dude has been tweeting for 17 hours straight

it must take some weapons grade stimulant to keep his ambulating corpse awake this long

10/5/2019 12:59:19 AM

If you honestly believed Trump would be anything but a disaster you were blinded by Hilary hate. The guy has been a celebrity for being a awful person since the 70’s

[Edited on October 5, 2019 at 7:21 AM. Reason : Also for being irrational, spastic, narcissistic, etc. ]

10/5/2019 6:59:49 AM

^^ have you ever seen his incessant sniffling during a speech? Side is obviously a raging coke head

10/5/2019 7:33:09 AM

what a potty mouth

Mitt Romney never knew how to win. He is a pompous “ass” who has been fighting me from the beginning, except when he begged me for my endorsement for his Senate run (I gave it to him), and when he begged me to be Secretary of State (I didn’t give it to him). He is so bad for R’s!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 5, 2019

10/5/2019 10:23:23 AM

Why is "ass" in "quotes"?

So many things I'll never know

[Edited on October 5, 2019 at 11:13 AM. Reason : That reads like it was ghost-written.]

10/5/2019 11:10:44 AM

^^^ awhile back someone involved i think with the apprentice said it was adderall, sometimes snorted

10/5/2019 12:09:57 PM

David Fahrenthold's reporting has suggested that President Trump has had an amphetamine addiction in the past, if not still today.

10/5/2019 1:22:21 PM

I wonder if this is connected to Trump talking bad about the fed.

10/5/2019 2:34:22 PM

yeah, its a conspiracy, the deep state made trump say those things to make him look bad to impeach him

#votegreen
#maga

10/5/2019 2:52:33 PM

^^^
https://twitter.com/JRehling/status/1180505950613958658?s=20

Extremely convincing evidence that's the case.

For reference, the original picture is here:
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/728297587418247168?s=21

This sort of "mistake" is so blatant, you can't help but believe it was planted, but also they could simply just be this careless.

10/5/2019 5:54:32 PM

lol, trump is saying rick perry made him do it

10/5/2019 10:20:38 PM

[Edited on October 5, 2019 at 10:40 PM. Reason : X]

10/5/2019 10:39:32 PM

^^ but also it was a perfect beautiful call

Hope people see how he stabs people in the back and keep singing.

10/5/2019 11:05:03 PM

https://twitter.com/hillbeverlyhill/status/1180595151598583808?s=21

Thankfully we have a president committed to rooting out corruption so we will definitely see if their jobs as top advisors to POTUS has benefited them financially.

10/6/2019 8:33:57 AM

Trump is going to start throwing out random names of people who travelled to Ukraine over the past six months.

"I only called the Ukraine because Bob asked me to. Bob. From Sioux City. Fantastic town."

10/6/2019 12:34:33 PM

... and bob said to me, "sir, it would be really really great for us hard working people if you could call this guy. really great. very great people." so that's what I did I called them and it was perfect and there's no problem. they said, the corrupt media, shifty shciff, they're attacking me for my perfect call. corruption. i'm fighting corruption but the corrupt fake news media -- i'm the most attacked president. can you imagine if they attacked another president like this? out to get me. fake news. i made the call because it was important to stop corruption. perfect call. these guys, attacking me - treason. it's treason, it really is, they used to handle treason in a different way...

10/6/2019 12:55:03 PM

I'm not declaring the fed thing but I'm just putting it out there after running possible scenarios in my head. I've been trying to think of a reason why this Ukraine call is such a big deal. No one's denying it happened, not even Trumpanzees. Here is the timeline of all I know.

1.Trump did half a dozen impeachable offenses
2. Pelosi came out against impeachment
3. Trump talked bad about the fed
4. Whistleblower comes out about Ukraine call
5. Avalanche of demands for impeachment from people who hadn't previously been for impeachment.

5 is the huge mystery. Everyone I've come across thinks the call happened at that it was inappropriate at best, but I"m still trying to find answers to a few really important questions.

A. Why is this the worst thing Trump has done?
B. How did this call "jeopardize our national security"?
C. How can this be considered betraying our country?

As someone who hates when police investigate themselves I can understand the need for someone to help with
high level investigation. Hypothetically speaking, its better to have 3rd parties investigate things that are politically charged. Theres no way someone like Biden could be properly investigated by American investigators so why not ask the other countries involved for help?

Think about it. If only Epstein had been sent to suicide watch in China he'd still be alive today. Theres no way he was going to survive in an American system.

