ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this
holiday season!

Elizabeth Warren Close To Leading The Race

[ Posted Wednesday, October 2nd, 2019 – 17:02 UTC ]

It's hard, when the president is literally tweeting "BULLSHIT," to focus on anything else going on in the world of politics. But today I'm going to ignore the impeachment circus and focus instead on the Democratic primary race, because several important developments are simultaneously happening which could entirely redefine the race. Elizabeth Warren continues her impressive climb in the polls, Joe Biden is beginning to falter amidst all the mud Trump has been throwing, and Bernie Sanders just had an emergency heart operation. How much each of these events will impact the race is still somewhat up in the air, but we should at least be able to see some indication before the next debate is held.

Before we get to the front ranks, though, there are also a few minor developments towards the bottom of the poll standings worth mentioning. Pete Buttigieg is now in fourth place, as Kamala Harris continues to slide. The two are still neck-and-neck, but the trendline has to be pretty worrisome for the Harris team. Will she attempt to make some more news in her next debate performance, perhaps by attacking the frontrunners? It worked -- for a while -- after the first debate, when Harris attacking Biden was the big story. But it wasn't sustainable, so it'll be interesting to see if she'll try this tactic again, out of desperation.

Andrew Yang is also enjoying a modest rise in the polls, while Beto O'Rourke and Cory Booker have fallen back. The three used to be tightly grouped in the polls, but increasingly Yang is pulling away from the other two to stand alone in sixth place, and Yang just turned in an impressive $10 million fundraising quarter.

But the big news in the polls is Warren's rise, of course. Warren is now routinely besting Biden in standalone national polls, which is a new development in the race. This actually began before the whole impeachment fracas started, but one has to wonder how much all the mudslinging towards Biden and his son Hunter is already beginning to hurt his poll standings. At this point, Warren has successfully eaten into the perception that Biden is somehow inevitable, which is a major accomplishment on its own. Up until now, many voters were kind of resigned to Biden becoming the nominee, but now that's not looking like such a sure bet. Warren's spike upwards coincides with Biden's spike downwards, indicating that she's directly siphoning off some of his supporters. Nobody other than Warren and Biden have seen such dramatic changes in their polling trendlines over the past few weeks, so the obvious conclusion is that Warren is picking up voters who are turning away from Biden, for whatever reason. As of this writing, Warren's trendline (on the Real Clear Politics rolling average chart, where we get all our polling data) has not quite surpassed Biden's, but if the trends continue, this crossover will probably happen in the next week or so. If it does happen, the lines should cross right around the 25 percent mark.

This would be momentous, because then Elizabeth Warren would become the official frontrunner of the Democratic race, a position that has been solidly held by Biden ever since he jumped into the fray. Biden could always recover, it's worth pointing out, but he will no longer be seen as invincible or the inevitable nominee. Psychologically, that's a big deal, because it drives votes (Democratic voters are overwhelmingly interested in nominating the candidate with the best chance of beating Trump, this time around). The stronger Warren gets, the less inevitable Biden looks, which makes it easier for Biden voters to jump ship.

What Biden really needs at this point is a big vote of confidence from his former boss, Barack Obama. Now, Obama has been scrupulously staying on the sidelines throughout the primary process, which was to be expected. He is avoiding any show of favoritism towards Biden or any other candidate. But backing Biden up on what he did in Ukraine wouldn't be favoritism at all, it would merely be setting the record straight to fight back against the Republican smears. Obama needs to indicate that Biden's actions towards the Ukrainian prosecutor were part of Obama's official foreign policy, and not some sort of "freelancing" by Biden. Again, this would merely be setting the historical record straight rather than showing favoritism towards his former vice president. But the more time that goes by without such a show of support from Obama, the worse it is going to get for Biden, as people's doubts increase.

The mainstream media has (so far) been too timid to ask a very important question today, which is: "Is Bernie toast?" This is somewhat strange, because they've been saying Bernie's toast for the entire campaign, even though he has been one of only three candidates to even register in double digits in the polling. Perhaps it is because Bernie just announced the biggest quarterly fundraising number -- a whopping $25 million -- of any of the candidates so far, which shows that he's far from losing his base of support. It's hard to juxtapose record-setting fundraising with "Bernie's toast," but that's never really stopped the pundits before.

But today, the Bernie Sanders campaign just announced he had undergone emergency heart surgery to insert stents. Now, this is fairly minor as heart surgeries go, but the American public has long been leery of electing presidents with health problems. This has led to candidates (and presidents) hiding their health problems from the public (as both J.F.K. and F.D.R. did), because lying was seen as less politically risky than admitting the truth.

But Bernie's surgery was made public knowledge immediately, and nobody knows how it'll affect his levels of support. Such health problems only shine a spotlight on how elderly the Democratic frontrunners are in general, and Sanders in particular. The public wants a new president to be healthy and vigorous for an entire four-year term, and emergency heart surgery on the campaign trail -- fairly or unfairly -- does not help with this perception. If voters start thinking along the lines of "Bernie's great, but I don't think he'd be physically up to being president," then they're going to start considering other options.

This could lead to a slide in the polls, although (obviously) it is far too soon to see whether or not this will actually happen. So far, Bernie's floor of support has been admirably rock-solid. Even during Elizabeth Warren's recent rise (and Biden's recent slide), Bernie has stayed as stable as ever, hovering in the high teens. If voters start worrying about his health problems and begin to migrate to other candidates, though, it'll show up as a slide in Bernie's numbers, down to (at least) the low teens.

If this does happen, Elizabeth Warren seems the likely beneficiary. She and Bernie are the closest of any of the candidates ideologically, and there is little bad blood between the two camps. Some Bernie supports grumble that Warren doesn't go far enough and isn't using the words "revolution" and "Democratic socialism," but that is really just a matter of political emphasis. Warren and Sanders have almost identical platforms, especially when compared to the rest of the field. Their supporters don't hate each other in the same fashion as the Hillary-versus-Barack or the Hillary-versus-Bernie intraparty schisms, so if Bernie were to falter it would seem natural for his supporters to shift their support to Warren. Of course, there's no guarantee of this happening -- demographically, the two candidates' supporters aren't identical. Bernie pulls in more working-class support while Warren enjoys more suburban upper-middle-class support. But if Bernie's voters begin to question his physical endurance, then it seems most likely that they'd first take a look at Warren before backing any of the others in the race.

This could set Warren up to solidly take first place. If Warren and Biden enter a two-person neck-and-neck race, that's one thing, but if Biden and Sanders fall and Warren reaps the rewards then she's going to rocket far beyond their polling and begin to dominate the standings in the same fashion that Biden has managed up until now. If Warren tops 30 percent while Biden and Bernie are in the teens (or even low 20s), then the entire dynamic of the race will have changed in a way that hasn't happened yet during this campaign.

Again, it is simply too soon to tell if this will come to pass or not. In another few weeks it might become a lot clearer. By the time the next debate rolls around, Elizabeth Warren could occupy the center-stage spot, which will change the dynamics of both the debate and the race as a whole. That's a big deal, since we have not yet had such a change at the top throughout the entire campaign. So far, this news has been overshadowed by the furor surrounding the impeachment inquiry, but if it continues and Warren's poll average soon crosses Biden's, then we will have a new frontrunner in the Democratic race. Which is going to be big news, even with the impeachment circus in town.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

117 Comments on “Elizabeth Warren Close To Leading The Race”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    If President Obama remains silent now, then he will deserve a forceful calling out as THE MDDOTW.

  2. [2] 
    Paula wrote:

    One thing I've been wondering all along is how things would shift if Blotus isn't the nominee. Hope we find out!

    In the meantime, yep, EW continues steady upward progress.

    On the Dem side it would surprise me if Blotus' accusations about Hunter really hurt Joe - we Dems know Blotus is an abject liar. But what may hurt Joe is his response to Blotus' lies. I don't really know what the most effective response is, but if Blotus keeps up the attacks JB may need to more forcefully defend himself/Hunter as a means of proving he can effectively fight Blotus.

    OTOH, Blotus is becoming so unhinged and so much stuff is coming out the Biden angle in all this may get lost in the larger impeachment story.

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I don't really know what the most effective response is, but if Blotus keeps up the attacks JB may need to more forcefully defend himself/Hunter as a means of proving he can effectively fight Blotus.

    I tend to agree with all of that, Paula.

    The problem as I see is that Senator Biden's biggest fault is his … ah, not his inability … but his reticence to defending himself. He'd rather just talk about policy or strategy or anything else really.

  4. [4] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I also think that his silence (Biden's silence, to be clear, not you know who) is the right tactic for now, while everything is in such a state of flux with respect to wrongdoing by the president.

  5. [5] 
    Paula wrote:

    [4] EM: Yep.

    Biden's in this in part because he may be the Dem nominee and Blotus wants to damage him in general and on principle. But he's also entangled because Blotus has been trying to discredit Mueller and debunk Putin's interference in 2016 - and Ukraine is part of that larger scheme. And that larger scheme - the effort to protect Putin and damage Mueller is really the main story. (Well, the fact that Blotus was extorting Ukraine is also a story, but it's a different one.)

    Anyway, if the focus turns to the bigger picture the Biden angle may well fade away.

  6. [6] 
    TheStig wrote:

    The best advice to Bernie is don't listen to anything Dr. Oz has to say on the
    TV about stent surgery recovery.
    If Bernie is able to stump in a week to 10 days
    I think his core will be satisfied he is durable enough to handle the
    Presidency. Resiliency is a helpful attribute in any stressful job.

    Maybe it's just me, but I've found Biden a bit meh this past week. I don't think it's just the Hunter thing...he just seemed flat.

    Warren? She's on fire. Keeps getting better....and polls reflect it.

  7. [7] 
    TheStig wrote:

    My tablet is having spacing issues tonight.

  8. [8] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Paula -2

    I downgrade Trump from unhinged to deranged. He's all fury, facts can go to hell. Rudy is the perfect accessory under these conditions. Turn the crazy up to 12.

  9. [9] 
    Paula wrote:

    [8] TS: Rudy may help bring him down, totally inadvertently. Rudy's admitted he was the guy who put together the packet of disinformation the State Dept was supposed to act on.

  10. [10] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    But the more time that goes by without such a show of support from Obama, the worse it is going to get for Biden, as people's doubts increase.

    I don't think we should put it all on President Obama, though.

    Some of the media have done a very good job of calling these accusations against Biden outright lies, as well they are.

    The media overall could be doing a better job as could the blogosphere.

    Former Obama administration officials could be saying more as well, like a certain congressman today who was involved with the Ukraine file and who has debunked all the Trump accusations Re. Biden and Ukraine.

  11. [11] 
    TheStig wrote:

    It's no secret that I think the RCP rolling average is not very precise, but My eyeball tells me there is a pretty clear signal over the last 2 weeks:

    Biden down, Sanders flat, Warren up and even with Biden for practical purposes.

    Pity that next debate will feature an excess of not-a-chance-in-Hell candidates.

  12. [12] 
    TheStig wrote:

    If it were just possible to combine the best attributes of the top three:

    Biden's institutional knowledge
    Sander's community organization skills
    Warren's attention to detail

    OK, taking that literally would create a hideous 3 headed 6 leg hermaphrodite....but still much less disturbing - and far more articulate than Trump.

  13. [13] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Well, TS, I would think and expect that Warren and Sanders could play important roles in a Biden administration, along with some of the other presidential candidates.

    There is something about Warren that I can't forget and which, for me, disqualifies her as presidential material, especially now, when the next economic downturn and possible (severe) recession is on the horizon. She still believes that what Secretary Geithner did to resolve the AIG situation was wrong and unnecessary and that the bankruptcy laws would have been a better route. She demonstrated a critical lack of understanding of what needed to be done to prevent a global financial disaster.

    I think she would be great as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, though.

  14. [14] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    The two are still neck-and-neck, but the trendline has to be pretty worrisome for the Harris team. Will she attempt to make some more news in her next debate performance, perhaps by attacking the frontrunners?

    Oh, yeah! Because that strategy has worked out so well for her since the first time she tried it.

    Sorry, I couldn't possibly resist … :)

  15. [15] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    Warren is now routinely besting Biden in standalone national polls, which is a new development in the race. This actually began before the whole impeachment fracas started, but one has to wonder how much all the mudslinging towards Biden and his son Hunter is already beginning to hurt his poll standings.

