|
Eltoasto posted:It would be truly a great example of our system if the house passes a terrible bill to get it off their desk, knowing the senate will kill it, just for the senate to craft a terrible bill and send it back to the house assuming the freedom caucus will kill it, and then it becomes law. I think I saw that on Schoolhouse Rock!  
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 12:28 |
|
|
King laying into these assholes pretty good for refusing to answer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
I don't know who's talking now but I love him, good on him for pressing these IC dudes
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
Al Borland Corp. posted:I wish for Wray to publicly announce he was not asked and does not want the job. Please God Of course he wants the job. He's a republican hack who can use that job to do a ton of evil.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
JazzFlight posted:In this case, couldn't (in theory) the House just always pass a generic "BLAH BLAH BLAH REPLACE TEXT HERE" bill and let the Senate rewrite it in all instances? Why even bother spending time writing a legitimate bill in the first place? House has to vote on the amended bill again, so you cant pass trash and totallu rewrite it in senate, and pass it to law immediately Its got to go back to house
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
HOLY poo poo, MAINE GOONS: FIX YOUR poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/LisaMirandoCNN/status/872477728741765121
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
JazzFlight posted:In this case, couldn't (in theory) the House just always pass a generic "BLAH BLAH BLAH REPLACE TEXT HERE" bill and let the Senate rewrite it in all instances? Why even bother spending time writing a legitimate bill in the first place? In normal times the House will write a bill that isn't laughably terrible, and the senate will give it genuine consideration and say "we like a lot of this, but we want to change this." If the senate passes the house bill without modifications it goes to the president. If they change anything, it either goes back to the house to pass it without further modifications (which the dems had to do for ACA because of Leiberman), or if the house doesn't want to pass the senate bill but they think they can figure out a compromise, they can have a conference committee made up of lots of senators and house members who talk it over to see what can pass both houses. The compromise bill then has to be voted on again by both houses. In the end, both houses have to agree on the bill as written, if the senate changes the bill and the house goes "gently caress you, no" then the bill just dies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
Wittes has been doing this a lot lately. https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/872480143205425152
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
The Washington Post published this too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/872479425291538432
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:HOLY poo poo, MAINE GOONS: what did their governor do now
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
Sloober posted:House has to vote on the amended bill again, so you cant pass trash and totallu rewrite it in senate, and pass it to law immediately
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
You know, I've realized why this worked during the campaign and doesn't work now. During the campaign, if they wanted him to shut up, they could shoot pure heroin into his eyeballs by scheduling rallies. Here, nothing they have is going to captivate his attention the same way, and the little poo poo takes revenge for attempts to control him. Like, sure, he was happy to go play sword dances and power orbs with the Saudis, but the second he stopped having fun in Europe he omitted the Article 5 pledge. I don't think they have anything that can keep his attention enough to stay off a guy he hates possibly 'slandering' him.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
Nazzadan posted:My friend have a seat, I have something terrible to tell you about live video chats for the past 5 years or more. I watched a live chat session just an hour before this one, was more or less benign and even fun in parts. This though? It was like the entire thing was made up of 80 percent bots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
Democrat are gutless losers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
Fitzy Fitz posted:Wittes has been doing this a lot lately. Well, he delivered yesterday, but its pretty loving early in the day for another big scoop
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:Well, he delivered yesterday, but its pretty loving early in the day for another big scoop Isn't this Comey's buddy? At this point it's probably just that Comey is testifying tommorow. Why drop stuff beforehand?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Isn't this Comey's buddy? At this point it's probably just that Comey is testifying tommorow. Why drop stuff beforehand? To help set the narrative?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
Zapf Dingbat posted:The nothing matters comments feel a lot like clinical depression. I think maybe it's actually all the stuff not mattering. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
OOOooo Manchin is the committee virgin, so happy to be here!
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
JazzFlight posted:Oh, I know it has to then go back to the House. But if this bill is so different from the original, then it'll just be yet another round of courting the Freedom Caucus crazies, right? It was just a ton of wasted time to get them on board on the first two attempts. We are hoping that the Senate fails to get to 50, but if the senate passes something, then yes our final hope will be that the HFC crazies tell the senate to gently caress off and die.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:To help set the narrative? The narrative is already set. If Comey wants to be asked something directly, he can quietly talk to a Democratic Senator's aide like he did last time. Now, you want the testimony to be as newsworthy as possible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
Anyone setting themselves up for anything other then disappointment from Comey is going to feel a little heartburn.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
They have to treat Trump like he's Livia Soprano or some poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Isn't this Comey's buddy? At this point it's probably just that Comey is testifying tommorow. Why drop stuff beforehand? No idea why, but yesterday when he posted the same thing it was before the NYT's piece on Comey asking Sessions not to leave him alone with Trump.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
Flip Yr Wig posted:Whoa, does that mean the actual text of the House-passed bill, or is this part of the procedure to start considering the bill and then re-draft it themselves? https://twitter.com/ddiamond/status/872481743571431424
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:HOLY poo poo, MAINE GOONS: never
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
Blitz7x posted:Anyone setting themselves up for anything other then disappointment from Comey is going to feel a little heartburn. There is reason for hope. He has in the past quietly told a Dem senator to ask him a specific question, and then used that to drop a stunning bombshell before.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
Rigel posted:There is reason for hope. He has in the past quietly told a Dem senator to ask him a specific question, and then used that to drop a stunning bombshell before. He also declined to testify until he was given a public hearing, so presumably he wants to say something
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/thedailybeast/status/872483404033519616quote:Passing on alt-right conspiracies. Railing about ‘teaching gayness.’ Arguing for leniency to sentence minors to death. And these three nominees are expected to be confirmed easily.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Democrat are gutless losers. Could be trying reverse psychology.  If Democrats come out in favor of Trump's guy, he's going to get a little paranoid about him.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
You would think "Finish writing the drat thing" would be the first check box, but what the hell do I know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:He also declined to testify until he was given a public hearing, so presumably he wants to say something I mean, I thought the main 'worry' was just that this has been overhyped, because the presence of Mueller means that Comey can't say anything that might compromise his investigation, and thus the testimony cleared with Mueller is probably going to be less incendiary than it was before there was a Special Counsel.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
Fitzy Fitz posted:No idea why, but yesterday when he posted the same thing it was before the NYT's piece on Comey asking Sessions not to leave him alone with Trump. And that was hilarious, sure, but not exactly a bombshell. This sort of stuff is getting overhyped.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
I liked seeing Manchin press the "well if you can't answer in open hearing, come on back for the closed hearing in a few hours" invite. Unfortunately, they got bailed out by the chair with "Oops, that session is chock full for 702 technical details".
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/USATODAY/status/872449368959455232 Got lost earlier I think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
No filibuster for regular judicial nominees anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:https://twitter.com/USATODAY/status/872449368959455232 That seems like kind of a big deal but I'm nothing near a lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 12:28 |
|
|
evilweasel posted:what did their governor do now Senator King, actually. Guy apparently doesn't think all citizens by default deserve the grace of "We will not comment on ongoing investigations." King has been pressuring Rosenstein hard for answers specifically regarding Trump's legal maneuvering, stating that he is aware of no law preventing the Department of Justice from answering questions on ongoing investigations. King kept railing, "Can you name for me the law behind why you are not answering the question(s)?" Rosenstein eventually answered, more politely, "Have you seen a loving cop show ever?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 17:11
|
|