i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
It only takes one post. Not 14000 unless you want to clarify?
The dumb question got a dumb answer. Do what you will with that.
How profound. But not unexpected. What are you afraid of?
I'm afraid you're going to be mean to me with your outstanding arguments. I couldn't possibly be expected to counter them in any way. I mean, look how dynamite they've been so far in this exchange.
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
I thought for sure you answered that question right. I can only imagine what road "Roberts" would have brought us down.
jcornyn (or someone on his staff) is the one US Senator that follows my own meager personal instagram feed. He literally posts pictures of his cat, and office visits from his constituents.
Do you enjoy him or I following you the most?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Serious question: Assuming Trump is on tape saying he wants the ambassador out...so? Isn’t it his prerogative as President?
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
Do you? You seem to believe that Roberts is some unbiased arbitar of truth, justice and the American way rather than a partisan. Fancy that.
Serious question: Assuming Trump is on tape saying he wants the ambassador out...so? Isn’t it his prerogative as President?
yes it is. its the way it was done. so for not even knowing where his authority actually is and where/how he acts where its limited or doesnt exist is reason enough to remove.....
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
It only takes one post. Not 14000 unless you want to clarify?
The dumb question got a dumb answer. Do what you will with that.
How profound. But not unexpected. What are you afraid of?
I'm afraid you're going to be mean to me with your outstanding arguments. I couldn't possibly be expected to counter them in any way. I mean, look how dynamite they've been so far in this exchange.
Avoiding direct answers is not a good look. You complained about “Trump/Bernie bitching” and what are you doing? “Bitching.”
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
It only takes one post. Not 14000 unless you want to clarify?
The dumb question got a dumb answer. Do what you will with that.
How profound. But not unexpected. What are you afraid of?
I'm afraid you're going to be mean to me with your outstanding arguments. I couldn't possibly be expected to counter them in any way. I mean, look how dynamite they've been so far in this exchange.
Avoiding direct answers is not a good look. You complained about “Trump/Bernie bitching” and what are you doing? “Bitching.”
Oh sorry if it's not a good look in your opinion. You still asked me a stupid question which only deserves a stupid answer. I gave it the seriousness commensurate with the question.
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
Do you? You seem to believe that Roberts is some unbiased arbitar of truth, justice and the American way rather than a partisan. Fancy that.
Nope.. read the thread again. R.I.F. Nowhere did I say that. Your cartoonish bias disables you from processing rational arguments.
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
Do you? You seem to believe that Roberts is some unbiased arbitar of truth, justice and the American way rather than a partisan. Fancy that.
Nope.. read the thread again. R.I.F. Nowhere did I say that. Your cartoonish bias disables you from processing rational arguments.
Then what did you mean by “overt partisan hack?” We deconstructed it to “partisan” and it seems you believe otherwise. I’m assuming on his case voting record. I disagree with you. And you characterized the concern of Roberts and his potential judgements to be nothing but “Trump/Bernie bitching.” And when asked who you trusted more, Roberts or Sotomayor, you didnt answer.
My “cartoonish” bias? I wish I could draw. Thanks for the laugh.
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
Do you? You seem to believe that Roberts is some unbiased arbitar of truth, justice and the American way rather than a partisan. Fancy that.
Nope.. read the thread again. R.I.F. Nowhere did I say that. Your cartoonish bias disables you from processing rational arguments.
Then what did you mean by “overt partisan hack?” We deconstructed it to “partisan” and it seems you believe otherwise. I’m assuming on his case voting record. I disagree with you. And you characterized the concern of Roberts and his potential judgements to be nothing but “Trump/Bernie bitching.” And when asked who you trusted more, Roberts or Sotomayor, you didnt answer.
My “cartoonish” bias? I wish I could draw. Thanks for the laugh.