    I hope you can understand how frustrating it is to read a sentence like the one above, similarly read all over the media and blogosphere, that leaves out the all important part about saying that the mudslinging has no basis in reality.

    When people hear that there is mudslinging going on, they often assume that there is truth in the mud.

  16. [16] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    But the more time that goes by without such a show of support from Obama, the worse it is going to get for Biden, as people's doubts increase.

    Each day that goes by, I lose a little respect for President Obama.

  17. [17] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    So, you can call me way too sensitive on this particular issue because, well, I certainly am. :)

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya'all are REALLY blurry.. :D

    First, to Liz.. I know you don't like reading past commentaries.. But I left a note for you in yesterday's PROGRAM NOTE, I would like you to see.. If you want to respond there or here, max nichts.. :D

    But I just wanted to make you aware it was there..

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    Now, to business..

    It's hard, when the president is literally tweeting "BULLSHIT," to focus on anything else going on in the world of politics.

    Awwwwww Did that bad language from that bad man upset da widdle snowflakes sensibilities?? :D J/K (a widdle) :D

    Funny how no one had any problem with Beto spewing FUCK this and FUCK that all over the place.. :^/

    Oh, yea.. That's right..

    "Well... er.. uh... THAT'S different!!"
    -Weigantian Response

    Of course, it's different. Beto has a -D after his name..

    But today I'm going to ignore the impeachment circus

    Here's betting you are the ONLY one who will.. :D hehehehe

    Joe Biden is beginning to falter amidst all the mud Trump has been throwing,

    While it's nice to see you confirm what I have been saying for the past week :D let's be factually accurate..

    Joe Biden's demise is more based on the FACTS coming out more than President Trump's slinging o the mud..

    Unless you want to claim that President Trump is telling the facts and Americans listen to what President Trump has to say..

    Hmmmmmm is THAT what you are saying?? :D

    How much each of these events will impact the race is still somewhat up in the air, but we should at least be able to see some indication before the next debate is held.

    Bernie is done.. If he can't handle a primary without blowing a gasket, he will certainly mortally vapor-lock in the General against President Trump..

    Bernie is done.. There is no Bernie..

    Pete Buttigieg is now in fourth place, as Kamala Harris continues to slide.

    As I am wont to do (much more often than anyone else here :D) I admit I was wrong..

    I had called Harris for the win...

    Who knew she would be so incompetent??

    Andrew Yang is also enjoying a modest rise in the polls, while Beto O'Rourke and Cory Booker have fallen back. The three used to be tightly grouped in the polls, but increasingly Yang is pulling away from the other two to stand alone in sixth place, and Yang just turned in an impressive $10 million fundraising quarter.

    Wouldn't that be the shitz if Yang was the winner.. :D

    Trump vs Yang Combat for the ages.. :D

    But the big news in the polls is Warren's rise, of course. Warren is now routinely besting Biden in standalone national polls, which is a new development in the race.

    Who could have POSSIBLY predicted that!!?? :D

    Oh.. Wait.. :D

    What Biden really needs at this point is a big vote of confidence from his former boss, Barack Obama. Now, Obama has been scrupulously staying on the sidelines throughout the primary process, which was to be expected.

    Not "scrupulously" but by and large, it has been factually accurate...

    But backing Biden up on what he did in Ukraine wouldn't be favoritism at all, it would merely be setting the record straight to fight back against the Republican smears.

    Do you have any facts to support this??

    Maybe Obama knows something about Ukraine that you do not.. Maybe Obama chewed Biden a new one over Hunter Biden's criminal activity in Ukraine.. Maybe Obama is royally PISSED OFF that Biden bragged about how the sausage was made in 2018. Maybe Obama is doing Biden a FAVOR by not getting involved..

    You really have to consider that fact if you want to claim the reality mantle..

    I'm just sayin'...

    Obama needs to indicate that Biden's actions towards the Ukrainian prosecutor were part of Obama's official foreign policy, and not some sort of "freelancing" by Biden.

    The longer Obama doesn't get involved, the more likely it is that Ukraine WAS some freelancing op by Biden..

    Again, you MUST consider the possibility if you want to take the reality-based hill.. :D

    But the more time that goes by without such a show of support from Obama, the worse it is going to get for Biden, as people's doubts increase.

    Can you concede that the more time that goes by without Obama speaking out, the more likely it is that there is a VERY GOOD REASON Obama is staying silent?? That MAYBE Obama speaking the FACTS of the situation might make things WORSE for Biden..

    Can you concede that possibility?? Can any one???

    Excellent commentary, CW.. :D

    The lingering question of Bernie Toast or No Toast is simple to answer. While Bernie won't lose his base, it's clear that the American public will see Bernie as too frail to continue..

    If his heart can't take the Primary, there is NO WAY he should be running in the General..

    NOW, let's get to impeachment.. :D

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    If President Obama remains silent now, then he will deserve a forceful calling out as THE MDDOTW.

    Unknown.. Perhaps Obama is doing Joe a FAVOR by remaining silent.. :D In that Obama might deserve the MIDOTW award.. :D

    The possibility must be considered

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    I also think that his silence (Biden's silence, to be clear, not you know who) is the right tactic for now, while everything is in such a state of flux with respect to wrongdoing by the president.

    I have to disagree, Liz..

    By ceding the field of battle to President Trump, it gives credence to President Trump's claims..

    And it also lends credence to the FACTS that are being revealed...

    If Joe is not seen fighting back against these alleged lies, then people will begin to wonder if there is any truth to them..

    I think the reason Joe Biden is being silent is Joe pissed off Obama by revealing how diplomatic sausage is made.. To respond to the critics and President Trump with MORE reality of how sausage is made, Biden runs the risk of irrevocably damaging Obama's legacy, even more so than it is..

    Personally, I don't think Joe owes Barry ANY loyalty whatsoever. Obama has shown no loyalty to Joe..

    But you know how Joe is.. Loyal to a fault...

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    Stig,

    I think his core will be satisfied he is durable enough to handle the
    Presidency. Resiliency is a helpful attribute in any stressful job.

    But you and I BOTH know that Bernie needs to satisfy much MUCH more than his base..

    How could you forget this fact???

    Bernie is done..

    It's that simple..

