Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, June 10, 2019

The details of which documents would be provided to the committee were not disclosed, but Nadler said the agreement would allow all Judiciary Committee members to see "Robert Mueller's most important files ... providing us with key evidence that the Special Counsel used to assess whether the President and others obstructed justice or were engaged in other misconduct."

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Barr's owner can't be very happy about this.

#1 | Posted by Zed at 2019-06-10 01:59 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

quick

someone post a breathless safe space thread about some internet website, (and try to be as insulting and childish as possible)

--- leftcoasttoecentrelawyerdian

#2 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-06-10 02:00 PM | Reply

Hate to say I told you so...

This is more than the House needs to start the impeachment proceedings, Nadler needs to stop fccking around with testimony from people like John Dean (laughable) and do his job.

#3 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 02:13 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Is this where the Trump DOJ hands over a plain manila folder with nothing inside?

#4 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-10 02:40 PM | Reply

All along the DOJ has been offering Nadler all evidence except for GJ protected and counterintelligence evidence and even offered FBI summaries of interviews with GJ protected witnesses, the same way they had offered Schiff all counterintelligence information if he agreed to limit review of that evidence to people with the proper clearances...which is what they are now getting after 3 months of useless delays.

Well done, I guess.

#5 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 03:00 PM | Reply

"which is what they are now getting after 3 months of useless delays"

must be really tiring to know-it-all, all-the-time

this must be why DOJ agreed only after the Committee forwarded a contempt resolution

Well done indeed

#6 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-06-10 03:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Well done, I guess.

#5 | Posted by Rightocenter

oooooh

Humpy gonna be so mad...

.....He gonna twitter and tweet all night at them Angry Dem Birds!

#7 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-10 04:09 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Evidence #1: "..uhh...I...um,...heads up....ok, thanks....call me sometime."

Evidence #2 " What's your advice on firing Mueller?"

#8 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-10 04:16 PM | Reply

this must be why DOJ agreed only after the Committee forwarded a contempt resolution

#6 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019

Barr blinked.

#9 | Posted by Zed at 2019-06-10 04:46 PM | Reply

Barr blinked.

#9 | Posted by Ze

You gotta watch their eyes.

Liars blink less frequently than normal during the lie, and then speed up to around eight times faster than usual afterwards.

Barr is blinking like a mo fo now.

#10 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-10 05:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

- Liars blink less frequently than normal during the lie

Are you liars still blinking through the whopper that Micheal Cohen went to Prague to collude with Russias?

#11 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-10 05:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

tenor.com

#12 | Posted by Corky at 2019-06-10 05:35 PM | Reply

Holy crap batt guy. Is over for Trump. It's jail for him.

#13 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-06-10 05:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

It's jail for him.

#13 | Posted by Sniper

You think? Oh right. Never mind. You don't.

#14 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-10 06:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Finally, the evidence that proves Trump innocent will be found.

#15 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-06-10 06:12 PM | Reply | Funny: 4

I'll believe it when I see it. I don't trust the guy as far as I can throw his Hefer ---.

#16 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-06-10 06:15 PM | Reply

Are you liars still blinking through the whopper that Micheal Cohen went to Prague to collude with Russias?

#11 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Weak sauce, Comrade.

No one here "lied" about that. How could they? We only suspected it because his phone was reported to have pinged from there. Which was a reasonable assumption at that time.

No one here knew enough of anything to LIE about it.. Including you (tho it did not stop you). That would mean we would have to have known the truth then repeated the story in order to fool everyone anyway.

You know. Like Trump. Like you.

Did you notice no one is trying to push that story anymore?

Except you?


#17 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-10 06:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

We only suspected it...
#17 | POSTED BY DRUMMERBOY

LOL. It was another Fake News bombshell.

washingtonmonthly.com

#18 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-10 06:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I remember when "MUELLER REPORT TO BE RELEASED TODAY!" got you lumps all excited. This "KEY EVIDENCE!' can't be any more of a letdown than that.

#19 | Posted by Spork at 2019-06-10 06:38 PM | Reply

- This "KEY EVIDENCE!' can't be any more of a letdown than that.

They keep trying to catch Santa Claus, when it was the DNC and media all along.

Then comes the tears, pouting, and locking themselves in their rooms.

#20 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-10 06:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"They keep trying to catch Santa Claus, when it was the DNC and media all along."

There is no Santa Claus Comrade so are you saying there was no Russian interference and it was all just a HOAX by 17 Angry Birds that turned into a Mouse?

So let's see if I have this right...

You and Pooty Poot's position is that there was NO Russian interference and there was NO cooperation by anyone in Trumps circle and there was NO Obstruction of Justice nor any Abouse of Power?

Did I get that about right?

You obviously have still not read the Report, Comrade.

#ReadTheReport

#21 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-10 06:52 PM | Reply

If they were guilty, they would start some wars.....

Has anyone heard anything about some smokescreen wars going on?

#22 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-06-10 06:55 PM | Reply

Barr blinked.

LOL, here is how this unfolded:

1. DOJ told Nadler that he could have all of the underlying evidence except for GJ protected and Counterintelligence protected information along with FBI summaries of GJ witness interviews.

2. Nadler issued a subpoena for the unredacted report and all evidence.

3. DOJ said no, we can't do that, that would be against a whole bunch of laws, so you get nothing until you withdraw that subpoena.

