Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      


Goto page 1, 2  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6214
Reputation: 295.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 12:27 pm    Post subject: Politics after the midterms ... Reply with quote

Incoming Democrat Chairman: Dems Will Go ‘All-In’ On Russia, Impeach Kavanaugh For ‘Perjury’
[ii]Also laments that elite Republicans are joining Democrats.[/i]
Mollie Hemingway By Mollie Hemingway
NOVEMBER 7, 2018

Judiciary Committee ranking member Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., revealed plans for House Democrats to investigate and impeach Justice Brett Kavanaugh for alleged perjury and investigate and impeach President Donald Trump for alleged treasonous collusion with Russia.

In post-election chats with various callers while riding the Acela train from New York to Washington, Nadler gave advice to a newly elected representative and discussed potential 2020 Democratic presidential nominees with another. He also lamented identity politics and the thriving economy and worried about Democrats losing working-class voters while gaining elite former Republicans and suburban women.

Nadler was headed to DC for a two-day planning session with his staff and Judiciary Committee staff. “We’ve got to figure out what we’re doing,” he explained in a phone call with a friend. Nadler requested that the friend’s name be concealed on the grounds he is a private citizen.

The two discussed two routes for investigating new Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh. The first is to go after the FBI for how they handled the investigation into unsubstantiated claims he sexually assaulted women. “They didn’t even do a half-ass job,” he said. “They didn’t interview 30 witnesses who said ‘Interview me! I’ve got a lot to say!'” he said, while mimicking people waving their hands to be called on.

His other plan is to go after Kavanaugh because “there’s a real indication that Kavanaugh committed perjury.” He claimed that The Atlantic published an article about the allegations of a third woman. Then he claimed that when Kavanaugh was “asked at a committee hearing under oath when he first heard of the subject, he said, ‘When I’d heard of the Atlantic article.’ But there is an email chain apparently dating from well before that from him about ‘How can we deal with this?'” Nadler told the caller.

Nadler was apparently discussing a slightly different claim, since debunked, which is that Kavanaugh perjured himself when he denied hearing of The New Yorker’s disputed allegation involving Deborah Ramirez until the story came out. Considering that The New Yorker included a denial from Kavanaugh in its own controversial story, and was asking him about it right before publication, and he acknowledged all that in his Senate testimony, it’s unclear how fruitful such a perjury claim would be.

When the caller objected to the plan, Nadler pushed back, “That’s not technical, that’s real.” He conceded that maybe it was not a great plan, since even if Kavanaugh could be removed, it might not result in the political results desired.

“The worst-case scenario — or best case depending on your point of view — you prove he committed perjury, about a terrible subject and the Judicial Conference recommends you impeach him. So the president appoints someone just as bad.”

When the caller suggested going after Kavanaugh quietly, Nadler explained, “You can’t do it quietly because word will get out that the FBI or the committee is reaching out to witnesses.”

The caller then suggested that impeachment might still be worthwhile because the president elected in 2020 could nominate someone else. Nadler said the problem was that any investigation wouldn’t take long enough to last until the presidential election. “There are a finite amount of witnesses. I don’t see why it should take long at all,” he said. “We’re not talking about a 30-year scheme of getting money from Russians via hidden sources — that takes time.”


That was an apparent reference to Democrat beliefs in a dramatic and unsubstantiated theory that Trump conspired with Russia to steal the 2016 presidential election. He promised it would also be an avenue that Democrats would pursue vigorously at the launch of the new Congress.

Nadler said Russia investigations would be under a broad umbrella of holding Trump “accountable,” since it’s a more palatable argument than impeachment, that they would be going “all-in,” and much of what they get to would be “depending on what [special counsel Robert] Mueller finds.” Still, he said the Judiciary Committee would only be in a supportive role to Rep. Adam Schiff and the Intelligence Committee, which has “a way ahead start on that.” Still, he said Judiciary “will have a role” in the Russia investigations.

Nadler and his callers discussed 2020 presidential prospects, noting that Joe Biden would be hurt by the efforts to go after Kavanaugh since it would bring his role in the Clarence Thomas hearings back to prominence. “The only relevance of Clarence Thomas hearings is it will come back to hit Joe Biden over head if he runs for president,” Nadler said. Uproarious laughter from the caller could be heard on the other end of the phone. Other candidates were dismissed for being “too conservative” or “too conservative on economic issues for the party” or “not charismatic.”