I said it was premature to call the proceedings rigged based on Roberts being the justice, and there was nothing in his justice record that could lead one to call him an overt partisan hack. You also asked if I knew Roberts voting record, I assume you mean election, not judicial and of course I don't, like neither of us knows Sotomayor..at least I don't. The point I made and continue to make, is that it's silly to act like the trial is rigged because Roberts presides. He has done zero to lead one to that conclusion. Save the bitching for when something happens. Otherwise it's like Sanders and Trump supporters who claim everything that doesn't go their way is "rigged".
Serious question: Assuming Trump is on tape saying he wants the ambassador out...so? Isn’t it his prerogative as President?
Yes, but the bizarre part is that he's talking about whatever he's talking about over dinner with these Ukrainian dudes and whomever else. If someone had taped him having this discussion with a couple cabinet members in the oval office it would be "ok...so what?"
jcornyn (or someone on his staff) is the one US Senator that follows my own meager personal instagram feed. He literally posts pictures of his cat, and office visits from his constituents.
Do you enjoy him or I following you the most?
I don't follow him, so...
Bristow 05132010 to Amsterdam 2 06132018
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,800
jcornyn (or someone on his staff) is the one US Senator that follows my own meager personal instagram feed. He literally posts pictures of his cat, and office visits from his constituents.
Do you enjoy him or I following you the most?
I don't follow him, so...
hes asking which stalker you like better following YOU.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
Do you? You seem to believe that Roberts is some unbiased arbitar of truth, justice and the American way rather than a partisan. Fancy that.
Nope.. read the thread again. R.I.F. Nowhere did I say that. Your cartoonish bias disables you from processing rational arguments.
Then what did you mean by “overt partisan hack?” We deconstructed it to “partisan” and it seems you believe otherwise. I’m assuming on his case voting record. I disagree with you. And you characterized the concern of Roberts and his potential judgements to be nothing but “Trump/Bernie bitching.” And when asked who you trusted more, Roberts or Sotomayor, you didnt answer.
My “cartoonish” bias? I wish I could draw. Thanks for the laugh.
I said it was premature to call the proceedings rigged based on Roberts being the justice, and there was nothing in his justice record that could lead one to call him an overt partisan hack. You also asked if I knew Roberts voting record, I assume you mean election, not judicial and of course I don't, like neither of us knows Sotomayor..at least I don't. The point I made and continue to make, is that it's silly to act like the trial is rigged because Roberts presides. He has done zero to lead one to that conclusion. Save the bitching for when something happens. Otherwise it's like Sanders and Trump supporters who claim everything that doesn't go their way is "rigged".
Puff Roberts is not in control it’s Midnight Mitch and the fix is already in , he will never be convicted it’s all a farce and so is the Constitution ...
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
Do you? You seem to believe that Roberts is some unbiased arbitar of truth, justice and the American way rather than a partisan. Fancy that.
Nope.. read the thread again. R.I.F. Nowhere did I say that. Your cartoonish bias disables you from processing rational arguments.
Then what did you mean by “overt partisan hack?” We deconstructed it to “partisan” and it seems you believe otherwise. I’m assuming on his case voting record. I disagree with you. And you characterized the concern of Roberts and his potential judgements to be nothing but “Trump/Bernie bitching.” And when asked who you trusted more, Roberts or Sotomayor, you didnt answer.
My “cartoonish” bias? I wish I could draw. Thanks for the laugh.
I said it was premature to call the proceedings rigged based on Roberts being the justice, and there was nothing in his justice record that could lead one to call him an overt partisan hack. You also asked if I knew Roberts voting record, I assume you mean election, not judicial and of course I don't, like neither of us knows Sotomayor..at least I don't. The point I made and continue to make, is that it's silly to act like the trial is rigged because Roberts presides. He has done zero to lead one to that conclusion. Save the bitching for when something happens. Otherwise it's like Sanders and Trump supporters who claim everything that doesn't go their way is "rigged".
Puff Roberts is not in control it’s Midnight Mitch and the fix is already in , he will never be convicted it’s all a farce and so is the Constitution ...
1. It’s not Roberts place to be in control 2. He won’t be convicted because the votes aren’t there. Earl Warren could be the justice and the outcome would be the same. 3. It’s a farce because your desired outcome isn’t achieved? This is what I’m talking about...right there. No one with a brain ever thought the votes were there.
