
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Jamie Raskin promises Dems will go after corporations and law firms that helped Trump
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:24 am to mwade91383
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:24 am to mwade91383
quote:
Why, is this bad? Who do you think funded the last two years of this?
So it's ok then? I thought it was bad? Is it not bad? If it's not bad.....why the crying about it?
And again: how is this going to "reduce costs for the American people"?
This post was edited on 11/5/26 at 9:25 am
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:24 am to SouthEasternKaiju
quote:
No one wants to admit it but the Left are inviting violence
I mean, let's fricking give it to them already. They seem to really want it.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:25 am to Ailsa
Susan Rice is such a pile of shite.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:27 am to Ailsa
quote:
Jamie Raskin promises Dems will go after corporations and law firms that helped Trumpby
As much as this makes me livid, this is the game they play. Trump is playing a weaker “politics” game. Even after getting shot. He’s going to lose in the end. Lose = arrested along with his administration.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:27 am to CleverUserName
Lawfare is bad. Rooting out corruption is good.
The problem is the other side jsut pretends everything is the former when the truth is closer to the latter.
The problem is the other side jsut pretends everything is the former when the truth is closer to the latter.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:30 am to Trevaylin
quote:
Gonna have to find out Raskin's sins and rain it down on him. May start looking in the woodpile
That just happened to garcia.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:36 am to ninthward
quote:
Susan Rice is such a pile of shite.
Yes...he is.

Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:37 am to jlc05
quote:
And the market is reacting to the rhetoric
yep.
gridlock?
yeah, about that...
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:42 am to mwade91383
quote:
Lawfare is bad. Rooting out corruption is good. The problem is the other side jsut pretends everything is the former when the truth is closer to the latter.
So let me take a quick guess here... Trump engaged in only lawfare (SFP will be along shortly, I'm SURE, to call you out on the use of lawfare) but the democrats have only rooted out corruption?
Have you missed the mass amount of Healthcare and Medicare fraud arrests the past month? Many relating to foreigners waved in by democrats? The federal bribery investigation in New York City that centered on corruption and bribes related to lucrative migrant shelter contracts issued during the Adams administration? Corruption related to mass migration cheered by dems? The regional corruption of law enforcement running escorts to drug mules in the democratic dominated Mississippi Delta?
And that's just the tip of the past two years.
And for the third time.... How is this going to reduce costs for the American people?
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:46 am to FatAndTired
quote:
They can't do anything without the Executive.
If they have 67 seats...which they will in january...unless something changes, they can overrule a veto.
quote:
To overcome a presidential veto in the United States, Congress must pass the vetoed bill again with a two-thirds supermajority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:46 am to CleverUserName
Well, no, you guessed wrong.
When I said the "other side" it pretty clearly implied both.
What's the point of this question? Is your logic we shouldn't go after crime if it doesn't reduce costs for the American people?
When I said the "other side" it pretty clearly implied both.
quote:
And for the third time.... How is this going to reduce costs for the American people?
What's the point of this question? Is your logic we shouldn't go after crime if it doesn't reduce costs for the American people?
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:47 am to Ailsa
quote:
If they have 67 seats...which they will in january
Did I miss something?
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:47 am to Ailsa
I thought yall's ilk was all for going after people and companies who "bend the knee" ?
But why stop now with your hypocrisy, I guess.. 'Good for thee, but not for me' should be the GOP official slogan .
But why stop now with your hypocrisy, I guess.. 'Good for thee, but not for me' should be the GOP official slogan .
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:48 am to mwade91383
quote:
To be clear: is corruption bad? If we find it, should we go after it?
If not, how do we ever deter it in the future?
Does that include Omar?
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:51 am to mwade91383
quote:
What's the point of this question? Is your logic we shouldn't go after crime if it doesn't reduce costs for the American people?
Why is is so hard to answer?
So why are they not hitting the road with plans to reduce costs instead of backlogging Congress with these show trials? Why am I not hearing how the supply of energy and electricity is going to be increased to lower prices? Why am I not hearing how they are going to lower housing costs?
This post was edited on 11/5/26 at 9:53 am
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:52 am to BK Lounge
Reskin better call his CPA.
He can’t afford the pay cut.
He can’t afford the pay cut.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 9:53 am to mwade91383
quote:
I listened to what Raskin actually said.
What he is doing is whipping up his base and laying the groundwork. It is tried and true political steps always taken to delegimize the opposition.
These same people use the opposite rhetoric when discussing the current admin trying to fight corruption and fraud.
Somehow I tend to read what you type and just know that you think this is somehow (D)ifferent.

Popular
Back to top


1