In another call, Nadler said Republicans did better than expected on election night because of the booming economy. He suggested messaging that the economy is only helping wealthy people and not other classes, and worried that changes to the economic boom would be blamed on Democrats. He also complained that the new voters being recruited to join Democrats were “Rockefeller Republicans” who are liberal on social issues and that the new group makes Democrats more vulnerable to the charge they are no longer the party of the working person.

Nadler told one newly elected Democrat to start thinking about committee assignments.

Following the train ride, Nadler weighed in on Twitter about the news that Attorney General Jeff Sessions has resigned, using the language of accountability: “Americans must have answers immediately as to the reasoning behind @realDonaldTrump removing Jeff Sessions from @TheJusticeDept. Why is the President making this change and who has authority over Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation? We will be holding people accountable.”

In March 2017, however, Nadler called for Sessions to resign ...
https://thefederalist.com/2018/11/07/incoming-democrat-chairman-dems-will-go-all-in-on-russia-impeach-kavanaugh-for-perjury/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=8aac49eaf7-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_11_09_10_46&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-8aac49eaf7-83873765
=================================================

There seems to be some determination to use the House to create headlines for the media. As I noted -- they have been 'doubling down' on every failure. So one can only relish the onslaught to come!
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6214
Reputation: 295.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2018 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nancy Pelosi: Mueller Doesn’t Have to Indict Trump for Congress to Impeach Him
But the congresswoman says she isn’t planning to go down that road—yet.

EDWARD-ISAAC DOVERE
7:00 AM ET

Nancy pelosi really does not want to impeach Donald Trump—and she’s prepared to take all the heat from her party and from the new House Democratic majority she’s hoping to lead, unless she sees something wildly different emerge.

But she said she won’t let Robert Mueller define the decision.

“Recognize one point,” Pelosi told me during an interview in the conference room of her minority-leader suite in the Capitol late Friday: “What Mueller might not think is indictable could be impeachable.”

Pelosi said people should pray for the country as long as Trump is in charge. She’s not sure of his mental condition. She thinks he’s degraded the Constitution and American values. She says the intelligence assessments are indisputable in showing that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. She thinks the firing of Jeff Sessions and the appointment of Matthew Whitaker as acting attorney general in a clear move against the Mueller probe “is perilously close to a constitutional crisis.”

That’s not enough, she said.

“You have to have evidence, evidence of the connection. Everything’s about the connection,” Pelosi explained.

In other words, it comes down to a topic the president has notably refrained from tweeting about for weeks: collusion. [....]
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/11/why-nancy-pelosi-might-impeach-trump/575560/
=================================================

This is part of a longer article, but it makes the point about the Democrats keeping up the fight by trying to impeach Trump. This should be taken as the Pelosi approach as she rallies support for her candidacy as Speaker of the Democrat House of Representatives. But she is doing it because there's a lot of that feeling amongst the Democrat representatives.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 9462
Reputation: 307.6Reputation: 307.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

( there is rumours of yet another Hilary for president run , seriously can't think of anything that would make republicans happier )



Former Clinton adviser says Hillary will run in 2020



By CAITLIN OPRYSKO
| 11/12/2018 08:40 AM EST


Two-time Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton will mount a third bid for the White House, longtime Clinton adviser Mark Penn wrote in an op-ed published Sunday by The Wall Street Journal, predicting that the former first lady and secretary of state is readying a "Hillary 4.0" campaign for 2020.

In the Journal op-ed, Penn, an adviser and pollster to the Clintons from 1995-2008, and former New York City politician Andrew Stein wrote that in a 2020 run, Clinton would reinvent herself “as a liberal firebrand." The twice-failed presidential candidate would not “let a little thing like two stunning defeats stand in the way of her claim to the White House," they wrote.

.
Although she has routinely shot down talk of a 2020 run, Clinton said in an interview earlier this month that "I’d like to be president" after answering "no" when asked whether she wanted to run for president again.

Another longtime Clinton aide, Philippe Reines, told POLITICO last month that he thought it was odd Clinton’s name wasn’t “in the mix” of potential 2020 contenders, though he said more recently that he couldn’t think of a Democrat who would be able to successfully challenge President Donald Trump.

Clinton’s surprise loss to President Donald Trump in 2016 sent shockwaves through Democratic Party, but Penn and Stein write that two years of hand-wringing and reflection — as well as some denial on Clinton’s part — will strengthen Clinton and put her in the best position to take Trump on again.



Though the duo did not offer an outline for how Clinton will improve her dismal standing in the Midwest or move past the scandals that plagued her in 2016, they wrote that voters should “expect Hillary 4.0 to come out swinging,” relegating former Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton to fundraising roles. “She has decisively to win those Iowa caucus-goers who have never warmed up to her. They will see her now as strong, partisan, left-leaning and all-Democrat — the one with the guts, experience and steely-eyed determination to defeat Mr. Trump.”