4. Nadler holds Barr in contempt, threatens judicial proceedings.

5. DOJ says, if you withdraw threat of criminal contempt proceedings and your demand for unredacted GJ and counterintelligence information, we will give you what we originally offered to you.

6. Nadler says "I will hold the criminal contempt in abeyance for now".

7. DOJ agreed to give Nadler all of the underlying evidence except for GJ protected and Counterintelligence protected information along with FBI summaries of GJ witness interviews that they originally offered him.

Genius!

-the Usual Idiots of the DR Left

#23 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 06:57 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

I'm glad RoC is here with all the inside knowledge. Inside of his colon.

#24 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-06-10 07:03 PM | Reply | Funny: 4

"Details about which documents would be provided to the committee were not disclosed,"

#25 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2019-06-10 07:04 PM | Reply

#23 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 06:57 PM |

"Details about which documents would be provided to the committee were not disclosed,"

#25 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 20

#26 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2019-06-10 07:06 PM | Reply

#2.
Uraniumdealingpizzanothingburger.com

#27 | Posted by Docman at 2019-06-10 07:06 PM | Reply

6. Nadler says "I will hold the criminal contempt in abeyance for now".

If by "abeyance" you mean the contempt vote is still on for Wednesday.

Things change fast here in Trumplandia with Humpy tweeting every five minutes (which I suspect is the "Plan").

But, 5 hours ago the headline was

House Democrats To Get Some Mueller Report Material, But Contempt Vote Is Still On

www.npr.org

Cummings says the contempt vote is set for Wednesday for Barr and Ross.

thehill.com

#28 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-10 07:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Details about which documents would be provided to the committee were not disclosed,"

You liked that sentence so much you pulled a Corky and posted it twice.

Let's see, Nadler says he is getting "key evidence that the Special Counsel used to assess whether the President and others obstructed justice or were engaged in other misconduct" that all House members can review, after the DOJ already offered him everything except for the GJ and counterintelligence information, so I doubt he is getting less than what was previously offered him.

The DOJ had adamantly said that they need a court order to release the GJ information and nothing in Nadler's statement indicates that has happened, because if it had, then he would have announced it.

The DOJ also announced that it had reached an agreement with Schiff to provide the CI protected evidence only to members of his committee with the proper clearances, so that information is also covered.

So what else is there? If you know, share with the class.

#29 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 07:23 PM | Reply

#28

Swing and a miss:

The Judiciary Committee vote for a civil contempt authorization is still on, a very different thing than a criminal contempt vote, and according to MSNBC, that is now also on hold.

Similarly, Cummings contempt vote is for a completely different subpoena for very different documents.

#30 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 07:27 PM | Reply

So what else is there? If you know, share with the class.

#29 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 07:23 PM | R

How and the hell should I know because
"Details about which documents would be provided to the committee were not disclosed,"
we don't know you don't know.

If you say you know your full of feces

#31 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2019-06-10 07:34 PM | Reply

He has brown eyes. I'm just sayin'.

#32 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-06-10 07:41 PM | Reply

Similarly, Cummings contempt vote is for a completely different subpoena for very different documents.

#30 | Posted by Rightocenter

show your work brother...

FTA "Nadler wants to keep the door open to a contempt action if Barr and the Justice Department don't continue to play ball."

yes, there are OTHER contempt votes that are in the works. True. It is a very contemptible administration.

But, Barr is still in contempt up until he release the full report. When Barr rejected the subpoena from Congress he was in Contempt. That has not changed.
He is still in contempt because of that. Also why did Collins say this?

"In light of today's agreement from the Justice Department, it's logical to ask: Is the chairman prepared to rescind his baseless recommendation to hold the attorney general in contempt, or do House Democrats still plan to greenlight lawsuits against the attorney general and former White House counsel tomorrow?" Collins asked in statement.

-- This report was updated at 2:58 p.m.

#33 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-10 07:43 PM | Reply

I don't know, but by a simple process of elimination (as in #29) I think we can make a pretty good guess: it seems to me that the only way #29 changes is if Nadler accepted less than he was originally offered, but I don't think he is that dumb.

#34 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 07:44 PM | Reply

Are you liars still blinking through the whopper that Micheal Cohen went to Prague to collude with Russias?

#11 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Are you ever going to take one day off from repeating trump's talking points for him?

Trump accepted russia's help from a criminal attack against the united states. He did not report this criminal attack to the authorities. What does your cult tell you to say to refute that?

#35 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-10 07:44 PM | Reply

Also, for extra credit maybe you can "Trump splain" why if it was a "baseless recommendation" then why is Barr suddenly giving in just before the contempt vote was scheduled?

Please use double spaces and show your work.

thank you

#36 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-10 07:46 PM | Reply

Similarly, Cummings contempt vote is for a completely different subpoena for very different documents.
#30 | Posted by Rightocenter
show your work brother...

"The House Oversight and Reform Committee will vote on Wednesday on whether to hold Attorney General William Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in contempt for failing to comply with congressional subpoenas.

The resolution stems from --------- committee's investigation on the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 census."

---------ets contempt votes for Barr, Ross for Wednesday

As for the rest of it, your quotes just confirmed my point that the Judiciary Committee contempt authorization vote is now on hold as well, since "Nadler wants to keep the door open to a contempt action if Barr and the Justice Department don't continue to play ball."

Why you persist in making it so easy to prove you wrong amazes me.