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Stig

    My tablet is having spacing issues tonight.

    Oh sure.. Blame it on the tablet.. :eyeroll:

    hehehehe

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Stig,

    I downgrade Trump from unhinged to deranged. He's all fury, facts can go to hell.

    And what FACTS do Democrats have??

    Not a single fact that supports impeachment..

    Funny how that is always the case with you Democrats, eh? :D

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Stig

    It's no secret that I think the RCP rolling average is not very precise, but My eyeball tells me there is a pretty clear signal over the last 2 weeks:

    Biden down,

    Thank you for your acknowledgement of my predictive capabilities.. :D

    It's appreciated.. :D heh

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    I hope you can understand how frustrating it is to read a sentence like the one above, similarly read all over the media and blogosphere, that leaves out the all important part about saying that the mudslinging has no basis in reality.

    As long as Obama doesn't set the record straight (if, indeed, the record is not ALREADY straight.. You have to concede the possibility) Biden will continue to suffer..

    Hell, even if Obama does set the record straight, there will still be tens of millions of Americans who will have doubts..

    If Joe hasn't already, he is very VERY close to the rubicon..

    In deference to you, I promise to restrict (or at least direct) my gloating when (if) Biden closes his campaign..

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democrats’ impeachment drive serves their needs, not the country’s
    https://nypost.com/2019/09/30/democrats-impeachment-drive-serves-their-needs-not-the-countrys/

    And, let's be factually accurate here...

    This faux impeachment.. This coup ALSO serves the needs of Russia and Putin..

    This is undeniable..

    So, it is UNDENIABLE that Democrats are serving the needs of Russia and Putin..

    "These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed."
    -Captain Smilin' Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya'all really have to appreciate the irony..

    Democrats have thrown their entire agenda away..

    Gun control?? Whoop... Out the window..

    Health Care?? Biff... Not gonna do it..

    Infrastructure?? Slap... Gone in 60 seconds..

    Immigration Baam... See ya wouldn't want to be ya

    Democrats have thrown away EVERYTHING they claimed to have held dear...

    NOW, the Democrats have replaced all of that with one single overriding agenda..

    Nullifying a free, fair, legal, demoratic and Constitutional election....

    In other words, a coup...

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's actually hilarious when ya think about it..

    When we come out on the other side of this, with President Trump still firmly in office (a virtual certainty says Official Weigantia), Democrats are going to have to run on their "record"...

    And the ONLY "record" the Democrats are going to have is one failed coup after another..

    Ya gotta just laugh at the irony.. :D

    The ONLY record that Democrats have is one failed coup after another.. :D

    Now, remind me.. WHO here thinks this coup is a good idea?? :D

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    And it gets worse..

    Democrats have made impeachment the SOLE topic of discussion nationwide... Oh sure, lip service might be paid to another topic here or there.. But it will be unnoticable because of impeachment..

    For all intents and purposes, Impeachment is all. All is impeachment..

    24/7 Impeachment Impeachment Impeachment Impeachment
    Impeachment Impeachment Impeachment Impeachment Impeachment Impeachment Impeachment Impeachment 24/7

    Then... ***BAAAAM***

    Impeachment is over... President Trump remains in office.. Totally exonerated....

    Figure this is around Jan 2020...

    Now, I ask ya... What is going to be the topic of discussion for the next 10 months??

    HOW DEMOCRATS LOST IMPEACHMENT!!!

    HOW PRESIDENT TRUMP ROYALLY WIPED THE FLOOR WITH DEMOCRATS!!!

    THAT is going to be the topic of conversation in the run up to Nov 2020...

    Just when you thought Democrats could not scroo the pooch ANY MORE... They surprise ya... :D

  31. [31] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    One thing I've heard a lot that makes no sense to me is candidates saying they'd not let their vp's kids sit on the boards of foreign companies. Notwithstanding that it's a chickensh*t snipe at biden, how exactly would they try to prevent it? Grown up kids don't always do what their parents want.

  32. [32] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    You will have to post your note to me here as I have no time to scroll through a 100 plus comment thread to find it.

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    One thing I've heard a lot that makes no sense to me is candidates saying they'd not let their vp's kids sit on the boards of foreign companies. Notwithstanding that it's a chickensh*t snipe at biden, how exactly would they try to prevent it? Grown up kids don't always do what their parents want.

    Good point..

    So, basically, these candidates would violate the constitutional rights of their own KIDS..

    If they are willing to violate their KIDS' rights in such an heinous, illegal and unconstitutional manner...???

    What does that say about what they will do to the rights of everyday Americans??

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    You will have to post your note to me here as I have no time to scroll through a 100 plus comment thread to find it.

    Fair enough. Normally I don't like to pollute current threads with old business..

    But for you??? :D

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    As requested.. :D

    Your efforts are truly appreciated, Liz..

    These are haters.. They will spew their hatred because they cannot help themselves..

    I do my best to simply ignore them..

    And that seems to be the problem. They are like recalcitrant children.. The act out and when you ignore them they simply get worse and worse until they do something that simply CAN'T be ignored..

    Many of these children grow up and are the same way. In extreme cases, they fall victim to suicide because they can't get the attention they crave..

    Oh sure, we have our break throughs.. Sometimes they become so abhorred by the actions they take a step back, see what is happening and say "This is ridiculous" and make peace.. We saw that recently..

    But there are those who are so ensnared with their hate, they can't escape from it..

    I honestly don't believe the solution is within our grasp.. We are like a small self-contained society here. And every society has it's trouble makers along with the good people of the group and those who don't want to get involved..

    Unfortunately, for our little society, the trouble makers and those who choose not to get involved far outnumber the good of the ground..

    So, it appears that the solution will have to be an imposed solution...

    OTOH, we might get lucky. The trouble makers might get bored and leave.. They might have a horrendous accident that knocks some sense into them and become a totally different person.. In the extreme case, they might actually get disgusted with their own hate and make peace..

    It could happen. :D

    Meanwhile, we just press on.. :D

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    Now I have chickens and animals to feed.. :D

  37. [37] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Joshua[31],

    It's also a disqualifier for any hope they may have of being involved in a Biden administration, should Democrats be successful in 2021.

    Senator Booker had a wonderful response to a question about the accusations against Biden and his son and whether he would ban the kids - he didn't answer that and went into a full-throttled defense of Biden.