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
Do you? You seem to believe that Roberts is some unbiased arbitar of truth, justice and the American way rather than a partisan. Fancy that.
Nope.. read the thread again. R.I.F. Nowhere did I say that. Your cartoonish bias disables you from processing rational arguments.
Then what did you mean by “overt partisan hack?” We deconstructed it to “partisan” and it seems you believe otherwise. I’m assuming on his case voting record. I disagree with you. And you characterized the concern of Roberts and his potential judgements to be nothing but “Trump/Bernie bitching.” And when asked who you trusted more, Roberts or Sotomayor, you didnt answer.
My “cartoonish” bias? I wish I could draw. Thanks for the laugh.
I said it was premature to call the proceedings rigged based on Roberts being the justice, and there was nothing in his justice record that could lead one to call him an overt partisan hack. You also asked if I knew Roberts voting record, I assume you mean election, not judicial and of course I don't, like neither of us knows Sotomayor..at least I don't. The point I made and continue to make, is that it's silly to act like the trial is rigged because Roberts presides. He has done zero to lead one to that conclusion. Save the bitching for when something happens. Otherwise it's like Sanders and Trump supporters who claim everything that doesn't go their way is "rigged".
Puff Roberts is not in control it’s Midnight Mitch and the fix is already in , he will never be convicted it’s all a farce and so is the Constitution ...
1. It’s not Roberts place to be in control 2. He won’t be convicted because the votes aren’t there. Earl Warren could be the justice and the outcome would be the same. 3. It’s a farce because your desired outcome isn’t achieved? This is what I’m talking about...right there. No one with a brain ever thought the votes were there.
You literally made every one of my points.
The votes are not there because midnight Mitch made sure of it! That’s the fix it was never to be a fair trial the outcome has already been determined
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
Do you? You seem to believe that Roberts is some unbiased arbitar of truth, justice and the American way rather than a partisan. Fancy that.
Nope.. read the thread again. R.I.F. Nowhere did I say that. Your cartoonish bias disables you from processing rational arguments.
Then what did you mean by “overt partisan hack?” We deconstructed it to “partisan” and it seems you believe otherwise. I’m assuming on his case voting record. I disagree with you. And you characterized the concern of Roberts and his potential judgements to be nothing but “Trump/Bernie bitching.” And when asked who you trusted more, Roberts or Sotomayor, you didnt answer.
My “cartoonish” bias? I wish I could draw. Thanks for the laugh.
I said it was premature to call the proceedings rigged based on Roberts being the justice, and there was nothing in his justice record that could lead one to call him an overt partisan hack. You also asked if I knew Roberts voting record, I assume you mean election, not judicial and of course I don't, like neither of us knows Sotomayor..at least I don't. The point I made and continue to make, is that it's silly to act like the trial is rigged because Roberts presides. He has done zero to lead one to that conclusion. Save the bitching for when something happens. Otherwise it's like Sanders and Trump supporters who claim everything that doesn't go their way is "rigged".
Puff Roberts is not in control it’s Midnight Mitch and the fix is already in , he will never be convicted it’s all a farce and so is the Constitution ...
1. It’s not Roberts place to be in control 2. He won’t be convicted because the votes aren’t there. Earl Warren could be the justice and the outcome would be the same. 3. It’s a farce because your desired outcome isn’t achieved? This is what I’m talking about...right there. No one with a brain ever thought the votes were there.
You literally made every one of my points.
The votes are not there because midnight Mitch made sure of it! That’s the fix it was never to be a fair trial the outcome has already been determined
Explain how Mitch fixed it and has manipulated the votes of 20 some Republican senators that would have convicted if say...Grassley was majority leader instead.
So if the votes weren’t there than what don’t bother with trial or impeachment at all? Just let this administration keep on their mob tactics in other words no rules/laws and fuck the constitution fuck it ...
So if the votes weren’t there than what don’t bother with trial or impeachment at all? Just let this administration keep on their mob tactics in other words no rules/laws and fuck the constitution fuck it ...