#37 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 07:50 PM | Reply

Also, for extra credit maybe you can "Trump splain" why if it was a "baseless recommendation" then why is Barr suddenly giving in just before the contempt vote was scheduled?
Please use double spaces and show your work.

As I said earlier, the DOJ told Nadler, back in late March, that if he dropped his demand that they provide the unredacted report, he would get what they had earlier offered him. Nadler now says that he has reached an agreement to hold the criminal contempt referral in abeyance and guess what, it looks like he is now getting what they had earlier offered them.

If Nadler had succeeding in getting a court order to release GJ protected evidence, he would have announced it. He didn't, and isn't getting that material without that court order.

#38 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 07:56 PM | Reply

#38 | Posted by Rightocenter

You sure are informed about the trees. Yet somehow you can't see the forest.

Why has the trump cult been fighting this investigation the whole time?

What should a man who deserves to be president do when he finds out our enemies are attacking our nation to try and elect him?

#39 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-10 08:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#39

You mean impeaching Trump for Obstruction of Justice? That forest?

Impeach him, there is plenty of evidence.

#40 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 09:06 PM | Reply

Impeach him, there is plenty of evidence.

#40 | Posted by Rightocenter

So what's wrong with your party that they support someone for whom there is plenty of evidence for impeachment?

#41 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-10 09:17 PM | Reply

#40 | Posted by Rightocenter

You should just admit you're for impeachment only because it might hurt democrats.

Day after day, hour after hour, you bash and mock democrats, saying nothing about republican intransigence over criticizing this president for any of the myriad of awful statements and lies he commits day after day.

#42 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-10 09:19 PM | Reply

"So what's wrong with your party that they support someone for whom there is plenty of evidence for impeachment?"

Oh, RoC doesn't want Republicans to impeach Trump. He wants Democrats to impeach Trump, so the whole Final Judgements will be turned over to Mitch McConnell and the Senate Republicans, a.k.a. UnKool and The Gang.

#43 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-10 09:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

##41-43

Good to see that the Wizard Sleeve Contingent is convening on this thread. Dorkus of Nothingham should be by shortly to preside over your inanity.

#44 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 09:25 PM | Reply

While you are waiting, why don't you all grab your John Dean dolls and rock yourselves to sleep.

#45 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 09:28 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

"why don't you all grab your John Dean dolls and rock yourselves to sleep."

Serious question:

Why do you accept a President who believes you deserve to be lied to? Trump tells everyone lies, including his followers. Why do feel the need to act like a battered spouse?

#46 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-10 09:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

While you are waiting, why don't you all grab your John Dean dolls and rock yourselves to sleep.

#45 | Posted by Rightocenter

Waiting for what? A republican to provide an honest argument for why trump should remain president?

You yourself said there was plenty of evidence for impeachment.

#47 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-10 09:36 PM | Reply

Why do you accept a President who believes you deserve to be lied to? Trump tells everyone lies, including his followers. Why do feel the need to act like a battered spouse?
#46 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2019-06-10 09:31 PM

I have been calling for his impeachment for obstruction of justice since the day that the redacted Mueller report was released, which is the only way to get rid of him.

How about you?

#48 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 09:39 PM | Reply

Rep Justin Amash: There is sufficient evidence to commence impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

Dannie/DBoy/Shreek: Yay, he's a hero!!!

ROC: There is sufficient evidence to commence impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

Dannie/DBoy/Shreek: You suck, what are you up to???

#49 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 09:42 PM | Reply

Impeachment is too much of a political risk for Democrats which is why they won't do it.

I don't blame them. Public support isn't there for it.

Keep multiple investigations going and try for the 'death by 1000 cuts' approach.

Winning in 2020 is the best way to remove Trump from office.

#50 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-10 09:49 PM | Reply

I see that RoTomCotton is still trying to get Dems to do his Party's dirty werk for them; get rid of the imbecile criminal they foisted on the American people.

This effort of his here is, of course, in lieu of him posting the letter he wrote to Yurtle pressing him to signal that the GOP Sen will take any impeachment from the House seriously.

RoTC (see what I did there?) will be posting that letter for us any time now..... waiting.....

#51 | Posted by Corky at 2019-06-10 09:58 PM | Reply

ROC: There is sufficient evidence to commence impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

#49 | Posted by Rightocenter

...but I'm still going to defend him and repeat his propaganda and attack his enemies all day every day.

#52 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-10 10:02 PM | Reply

How about an email Dorkus:

To: Senator Mitchell McConnell

From: Rightocenter

Re: Impeachment

You should, like, totally take seriously the articles of impeachment that you haven't yet seen from the Democrats who are afraid to do the right thing and who will never present them to you and like, totally support conviction on those articles that you haven't seen.

#53 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 10:04 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

defend him and repeat his propaganda

Feel free to post examples of that.

and attack his enemies all day every day.

If you mean highlight your stupidity, well, yes I do that on a regular basis.

#54 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 10:05 PM | Reply

As a matter of fact, I just sent that exact email to www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Contact

#55 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 10:14 PM | Reply

Kind of an interesting question. House impeaches, Senate doesn't convict. Obvious outcome.

Same scenario as Bubba but Bubba wasn't running for president again.

Who gains?

#56 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-06-10 10:18 PM | Reply

As a matter of fact, I just sent that exact email...

Why didn't you send something that they might take seriously? I'm sure you could write one.