  38. [38] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale [35],

    I'd have been very happy if you had just stopped at "Your efforts are truly appreciated, Liz."

    Because, then you would have gone a long way toward making these comment sections better.

    Sigh.
    :-(

  39. [39] 
    TheStig wrote:

    EM-

    The AIG bonuses still sticks in my craw. AIG made good on its debt, but it was a bad precedent. I think Warren was right. The economic rule book in the USA needs some serious rewriting and the playing field needs to be leveled.

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    I'd have been very happy if you had just stopped at "Your efforts are truly appreciated, Liz."

    Because, then you would have gone a long way toward making these comment sections better.

    You mean you want me to be succinct and brief instead of loquacious and verbose??

    I said THEY would have to change.. :D

  41. [41] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    It doesn't stick in mine because I understand that there was no way around that.

    I'm sure it sticks in Geithner's craw just as much if not more than in yours!

    She's probably right about the need for more tools in the tool box and Geithner would be the first one to agree with that. But she was and is still dead wrong about the GLOBAL giant AIG and the American bankruptcy solution. That and she showed total disrespect for the treasury secretary who virtually single-handedly saved the American economy, not to mention my own retirement savings plan. Ahem.

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ahh what have we here???

    GOP demands 'equal playing field' ahead of former Ukraine envoy Volker's scheduled testimony
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-kurt-volker-dems-schiff-forbid-foreign-affairs-committee-republicans-questions-equal-representation

    Schiff-head has decreed that the GOP is not allowed to question today's witness in any way, shape or form..

    I KNOW there has to be SOME (a few) amongst you who finds that totally unacceptable...

    What are Democrats afraid of??

    The facts!??

    They should be...

    Where is the "whistle blower"???

    What are Democrats afraid of...???

  43. [43] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    That is the height of ridiculousness, on your part, Michale.

    You know you can't believe everything you hear or read on FoxNews, don't you? Especially nonsense like that!

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    House Republicans are demanding an “equal playing field” in the Democrat-led impeachment probe against President Trump after Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said ahead of Thursday’s scheduled testimony from former U.S. envoy for Ukraine Kurt Volker that GOP members of the Foreign Affairs Committee will not be permitted to ask questions or have equal representation during the hearing.

    What are Democrats trying to hide???

    This is another instance where the Weigantia of old would NEVER have supported such a move by Democrats..

    NEVER....

    Just another indication as to the depth of HHPTDS that is a plague around here.. :(

  45. [45] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You mean you want me to be succinct and brief instead of loquacious and verbose??

    In this case, one lovely sentence would have served the purpose well.

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    You know you can't believe everything you hear or read on FoxNews, don't you? Especially nonsense like that!

    And yet, CW and many others have quoted Fox News when it suited there purpose.

    Funny how that is, eh?

    But awww right.. aww right..

    I would be willing to entertain ANY facts you have that dispute the claims in the afore mentioned report..

    I'll be here all day.. :D

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    In this case, one lovely sentence would have served the purpose well.

    You asking me to be brief and succinct would be like me asking you to be hateful, hurtful and/or nasty..

    In Weigantia, it's just not who we are.. :D

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    But hay.. If you don't want to read about Democrats and their cowardice from FoxNews..

    LETTER: McCaul Rejects Democrats’ Limitation of Republican Involvement in Volker Testimony Tomorrow
    https://gop-foreignaffairs.house.gov/press-release/letter-mccaul-rejects-democrats-limitation-of-republican-involvement-in-volker-testimony-tomorrow/

    How about from the OFFICIAL US GOVERNMENT HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES???

    Again, the question MUST be asked..

    What are Democrats afraid of that they have to forbid the GOP from asking questions??

  49. [49] 
    TheStig wrote:

    EM-41

    I'm glad to hear your retirement plan is secure. I retired 2 yrs ago and have never been happier. My last 10 working years were mild to moderate to pure hell.

  50. [50] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    So the impeachment distraction is put on hold to cover the Dems presidential primary distraction.

    "We interrupt this news broadcast for breaking news!"

    Does it really make any difference which big money Democrat wins the nomination?

    When are people going to realize that Lucy will NEVER let you kick the football?

    When are you, CW, going to stop perpetuating the lie that this time Lucy will let people kick the football?

    It's time for some American Pie (the song, not the movie).

    It's time for the marching band (ordinary citizens) to refuse to yield when the players (the big money Dems and Republicans) try to take the field and leave the devil (the big money interests) on the sidelines in a cast.

    When are you, CW, finally going to sing bye-bye Miss American Lie?

    It's not as hard as you think it is.

    One day per week on impeachment/scandals, one day per week on the presidential primaries/2020 presidential election with both reviewed in FBP and two days covering actual reality.

    Get Real.

  51. [51] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Sorry to hear about that TS.

    My last 10 working years have been all about full-time lowly manager in retail, no less, at work and full time at home with mom, actually 24/7 with mom, and I'm not done yet.

  52. [52] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Who shall we ask to bring out the violins? :)

  53. [53] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Can you imagine how stupid Trump will look if Warren wins the nomination and Trump is impeached for trying to dig up dirt on someone he isn’t even running against? Biggest idiot to ever steal an election!

    Republicans might want to rethink canceling their primary!

    Here’s a question: if Trump & Pence both are impeached and Nancy becomes the President after the Republicans’ nominate Trump but before the general election, what then? Would it be Democrats vs. whoever runs as independents for the presidency?

  54. [54] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Russ,

    Well, I think that would be the sign that Republican John Kaisich (sp?) has been waiting for to catch the nomination.

    And, in that case, Biden had better win the nomination if Democrats as a whole wish to win the White House.

  55. [55] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Listen

    Get real, since when was "Trying to dig up dirt on someone" against any law?? Isn't that the main undertaking of most politicians?

    That's equivalent to saying it's against the law for farmers to plant seeds, or it's against the law for carpenters to saw wood, or it's against the law for tailors to sew fabric!!

  56. [56] 
    TheStig wrote:

    LM-51,52

    My career was stalled and involved too much commuting, too many meetings, too much proposal wrtiing and too little joy. Taking part time work in order manage home care of my parents made sense for them and preserved their estate for me and my two brothers. Not easy, but a no brainer. It's worked this way in my immediate family for at leatst 3 generations the eldest son is point man. Brothers provide cover. Now that the mission is over, I can cut loose and be crazy.