Penn and Stein offer a scathing criticism of other expected Democratic candidates, writing that Clinton “will not allow this humiliating loss at the hands of an amateur to end the story of her career,” and that while another run would likely infuriate Senate Democrats looking to take control of the party with a 2020 run, the two authors wrote that White House hopefuls in the chamber fumbled moments like the Kavanaugh confirmation as if they were “bumbling amateurs.”


By BRENT D. GRIFFITHS

“You can expect her to run for president once again. Maybe not at first, when the legions of Senate Democrats make their announcements, but definitely by the time the primaries are in full swing,” they predicted.

News that Clinton might try to take on President Donald Trump again elicited cheers from the White House. Counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway on Sunday retweeted reporting on Penn and Stein's assertion, adding: “Dear God, please, yes.”


https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/12/clinton-aide-2020-run-983684
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6214
Reputation: 295.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Who can beat her? She has control of most of the money. Bernie might have beaten her if the election were honest, but ... you know how that went.

Who are the rising new stars? Watch for them to be mown down before they get their bearings in Presidential competition.

You would think that she would retire to live happily ever after with Bill, back in Arkansas, and relish those moments when they had most of the People fooled ... but no ... Hillary has left the Glass Ceiling unbroken. And she's only 70! She has one more chance ...

It's like a re-run of The Night of the Living Dead!
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 9462
Reputation: 307.6Reputation: 307.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i think the democrats have an old guard vs new guard problem or simply a problem letting go of the old guard


Nancy Pelosi was last house speaker in 2007-2010 and lead democrats to one of the worst defeats ever in the 2010 mid terms

sure they did better this election but it has not always been the case under her watch


if billionaries don't continue to give the democrats Millions in free money for house campaigns , they could easily lose many of there 2018 gains in future elections as some were not won by that much , if they don't have a massive financial advantage over the GOP candidate


as for Hilary Clinton , seriously another run ? this woman needs help
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6214
Reputation: 295.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think it's a scary scenario. The younger they are, the more extreme -- or idealistic -- they are. Bernie may be an old fart but his followers are all young and believe in such things as free tuition, free health care for everybody, and open borders.

Elizabeth Warren is extreme in terms of the amount of government regulation she would countenance. Cory Booker -- "Spartacus" -- is wild-eyed. There could be others that I don't know about, but they are all on the far left.

The other choice seems to be Hillary. Her allies are Pelosi and possibly Schumer. They control the party's money.

There is the potential that the millions will leave the Democrats whatever choice they make.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6214
Reputation: 295.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pat Buchanan: Will Democratic Rebels Dethrone Nancy?
by Tyler Durden
Tue, 11/20/2018 - 10:25
Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

After adding at least 37 seats and taking control of the House by running on change, congressional Democrats appear to be about to elect as their future leaders three of the oldest faces in the party.

Nancy Pelosi of California and Steny Hoyer of Maryland have led the House Democrats for 16 years. For 12 years, they have been joined in the leadership triumvirate by Jim Clyburn of South Carolina.

If these three emerge as speaker, majority leader and majority whip, all three Democratic leaders will be older than our oldest president, Ronald Reagan, was when he went home after two terms.

By 2020’s election, all three House leaders would be over 80.

Was this gerontocracy what America voted for when it awarded Democrats control of the U.S. House?

Hardly. Some Democrats won in 2018 by pledging not to vote for Pelosi as speaker, so unpopular is she in their districts. And if all who said they want new leadership were to vote for new leaders on the House floor Jan. 3 — when the speaker will be chosen — Pelosi would fall short. The race for speaker could then break wide-open.

Some 16 Democrats vowed Monday to oppose Pelosi on the House floor, one shy of being enough to block her return to the speakership after eight years.

In a letter that went public, the 16 declared:

Quote:
“Our majority came on the backs of candidates who said that they would support new leadership because voters in hard-won districts, and across the country, want to see real change in Washington. We promised to change the status quo, and we intend to deliver on that promise.”


The likelihood of the rebellion succeeding, however, remains slim, for no credible challenger to Pelosi has yet announced.

What explains the timidity in the Democratic caucus?



Pelosi punishes enemies. Democrats calling for new leaders have already been branded as sexists with the hashtag “#FiveWhiteGuys.”

Yet evidence is mounting that a Pelosi speakership would prove to be an unhappy close to her remarkable career.