#57 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-06-10 10:38 PM | Reply

#56

I actually think that if the Dems do it right, no matter what Trump says says or the Senate does, they end up looking far better than they will if they don't do it.

#58 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 10:47 PM | Reply

#57

I sent a far more serious email to my two Senators, Feinstein and Harris, and got stock replies from someone in their office.

What makes you think that McConnell's office would do anything different from a non-constituent?

#59 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-10 10:51 PM | Reply

Both fair points.

#60 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-06-10 10:57 PM | Reply

I actually think that if the Dems do it right, no matter what Trump says says or the Senate does, they end up looking far better than they will if they don't do it.

#58 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

The problem as I see it is they have to demonstrate corrupt intent which is very difficult.

That was the folly of designing a Special Counsel that is a function of the Executive branch.

For example, Trump would have been well within his powers to shut the investigation down.

As you well know I think impeachment is a bad move politically for Democrats.

On this issue we disagree.

#61 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-10 11:04 PM | Reply

The problem as I see it is they have to demonstrate corrupt intent which is very difficult.

Not really. They just need the votes. House will vote for, Senate will vote not.

The actual facts matter very little. It's not a courtroom.

#62 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-06-10 11:28 PM | Reply

LOL. It was another Fake News bombshell.

washingtonmonthly.com

#18 | Posted by SheepleSchism

LOL I love it how in a matter of a week or so Sheepleshart has gone from "I'm a disgruntled Dem!" to faithful regurgitator of everything Trump feeds him.

#63 | Posted by jpw at 2019-06-10 11:54 PM | Reply

For example, Trump would have been well within his powers to shut the investigation down.

LOL

Sure.

#64 | Posted by jpw at 2019-06-10 11:55 PM | Reply

"As you well know I think impeachment is a bad move politically for Democrats. On this issue we disagree."

No you don't. He thinks it's a bad move, too. That's why he wants Dems to start the suicide mission.

#65 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-10 11:59 PM | Reply

Do it, impeach, triple dog dare.

#66 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-06-11 11:03 AM | Reply

A republican to provide an honest argument for why trump should remain president? - #47 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-10 09:36 PM
Here's your answer. He was duly elected and the proper steps to remove him have not yet been taken.
Trying to overturn the first without following the steps of the second is a problem regardless of your opinion of the President.

#67 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-06-11 11:09 AM | Reply

For example, Trump would have been well within his powers to shut the investigation down.
---
LOL

Sure.

#64 | POSTED BY JPW

You claim to have read the report. I direct you to page 12 of the Summary section of Volume II. Mueller spells it all out.

#68 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 11:11 AM | Reply

He thinks it's a bad move, too. That's why he wants Dems to start the suicide mission.

I didn't know that they also taught mindreading in your accounting classes.

The only bad move for the Dems is to do what they are currently doing, if they don't bring impeachment proceedings Trump is going to say "See, I told you they had nothing" and have a much stronger basis then if they impeach him and he is acquitted by a party line vote.

But go ahead and remain fearful of my so called "hidden agenda".

#69 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-11 11:45 AM | Reply

#68

That's partially correct, but that is also why his direction to McGahn to fire Mueller is the way to go: White House counsel is not in the direct line to Justice, so improper intent can be inferred by using his in-house lawyer to do his dirty work (kind of like Ratso) instead of going through proper channels.

#70 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-11 11:48 AM | Reply

"I didn't know that they also taught mindreading in your accounting classes."

The list of what you didn't know would take all day to scribe. Including the fact I took the sum total of ONE accounting class. And by that, I mean one DAY.

"The only bad move for the Dems is to do what they are currently doing,"

And once again, you have advice for Dems, but not one keystroke aimed at Republicans.

"if they don't bring impeachment proceedings Trump is going to say "See, I told you they had nothing""

And the answer will be all the witches they found, among all "the best people".

"But go ahead and remain fearful of my so called "hidden agenda"."

Don't give yourself that much credit. NONE of your agenda is "hidden".

#71 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 11:56 AM | Reply

#71 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2019-06-11 11:56 AM | REPLY | FLAG: STRAWMAN

#72 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 12:01 PM | Reply

"...and remain fearful"

Hard to remain fearful when I've never become fearful.

I just laugh at how you think people believe you're interested in "helping" Democrats.

#73 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 12:03 PM | Reply

#72

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

What do you think it means, and how does that relate to my post?

#74 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 12:04 PM | Reply

#74 Actually, you are correct.

I don't know what I thought I was reading...temporary dysleixa, I guess.

#75 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 12:12 PM | Reply

"I have been calling for his impeachment for obstruction of justice since the day that the redacted Mueller report was released"

And you were silent during the first 10,000 lies, which makes your timing totally suspect.

Again: Why do YOU accept a President lying to you on a daily basis? Why do you think YOU don't deserve the truth?

#76 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 12:35 PM | Reply

ROC: There is sufficient evidence to commence impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

Dannie/DBoy/Shreek: You suck, what are you up to???

ROC: Telling the Democrats what to do.

Dannie: And what have you told the Republicans?

ROC: (crickets)

FTFY, after you left out the salient parts.

