- 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: Miss Lindsey about to hold impromptu presser
Posted on 1/29/20 at 10:58 am to Stonehog
Posted on 1/29/20 at 10:58 am to Stonehog
quote:
We know Bolton's testimony isn't actually going to sway Republicans in favor of removal, so why block it?
I refer back to my previous post about setting dangerous precedence. Just to take it a tad further to assist, what this would amount to is then the possibility of every single President from here on out being impeached PLUS the impeaching party citing this President's setting precedence that let's hear from the entire administration without worrying with executive privilege. "Heck, Trump allowed it, why don't you allow it??" Rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat.
0
Posted on 1/29/20 at 10:59 am to Rebel
quote:
impromptu [im'präm(p)?t(y)o?o]
ADJECTIVE
1.done without being planned, organized, or rehearsed.
"an impromptu press conference"
synonyms: unrehearsed · unprepared · unscripted · extempore · extemporized
Not so impromptu at this point.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 10:59 am to Stonehog
quote:
It's the right move.
So the Dems can score more unanswered points against Trump?
Turtle needs to kill this now. Only thing I can see is they think they are in jeopardy of losing the Senate if they don’t help Toomey et al.
Screw Mittens!
Posted on 1/29/20 at 10:59 am to Stonehog
quote:
I said he could challenge the subpoenas, dipshit
And I'm saying he better fricking challenge them, because it's the right thing to do, dipshit.
You're here arguing he needs to let the Democrats further trample his rights for political expediency.
It doesn't work like that. And you, yet again, have a horrible take.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 10:59 am to Bard
bullshite. House claimed their case was urgent and persuasive so why do we need a redo in the Senate?
You know why.
You know why.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:00 am to Stonehog
There’s the optics angle again
The Dems and media will spin it negatively no matter what the GOP does so get it over with is blocking witnesses and voting on what was presented during trial. You’re not all the smart baw, but you never were.
The Dems and media will spin it negatively no matter what the GOP does so get it over with is blocking witnesses and voting on what was presented during trial. You’re not all the smart baw, but you never were.
This post was edited on 1/29/20 at 11:08 am
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:03 am to Rebel
The IG gave a deposition in the FISC, and the DEMS won't release it. Word is, it's very damaging to the Dems.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:05 am to greygoose
I'm about to give up on this a-hole. We are going on an hour late now. Two fricking hours since he said an "impromptu" press conference any minute.
Unprofessional.
Unprofessional.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:06 am to greygoose
So is Lindzeeeee a face or heel today? I can never tell what he’s up to anymore
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:06 am to BoarEd
They already had it. Lindsay basically telling gop to stop attacking Bolton’s character.
ETA - Harris Faulkner just read some bullet points. I didn’t see any of it.
ETA - Harris Faulkner just read some bullet points. I didn’t see any of it.
This post was edited on 1/29/20 at 11:08 am
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:08 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
You’re not all the smart baw, but you never were.
Good try.
quote:
The Dems and media will spin it negatively no matter what the GOO does so get it over with is blocking witnesses and voting on what was presented during trial.
If all people hear is how the Republicans are blocking witnesses, it gives the appearance of an unfair trial and that they're hiding something. Some of you seriously need to take a step back and realize there are a lot of different kinds of people in this country outside this very conservative board. Think about public perception.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:08 am to Rebel
What a fricking waste of time this was.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:09 am to CAD703X
quote:
House claimed their case was urgent and persuasive so why do we need a redo in the Senate?
And even then they had to selectively leak transcripts from Schiff's Double Secret hearing in order to try to taint public opinion. When the full transcript was released -in every case I can think of at the moment- it eventually shitted on the Dems' assertions. They literally had to push this all through before that truth was disseminated enough to make an impact.
Pulling witnesses into the Senate would give the GOP members a chance to question these people without the filter Schiff placed (especially withholding the WB) and without the taint he purposely created. If anything, the GOP needs this to provide a clear and concise balance against the questioning in the House.
There is no "lose" for Trump here, it's why he wants it.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:09 am to greygoose
Yes, it is. And If Graham bailed on this it is because he lost this guy. But truly after Chad's reporting today on Graham protecting Bolton's good name, and he rolled his eyes during damning Biden video played in the trail. Graham wants the Biden's cleared as well. I knew this would all be a mess. It is sad.
quote:
Manchin just spoke to reporters and said he wants to hear from all witnesses, including Hunter Biden. He added that he thinks Biden can clear himself of any suggested wrongdoing and that he won’t help the president’s defense but nonetheless he wants to hear from all witnesses.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:09 am to BoarEd
quote:
You're here arguing he needs to let the Democrats further trample his rights for political expediency.
Political expediency, in a political process. What a concept!
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:10 am to Stonehog
see what I mean. I already addressed that.
They will say all of that anyway NO MATTER WHAT THE GOP DOES.
They will say all of that anyway NO MATTER WHAT THE GOP DOES.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:10 am to Rebel
quote:
According to Sandra Smith (Her and I went to the same University).
You apparently didn't major in English, and she graduated from LSU.
This post was edited on 1/29/20 at 11:13 am
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:11 am to Stonehog
quote:
Political expediency, in a political process. What a concept!
So political expediency now takes precedence over POTUS' constitutional rights?
Do you realize what you're saying? Or what they're doing?
They just brought a world of shite down on top of themselves.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:12 am to greygoose
Just called Graham's office as well as my other SC senator, Tim Scott. Left a message for Miss Lindsey but actually got a human answering for Scott. Told both I was opposed to witnesses as the House didn't do it's job properly, but also that if witnesses were allowed it would be ridiculous to have only witnesses the Dems wants without allowing witnesses called by the Reps and President.
If anyone wants to contact their senator, go here.
If anyone wants to contact their senator, go here.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 11:14 am to Bard
quote:
No he doesn't. He can still claim EP, that would go to the courts and quickly to SCOTUS.
EP is not a blanket deal that simply covers a whole person. Some questions wouldn't be covered by EP, some would. Thus, it's a question ny question scenario. So how long do you think THAT process takes to play out??
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News