Jwheel86

1 minute ago, mclumber1 said:

Unless Trump does a lateral cabinet move that doesn't require confirmation, I'm not sure the GOP is going to be happy confirming a new SecDef.

There is a reason Congress approved his waiver to be Secretary, this is going to make a lot in Congress very nervous. Maybe Mattis will retire to North Carolina and return at the head of the 13th (Legion) Marine Expeditionary Unit? 

2 minutes ago, osxmatt said:

 

Fuck. 

I'd be okay with us pulling back to Bagram Air Base. This is different from Syria, the Kurds deserve our help, the Afghans.....

2 minutes ago, SFLUFAN said:

I hope you like on every street corner!

So Mike Duncan will be Minister of Culture and History?

1 hour ago, SFLUFAN said:

Hell yeah!  Shut that thing down so that people continue to lose faith in the system!  It will make things so much easier to completely start the new "state" from Year Zero!

 

 

What would the Union of Wade Soviet Republic look like? 

So we have a President who can't be trusted with a simple charity (raise money, distribute said money to actual charities), but can be trusted with nuclear weapons. God bless America

8 minutes ago, RedSoxFan9 said:

People like her because of the policies she supports. 

Why aren't other progressives in Congress getting the same attention she gets. 

7 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

Don't get me wrong, I would love a populist, left, truly progressive candidate. But the argument that if we aren't lucky enough to get one then fuck the election Trump can win who cares then? That makes no sense.

It's more laziness than actively deciding to stay home and not vote (or vote Trump out of spite). If it's not someone they buy into, they won't show up. 2008 and 2012 were about inspiration, this election is not that. AOC is popular because she's got an slightly pissed off "look at this bullshit" streak to her. That's what it's going to take to get progressives to show up. 

You're not going to talk the progressive wing of the party to show up by shaming them to show up, you should be able to, but you can't. So by logic the only way to unify the party is to find a progressive. The Republicans figured this shit out a long time ago. In my mind the progressive test isn't M4A, it's no big donors, I think they'd show up for a democratic conservative so long as he was clean and had a spine. 

Is Jacob Rees-Mogg a twat? I'm watching the BBC and need a primer on UK politics.

She survived, 200-117

6 minutes ago, osxmatt said:

 

Another scenario: Trump wins in 2020.

 

Burn it all down.

But is he willing to take that risk and the problem returns in 2024. The Republicans and Pence won't do it during the 2020 or 2024 transition, it doesn't benefit them. But if he resigns before 20 then he could make a deal with Pence to "go away" in exchange for the pardon and endorsement. One way or another, Trump is going to be the most politically active former President ever. The Republicans aren't going to want him defacto controlling the party through Twitter and MAGA rallies forever. Trump in jail and off Twitter benefits the Republican Party since it returns control of the party to the Jebs of the GOP. A democratic DoJ is the best outcome for the GOP, they can rally the base by crying victim and Trump is off Twitter. Trump making a deal with Pence is the only other way for Trump to get out clean. 

My brain is running through scenarios. Let's say there is no impeachment or he survives it. DoJ policy is they don't indict a sitting President, If Trump loses in 2020, he's now open to indictments. Would Trump risk "norms" protecting him once out of office, or would he resign ahead of 2020 in exchange for a pardon from Pence? 

I'm jumping the gun, but could McConnell pull a Merrick Garland on an Impeachment trial? 

tf...?

5 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

An easy guess is that he's angling to get the feds to let his family keep some of the money.

By not cooperating? Wouldn't that be a reason to take all his money?

Is Cohen protecting someone? Why potentially burn Trump regarding Russia by cooperating with Mueller but not cooperate with SDNY regarding the non Russia stuff? 

6 minutes ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

My problem here is it could look like Jr. gets subpoena'd because he was mean to a girl over twitter. 

 

I just hate it when Democrats practically hand a false yet damning narrative to the republicans. 

Narrative for who though? There are no moderate swing voters this deep into politics. The only ones offended by this are full MAGA already. 

Twitter is 10/10 today 

9 minutes ago, Chairslinger said:

So she's threatening to retaliate against Donald Trump's family with punitive investigatons because one of them said something mean about her?

 

 

I am aware of the right wing campaign to brand her as stupid, but this remark is stupid. And I am aware that they will come up with leftist boogeymen no matter what but this serves it up to them on a platter(and may even be grounds down the road to challenge the legitimacy of an investigation).

 

Either something is worth investigating or it's not. Period. Your personal feelings should have nothing to do with it.

They did a million Benghazi hearings, can't we get at least 1?

I thought he was unpopular within the Army?

11 hours ago, SaysWho? said:

 

 

I guess NC is next lol.

 

What sore losers.

They learned this in North Carolina first. 

https://www.transfermaster.com/blog/view-post/Eddie-Ndopu-Set-to-Become-First-Wheelchair-User-to-Go-to-Space

And an SMAbro too! This smells like Richard Branson's company.