[Edited on October 6, 2019 at 1:55 PM. Reason : k]

10/6/2019 1:54:55 PM

10/6/2019 2:32:22 PM

^^^^ I'm just waiting to hear from Dave, Juliet, and the twins.

10/6/2019 8:48:24 PM

Trump announced we’re pulling out of Syria and letting turkey move in. Presumably leaving the Kurds to be slaughtered. And some vague thing about turkey taking the captured isis fighters?

Seems like a disaster on multiple fronts but at least he’s not starting a new war yet to distract from escalating impeachment.

10/6/2019 11:58:58 PM

Wow turns out a house member's answer to Question B is that if we withhold aid to Ukraine then Russia could invade them and then the dominoes could fall and this poor country could take over all of Europe and then overrun the USA.

-John Garamendi D-CA

So out of the 3 important questions, two have been completely ignored (because they can't be answered?) and 1 has a preposterous answer.

Looking good moose.

Also, only idiots still trust the FBI, CIA, NSA, etc.

[Edited on October 7, 2019 at 7:32 PM. Reason : how long will it take for you to realize that the FBI and CIA aren't on the side of the people]

10/7/2019 7:20:58 PM

yeah, the CIA and FBI are part of the deep state which is why we should trust foreign intelligence agencies working through rusy giuliani instead

#maga
#votegreen

10/7/2019 10:16:51 PM

You are the king of binary thought.

10/8/2019 4:45:59 AM

Tried to find the Garamendi quote and twitter was a cesspool of MAGA fans killing him over a Martha Mccallum appearance.

What did he actually say? Best I can tell is this.

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/07/768095322/democratic-rep-john-garamendi-discusses-his-recent-trip-to-ukraine?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=politics

But he appears to be talking about Ukraine and not Russia invading the US?

[Edited on October 8, 2019 at 6:24 AM. Reason : I see earl is in with tbe Aaron Mate and Matt Taibbi “not a real whistleblower” spin]

10/8/2019 6:23:07 AM

Stop with your binary thought

10/8/2019 6:27:45 AM

Quote :

" that if we withhold aid to Ukraine then Russia could invade them"

Also, I missed this. Earl doesn’t think Crimea and the Donbass were rightfully part of Ukraine so “could invade” makes perfect sense to him. I just remembered that from one of his past iterations on here.

I could be misremembering but he’s quoted opinion polling on who they identify more with like Russia isn’t engaging in imperialism. It’s only imperialism if it’s America to him.

10/8/2019 7:32:09 AM

^I expect this is true of Russian trolls in general.

10/8/2019 8:11:28 AM

^^ the second one may have been adultswim, he also consumed a lot of the russian misinformation spread in leftist circles

10/8/2019 9:02:18 AM

10/8/2019 9:38:06 AM

Is there a reason why the line for Bill Clinton stops at his impeachment inquiry date?

10/8/2019 10:54:29 AM

maybe they stopped polling after impeachment started?

10/8/2019 11:18:27 AM

Even if we ignored the fact that many Eastern Ukranians identify as Russian, speak Russian and want to be part of Russia, you'd still be wrong. Even if we ignored history and assumed Crimea wasn't with Russia from 1783-1991, Russia invading Crimea would still, in my opinion, be none of our business and have nothing to do with our national security all the way on the other side of the world. I don't subscribe to the idea that we have to be the policemen of the world. The miscontextualization of WW2 is a huge misconception where everyone thinks if one country invades another and we don't immediately go to war, suddenly, the entire world will be invaded or fall into chaos. This is an even deeper version of American exceptionalism that assumes all of humanity are children and we are the adult in the room.

You're the ones who have fallen for propaganda and misinformation. Its not misinformation when you actually go to there and meet people face to face who say most of their family and friends prefer Russia. The sentiment especially makes sense for old people who grew up in arguably the most advanced nation on Earth at the time and now find themselves in a poor, corrupt 20 something year old country because of a backroom deal.

10/8/2019 12:44:41 PM

nyes comrade

10/8/2019 1:29:13 PM

Rudy out there moving goalposts.

Used to be the White House wanted a full vote on an impeachment inquiry. Now the House needs to vote and Schiff needs to be removed. Also, Rudy would love to take Graham up on his offer to testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee but the legal issues are just too complicated.

^^^^ Don't know for sure, but that may have been the high mark of support for Clinton's impeachment. That whole thing started out unpopular and only got moreso.