#77 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 12:37 PM | Reply

Why do YOU accept a President lying to you on a daily basis? Why do you think YOU don't deserve the truth?
#76 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 12:35 PM

Because we're used to it. Trump is not the first president to lie to the people. He most assuredly won't be the last. Our last President lied to us. The one before that lied to the world. The one before that lied under oath. The one before that lied in his campaign. The one before that forgot if he told a lie.
President's lie to the people. Stop clutching your pearls now. That horse has left the barn. We deserve the truth, but we don't expect it from our government. Welcome to the adversarial relationship that most conservatives feel towards the government. It's good to have you onboard. It's a shame you slink off every time a 'D' is in charge.

#78 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-06-11 01:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Grr...presidents, not president's

#79 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-06-11 01:28 PM | Reply

#76-77

Dannie the Tax Accountant/Mind Reader...

It really bothers you that I waited until the Mueller report to come out and read the conclusions to make a judgment about what should be done with Trump, doesn't it? You know, like lawyers are supposed to do...

I didn't vote for Trump, won't vote to reelect him but I am not going to run in circles, screaming to the skies when he does something that I disagree with or, god forbid, lies, because I am an adult and don't need to make myself feel better by being overly dramatic.

As I have said repeatedly, I have emailed my Congressman and both Senators, all of whom I voted for, to express my support for impeachment. But guess what...they are Democrats, and the Majority controls the process.

I could send hundreds of emails to GOP reps and Senators and similar to the responses from my elected representatives, get form responses back thanking me for my input.

Either you support impeachment or you don't, I happen to support it, unlike you and the rest of the liberal ------- here on the DR.

#80 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-11 05:03 PM | Reply

It's a shame you slink off every time a 'D' is in charge.

Dannie would NEVER criticize a Democrat, that's just how he rolls.

#81 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-11 05:05 PM | Reply

Including the fact I took the sum total of ONE accounting class. And by that, I mean one DAY.

Yet you do people's taxes.

Terrifying.

#82 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-11 05:33 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

And once again, you have advice for Dems, but not one keystroke aimed at Republicans.

Unlike you, I criticize Republicans regularly, including our POTUS, where I have never seen you criticize a Democrat...EVER.

And the answer will be all the witches they found, among all "the best people".

I hate to break it to you, but if Mueller and his team didn't find what you were so desperately hoping for, -------------------------- aren't going to do any better.

Don't give yourself that much credit. NONE of your agenda is "hidden".

Glad to see that you are coming around to the scary idea of commencing impeachment proceedings, Wizard Sleeve.

#83 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-11 05:37 PM | Reply

--Yet you do people's taxes.

Terrifying."

Theatre arts majors have to do *something* to earn a living. Why not a tax prep certificate from H&R Block?

#84 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 05:53 PM | Reply

Why not a tax prep certificate from H&R Block?

No need...I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express!!!

-Dannac the Magnificent

#85 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-11 06:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Because we're used to it. Trump is not the first president to lie to the people."

He's the first to employ constant lies as a governing tactic.

"We deserve the truth."

Clearly you don't believe that; certainly not with all that turd polishing.

#86 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 11:59 PM | Reply

"Theatre arts majors have to do *something* to earn a living."

And I'm just about to start getting pensions from both Actor's Equity, and the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists.

You have to make "a living" to qualify for a pension. Had I been stripped of my AEA pension the first day I earned it, I would've earned it again, and had I been stripped again that day, I would've eartit a third time. Same for my AFTRA pension.

You, meanwhile, look dumber with each specious claim.

#87 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 12:04 AM | Reply

"Yet you do people's taxes."

You clearly don't have the vaguest idea what is entailed with tax prep. Yet you're happy to parade your ignorance. Go figure.

#88 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 12:07 AM | Reply

"Unlike you, I criticize Republicans regularly"

Actually, that's A LOT like me: I criticize Republicans regularly.

"...including our POTUS, where I have never seen you criticize a Democrat...EVER."

Have you ever seen me praise a Democrat? Feel free to link to any post of mine you can find. Go back in my history as long as it takes.

#89 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 12:15 AM | Reply

"As I have said repeatedly, I have emailed my Congressman and both Senators..."

Yeah...we know: you've got plenty of advice for Democrats. We also know you haven't sent word one to Mitch McConnell or any other Republicans.

Do you want Trump impeached and acquitted, or impeached and removed?

#90 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 12:19 AM | Reply

Impeached and removed.

How about you?

#91 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-12 12:56 AM | Reply

Have you ever seen me praise a Democrat?

Please put the goalposts back where you found them. (Kudos to JPW for that one)

Criticism is not the same as praise, stay focused.

#92 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-12 12:58 AM | Reply

We also know you haven't sent word one to Mitch McConnell or any other Republicans.

You obviously missed the email that I sent to him upthread.

#93 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-12 12:59 AM | Reply

"Criticism is not the same as praise"

Thank you for agreeing with my point. You pretend I praise Democrats. I don't; I just lambaste Republicans as much as they deserve, and to you it feels like all the time. With apologies to HST, I tell the truth about Republicans, and you think I'm giving them hell.

#94 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 01:03 AM | Reply

"As a matter of fact, I just sent that exact email "

Of course you did...why, you even looked up his email address! I'll bet you even signed it RightofCenter, and then put in little Xs and Os.

#95 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 01:07 AM | Reply

Where we differ is that I tell the truth about Democrats and Republicans, and you think that I am full of shht.

Try to criticize your #Team for once Dannac, you will initially find it uncomfortable but ultimately liberating.

#96 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-12 01:07 AM | Reply

You pretend I praise Democrats. I don't; I just lambaste Republicans
#94 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

#metoo, only I'm the opposite. weird.

