And you know this how?
I’m 100 percent convinced Trump will be impeached in time for the 2020 elections. I expect 2020 to be wall-to-wall coverage of house inquiries and impeachment proceedings.
Once again DEMs simply won’t get it. These theatrics will only ensure Trump is reelected. IMHO
It’s remarkable that a thread about nancy pelosi can turn into an opportunity to share racist memes around here.
It appears that all you see when you look at Obama is a black man.
I see a guy who is likely articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.
drinking 40oz bottles of colt 45 is a racist stereo type.
Oh please, everything non-progressives do is labeled racist these days. Charges of racist have become so passé that they have about as much effect as a single gnat attacking a battleship with anyone who isn’t easily bullied in the face of public opinion.
Here’s a hint: when you echo the same thing over and over again pretty soon no one cares. Especially if some folks are so desperate for racism to cry out against that they are infamously committing fake hate crimes or else have time to be upset about statues or place names.
Interesting how people see different things.
I see a past president who lied to the American people about healthcare.
I see a past president who lied about Benghazi.
I see a past president who amplified the divisiveness in this country when in office and after leaving office.
I see a past president who should have been investigated during the Mueller collusion and obstruction investigation.
The list is endless as it was 8 very long years.
But most of all I am grateful as he is a past president.
I drank Colt 45 as a bad teenager. Eyes no blahg man capn holoman.
What kind of mind numbing substance should the political cartoon have used? Interesting that you focus on that stereotype instead of the clean, well dressed, nice looking guy.
“Lid” … another autocorrect feature causing trouble I see…
I remember when people were making fun of the choice of Bud Lite in the Beer Summit. At the time I noted that hardly anyone – no one actually – was defending the choice. This was curious because since Bud Lite is such a popular “brew” that you knew that there were drinkers reading those threads, just as a matter of statistics.
Thus I realized that it is a beer that no one will stand up for. Much like people won’t stand up for Cleveland even though they will for Detroit or Chicago.
Bud Lite: the Cleveland of Beers
Corrected and turned off.
Why do you lie so much? Seriously…
I’m just wondering what you and others will be saying if those that have abused their positions like Comey, McCabe, Strzok, The Weasel Rosenstien, Page, Ohr, Brennan and Clapper to name a few get indicted?
That that’s not even including Samantha Power and those that used her name to unmask private Americans personal data/emails/phone calls.
I have no faith in him…apparently he’s been missing in action.
What I would do? Congratulate the hard working men and women who were able to catch those criminals. I don’t give a shit what side of the isle you are on. A felony is a felony.
Who votes for them (and thereby extends their DC shelf life) - their base, or hypothetical people?
They won’t risk the base’s wrath unless evidence is so overwhelming and damning they have no choice.
In response I point you to the last 4 decades: the Republicans in office do not keep their promises, they do not roll back Democrat efforts except on relatively rare occasions, they do act like their job is to be Statesmen. And “Statesmen” generally only means getting along with Democrats and cooperating with them in what they want to do.
This is especially the case when a Republican is in the White House for then the so-called “moderates” indulge their spendthrift ways, eagerly reaching across the isle to the ever eager to spend more Democrats (who know they will never pay a price with their base for being spendthrift), and not coincidentally setting the RNC up for future electoral reversals as Republican voters become frustrated.
The only time that these so-called “moderates” can generally restrain themselves has been proven to be in opposition to a Democrat in the White House.
Under Clinton they went along with the Contract for America,however fitfully (search for Not So Radical Republicans, Reason, 1998) in opposition to the Democrat POTUS.
Immediately when W was in office they styled themselves the go-to guys if he wanted ANY of his agenda, even giving the Dems the Senate for a short time with Jumping Jim Jeffords. They eagerly cooperated with Democrats to indulge their previously frustrated spending urges.
They set us up for 6 years without a veto.
Then they were the ultimate cause for losing the House (at which point the Democrats, still with their cooperation, proceeded to REALLY show us what spendthrift was like).
Immediately after Obama was in office the very same folks who voted for Part D voted against Obamaharm in lockstep. They likewise cooperated with conservatives against Obama.
With the election of Trump we were momentarily blessed that these Quislings were so opposed to the President that they stayed in opposition mode for nearly a year in some cases rather than immediately start spending as they did under W.
I’m not saying it doesn’t make a certain amount of sense, but still. Republicans get voted in, they go back on their promises, and yet the incumbency rate is still what - 85, 95%? So they haven’t had much to be afraid of in terms of job security.
I’d also counter with this - it’s one thing to go back on promises, it’s quite another to go against a POTUS whose base is rabidly loyal to him and considers any criticism of him nothing short of treason. It would depend on the politician and his constituency, of course, so there’s no one standard. But any GOP politician who serves where Trump has a devoted following and actually goes along with something as drastic as impeachment proceedings is taking a risk with poor odds.
But expect every finger to be testing the wind. “Moderate” Republicans are useless, they’re neither hot or cold.
Whoa there hoss, republicans didn’t open the spending flood gates under W until after 911, which warranted a bit of spending on defense and of course, bribing the shitty democrats into supporting the wars after.