|
https://twitter.com/ChadPergram/status/1205134888845881344 Basically, it's just a bullshit excuse to be able to say "okay I want to modify something really slightly TIME TO TALK ABOUT IT WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" and it's super asinine. Edit: Ugh, what a bullshit page snipe. Santa Cat is judging me. 
Dzurlord fucked around with this message at 16:02 on Dec 12, 2019 |
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 15:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:05 |
|
|
Ugh this is the worst
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:01
|
|
|
lmao in the entire history of impeachment, we have never set a precedent for high crimes and misdemeanors, therefore edit* swalwell up, staring directly at the camera
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
Wylie posted:Anyone got an answer as to why everyone is moving to strike the last word? Seems like they do that, then they get 5 minutes to make a speech. What sort of parliamentary trick is this? (Warning: halfass explanation) It's an old technicality fuckery trick. There's some rule that says a bill, etc. can only be debated for 10 minutes total (5 each side) before voting, which is obviously insufficient for grandstanding. Moving to strike the last word of something is a way that a member can be recognized to offer an amendment to the amendment already under debate (which doesn't actually do anything but give them a chance to talk). It's just wordplay to stick to the letter of the law and still get a statement on record. A single word is the smallest granular element that can be stricken, so they just use that to meet pro forma ('adhering to form/rules', loosely) requirements. Pissed Ape Sexist fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Dec 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:06
|
|
|
lol they are talking about Bill Clinton again my brain is exploding
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:10
|
|
|
what in the gently caress is gohmert slurring about?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
Almost exclusively the words crime and fraud, it looks like.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:13
|
|
|
where were u when ukraine needed the javelins??
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:24
|
|
|
Rorkshire ink blot test.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:25
|
|
|
I loving hate that the republicans are so shameless in defending this president. Gohmert is especially bad claiming that all the Russia stuff was debunked, the Ukraine stuff was not a quid pro quo (Trump released the aid, checkmate. Please don't look at the timing or the actions surrounding it!), that this whole thing is a giant sham because the IG report says [opposite of reality] and  Nancy Pelosi and those durned liberals hate our president.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:33
|
|
|
The serious republican gaslighting is insane. This is infuriating.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:33
|
|
|
ManBoyChef posted:The serious republican gaslighting is insane. This is infuriating. I just want someone to point it all out. I want some Democrat to stand up and point out what's going, and the lies and misrepresentations and hypocrisy and use those words. Ugh. I know that nobody will because  but still.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:37
|
|
|
Why are you all doing this to yourselves? Just mute the Repubs when they're on and unmute when it goes back to the Dem's for goodness sakes....
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:37
|
|
|
Pissed Ape Sexist posted:(Warning: halfass explanation) It's an old technicality fuckery trick. There's some rule that says a bill, etc. can only be debated for 10 minutes total (5 each side) before voting, which is obviously insufficient for grandstanding. Moving to strike the last word of something is a way that a member can be recognized to offer an amendment to the amendment already under debate (which doesn't actually do anything but give them a chance to talk). It's just wordplay to stick to the letter of the law and still get a statement on record. A single word is the smallest granular element that can be stricken, so they just use that to meet pro forma ('adhering to form/rules', loosely) requirements. This is so utterly unimportant, but does the last word actually get struck from the record? The idea of a bill ending in the middle of a sentence because of dumb rules is kind of funny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
So is this one of those things where it's just 5 minutes each person?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:40
|
|
|
'and the hostage with the gun to his back even swears he's not a hostage! he thinks the gun is very comfortable, not very cold at all! what more do you need????'
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:40
|
|
|
SalTheBard posted:So is this one of those things where it's just 5 minutes each person? Jim and Gaetz have already been up twice. So who knows
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:41
|
|
|
Dzurlord posted:I just want someone to point it all out. I want some Democrat to stand up and point out what's going, and the lies and misrepresentations and hypocrisy and use those words. That also doesn't actually work to sway the public much, it comes across as "No u"
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:42
|
|
|
SalTheBard posted:So is this one of those things where it's just 5 minutes each person? Each member has the option of 5 minutes per amendment. This is all regarding the first amendment to change the name to Donald John Trump and Gyms amendment to that to...strike the entire first article of impeachment. If they do another amendment they get another round. Could be here a while. Republicans WANT to be here a while. Edit: Gym and Gaetz had time yield to them by other GOP members.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:42
|
|
|
'also if he is impeached it means everyone is disrespecting the trump voters and looking down on them...do you HEAR THAT, TRUMP VOTERS? THEY LOOK DOWN ON YOOOOU' EDIT: A few Democrats have stood up to speak, which led to that pissy 'I'm answering her question!' interruption that made me yell IT WAS A RHETORICAL at the radio
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:43
|
|
|
DandyLion posted:Why are you all doing this to yourselves? Just mute the Repubs when they're on and unmute when it goes back to the Dem's for goodness sakes....
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
Faustian Bargain posted:I loving hate that the republicans are so shameless in defending this president. Gohmert is especially bad claiming that all the Russia stuff was debunked, the Ukraine stuff was not a quid pro quo (Trump released the aid, checkmate. Please don't look at the timing or the actions surrounding it!), that this whole thing is a giant sham because the IG report says [opposite of reality] and On the second part that means (in reductively simple terms) that anyone who's deciding whose side to pick is less likely to pick the US than they were previously, because the probable cost and value of such a relationship has changed; and on the first part that means that other foreign powers will feel more willing to attack US allies. I guarantee that it's something that figured into Erdoğan's decision to going after the Kurds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
SubG posted:The thing that I really haven't heard discussed because this is way the gently caress too nuanced for the process we have, is that regardless of whether or not the aid was released, and leaving aside everything else about the withholding, tremendous harm has been done 1) in signalling to anyone who might be lining up against US allies that the US is currently treating its treaty relationships like a protection racket, and further 2) in undermining the value of those relationships as an enticement to potential allies. I'm fairly sure this was intentional on Trump's part; he wants the US to stand alone and have no allies or friends because the US is just so awesome. Unfortunately no one's going to trust us really ever again, no matter who we elect next (if we elect anyone next) (edit: also, watching Rep. Biggs is pretty funny because with the sound off it just looks like he's lunging forward, mouth open, and then falling back into his seat, over and over again)
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:55
|
|
|
Baronash posted:This is so utterly unimportant, but does the last word actually get struck from the record? The idea of a bill ending in the middle of a sentence because of dumb rules is kind of funny. I think they're technically just proposing to strike the last word of the amendment under consideration, which affords them time to 'debate' that single word but not actually address the wording at all, which is why it can keep going and going and going (and it doesn't get included in the final text of the bill/whatever, just on the record(?)). Each rep can do it only once, though, unless someone else yields their time to a rep that has already spoken. It's clunky and stupid and is used in the House far more than the Senate since they're understood to be a bit looser with fussy parliamentary rule stuff. (E: for clarity, based on this good explanation.) Pissed Ape Sexist fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Dec 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:59
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:I'm fairly sure this was intentional on Trump's part; he wants the US to stand alone and have no allies or friends because the US is just so awesome. Unfortunately no one's going to trust us really ever again, no matter who we elect next (if we elect anyone next) The only thing that fixes it is for the Republican party to be crushed so hard that they're not going to recover. Which is basically what will happen if we take the Senate and pass HR1
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:59
|
|
|
The blatant lies are really bothering me. Its astounding how Fox news is only going to play the clips of republicans lying which they will present as fact. This will lead to everyone's brainwashed uncles and grandpas to believe the stupidest poo poo which they will then vote on with smug satisfaction that they are making the right choice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:00
|
|
|
Ratcliffe logic: I'm not guilty of murder because I wasn't screaming "I"M MURDERING YOU NOW" as I do it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:00
|
|
|
Faustian Bargain posted:What does this accomplish? Maybe mental health? We talk about how republicans are in their own bubble, but pretending it isn't happening doesn't make it go away. They aren't changing my mind, it's just so infuriating that this is happening and the base eats it up. Mental health is exactly it. This whole thing is dinner theater anyways. Why let the Republican ghouls have free airtime in your subconscious. Mute them and neuter what insignificant affect they may have on someone who's not a CHUD.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:01
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:I'm fairly sure this was intentional on Trump's part; he wants the US to stand alone and have no allies or friends because the US is just so awesome. Unfortunately no one's going to trust us really ever again, no matter who we elect next (if we elect anyone next)
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:03
|
|
|
DandyLion posted:Mental health is exactly it. This whole thing is dinner theater anyways. Why let the Republican ghouls have free airtime in your subconscious. Mute them and neuter what insignificant affect they may have on someone who's not a CHUD. Because it is important to me to hear what is really said, and not what the news reports as being said. Even if it's frustrating or tough to hear. The articles and sound bytes on these hearings really aren't capturing the breadth of them. I respect that some people need to take a break from politics for their own mental health, but I personally would be more anxious NOT listening to this. We all get to choose what we let into our worlds, and politics is very important to mine. StrangersInTheNight fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Dec 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:04
|
|
|
SubG posted:Oh yeah it's intentional by Trump, it's part of the standard fascist playbook. I'm never entirely certain how much Trump intends a certain outcome and how much he just goes "well somebody who says I'm awesome thinks I should do this so I will because I'm awesome" instead. https://twitter.com/RepJayapal/status/1205156051177357312
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:05
|
|
|
StrangersInTheNight posted:Because it is important to me to hear what is really said, and not what the news reports as being said. The articles and sound bytes on these hearings really aren't capturing the breadth of them. I respect that some people need to take a break from politics for their own mental health, but I personally would be more anxious NOT listening to this. I'm in the same boat really. While I don't WANT to hear the bullshit, I'd rather know my opinions are based on seeing it myself instead of based on clips I see elsewhere. Except for Gohmert. He kills brains cells by existing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:07
|
|
|
"I have never sent someone to prison where the victim didn't know or figure out they were a victim... and the victim never knows or figures out there's a victim." -Lupus Gomer
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:11
|
|
|
Retro42 posted:I'm in the same boat really. While I don't WANT to hear the bullshit, I'd rather know my opinions are based on seeing it myself instead of based on clips I see elsewhere. The lies amaze me, but I guess its important to hear them. I do need to hear it so when I talk to others about the impeachment hearing I could speak from a place of knowledge which I think goes a little farther than just regurgitating the MSM takes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:13
|
|
|
Pissed Ape Sexist posted:"I have never sent someone to prison where the victim didn't know or figure out they were a victim... and the victim never knows or figures out there's a victim." Someone shoots at you but you dont know that they shot at you. does that mean that it wasn't attempted murder?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:13
|
|
|
ManBoyChef posted:The lies amaze me, but I guess its important to hear them. I do need to hear it so when I talk to others about the impeachment hearing I could speak from a place of knowledge which I think goes a little farther than just regurgitating the MSM takes. If you're accurately describing the hearings you're going to sound like regurgitating "the mainstream media" to anyone who thinks The Mainstream Media is a thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:14
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:If you're accurately describing the hearings you're going to sound like regurgitating "the mainstream media" to anyone who thinks The Mainstream Media is a thing. edit:nm
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:15
|
|
|
ah geez Raskin - Trump didn't actually steal money from his own charitable org, he just used the org as a front for money laundering is all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
ManBoyChef posted:Someone shoots at you but you dont know that they shot at you. does that mean that it wasn't attempted murder? This legal opinion courtesy of the Assassin’s Guild - “if you saw one of us, it wasn’t one of us.”
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:05 |
|
|
Is there even any kind of defensible reason, no matter how far out there, for asking China to get involved? Genuinely curious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:20
|
|