Unfortunately for you, the Constitution wasn't established to provide you your desired outcome. Pelosi (and everyone) knew going on there was about zero chance for a conviction. Anyone who thought otherwise was woefully misinformed. About zero isn't zero... but damn close.
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
Do you? You seem to believe that Roberts is some unbiased arbitar of truth, justice and the American way rather than a partisan. Fancy that.
Nope.. read the thread again. R.I.F. Nowhere did I say that. Your cartoonish bias disables you from processing rational arguments.
Then what did you mean by “overt partisan hack?” We deconstructed it to “partisan” and it seems you believe otherwise. I’m assuming on his case voting record. I disagree with you. And you characterized the concern of Roberts and his potential judgements to be nothing but “Trump/Bernie bitching.” And when asked who you trusted more, Roberts or Sotomayor, you didnt answer.
My “cartoonish” bias? I wish I could draw. Thanks for the laugh.
I said it was premature to call the proceedings rigged based on Roberts being the justice, and there was nothing in his justice record that could lead one to call him an overt partisan hack. You also asked if I knew Roberts voting record, I assume you mean election, not judicial and of course I don't, like neither of us knows Sotomayor..at least I don't. The point I made and continue to make, is that it's silly to act like the trial is rigged because Roberts presides. He has done zero to lead one to that conclusion. Save the bitching for when something happens. Otherwise it's like Sanders and Trump supporters who claim everything that doesn't go their way is "rigged".
Puff Roberts is not in control it’s Midnight Mitch and the fix is already in , he will never be convicted it’s all a farce and so is the Constitution ...
1. It’s not Roberts place to be in control 2. He won’t be convicted because the votes aren’t there. Earl Warren could be the justice and the outcome would be the same. 3. It’s a farce because your desired outcome isn’t achieved? This is what I’m talking about...right there. No one with a brain ever thought the votes were there.
You literally made every one of my points.
The votes are not there because midnight Mitch made sure of it! That’s the fix it was never to be a fair trial the outcome has already been determined
Explain how Mitch fixed it and has manipulated the votes of 20 some Republican senators that would have convicted if say...Grassley was majority leader instead.
Just look at his statements before the trial he was telegraphing his intentions that this trial was just for show , like I said it’s the way I see it! So tell us what the answer to this would of been just let him get away and wait till November?
So if the votes weren’t there than what don’t bother with trial or impeachment at all? Just let this administration keep on their mob tactics in other words no rules/laws and fuck the constitution fuck it ...
Unfortunately for you, the Constitution wasn't established to provide you your desired outcome. Pelosi (and everyone) knew going on there was about zero chance for a conviction. Anyone who thought otherwise was woefully misinformed. About zero isn't zero... but damn close.
But your not offering an answer on what should of happened? Please tell us ..
i think he is as much of a partisan as the rest of them. trump gave him gorsuch and kavanaugh, which gives roberts a conservative majority for propably 25 years. this is probably one of the reasons roberts is acting the way he is. the fix is in.
Oh Christ... anytime someone doesn't agree with someone else or things don't go someone's way "the fix is in".. what's he fixing precisely? I'm so tired of Bernie/Trump talking points infiltrating every discussion.
Ruling that executive privilege Trumps house subpoenas, if it ever reaches the Supreme Court. Once this trial farce has concluded, the house should go to court over the witness testimony and documents to compel them to be provided. See where that goes because it will reach the Supreme Court. See how that turns out. “The fix is in,” is not a Bernie talking point but a distinct possibility, particularly now that there have been life time appointments to the federal bench of folks who have never presided over a trial and owe their loyalty to a party and an ideology. Impartiality is being systemically eroded. On purpose.
1. Bitch when Roberts rules for unlimited executive privilege 2. Bitch when Roberts makes a binding ruling that materially affects the course of the trial.
Until then, it's Trump/Sanders complaining of "rigged".
So wait until it’s too late. Gotcha.
Your pre-bitching makes a difference?
