kentuck
kentuck's JournalLittle Rich Boys Playing With Their Toys
They are all around the world. They've got more money than they know what to do with. They are like a special club.
They like weapons. So, some of the rich kids sell weapons to those other rich kids that want the status symbol and the power that goes with it.
From Saudi Arabia, to Turkey, to the Philippines, to Israel, to North Korea, to Russia, to the United States, these little rich kids like to play their games. They like to kill journalists, and blow up oil refineries, and threaten their neighbors, and keep the money rolling.
Like an unlucky draw of history, they all seem to be playing their games at the same time?
They are greedy and adventurous.
It's a dirty job but somebody has to do it.
What was the "promise"?
"I promise you I will not be leaving in 2020"?
"I promise you I will pull all of the troops out of South Korea"?
"I promise that you will get equal drilling rights on the North Slope"?
Who knows? This story has created a lot of speculation.
But, it must have been very serious? That's what we are told.
Nancy Pelosi is not to blame for the impasse in the impeachment discussion.
There are 235 Democrats in the House of Representatives. At present, 134 Democrats have come out for impeachment. That means that 101 Democrats do not feel that Donald Trump should be impeached, at least, not at this time.
Since it only takes 218 votes to vote out Articles of Impeachment, that means that the Democrats only need 84 votes out of the remaining 101 Democrats.
Actually, they do not need the rest of the House Democrats at this time. They only need a majority vote on the House Judiciary Committee to begin the investigation, which they have done. It is in the rules of the House.
However, the Democrats would look much stronger if they could get 218 votes to officially open the Impeachment Investigation. It would not be a vote for Articles of Impeachment. But, to show that the Democratic Party has the power to impeach the Executive, if necessary. It would send a strong message to the criminals at the White House.
Again, a vote to officially open the investigation would not be the same as a vote on Articles of Impeachment. But it would show that the Congress is not as weak-kneed or chicken-legged as some might think. They would be operating from a position of strength, instead of where they are now.
But it all is dependent on the 101 Democrats that have not taken a position on Donald Trump yet. Supposedly, many of them got elected from red districts and do not want to lose their seats. Many others got elected to hold Donald Trump accountable. It would make sense for the Democrats to unite on this issue. They should show their support for their 134 comrades that have come out for impeachment already. It's really not that big of a deal to vote for an impeachment investigation. It would reflect the Democratic Party from a more powerful position.
The Acting Director of National Intelligence should not be permitted to defy a subpoena...
...from the Congress of the United States.
Send him a notice. If he refuses to appear for the subpoena, he is breaking the law. If he does not show up at such-and-such time, then he will be charged with Contempt of Congress. If it has to go to the Courts, then no one should expect any favors from the judges.
Also, a fine of $25,000 per day, each day that the subpoena is defied.
Final Notice.
Do you believe that Iran bombed the oil fields of Saudi Arabia??
I'm not sure although it does appear to be the case.
Who else would have that type of technology?
Although the orders may not have come from the Iranian government, there are independent rebel groups throughout the region that have loyalty to the ayatollahs.
It was quite a daring attack.
Trump says he is going to impose more sanctions. I don't know that I would believe that? I think he might do whatever the Kingdom might ask him to do?
Where are the judges?
Where are the decisions protecting our Constitution and our balance of powers?
How many cases have the Democrats appealed to the courts?
Is there a time limit before they can rule?
It appears the Judicial system is just as broken as the other two branches?
Otherwise, why are they sitting on their hands?
Can we assume that every witness that comes before the Judiciary Committee is a "hostile" witness?
Also, can we assume that the Republicans on the Committee will do everything they can do to obstruct and block the testimony?
Just as the witness and the Republicans did yesterday.
What does "Parliamentary inquiry, Mr Chairman" mean? When we Google, it says, "A parliamentary inquiry is a question directed to the presiding officer of a deliberative assembly to obtain information on a matter of parliamentary law or the rules of the organization bearing on the business at hand."
So, if the question is not parliamentary in nature, it should be shut down immediately. This rule was abused over and over yesterday and should have been anticipated.
"Point of order, Mr Chairman!" What does that mean? When we Google, it says, "In parliamentary procedure, a point of order occurs when someone draws attention to a rules violation in a meeting of a deliberative assembly."
So if it is not a "rules violation", shut it down immediately. Democrats should be better prepared for these tactics from the Republican obstructionists.
Brian Williams and his media pals seem to be afflicted with the Stockholm syndrome.
I would bet money he never watched the entire hearing today. He formed his editorial opinions from the first hour or so?
How much progress did they expect the Democrats to make today? For the first time, the Committee got direct testimony from a witness who validated that Donald Trump dictated a message to him to give to Jeff Sessions to give to the public - or else be fired. Attempted obstruction is the same as obstruction in the eyes of the law.
With that said, the Democrats made a great leap forward today. Unfortunately, the media, not just Brian Williams, rushed to report what a terrible job the Democrats did? Why did they do that? It looks either complicit or under the effects of the Stockholm syndrome?
Then, we get these wimpy little reporters on to say that the "Democrats did not move the ball". It sounds like somebody dictated a letter to them?
I think the Democrats' strategy should be...
...to take a secret vote in the caucus and see how many votes they are to 218?
It would be better to have a few more but that would be enough to open an official Impeachment Investigation, with no questions about its legitimacy.
Today was a big step toward that, in my opinion. The Republicans' strategy did not go the way they planned, in my opinion. Because they believed that the Mueller Report had already been discredited and Lewandowski was going to claim some sort of executive privilege from the White House. He let it be known that he was ordered to do so.
But, for the very first time, they have validation from a witness that Donald Trump dictated a message for him to give to the AG to stop the Mueller investigation.
Democrats should take a head count of Democrats for Impeachment Investigation.
Why did all the cable networks cut from Lewandowski hearing?
And they all decided to stop broadcasting at about the same time?
I am now watching it on C-SPAN 3.
The Democrats are getting very valuable information, in my opinion.
The Republicans seem to have deserted the hearing?
Lewandowski admitted that Trump dictated a note to give to AG Sessions. That is the first direct evidence uncovered by direct testimony, as far as I can tell.
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayMember since: 2001
Number of posts: 111,079