One week after the election, 150 protesters from the Sunrise Movement and Justice Democrats blocked Pelosi’s House office to demand action on climate change. They were joined by the youngest member of the incoming Congress, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Pelosi declared herself “inspired” by the protesters, 51 of whom were arrested. She urged police to let them exercise their democratic rights and pledged to revive the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, which Republicans abolished.

Dismissing the committee as “toothless,” the protesters demanded that Pelosi’s party commit to bringing an end to the use of all fossil fuels and to accepting no more campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry.

Not going to happen with Pelosi as speaker. For when it comes to the leftist agenda of liberal Democrats from safe districts — Medicare for all, abolish ICE, impeach Trump — Pelosi would pigeonhole such measures to avoid the party’s being dragged too far to the left for 2020.

And if the House were to pass radical measures, the bills would die in the Senate or be vetoed by the president.

Moreover, within Pelosi’s party in the House, the various factions are going to be demanding a new distribution of the seats of power, of which there are only so many to go around.

Democratic women, who won more seats than ever, will want more, as will the Congressional Black Caucus and the Hispanics. It will most likely be white male Democrats, that shrinking cohort, who will be the principal losers in the new House.

That adage about Democrats being a collection of warring tribes gathered together in anticipation of common plunder has never seemed truer.

What, then, does the new year promise?

As it becomes apparent that there is little common ground for bipartisan legislation on Capitol Hill — except perhaps on infrastructure, and that would take a long time to enact — the cable news channels will look elsewhere for the type of action that causes ratings to soar. That action will inevitably come in the clashes between Trump and his enemies and the media that sustain them.

Out of the House — with Adam Schiff, Elijah Cummings, Maxine Waters and Jerrold Nadler as new chairs — will come a blizzard of subpoenas and a series of confrontations with witnesses.

From special counsel Robert Mueller’s office will almost surely come new indictments, trials and the long-anticipated report, which will go to the Justice Department, where Matthew Whitaker is acting attorney general.

Then there is the presidential race of 2020, where the Democratic Party has yet another gerontocracy problem.

By spring, there could be 20 Democrats who will have announced for president. And five of the most prominent mentioned — Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, John Kerry, Joe Biden and Mike Bloomberg — are also over 70, with Elizabeth Warren turning 70 in June.

While some candidates will be granted airtime because they are famous, the lesser-known will follow the single sure path to the cable studios and the weekend TV shows — the trashing of Trump.

Trading barbs is not Nancy Pelosi’s kind of fight.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-20/pat-buchanan-will-democratic-rebels-dethrone-nancy
=================================================

Well, grab some popcorn. Here we are, in the Restaurant at the End of the Universe with the best seats in the house, where the Titans settle their issues. We Canadians are Titan-free, and thus play the same role in the contest as a puck does in the great game of hockey.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1292
Reputation: 123.1
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 2:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One would have to think the orange empire is crumbling in front of his very own eyes. Perhaps he is dumb as to not notice but that wouldn't be all that surprising.

He has shat on the military in many ways, Arlington ( I was on the phone) , France (its raining ...Oh noes!) , Retired Admiral McRaven ( i knew where Bin Laden was...LOL!) deployment of troops to border was a giant and unnecessary reaction to a non-threat.

Now darling daughter has done what Hillary did...sooo.... Lock up Ivanka !

Prince MBS is a total douchbag , of course in bed w the orange one , but foks now know why.

Acosta/CNN beat him at his own game. (perhaps not for long tho)

Rake the leaves! Prevent forest fires <------ Wow what kind of stupidity pills has he taken ? Seriously, what a complete and utter idiot. (the whole world laughed at that one)

And the blue wave...ripple.... whatever you want to call it.

Yup....those walls are closing fast. Best he go up to his bedroom and watch Fox news....whoops , Fox News is not showcasing the orange idiot anymore.

Better watch the Cartoon Network. More along his IQ line.

Oh yeah, almost forgot, Mar-A-Largo is losing 80% of its charity business.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6214
Reputation: 295.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Psst -- how could I get some of what you're smoking?
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1292
Reputation: 123.1
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 5:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
Psst -- how could I get some of what you're smoking?


Easy, read a newspaper.

Most are saying the exact same thing. Of course you dont deny it, you know it is true.

But the really funny one is, did you hear Ivanka's excuse ? She didnt know. Neither did Hillary.

Lock her up ! Lock her up !
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6214
Reputation: 295.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 6:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know there's a lot of delusional thinking going on right now, if only because you bring so much of it to this forum.