But they call me a Russian agent. Do they call you a Russian agent too?

#97 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 01:08 AM | Reply

"Where we differ is that I tell the truth about Democrats and Republicans, and you think that I am full of shht."

Show me where, and I'll show you where you're full of shhht.

"Try to criticize your #Team for once Dannac"

When Dems start to ---- up as badly as your #Team, you'll hear from me. Lately, they haven't wanted to borrow extra trillions, build a wall, or turn women into second-class citizens. And Obama didn't lie to me dozens of times a day, and expect me to eat those lies for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Luckily for Trump, folks like you & Avigdore are willing to swallow anything Trump jizzzzes out.

#98 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 01:11 AM | Reply

"criticize your #Team for once Dannac"

On my page, posted within the last 12 hours:

"Why are the Dems seeking John Dean's testimony..."

The ancient Dems think JD is young and relevant, and believe because they know him, EVERYONE knows him. Democratic myopathy at its most consistent.
POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2019-06-11 02:49 PM | REPLY

Gee, you sure look dumb now. You couldn't even be bothered to look at my current page before making your statement?!?

#99 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 01:15 AM | Reply

"#metoo, only I'm the opposite. weird."

Your Russian translator app is on the fritz again. Try adjusting the caps.

#100 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 01:19 AM | Reply

Yeah...we know: you've got plenty of advice for Democrats. We also know you haven't sent word one to Mitch McConnell or any other Republicans.

#90 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Well, what advice do you have for Democrats regarding impeachment?

#101 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 01:48 AM | Reply

"what advice do you have for Democrats regarding impeachment?"

Screw impeachment; Trump would be able to run out the clock in the courts. Keep the investigations in the House. Realize as soon as you hand ANYTHING over to Republicans, you're dealing with the likes of Nunes, Barr, and McConnell. All you can count on them for, is party over country every time.

#102 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 02:01 AM | Reply

Screw impeachment...

#102 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

I appreciate the honest and direct answer.

My POV is the absolute best way to remove Trump is to win 2020.

Do that and none of this other crap matters much.

#103 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 02:05 AM | Reply

It's only "screw impeachment" because the Senate Republicans are spineless twerps, afraid of 140 characters...and especially afraid of one character.

#104 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 02:08 AM | Reply

It's only "screw impeachment" because the Senate Republicans are spineless twerps, afraid of 140 characters...and especially afraid of one character.

#104 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

...which circles us back to Square-1

#105 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 02:12 AM | Reply

Danforth,

Your argument is difficult to fathom. From what I can tell you seem to think Senate Republicans should try and coerce a Democratic House to launch articles of impeachment against a Republican President.

This has been a consistent theme on your part for more than a month.

Which party was the driving force behind impeachment against Nixon? It was the opposition party?

How about Clinton? Yep, it was the opposition party.

For Trump? You seem to not only be giving the opposition party a complete pass but are blaming the GOP for inaction against their own party.

#106 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 02:18 AM | Reply

"...which circles us back to Square-1"

Exactly: where you loathe Republicans, and then vote for Trump's enablers, and I loathe Republicans, and vote against them.

#107 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 02:21 AM | Reply

Danforth,

When ROC calls on both Dems and Republicans to push for impeachment you get pissed, from what I've observed, that his focus isn't 100% on the GOP.

I then ask you what advice regarding impeachment you'd offer Dems, who control the House and hold most of the power over initiating impeachment proceedings, and your response is "because GOP."

Your position shrieks of partisan hypocrisy. Please offer some clarification on this.

#108 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 02:26 AM | Reply

"...which circles us back to Square-1"

Exactly: where you loathe Republicans, and then vote for Trump's enablers, and I loathe Republicans, and vote against them.

#107 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

I responded to this tack earlier - by now you should be pretty well aware of my policy preferences. Given what you know, why should I vote for Democrats over Republicans?

#109 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 02:28 AM | Reply

"From what I can tell you seem to think Senate Republicans should try and coerce a Democratic House..."

No, I believe Senate Republicans should act like they would if Obama had been doing all these things. We both know if the shoe were on the other foot, Hannity's head would be exploding nightly, as well it should. Instead, Rs are just enablers of this bad behavior, actually encouraging more by their lack of character.

For example...Trump just touted a trade bill THAT DOESN'T EXIST. If that had been Obama, you'd still be bitching about it. But have you heard a single Republican come out against the lie?

#110 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 02:30 AM | Reply

"Given what you know, why should I vote for Democrats over Republicans?"

They're nowhere near as intent on ------- up the country. It's not Dems borrowing trillions to give it away, trying to suppress black votes, or trying to turn women into second-class citizens.

The only reason I can see is you're afraid of stuff like Obamacare, because your wife works in the medical field.

#111 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 02:36 AM | Reply

"When ROC calls on both Dems and Republicans to push for impeachment you get pissed..."

Oh, please..,you didn't really fall for his McConnell fib did you? He said he sent the exact note...the note he signed RoC.

RoC is full of advice for Dems, all aimed at screwing them over in the long run.

And my position is it's stupid to hand over final judgement to Republicans when you already know the fix is in.

We both know if nine Republican Senators came forward in favor of impeachment the House would move in a heartbeat. But, as you admitted the last time we discussed this, Rs aren't going to move against a Republican.

Party over country.