I dont think anyone’s bitching makes a difference unless it’s directed at your elected representatives and believe me, I’m sure mine are sick of hearing from me. I know they’re on my side and are doing what they can. You’re dismissing of what is happening as “Trump/Bernie bitching” and waiting for it to be too late before speaking up is what is concerning. Unless you tend to agree with what is happening right under your nose?
Yes, I agree with it. My 14k posts all indicate the same.
There's nothing in Roberts judicial record to indicate that he's an overtly partisan hack.
He doesn’t have to be “overt” to be a partisan hack.
True, but just because you don't like his judicial philosophy also doesn't render him a hack
He doesn’t have to be “overt” or a “hack” to be partisan. Do you think Roberts is an independent thinker, devoid of politics when deciding?
That's an unattainable bar.
Defeatist. Who do you trust more, Sotomayor or Roberts?
Sotomayor is closer to me politically. She's also not a-political.
Didn’t answer the question. You know her voting record outside of the decisions she’s made?
You know Roberts record? I don't care about the voting record. We're discussing jurisprudence. You're so team oriented that you can't process the same arguments from the other side.
Do you? You seem to believe that Roberts is some unbiased arbitar of truth, justice and the American way rather than a partisan. Fancy that.
Nope.. read the thread again. R.I.F. Nowhere did I say that. Your cartoonish bias disables you from processing rational arguments.
Then what did you mean by “overt partisan hack?” We deconstructed it to “partisan” and it seems you believe otherwise. I’m assuming on his case voting record. I disagree with you. And you characterized the concern of Roberts and his potential judgements to be nothing but “Trump/Bernie bitching.” And when asked who you trusted more, Roberts or Sotomayor, you didnt answer.
My “cartoonish” bias? I wish I could draw. Thanks for the laugh.
I said it was premature to call the proceedings rigged based on Roberts being the justice, and there was nothing in his justice record that could lead one to call him an overt partisan hack. You also asked if I knew Roberts voting record, I assume you mean election, not judicial and of course I don't, like neither of us knows Sotomayor..at least I don't. The point I made and continue to make, is that it's silly to act like the trial is rigged because Roberts presides. He has done zero to lead one to that conclusion. Save the bitching for when something happens. Otherwise it's like Sanders and Trump supporters who claim everything that doesn't go their way is "rigged".
Puff Roberts is not in control it’s Midnight Mitch and the fix is already in , he will never be convicted it’s all a farce and so is the Constitution ...
1. It’s not Roberts place to be in control 2. He won’t be convicted because the votes aren’t there. Earl Warren could be the justice and the outcome would be the same. 3. It’s a farce because your desired outcome isn’t achieved? This is what I’m talking about...right there. No one with a brain ever thought the votes were there.
You literally made every one of my points.
The votes are not there because midnight Mitch made sure of it! That’s the fix it was never to be a fair trial the outcome has already been determined
Explain how Mitch fixed it and has manipulated the votes of 20 some Republican senators that would have convicted if say...Grassley was majority leader instead.
Just look at his statements before the trial he was telegraphing his intentions that this trial was just for show , like I said it’s the way I see it! So tell us what the answer to this would of been just let him get away and wait till November?
How did those statements alter the potential votes of the senators? Every single rule of the trial is subject to a majority vote. He's representing his caucus, he doesn't have some extra constitutional authority in this process.
Comments
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
My “cartoonish” bias? I wish I could draw. Thanks for the laugh.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
The point I made and continue to make, is that it's silly to act like the trial is rigged because Roberts presides. He has done zero to lead one to that conclusion. Save the bitching for when something happens. Otherwise it's like Sanders and Trump supporters who claim everything that doesn't go their way is "rigged".
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
2. He won’t be convicted because the votes aren’t there. Earl Warren could be the justice and the outcome would be the same.
3. It’s a farce because your desired outcome isn’t achieved? This is what I’m talking about...right there. No one with a brain ever thought the votes were there.
Pelosi (and everyone) knew going on there was about zero chance for a conviction. Anyone who thought otherwise was woefully misinformed. About zero isn't zero... but damn close.