    I hope things work out the same for you.

    As violinist, me want Alison Krause. :)

  57. [57] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Me, too. And, I may check out that violinist.

  58. [58] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    [55],

    Non-serious, ad nauseum.

  59. [59] 
    Kick wrote:

    Paula
    2

    OTOH, Blotus is becoming so unhinged and so much stuff is coming out the Biden angle in all this may get lost in the larger impeachment story.

    I know, right!? Witness Trump's completely unhinged meltdown during the presser yesterday wherein he raged ad nauseam about what he calls the "fake news" and "witch hunt" etc.

    Then in response to another question, Trump gleefully holds up an article from "The New York Times" as his so-called "proof" of how he's nothing more than a victim of Adam Schiff.

    How is the followup question from every member of journalism who attended that press corps not as follows:

    So with all due respect, Mr. President, you've just spent a substantial amount of time claiming that you're a victim of "fake news" and the "lame stream media" and now you're waving a copy of an article from "The New York Times" to defend yourself. So I have a few questions:

    * Are you completely unaware that the so-called exculpatory evidence you're waving around is what you routinely refer to as "fake news"?

    * Do you believe all Americans are gullible enough to continue to buy into this routine of yours or those who are commonly referred to as your "base"?

    Trump and the MAGA cult minions need to "pick a lane." It's either "fake news" or it isn't. It's the height of ignorance to go on a half-hour rant whining like a little bitch about being a victim of a "witch hunt" and "fake news" and then whip it out as exculpatory evidence.

  60. [60] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    35

    I do my best to simply ignore them..

    Narrator: Fact check: False. You troll harder and bombard the board with conspiracy theory bullshit ad nauseam replete with insults hurled endlessly toward posters individually and collectively as a group.

    And that seems to be the problem. They are like recalcitrant children.. The act out and when you ignore them they simply get worse and worse until they do something that simply CAN'T be ignored..

    Narrator: Fact check: True. This was demonstrated not too long ago and thereafter recently memorialized on a Mike!(TM) game card:

    *Mike!(TM)***Mike!(TM)***Mike!(TM)***Mike!(TM)*

    In early August 2019, who became unhinged and started spewing asinine conspiracy theories and then doxxed "neilm" for his awesome gift to this forum of yet another very helpful tool to erase the spamming of the board troll in the same manner as Charles Brown Esquire's legendary and award winning TamperMonkey(TM) script that was designed for the same purpose?

    *Mike!(TM)***Mike!(TM)***Mike!(TM)***Mike!(TM)*

    Many of these children grow up and are the same way. In extreme cases, they fall victim to suicide because they can't get the attention they crave..

    Narrator: On the other hand, some of them become forum trolls who bombard all the other posters with shit-storms off spamming posts... to the point where multiple scripts and links are created by the group and for the group that are specifically designed to filter and/or expunge completely the ever-increasing spamming and trolling in obvious search of the constant attention the troll is so obviously seeking.

    I'm not going to be ignored, Dan! ~ Glenn Close, Fatal Attraction

  61. [61] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    53

    Can you imagine how stupid Trump will look if Warren wins the nomination and Trump is impeached for trying to dig up dirt on someone he isn’t even running against? Biggest idiot to ever steal an election!

    Endorsed. Just when I think Trump couldn't look any more stupid than he already does, he lowers the bar yet another rung. At this point, he's digging a hole in order to lower the bar. Poor Donald cannot stop digging; it's like somebody informed him there's a treasure chest and a trophy and handed him a map and a shovel.

    Here’s a question: if Trump & Pence both are impeached and Nancy becomes the President after the Republicans’ nominate Trump but before the general election, what then? Would it be Democrats vs. whoever runs as independents for the presidency?

    If anyone is impeached (removal? not happening) -- regardless of position held within our government -- their successor or the requisite person/legislative body should be allowed to replace them with another person of their choosing.

    It should be no one's goal -- whether Republican, Democrat, or Independent -- to impeach Trump and Pence simultaneously. Full stop.

  62. [62] 
    TheStig wrote:

    EM-

    Alison Krause

    Sometimes I think I can still touch type. I am often wrong.

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    CRS

    Get real, since when was "Trying to dig up dirt on someone" against any law?? Isn't that the main undertaking of most politicians?

    Give them a break.. They have been demoralized and decimated since Nov of 2016..

    Give them their delusions.. :D

    That's equivalent to saying it's against the law for farmers to plant seeds, or it's against the law for carpenters to saw wood, or it's against the law for tailors to sew fabric!!

    Yep.. And THEN some..

    But it's all they have...

    It's going to be VERY interesting to see how they react when this LATEST coup falls apart..

    Wonder what their new delusion will be..

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    Russ,

    Can you imagine how stupid Trump will look if Warren wins the nomination and Trump is impeached for trying to dig up dirt on someone he isn’t even running against? Biggest idiot to ever steal an election!

    Thank you for proving that President Trump was not interested in the election, but more so interested in Justice.. :D

    You make a good Trump supporter.. :D

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, apparently no one can answer what Democrats are afraid of by preventing the GOP from questioning witnesses and by hiding the so-called "whistle blower"...

    Even Hunter Biden has gone into hiding in a non-extradition country..

    And further, no one can answer why Democrats abandoned their agenda for one last desperate roll of the dice..

    Democrats put ALL their chips on this coup...

    Democrats are going to lose and lose YYUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGELLEEEEEYYYYYY

  66. [66] 
    Michale wrote:

    BBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Russ is agreeing with me that Biden is NOT going to be the nominee..

    Since Biden is out of the race (according to Russ) then Russ won't mind if President Trump enlists China's aid to investigate the Bidens..

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Once again..

    Russ..

    Lose-Lose

    Courtesy of Michale.. :D

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump calls for China to investigate Biden family
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-calls-for-china-to-investigate-biden-family

    Guess the link helps, eh? :D

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:
  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    Pelosi's Sidestep on Impeachment Vote Cuts Both Ways
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/10/02/pelosis_sidestep_on_impeachment_vote_cuts_both_ways__141391.html?utm_campaign=distroscale&utm_medium=video-player&utm_source=polls

    We don't even have a real impeachment anyways..

    It's nothing but a coup...

    With NO FACTS to support ANY claim..

    Funny how that is, eh? :D

  70. [70] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @russ,
    If warren is the nominee, i'm sure Donald will feel he's come out of this impeachment ahead of the game. Rightly or wrongly, i think he sees biden as the biggest threat.

  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    I gotta ask....

    Still think this faux impeachment is "obvious and simple"??

    If so, I have to ask..

    Why is there not a single solitary FACT to support any impeachable offense???

    I mean, even if you take Blathy's BS (TRUMP MADE A PHONE CALL!!!!! AAARRRGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!) and claim it was criminal (It's not, as Hillary proved beyond ANY doubt) the fact is, it's NOT impeachable...

    So, WHERE are the FACTS to prove impeachment is justified "simple" and "obvious"???

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michael Goodwin: Trump's surprisingly optimistic take on impeachment. (Here’s what he told me)

    President Trump says the Bidens scammed China, Ukraine and the USA

    Trumps calls on China and Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter; Rich Edson reports from the White House.

    His enemies are divided only in the sense that some want to lock him up now while others want a trial first. So why is President Trump so cheerful?

    “We just got great news from California, a judge ruled for us,” he said, referring to a decision blocking a state law that aimed at keeping Trump off the ballot unless he made his tax returns public.

    The president said a “breaking news” alert had “me holding my breath because I know it’s going to be about me. They’re always about me.” We both laughed.
    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trump-optimistic-impeachment-michael-goodwin

    Democrats LOSE again!!!

    IN a CALIFORNIA COURT of all places!!! WOW!!

    :D

  73. [73] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Yes, it's still clear, still obvious, still simple, and still bad for the united states. Whether it's illegal is a question for constitutional scholars.

  74. [74] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    President Trump says the Bidens scammed China, Ukraine and the USA

    That is a wholly false statement by President Trump and you are not doing this site any favours by continuously repeating these false claims.

    And, don't ask me to provide proof of something that didn't happen. You should know by now that I don't play asinine games like that.

  75. [75] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    By 'you' I mean you, Michale. Stop spreading false claims on this site.

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yes, it's still clear, still obvious, still simple,

    Enlighten me... Blathy did a piss poor job. What justifies impeachment... Or whatever this is called..

    and still bad for the united states.

    Apparently, Democrats don't CARE that it's bad for the United States..

    Apparently, Democrats don't even CARE that it's bad for DEMOCRATS...

    As I said... They wiped out their ENTIRE agenda. They won't be able to do ANYTHING until at LEAST 2025...

    Explain to me the logic of that??

  77. [77] 
    Michale wrote:

    That is a wholly false statement by President Trump and you are not doing this site any favours by continuously repeating these false claims.

    Funny thing is, there are NO FACTS to dispute the claim..

    But there are PLENTY of facts to SUPPORT the claim..

    Starting with Biden's support of China...

    And, don't ask me to provide proof of something that didn't happen. You should know by now that I don't play asinine games like that.

    I know.. NO ONE here is into "FACTS"... Not even the "reality based" forum...

    It's all about "truth".. Democrat "truth"....

    As I said.. The Weigantia of 10 years ago would be APPALLED at the Weigantia of the here and now..

  78. [78] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale, you have no facts to support your claims that Biden did anything wrong vis-à-vis Ukraine or any other matter.

    What I don't understand is why Chris continues to allow your lies about Biden to fill these comments sections.

  79. [79] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale, you have no facts to support your claims that Biden did anything wrong vis-à-vis Ukraine or any other matter.

    I have a LOT more facts against Biden than ya'all have against Trump in the Ukraine fiasco..

    Start with Biden's OWN words how extorted Ukraine to fade the heat from Hunter Biden, apparently AGAINST the wishes of Obama..

    Where is Obama to defend Joe?? For that matter, where is HUNTER to defend his dad??

    Don't you think it's rather ODD that BOTH OF THEM are silent right when Joe Biden needs them most??

    Obama and Hunter are in full CYA mode... They have thrown their VP and their father under the bus..

    THAT should tell you something..

  80. [80] 
    Paula wrote:

    Excellent tweet thread re: Biden vs. Blotus:https://twitter.com/Susan_Hennessey/status/1179819361533616130

    Susan Hennessey
    @Susan_Hennessey
    All presidents and vice presidents and cabinet members have family and friends whose jobs might be impacted by policy. That's why we ask them to observe transparent ethics processes and norms. That is what Biden did. That is what Trump doesn't do.

    To begin with, we ask that presidents and vice presidents divest from personal business holdings. That is what Biden did. That is what Trump didn't do.

    Then we ask that presidents and vice presidents disclose tax returns and financial records to ensure transparency. That is what Biden did. That is what Trump refuses to do.

    Then we ask presidents and vice presidents to observe the laws and norms against nepotism in government, by not hiring their family members. Biden observed those norms and laws. Trump refuses to do so.

    Even when presidents & VPs divest from personal conflicts, disclose finances & avoid nepotism, sometimes questions still arise. Some things they can't recuse from & will impact their own financial interests or family/friends. Things like tax cuts, foreign policy, military action.

    And so we expect them to observe the norms of process in order to bolster legitimacy. By working through places like State Department, relying on interagency recommendations. It creates reassurance that decisions are being made in the national interest and not personal interest.

    What Trump has done is refused to divest from his business, refused to disclose tax returns and financial documents, handed his children government jobs, and then circumvented regular process in the face of opposition from the executive branch and Congress.

    Because Biden observed all ethics rules and norms, and was acting on behalf of the US with international support—a position reached through robust and transparent process—we can have confidence in his actions, even in situations in which someone identifies a possible conflict.

    This is why past presidents and vice presidents have voluntarily observed these rules (at least most of them and usually). Because they know they may need it to preserve political legitimacy. But Trump doesn't care about legitimacy. He is openly unethical and self-interested.

  81. [81] 
    Michale wrote:

    What Trump has done is refused to divest from his business, refused to disclose tax returns and financial documents, handed his children government jobs, and then circumvented regular process in the face of opposition from the executive branch and Congress.

    TRANSLATION:

    Trump has refused to kowtow to Democrat or partisan norms...