#112 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 02:45 AM | Reply

"Your position shrieks of partisan hypocrisy. "

Nonsense. I'm simply able to recognize a suicide mission when I see one. And if you actually think RoC is giving advice to help the Dems, I've got a bridge to sell you.

#113 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 02:49 AM | Reply

For example...Trump just touted a trade bill THAT DOESN'T EXIST. If that had been Obama, you'd still be bitching about it. But have you heard a single Republican come out against the lie?

#110 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

I ripped Trump's tariffs as being unconstitutional because that is something that is enumerated to Congress, not the Executive.

I ripped the Paris Accord and Iran Deal primarily because they weren't ratified. I'll do the same thing in regards to any deal Trump inks. Will you?

This is a gem:

"Given what you know, why should I vote for Democrats over Republicans?"

They're nowhere near as intent on ------- up the country. It's not Dems borrowing trillions to give it away, trying to suppress black votes, or trying to turn women into second-class citizens.

The only reason I can see is you're afraid of stuff like Obamacare, because your wife works in the medical field.

#111 | POSTED BY DANFORTH


So, you offered up 2 insipid talking-points, assumed they were consistent with my views and otherwise made ZERO attempt to address my question.

In short, you have taken a fancy to relentlessly attacking my votes and when I ask you to persuade me to vote otherwise you become more condescending and less convincing.

Nice job!

"You have a wonderful economy with words, Danforth. I look forward to you next syllable with great eagerness"

#114 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 02:51 AM | Reply

Party over country.

#112 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

No.

Polling over country.

Impeachment is an inherently political process that is driven by the pubic.

That's reality.

#115 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 02:55 AM | Reply

But, as you admitted the last time we discussed this, Rs aren't going to move against a Republican.

Party over country.

#112 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Nixon resigned because he was informed that he had roughly 16 Senate votes.

#116 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 02:57 AM | Reply

Cant wait until President Trump is reelected. Keep it up TDS sufferers. There's no better comedy than watching and listening to a political meltdown by these TDS freaks. President Trump is unbeatable. He's our president. Please, don't get over it. The best stand up comedy out there is CONgress, the TDS morons and their Marxist medias.

#117 | Posted by willsburrow at 2019-06-12 08:40 AM | Reply

We both know if nine Republican Senators came forward in favor of impeachment the House would move in a heartbeat. But, as you admitted the last time we discussed this, Rs aren't going to move against a Republican.

So, in your little world, it's incumbent on the GOP Senate to lead the impeachment charge against a GOP POTUS even though Dems control the House, impeachment starts in the House and the public is against impeachment?

And you wonder why we regard you as hyper-partisan.

#118 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 09:25 AM | Reply

"No. Polling over country."

A difference without a distinction.

"So, in your little world, it's incumbent on the GOP Senate to lead the impeachment charge..."

In my world, the responsibility doesn't evaporate if you have an (R) behind your name. It's incumbent they stand up for America, not for their own party OVER the American people.

"Nixon resigned because he was informed that he had roughly 16 Senate votes."

Ahhh, so you admit it's possible for Republicans to grow spines. Or at least it used to be.

"And you wonder why we regard you as hyper-partisan.'

No I don't: pretty much anyone who votes for politicians they don't loathe is a hyper-partisan in your book. Meanwhile, you and all the other Rs turned into shameless turd polishers.

To wit: how many times have you condemned Trump's lie about the nonexistent new trade pact with Mexico? Over/Under is 0.5, and I've taken the Under.

#119 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 10:11 AM | Reply

"when I ask you to persuade me to vote otherwise..."

You're beyond hope. There is clearly NOTHING Trump could do that would get you to stop voting for his enablers.

You claim you're worried about our unfunded liabilities, yet you voted for the folks who promised to make it worse. You clutch your pearls on a daily basis, then go into the voting booth and cast your ballots to enable more behavior like that.

You're clearly a Republican because you're a Republican. It may have to do with your meal ticket, but it's probably just the way you've voted all your life, so things like borrowing trillions, suppressing minority votes, and turning women into second-class citizens are just minor passing issues.

#120 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 10:19 AM | Reply

"No. Polling over country."
---
A difference without a distinction.

No, it isn't. Impeachment is an inherently political process and if public support isn't there it's not going to happen.

In my world, the responsibility doesn't evaporate if you have an (R) behind your name.

We're aware. In your world responsibility only evaporates if you have a (D) behind your name.

To wit: how many times have you condemned Trump's lie about the nonexistent new trade pact with Mexico? Over/Under is 0.5, and I've taken the Under.

I haven't followed that story.

pretty much anyone who votes for politicians they don't loathe is a hyper-partisan in your book.

Nope. I don't begrudge people for how they vote. "I held my nose and voted for the lesser of 2 evils" is a common refrain and it was visceral in 2016.

Hyper-partisan in my book is a complete lack of objectivity. Hyper-partisans reflexively attack 1 side, even if it isn't warranted and relentlessly either defend the indefensible of the other side or deflect and play whataboutism. The definition for what I just described is: Danforth. I may start using your screen-name as a verb. "Don't you dare Danforth Obama's 'lead from behind' debacle in Libya."

#121 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 10:23 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Hyper-partisan in my book is a complete lack of objectivity."

Like when folks complain about behavior, then vote to continue it?

"Hyper-partisans reflexively attack 1 side, even if it isn't warranted..."

I've yet to see an attack on today's Republicans that wasn't warranted.

