Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 61 to 69 of 69
  1. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    You've preached that ad nauseum Howie. It 's your favorite bedtime story.

    The R's have won 6 of the last 10 presidential elections using the only metric that matters - the electoral college. They also just won the presidency despite trotting out possibly the 2nd worst candidate in our nations history. Talk about being able to win left handed. If it wasn't for a handful of large urban metropolis', the D's would be about as relevant as the green party. Your best approach might be trying to reform your own party and ask what went wrong.
    Wait - winning Chicago, LA, Houston, Dallas, Miami, Atlanta, Charlotte, Des Moines, etc. makes you irrelevant. Out of all the stupid takes on this board, and there are a lot, this might be the dumbest.


  2. #62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justthefacts View Post
    People not interviewed by the House Cmte:

    George Papadopolous
    Michael Flynn
    Paul Manafort
    Rick Gates

    Quite the diligent search for truth there.
    Just to show you how dishonest your post is- here's an excerpt from the Dem status report on the investigation:

    In consideration of the Special Counsel’s ongoing investigative equities, the Committee also has deferred interviewing Michael Flynn,Paul Manafort,Rick Gates, and George Papadopoulos, but these interviews will be essential to a complete understanding of the issues of collusion and obstruction of justice. To conduct a legitimate investigation, the Committee would need to interview these individuals, whether or not they have reached plea agreements or are the subject of criminal indictments. For example, Mr. Flynn specifically informed the Committee via his attorney on June 7, 2017 that he planned to invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination; the Committee did not demand his appearance, as a result. In light of Mr. Flynn’s guilty plea, the Committee should revisit his appearance and seek to negotiate his testimony.

    They couldn't interview those fellas. You knew that. The problem is that the committee is torn down the middle by a political battle. Additional interviews weren't going to do anything. All of the people needing to be interviewed are either being deposed by Mueller or have given testimony to the IG. The IG report will shed some real light on where we are heading.

    What is still true, despite all the politics is that no one has any proof of Trump Russian collusion and there is substantial evidence of Hillary Russian collusion through Fusion GPS. All of this will be coming to light in the months and days ahead, including massive hanky panky during the Obama administration. The connections with Fusion GPS between the State Department, the Justice Department, the FBI, Obama officials, Hillary and the DNC look like a mob family diagram.

  3. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gopher_alum_2005 View Post
    Wait - winning Chicago, LA, Houston, Dallas, Miami, Atlanta, Charlotte, Des Moines, etc. makes you irrelevant. Out of all the stupid takes on this board, and there are a lot, this might be the dumbest.
    That's not what he said. Don't be dishonest.

  4. #64

    Default

    Jim Jordan sums things up pretty well:


    “We learned two key things from the Republicans on the intelligence committee — their report. The first is they told us something we already know, namely, there was no coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia to influence the election,” Jordan said on Fox News. “The second thing they told us is something that we suspected, now they’ve confirmed, which is that Clapper actually was the guy leaking information.”

    “Specifically leaking information I believe, from that January 6th meeting where they briefed President Trump, then President-elect Trump on the dossier,” Jordan continued. “Someone at CNN got information. We think it was Mr. Clapper who gave it to them. And then a few days later Buzzfeed prints the entire dossier."



    “So those in my mind were the two key takeaways,” he added. “No coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia and Mr. Clapper was leaking information. Here is one of the top intelligence people in the government at the time, leaking information to the press.”

    Jordan was asked what he would say to Democrats who are still suspicious of President Trump and he pivoted to the abuses within the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

    “The real concern here is what the FBI did. What the top people did,” Jordan concluded. “They took an opposition research document and dressed it all up, made it look like legit intelligence and took it to the FISA court to get a warrant to spy on a fellow American citizen. And the guy who leaked information about that dossier is James Clapper.”

    http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/14/ji...idential-info/

  5. #65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gopher_alum_2005 View Post
    Wait - winning Chicago, LA, Houston, Dallas, Miami, Atlanta, Charlotte, Des Moines, etc. makes you irrelevant. Out of all the stupid takes on this board, and there are a lot, this might be the dumbest.
    The D's, in a moment of self-reflection after losing to the Donald, even said they need to expand their base beyond large coastal centers.

  6. #66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    If you eliminate the large cities where most people live it would change things? Very interesting.

    The D party has a lot of problems. Both parties let their fringe drive them to bad places. But the R's have gone there almost completely. Perhaps it would have happened the other way if Bernie had won. I hope tonight's result shows them they need more moderates and less Bernie Bros at least in most places.
    I always find it funny when people use the word "moderate" to describe what should happen in politics. As if moderate views are inherently better worse than the liberal or conservative extremes. In other words, politicians should have "moderate" view like mine for the good of the country.

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    That's not what he said. Don't be dishonest.
    I’m not trying to be a smart ass, but how should we interpret this?

    “If it wasn't for a handful of large urban metropolis', the D's would be about as relevant as the Green Party”

  8. #68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gopher_alum_2005 View Post
    I’m not trying to be a smart ass, but how should we interpret this?

    “If it wasn't for a handful of large urban metropolis', the D's would be about as relevant as the Green Party”
    He didn't say you were irrelevant if you won those. He said that they would be irrelevant without those. His statement was correct but you tried to turn it on its head to make it sound dumb.

    The deeper point is that this urban constituency emphasis is also why the Dems are forced to go with the combination 1) free stuff 2) identity politics 3) open borders as their strategy. They cannot propose any real solutions that further America anymore because they are so wedded to threading the needle with the strategy of entitling the inner cities (which we can't afford and which damages the country).

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Shoreview
    Posts
    12,343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gopher_alum_2005 View Post
    I’m not trying to be a smart ass, but how should we interpret this?

    “If it wasn't for a handful of large urban metropolis', the D's would be about as relevant as the Green Party”
    In other words, "if it weren't for most of the people in this country, everyone would agree with me."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •