Yes it did. Read the bottom of page 1/top of page 2.
But it don't break the law.
Homo Screwed Up if your win is King Donald. There is a stupid prize if I ever saw one. Guess it makes sense.
Not in his perspective. Judicial activism is his winning, liberal tears is his winning, attacking people different from yourself is his winning. Later, conservatives will want liberals to believe that their concerns about behavior and law are sincere and justified, just cuz reasons, but their track record won't back them up.
Yes it did. Read the bottom of page 1/top of page 2.
Why do you think Rand Paul is trying to get someone else to do his dirty work instead of just naming the whistleblower himself?
so you think it is okay to out the whistleblower?? Knowing full well that Trumps rabid base and I am including you in this would stop at nothing to harm the whistleblower!!
BTW it is against the law!!
But that is not the same as saying there would be no repercussions for identifying the person whose complaint over Trump's dealings with Ukraine catalyzed the House impeachment investigation.
A member of Congress who reveals the whistleblower's identity could be removed from committees or face other legislative sanctions; a member of the public risks a civil lawsuit from the whistleblower's legal team, which has threatened to hold anyone who reveals the name personally liable if the disclosure results in harm to the whistleblower or the person's family.
The state of the union is bleak.
Remember when she said that impeachment was a bad idea? I do.You can’t possibly be serious, she played this about as perfectly as anyone could hope for.
If you think otherwise what actions by Pelosi do you think would have led to a different result?
As I've already stated, my bad for not remembering a political anecdote that I learned 30 years ago.No, he's just invoking Ben Franklin. Guess you don't read.
If you had watched the coverage a bit more closely you would have seen where Chief Justice Roberts answered that exact question. In case of a tie, it would not pass.it won`t happen but it would be funny if Robert`s had to break a tie...lolool
Pretty much like the DNC rule change to help Bloomberg while screwing Bernie. Kinda like the same plan as 2016 with the DNC, Hillary and Sen. Sanders.Looks like acquittal vote will not happen until Wednesday. Dems can vote on amendments which will all be expected to fail, before that vote, so that could even change. Really, crimping Trump's victory lap timing.
Probably more designed to F with the IOWA caucuses. They never miss an opportunity.
You believe that smoke screen of a joke. Neither he nor those clown Senators were elected by the people democratically. Republicans maintain congressional majorities by voter suppression and gerrymandering and dark money from billionaires. They are not democratically elected and that scum ball Roberts knows it. They are all a pile of shit. He presides over a court that was stacked by the Republican party, a party that needs to be exterminated by voter revolution.If you had watched the coverage a bit more closely you would have seen where Chief Justice Roberts answered that exact question. In case of a tie, it would not pass.
John Roberts, as Senate trial nears end, finally says he won't break ties
Chief Justice John Roberts made crystal clear Friday night that he has no intention of intervening in the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump by casting a tie-breaking vote.www.cnn.com
"
Here's the exchange:
Schumer: "Is the chief justice aware that in the impeachment trial of President Johnson, Chief Justice Chase, as presiding officer, cast tie-breaking votes on both March 31 and April 2, 1868?"
Roberts: "I am, Mr. Leader. The one concerned a motion to adjourn; the other concerned a motion to close deliberations. I do not regard those isolated episodes 150 years ago as sufficient to support a general authority to break ties. If the members of this body elected by the people and accountable to them divide equally on a motion, the normal rule is that the motion fails. I think it would be inappropriate for me, an unelected official from a different branch of government, to assert the power to change that result so that the motion would succeed."
Aren't you from California? You haven't even had the opportunity to vote for a Republican for US Senate in 6/8/10 years due to the gerrymandering of the State and yet somehow it's the Republicans who are suppressing the vote ?You believe that smoke screen of a joke. Neither he nor those clown Senators were elected by the people democratically. Republicans maintain congressional majorities by voter suppression and gerrymandering and dark money from billionaires. They are not democratically elected and that scum ball Roberts knows it. They are all a pile of shit. He presides over a court that was stacked by the Republican party, a party that needs to be exterminated by voter revolution.
I didn't "win" anything. Sorry that you don't like the truth that it isn't against the law to out the whistleblower's name. I was only pointing out the falsehood that is being cast out as fact when it isn't.
Pretty much like the DNC rule change to help Bloomberg while screwing Bernie. Kinda like the same plan as 2016 with the DNC, Hillary and Sen. Sanders.
You don't seem concerned.
Who cares? You do. Noone understands why. So we laugh.I didn't "win" anything. Sorry that you don't like the truth that it isn't against the law to out the whistleblower's name. I was only pointing out the falsehood that is being cast out as fact when it isn't.
Who cares? You do. Noone understands why. So we laugh.
GOP doesnt hold a patent for doing idiotic shit. Its all about the volume. The sheer massive volumes of stupid shit that the GOP musters that gets to people here... But no DNC isnt immune.Pretty much like the DNC rule change to help Bloomberg while screwing Bernie. Kinda like the same plan as 2016 with the DNC, Hillary and Sen. Sanders.
Remember when she said that impeachment was a bad idea? I do.
Maybe she should've stuck with that.
As I've already stated, my bad for not remembering a political anecdote that I learned 30 years ago.
I guess you don't read, either.
Aren't you from California? You haven't even had the opportunity to vote for a Republican for US Senate in 6/8/10 years due to the gerrymandering of the State and yet somehow it's the Republicans who are suppressing the vote ?
Ask her. She's the one who said it.If you want to provide why you think impeachment was a bad idea by all means do so. Remember when I said it was modestly popular?