10/8/2019 3:49:54 PM

Did the White House hire some 15 year olds to draft this legal opinion? I can't find a single legally compelling argument in that letter to support the WH's claim that it doesn't have to comply with the impeachment proceedings. It's nothing more than a string of political talking points, save for a few mildly salient points about precedent that witnesses should have access to counsel.

I seriously hope no lawyer actually tries to make those arguments in court defending the Cheeto, because he/she damned may well face bar sanctions for such a frivolous pleading. Holy shit.

10/8/2019 10:12:33 PM

Quote :

"I can't find a single legally compelling argument in that letter to support the WH's claim that it doesn't have to comply with the impeachment proceedings."

with johnson and clinton the house voted first, thats a good precedent to follow imo.

10/9/2019 7:55:11 AM

Yep. Democrats should follow all norms just like I’m sure Mitch McConnell would.

10/9/2019 8:09:24 AM

Quote :

"with johnson and clinton the house voted first, thats a good precedent to follow imo."

maybe republicans should have thought of that when they changed the rules to give themselves unilateral subpoena power.

democrats are just following the precedent set by republicans

10/9/2019 11:21:30 AM

They should totally change those rules back because they weren't fair, and an impeachment inquiry needs to be fair, and because everyone is so unfair to Trump, the WH shouldn't have to comply with subpoena requests because Trump doesn't care about politics, he cares about corruption and Hunter Biden, and corruption is bad, just like crooked Hillary who he beat in the Electoral College, OK?

10/9/2019 1:20:37 PM

I have wondered what the benefit of the House voting on the impeachment inquiry is for the White House/Trump. Based on the crazy stuff they have been putting forward they/he would argue that since they all voted on the impeachment inquiry they have made up their minds on impeachment and the White House doesnt have to comply with the subpoenas or it could just be a delay tactic.. but how are they gonna delay for a year...

10/9/2019 9:27:42 PM

Merrick Garland would like a word with you

10/9/2019 10:41:51 PM

gowdy incoming

10/10/2019 7:53:30 AM

Quote :

"I have wondered what the benefit of the House voting on the impeachment inquiry is for the White House/Trump."

There's some sense that if there were a vote, it would make the process more "formal" and give the Republicans the opportunity to exert a little more control.

One notion is that then the GOP Representatives could start calling their own witnesses - or, more accurately, since the Democrats are in the majority and could block all of those witnesses, the GOP Representatives could start crying about how the Democrats are actively blocking them from investigating fully and fairly. The upshot is that whether there's a vote or not, Republicans have a talking point to question the legitimacy of the whole thing.

10/10/2019 7:56:32 AM

Once the house votes, the Republicans def take control bc it moves to the senate.

The inquiry is the investigation to determine the standing to impeach. Democrats need to use this time to get as much focus on the dirt, bc once it leaves the house it becomes a different animal

10/10/2019 9:13:48 AM

I think that the vote in question, though, is whether to formally begin the impeachment inquiry, not to pass the actual articles of impeachment.

10/10/2019 9:21:36 AM

Oh, why would they do that? Is there any precedent or need to vote on that?

10/10/2019 9:31:36 AM

I think that there may be precedent for it, but I don't think that there are any strict constitutional requirements regarding it.

I was thinking that Republicans wanted to have the vote now before the Democrats could gain any additional votes in support of it; I wasn't aware that Republicans would benefit from gaining more control over the impeachment process after an impeachment inquiry vote is held.

Does anyone have any thoughts as to why Republicans want Ambassador Volker's testimony released to the public?

10/10/2019 10:17:05 AM

https://www.wsj.com/articles/two-foreign-born-men-who-helped-giuliani-on-ukraine-arrested-on-campaign-finance-charges-11570714188

I don't think a delay helps Trump. Trump's people are somewhat protected by their status as politicians, but there's plenty of other people involved in these crimes subject to normal criminal processes that can cause problems.

10/10/2019 10:26:47 AM

Trump does it again? The anti-corruption POTUS has rooted out more corruption!

10/10/2019 10:40:01 AM

The only requirement is that impeachment be conducted in accordance with House rules. Previous impeachment inquiries required a vote to give investigating committees subpoena power. Now, thanks to Benghazi-era rules changes passed by Republicans, House committees already have subpoena power.

Wanting a vote on an impeachment inquiry is basically a White House talking point for bitching about unfairness. If the House does hold a vote, it becomes an opportunity for House Republicans to insert poison pills or negotiate rules limiting scope, giving themselves more control over the process, etc.

10/10/2019 12:11:19 PM