I have learned that the media is so hair-triggered with their anti-Trump mendacity, and so zany right now, that it's best to wait a day or two while the blow-hards are having their 15 minutes. New information will appear ... that will put things in a different context.

Then it's time to judge.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1292
Reputation: 123.1
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 7:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
I know there's a lot of delusional thinking going on right now, if only because you bring so much of it to this forum.

Says the Infowars ass kisser !

LOL! Rich...but funny
Quote:

I have learned that the media is so hair-triggered with their anti-Trump mendacity, and so zany right now, that it's best to wait a day or two while the blow-hards are having their 15 minutes. New information will appear ... that will put things in a different context.

Then it's time to judge.


Oh like Orange idiot DID go to Arlington, never shit on the troops, it didnt rain in Paris keeping the blowhard in a hotel room for cartoons, the leaves will rake themselves, Acosta/CNN DIDN'T win ?

New information, kinda like Conways alternative facts?

Careful , your lips have this ugly shade of orange and brown.

But keep er coming, I enjoy the laughs.

New information... LOLLOLLOLLOL
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6214
Reputation: 295.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why would I care if he went to Arlington or not? Jeez, TC, you seem like a Rachel Madow disciple. Have you ever heard the expression don't sweat the small stuff?

All I am trying here is to keep the board abreast of American politics -- as theatre. It certainly affects us, so it isn't just theatre, but in terms of participation, we are only spectators.

For the gentle reader, to rescue this thread from the troll, it looks as if the Democrats are now locked in a generational fight for control of the party. Pelosi is under siege from the youth wing. Senorita Ocasio-Cortez speaks for a lot of them.

Personally, for the gentle reader, I think this will take the Democrats off in the direction they want to go, lightened from the weight of the Clintons and Pelosi, and all that gang. They will be after free tuition, free healthcare, open borders -- all of that stuff.

Something akin to this process has already taken place within the Republican Party, as a result of the election. Trump now has loyal Senate backing. He never had that before. Other parts are leaving. David Frum sounds like a Hillary supporter these days.

Serious observers say that the Republicans are now his party. Parts of the state are being re-made, notably the judiciary. McConnell is happily banging through judicial appointments, rebalancing the courts.

Don't let TC know this -- but it's the courts where the Social Justice types win their victories -- it's not at the ballot box. That's why we had to accept the redefinition of marriage so that it would be 'inclusive'. That's the driver for these 'trans-sexual rights' bits of nonsense -- including imposing a whole new system of pronouns on us!

Where did this so-called 'right' come from? you might ask.

None of this is the kind of thing that the sweaty masses are demanding. I don't know what energy drives it, but 'social justice' is imposed on the electorate through racial and gender categories, and punishes people by elminating their employment possibilities.

But these changes simply appear and start being implemented out of the blue, so far as the mainstream is concerned. Who worried about manspreading before 2010?

That's why they are having these intense fights over the Courts. It isn't to reverse or maintain Roe vs Wade. It's to go back to a closer reading of the Constitution, cutting back somewhat the expanding powers that government agencies have taken unto themselves. That's what this fight is about -- it's one major front in the war.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1292
Reputation: 123.1
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Wed Nov 21, 2018 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
Why would I care if he went to Arlington or not?.

You wouldn't. Me...not so much either.

But millions of US vets do. Especially in light of his so called support which pretty much anyone can see is bullshit.
Crap on a retired Admiral , crap on a war hero, be too afraid to go see the active members and one gets a beautiful picture of the orange idiot .

They get it. So do you, but you've boxed yourself in on this one and cannot admit it.

Come say it with me now...." lock her up, lock her up".....you can do it !
:)
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6214
Reputation: 295.4
votes: 8

PostPosted: Wed Nov 21, 2018 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think you can stop fretting about the wavering Trump support amongst veterans. The wavering will stop as soon as the Democrats pick a presidential candidate.

I confess, there's nothing I'd like more than to see Hillary locked up, unless it would be some of those other shadowy figures who ran the intelligence networks of the Obama administration. Brennan, who looks like Central Casting's idea of an underworld boss, perhaps the real-life version of the Joker.

There are times when I think -- jeez, if they're going to do all of this to Tony Clement, what will they do to Clapper?

But I am disappointed.

As for the Trump girl. Well, whataya gonna do? She'a an object or consumption, a woman with $thousands spent on personal grooming. Who likes her and her creepy husband nosing around like agents of the Mossad? She has the personality of a PR firm.

But jail? Put it this way -- you can put her name on the list, but her priority is probably about #50 ... so lets start at the top of the list and work down.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2

Goto page 1, 2  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Politics after the midterms ...

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB