HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » crickets » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

crickets

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: Georgia
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 15,091

Journal Archives

Schumer has described the actions of the Senate as a perfidy

and Claire McCaskill objects to him using that word. I think she's wrong. It was exactly the word to use: state of being faithless or disloyal : treachery. Covers it quite well for a governmental body that has betrayed its own duties and in doing so betrayed the country.

You and Phoenix are spot on.

Yet another reason why the WH and Repubs are covering so hard. It's not just the kompromat, it's the world wide money laundering scheme that would pull down more heads than Trump's.

View from the Senate Gallery

Wish You Were Here Jan 30 Connie Shultz

If you could watch the senators' conduct during these hours upon hours of testimony, you could decide for yourself which senators are taking seriously their oath to conduct themselves as close-mouthed, open-minded jurists and which ones made up their minds before they walked through the chamber doors. [snip]

As the wife of a U.S. senator, Democrat Sherrod Brown, I can sit in the family section of the senate gallery during the trial. I don't have to stand in line with the general public, who is admitted a handful at a time but never to the point where all the seats are filled. I can also stay as long as I like, which has allowed me to watch as entire rows of Americans are summarily ordered to rise in unison and leave, even though many seats in the gallery remain empty.

I don't blame the Capitol enforcers for this. They are some of the nicest public servants I know.

I was in the gallery for three hours last Thursday night, for another eight hours on Friday and for the morning session on Saturday. [snip]

The testimony can be dry at times, but the view is fascinating...

Bowie shreds Dershowitz and the Repubs here - excellent article.

eta:

We should all be skeptical of arguments that allow the government to tailor an offense retroactively to suit an obnoxious target.

But that’s not what’s happening to President Trump. And when Mr. Dershowitz defends the president by invoking my own law review article about Justice Benjamin Curtis, he seems to forget that when Curtis made a legality argument to contest President Johnson’s impeachment, Curtis declared, “There can be no crime, there can be no misdemeanor without a law, written or unwritten, express or implied.”


Dersh needs to watch out twisting arguments of living legal scholars. May they all come out with verbal knives like Bowie did; he deserves the public reprimand.

It is easy to get depressed in the middle of all this, but

I have to admire Robert Reich for refusing to lapse completely into doom and gloom. Along with this article, I read one from earlier this month that I'd missed:

Why I’m Still Hopeful About America

But I want you to remember this: As bad as it looks—as despairing as you can sometimes feel —the great strength of this country is our resilience. We bounce back. We will again. We already are.

Not convinced?


It's a good read, a nice chaser for the other excellent article, and left me feeling a little better about facing down the rest of the week, as well as the months and years to come.

The reason people like Bob Barr are on the tube is because

someone called them up and invited them, for ratings. And because they want to spread the bile these guests are guaranteed to spew. It's no surprise.

Preach it!

I'm from the South and we get the hick accent 'let me talk this way to show I think you're ignorant' thing all the time. It's not always appreciated, but (as you also pointed out) in this case it was a quick code well aimed and well deserved. Here's the thing: sometimes we use the same code for the same reasons on ourselves because some of us still have a sense of humor. So I have no problem with it here and I certainly don't care for Princess Barbie telling when my little fee fees should be hurt.

It was scathing hilarity gold.

No sympathy for her, and then looking at what she's upset about...

Even less.

She doesn't like the 'U-crane' CNN interview with Don Lemon, Wajahat Ali, and Rick Wilson. Too bad. It's not saying anything untrue and the hilarity is glorious. It's healthy to let off steam laughing at our problems every once in a while. Getting upset with CNN over this while FOX gushes a firehose of thinly veiled hate and outright disinformation day after day... princess needs to get over it. She's not getting ratioed quite as badly as Pompeo, but it's close, and well deserved.

Go for the longer version of the clip here. It's worth it.

Someone on MSNBC (maybe Chris Hayes - can't remember) said that to agree to this

is to perpetuate the very behavior for which Trump is being impeached.

It would be agreeing to another quid pro quo. Don't do it - it's a trap!

Also pointed out by McCaskill, the Senate has more than the 51 votes needed to call anyone they want to testify. Turning any witness list into a quid pro quo is not necessary at all for them. If they want to call Hunter Biden, make them just do it instead of playing these games.

Herschmann:

"Do we want the type of government where questions about suspect conduct are suppressed or dismissed as illegitimate because someone is intimidating or screams at... or is just too important? No, that is precisely when an investigation is most important."

What have House Democrats been saying all along?

Oh - He's claiming Biden was screaming and intimidating people re Burisma -- but it sound a lot like someone else we know. Also, this argument that Democrats have one standard of conduct for their own and another for everyone else is classic projection.

Does anyone else remember a comedian named Franklyn Ajaye? Because I am having a "Baby, does your head spin around?" moment right now.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next »