat and see it through. The impeachment can proceed, then the Garland hearings can begin. We don't want the senate bogged down in the meantime. Garland will be fine until then. Do you think Graham is trying to provoke the democrats to use the nuclear option ? Bonus episode: Inside the craziest meeting of the Trump presidency In this bonus edition, we take you back into those final weeks — to one long, unhinged night a week before Christmas, when an epic, profanity-soaked standoff played out with profound implications for the nation. Four conspiracy theorists marched into the Oval Office. It was early evening on Friday, Dec. 18 — more than a month after the election had been declared for Joe Biden, and four days after the Electoral College met in every state to make it official. "How the hell did Sidney get in the building?" White House senior adviser Eric Herschmann grumbled from the outer Oval Office as Sidney Powell and her entourage strutted by to visit the president. President Trump's private schedule hadn't included appointments for Powell or the others: former national security adviser Michael Flynn, former Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne, and a little-known former Trump administration official, Emily Newman. But they'd come to convince Trump that he had the power to take extreme measures to keep fighting. As Powell and the others entered the Oval Office that evening, Herschmann — a wealthy business executive and former partner at Kasowitz Benson & Torres who'd been pulled out of quasi-retirement to advise Trump — quietly slipped in behind them. Trump was no longer focused on any semblance of a governing agenda, instead spending his days taking phone calls and meetings from anyone armed with conspiracy theories about the election. For the White House staff, it was an unending sea of garbage churned up by the bottom feeders. https://www.axios.com/trump-oval-office-meeting-sidney-powell-a8e1e466-2e42-42d0-9cf1-26eb267f8723.html Edited February 3, 2021 by ALF
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 2 hours ago, ALF said: Do you think Graham is trying to provoke the democrats to use the nuclear option ? Bonus episode: Inside the craziest meeting of the Trump presidency In this bonus edition, we take you back into those final weeks — to one long, unhinged night a week before Christmas, when an epic, profanity-soaked standoff played out with profound implications for the nation. Four conspiracy theorists marched into the Oval Office. It was early evening on Friday, Dec. 18 — more than a month after the election had been declared for Joe Biden, and four days after the Electoral College met in every state to make it official. "How the hell did Sidney get in the building?" White House senior adviser Eric Herschmann grumbled from the outer Oval Office as Sidney Powell and her entourage strutted by to visit the president. President Trump's private schedule hadn't included appointments for Powell or the others: former national security adviser Michael Flynn, former Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne, and a little-known former Trump administration official, Emily Newman. But they'd come to convince Trump that he had the power to take extreme measures to keep fighting. As Powell and the others entered the Oval Office that evening, Herschmann — a wealthy business executive and former partner at Kasowitz Benson & Torres who'd been pulled out of quasi-retirement to advise Trump — quietly slipped in behind them. Trump was no longer focused on any semblance of a governing agenda, instead spending his days taking phone calls and meetings from anyone armed with conspiracy theories about the election. For the White House staff, it was an unending sea of garbage churned up by the bottom feeders. https://www.axios.com/trump-oval-office-meeting-sidney-powell-a8e1e466-2e42-42d0-9cf1-26eb267f8723.html I wish I had a clue as to what the plan is. See, I'm a simple guy, and I can't see where any dem leader would ever be concerned about sworn testimony from any FBI agent or personnel. In fact, I would think they would invite it. Likewise, I would think the Rs would be perfectly comfortable moving forward with the impeachment as is. If, as is speculated, impeachment is dead on arrival, it simply exposes the partisan nature of the hearing and Americans can glean from that what they will. No hearts and minds will be changed. so imo it's a giant circle jerk. Btw--I'm happy to answer questions you have, but please, personally spare me the Oliver Stone "inside the war room" fictionalized account of these last crazy days. In this case, direct quotes are attributed to individuals, replete with characterizations about the state of mind of the participants, and events happening sequentially as outlined. It's basically a trial run for a screen play. Of course, at the bottom of this short story, the 'get out of jail free card' is included: About this series: Our reporting is based on multiple interviews with current and former White House, campaign, government and congressional officials as well as direct eyewitnesses and people close to the president. Sources have been granted anonymity to share sensitive observations or details they would not be formally authorized to disclose. President Trump and other officials to whom quotes and actions have been attributed by others were provided the opportunity to confirm, deny or respond to reporting elements prior to publication. You might be quite comfortable with this sort of thing, but it bores the crap out of me. It also makes me wonder how people who buy into this sort of dramadey make it through everyday life. If they were being truthful, at the end of this paragraph they should include: Since we did not hear back from President Trump and other officials, this must be treated as gospel and we dare not be questioned. 1
ALF Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 (edited) Mc Connell turned over the majority to the democrats , I can respect that , but Graham , Cruz , Hawley not so much. https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/03/politics/senate-power-sharing-agreement-reached/index.html Edited February 3, 2021 by ALF
TBBills Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 27 minutes ago, ALF said: Mc Connell turned over the majority to the democrats , I can respect that , but Graham , Cruz , Hawley not so much. https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/03/politics/senate-power-sharing-agreement-reached/index.html This will speed up the 1.9trillion Covid relief that the republicans refused to even try and work with. All I want is for these two to work together but the republican party is such a mess right now. 10 republicans put out an insulting 600billion instead of working with the democrats in order to fool those who are fed false lies of democratic party that isn't bipartisan. This is the type of bull#### that brought down the republican party yet they keep trying... Maybe if they worked on the 1.9trillion dollar deal with Biden instead of refusing to do so.
Warcodered Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 1 hour ago, ALF said: Mc Connell turned over the majority to the democrats , I can respect that , but Graham , Cruz , Hawley not so much. https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/03/politics/senate-power-sharing-agreement-reached/index.html So I suppose this means Lindsey Graham can get ***** on his attempt to hold up the AG confirmation.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 DJT says...Pass. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/04/trump-senate-impeachment-trial-testify-house-democrats
TBBills Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 (edited) 1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: DJT says...Pass. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/04/trump-senate-impeachment-trial-testify-house-democrats So he is doing exactly what the democrats want? Just makes him look even more guilty. Edited February 4, 2021 by TBBills
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 4 minutes ago, TBBills said: So he is doing exactly what the democrats want? Just makes him look even more guilty. More guilty of what? Having common sense? 1
Doc Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 2 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: More guilty of what? Having common sense? Yeah, why waste his time when there's no way he's getting convicted? 1 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 10 minutes ago, TBBills said: Yes we know you supported the killing of the people in the riots. You loving you some Proud Boys? So far today, we've learned: You are 100% cool with segregation/discrimination by a private business so long as it's included in their policy; Conversations about testifying under oath caused you, quite unnaturally, to change the subject to your very unhealthy riot fetish and an obvious freudian obsession with certain anarchist groups.
Recommended Posts