"The definition for what I just described is: Danforth. "

What a riot. You're like the unfaithful husband, who to soothe his conscience has to pretend all husbands are unfaithful. I happen to vote for the folks bent on ------- up the country LESS than the folks who just voted to borrow an additional 10% of all the debt we've rung up since 1776. And after that happened, the 'objective" Jeff--you know, the one who "objectively" is against unfunded liabilities--voted for more Republican enabling, even after they promised ANOTHER tax cut.

But sure...lecture us some more about hyper-partisanship, expert.

#122 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 10:31 AM | Reply

Like when folks complain about behavior, then vote to continue it?

Yesterday I asked you to make a case as to why I should vote for Democrats given my policy preferences and you punted. I'm giving you another opportunity now.

But sure...lecture us some more about hyper-partisanship, expert.

#122 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

I can count on my penis the number of times you've criticized Democrats over the past 2.5 years. I can hold up 'The Shocker' symbol to display how many times you've criticized Democrats over the past 10.5 years. You seem to take the tack that since you are a straight party-line voter at the federal level it would somehow be hypocritical to criticize the party you vote for because Obama, or something. I don't overlook Republican misdeeds because I vote for them far more than I vote for Democrats.

#123 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 10:39 AM | Reply

I don't overlook Republican misdeeds because I vote for them far more than I vote for Democrats.

If anything, I am critical of Republicans because I expect more from them than I do Democrats.

#124 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 10:41 AM | Reply

"given my policy preferences"

What, exactly, are your policy preferences? Recently, you posted you SO wanted Obama to address the unfunded liabilities. Then you voted for folks who promised to exacerbate the problem. Then, once you understood the magnitude, and they promised another tax cut, you voted for them again. So we certainly can't believe what you've claimed in the past to be important.

#125 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 10:45 AM | Reply

You couldn't even be bothered to look at my current page before making your statement?!?

Democratic myopathy at its most consistent.

LMAO, Jeff and I have been pointing out that you never criticize Dems for months and you now point to one post, made today, of you misusing the word "myopathy" as evidence of how critical you are of them? I am guessing that you tried to call them weak, but that is the word you use?

Pro tip: Know the meanings of words before using them to somehow prove something.

From the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke:

"The myopathies are neuromuscular disorders in which the primary symptom is muscle weakness due to dysfunction of muscle fiber. Other symptoms of myopathy can include include muscle cramps, stiffness, and spasm."

Oh, gosh darn those stiff and crampy Democrats!

-Dannac the Magnificent

#126 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-12 10:54 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

What, exactly, are your policy preferences? Recently, you posted you SO wanted Obama to address the unfunded liabilities. Then you voted for folks who promised to exacerbate the problem. Then, once you understood the magnitude, and they promised another tax cut, you voted for them again. So we certainly can't believe what you've claimed in the past to be important.

Like I said, why should I vote for Democrats?

#127 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 11:00 AM | Reply

"I can count on my penis the number of times you've criticized Democrats over the past 2.5 years. "

Not unless you have multiple dicks. FFS, I posted a complaint about Dems within the last 24 hours. Don't you idiots ever even check my current page before making yourself look idiotic?

And 2.5 years? When have the Democrats had any power to do ANYTHING since Trump was elected?

#128 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 11:06 AM | Reply

"Like I said, why should I vote for Democrats?"

Like I asked: "What, exactly, are your policy preferences?"

See if you can answer without tap dancing any further.

#129 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 11:07 AM | Reply

FFS, I posted a complaint about Dems within the last 24 hours.

Right. A tepid criticism - the first in 2.5 years.

Like I asked: "What, exactly, are your policy preferences?"

Here is an incomplete list:

Addressing unfunded liabilities - it's something that goes WAY beyond the income tax code, especially considering they are taxed separately
Maximizing domestic energy production short-term
Rigorous protection of the 1st Amendment
Appointing originalist judges
Federalism - de-fanging the federal government and returning more power to the states
Moderate de-regulation at the federal level
Traditional stance on abortion (this is more of a state-level issue) both parties are moving to opposite extremes on this issue
Elimination of methanol mandates and subsidies and that pertains to all other forms of energy as well
Strong border security
Crack down on those who've entered this country illegally

Like I said, this list is far from complete but it's a start...

#130 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 11:19 AM | Reply

"Pro tip: Know the meanings of words before using them to somehow prove something."

Myopia; my mistake. I was going for short-sightedness.

Of course, that still means your claim was horse manure; I'd complained about the Dems within the prior 12 hours when you accused me of never saying a negative word about Dems.

#131 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 11:23 AM | Reply

--Like I said, this list is far from complete but it's a start...

It's a good list. So I take it you won't vote for Floppy Joe who is against everything on it.

#132 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-12 11:28 AM | Reply

I'd complained about the Dems within the prior 12 hours when you accused me of never saying a negative word about Dems.

Sorry, that should have been:

Gosh darn those stiff, crampy and nearsighted Dems!

I will admit, it is a start, but until you be honest with yourself that even the Dems do stupid stuff that deserves derision, calling them shortsighted or lacking imagination is hardly a biting criticism.

#133 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-06-12 01:59 PM | Reply

"hardly a biting criticism."

So now criticism isn't enough?!?

Are those goalposts heavy when you have to move them?

"I will admit, it is a start"

Yet you won't admit your accusation was wrong. Telling.

#134 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-12 02:27 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort