If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If you are having difficulty logging in, please REFRESH the page and clear your browser cache and try again.
If you still can't get logged in, please try using Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera, or Safari to login. Also be sure you are using the latest version of your browser. Internet Explorer has not been updated in over seven years and will no longer work with the Forum software. Thanks
Pre-Dementia Joe, obviously. I figured it was a prominent D.
According to Manchin, getting rid of the filibuster requires a two-thirds vote anyway.
Not sure he's right about that. Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell both changed filibuster rules without having a 2/3 vote.
Oh wait, he's saying to get rid of the filibuster entirely. Then that is correct. But you only need a majority vote (I believe) to make changes to the rules.
The carve out being for what the Ds want to pass in the immediate future. The, lol...Big Lie-driven "voting rights" bill. The next carve out being whatever the Ds want to next pass. The next carve out being...
Fortunately, this is tilting at windmills shit. But, I gotta give the Ds credit in their brazen shamelessness. Pretty amazing, really.
Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]? Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to do it, I'm just suggesting they can. McConnell has acknowledged as much and promises to raise holy hell if they do it.
Manchin, Sinema, and at least a few quiet others will not do it, however. So it's all spitting into the wind.
Well with Progs the end always justifies the means. Blow up Voting Rights = Race Warefare = More Minority Votes. Disharmony is always justified and in fact encouraged by Progs to get their wanted result.
I think you should read the article that crashcourse posted. Perhaps look at the video, if it doesn't upset you too much.
This is about a man who clearly, consistently, and provably, advocated for storming the capitol building. Have you seen anyone else who did the same and has not been charged? Have you ever seen someone who was FBI Most Wanted and then just disappeared from the list? Why was he dropped from the list? If we had a functioning news media, they would be all over this story.
Do you believe it's rational to believe that hundreds (or thousands) of people stormed the Capitol because they believed Ray Epps, a total stranger, wanted them to?
There's video of Epps trying to get people to enter the Capitol Building on the night of Jan. 5 too. And no one listened to him. Suddenly he became a highly persuasive speaker the next day!
BTW, the Jan. 6 Committee just released a statement that they talked to this guy months ago.
This conspiracy theory is mostly the brainchild of Darren Beattie, a former Trump speechwriter who got fired after attending a white nationalist yankfest. Beattie previously claimed that a guy named Ronald Loehrke was an FBI informant and provocateur too. But then ol' Ron got arrested and charged, so never mention him again.
Do you believe it's rational to believe that hundreds (or thousands) of people stormed the Capitol because they believed Ray Epps, a total stranger, wanted them to?
There's video of Epps trying to get people to enter the Capitol Building on the night of Jan. 5 too. And no one listened to him. Suddenly he became a highly persuasive speaker the next day!
BTW, the Jan. 6 Committee just released a statement that they talked to this guy months ago.
No, it is not rational to believe that thousands of people believed Epps. But it IS rational to believe that the intelligence community had resources on-site at the Jan 6 riot. It is PROVEN that the IC, and particularly the FBI, covered for the Hillary campaign when they started the Russian Hoax. The top leadership of the FBI was trying to get rid of Trump once he took the presidency. Again, that is a fact.
I find it plausible that the FBI encouraged the Jan 6 riot. I also find it plausible that Pelosi left the capitol basically without the extra security that Trump had asked for (twice) and the Metropolitan police had also asked for. Why would she not want the National Guard around?
Now, do you find the Jan 6 Committee's work product to be honest? How can a House committee not allow the minority party to pick its own members on that committee? Remember, Pelosi would only accept two anti-Trump Rs (Cheney and Kinsinger). Once again, evil-party and stupid-party.
Trump did NOT ask for more national guard to guard the Capitol only to have Pelosi block him. This is horseshit that has been peddled in rightwing circles who want to blame everyone BUT Trump for Jan. 6. Trump himself has claimed he ordered 10,000 troops. His word is worth ABSLUTELY NOTHING.
There's not one single corroborating piece of evidence that Trump formally requested the National Guard, let alone 10,000 Guardsmen, guard the Capitol building. The ONLY thing that anyone can point to is that on the night of Jan 5th, in a phone conversation with then-acting Sec of Defense Miller, Trump told him they would need 10,000 troops to guard the Capitol because so many of HIS people were coming. Miller has said that he didn't take that conversation to be an "order". It was a casual conversation. Anyways, formal orders are made IN WRITING and no such thing exists.
Tweet
Comment