    Newsflash for ya'all??

    THAT'S WHAT AMERICANS HIRED HIM TO DO...

    To give a big mighty FRAK YOU to the establishment..

    And THAT is what President Trump is doing.

    And THAT is why he will AGAIN, defeat this Democrat coup attempt..

    And THAT is why he will win by a landslide re-election...

    Ya'all can't hang with the big dogs.. So the big dogs are passing ya'all by.. :D

    OK, poker night.. See ya'all in the AM.. :D

  82. [82] 
    Michale wrote:

    And for the record, the MAJORITY of Weigantians knows that what I said just then is FACTUALLY ACCURATE... :D

  83. [83] 
    Paula wrote:

    Meanwhile in the realm of unintended consequences, rightwing weasels Wohl & Burkman had a press conference complete with a rather flattering poster of EW and the words: Elizabeth Warren, Cougar?

    They released a letter by some 24 yr old (supposedly) idiot claiming he was scarred on his back by EW during some S&M - within minutes the same photo of this guy's scarred back was found on Instagram from 4 yrs ago on which he explained he scarred his back taking down a swingset or something like that.

    Twitter's been having a great time with the whole thing - supporters' responses boil down to: if she did it good for her! But no one believes it.

    (And actually, I think it might just increase her appeal among the rather large cohort of Repub men who seem to like being subservient to dominatrixes.)

    Good times.

  84. [84] 
    Paula wrote:

    Rex Huppke
    @RexHuppke
    ·
    38s
    I missed the Jacob Wohl thing, but I infer that Elizabeth Warren will now change her campaign slogan to "Warren 2020: Unstoppable Sex Monster" and win in a landslide?

  85. [85] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Kick,

    If anyone is impeached (removal? not happening) -- regardless of position held within our government -- their successor or the requisite person/legislative body should be allowed to replace them with another person of their choosing.

    It should be no one's goal -- whether Republican, Democrat, or Independent -- to impeach Trump and Pence simultaneously. Full stop.

    No one, especially Trump, thought he would be elected, so I am just asking as a “what if they were removed” to be cautious. If they were both removed — seeing how Trump appears that he plans on throwing anyone he can under the bus to save himself — then Nancy Pelosi becomes President. But I see what you are saying — there would separate impeachment hearings so that if Trump is removed, Pence would have time to select his own VP before his impeachment hearing begins. The only way they both are out at the same time would be due to a tragedy.

    We move the #2 person to the #1 position, but we don’t move the #3 to the #2 position anymore.

    Here’s another question for you: if tragedy struck and the designated survivor is a Cabinet member who is a lifelong Democrat that a Republican President chose for his Cabinet, would President Survivor still be considered as representing the Republican Party since he was designated by the President to take the office — or would they just NEVER allow a member of the opposing party to be the designated survivor? Again, this is a “but if they DID” kind of question.

  86. [86] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Trump has refused to kowtow to Democrat or partisan norms...

    It should read, ”Trump has refused to kowtow to democratic norms...

    There, now it is correct.

  87. [87] 
    dsws wrote:

    And for the record, the MAJORITY of Weigantians knows that what I said just then is FACTUALLY ACCURATE

    Nope. You post such a volume of cut-and-paste blather that a majority of us don't read most of it. So even if what you said just then was that 2+2=4, we still don't know that what you said was true, because we don't know that that's what you said.

    --

    Trying to dig up dirt on opponents (oppo research) is perfectly lawful -- provided it's done in lawful ways. Soliciting the aid of a foreign entity in a US political campaign is illegal, even if the activity solicited is something that would be ok for a US entity to do.

  88. [88] 
    dsws wrote:

    Dang it, what happened to my </i>?

  89. [89] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Every now and then YouTube posts something genuinely informative. In this case:

    Is the Whistleblower Complaint HEARSAY? - Real Law Review

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xGluGlQgdA

    Quick summary: How Team Trump shyster lawyers are weaponizing a legal term of art in order to deceive the public. Yes, the semi-transcript is hearsay, but hearsay is not what most people think is. Hearsay is not necessarily weak evidence and is routinely admissible as evidence if certain tests are met.

    Forget what you heard on Perry Mason. On second thought, if you are old enough to remember Perry Mason, you have probably already forgotten what you heard.

  90. [90] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Dang it, what happened to my ?

    Do you want me to answer that? :)

  91. [91] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hey!?

  92. [92] 
    TheStig wrote:

    More from Legal Eagle explaining how flawed Team Trump's legal defense is:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BD3my03ioio

  93. [93] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    What are the flaws?

  94. [94] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    CRS

    Get real, since when was "Trying to dig up dirt on someone" against any law??

    Since the late 1700’s, any elected official in this country that uses the power of their office for personal gain was considered in violation of our laws. Hiring a professional investigator to look for dirt is not an issue; trying to get a foreign government to dig up dirt for you is abuse of authority. If the foreign country refuses to help you, why should they expect that you would continue to provide them the same amount of aid that you have in the past?

    Ukraine’s President mentions that his country is looking forward to purchasing more weapons from the US to defend itself from Russian aggression, and Trump responds that he has a favor that he needs them to take care of for him, THOUGH! That is a crime.

  95. [95] 
    Michale wrote:

    No one, especially Trump, thought he would be elected,

    And, as usual, you have NO FACTS to support this claim..

  96. [96] 
    Michale wrote:

    What IS it about you people that you simply have NO FACTS??

  97. [97] 
    Michale wrote:

    Russ,

    Since the late 1700’s, any elected official in this country that uses the power of their office for personal gain was considered in violation of our laws. Hiring a professional investigator to look for dirt is not an issue; trying to get a foreign government to dig up dirt for you is abuse of authority.

    Once again.. you have NO FACTS to support that claim.

    NONE.. ZERO.. ZILCH.. NADA... NOTHING..

  98. [98] 
    Michale wrote:

    DSWS,

    Nope. You post such a volume of cut-and-paste blather that a majority of us don't read most of it. So even if what you said just then was that 2+2=4, we still don't know that what you said was true, because we don't know that that's what you said.

    Then that's on ya'all, not me..

    But I will be happy to clarify..

    The MAJORITY of Weigantians believe that President Trump is going to be re-elected..

    Hope this helps.. :D

  99. [99] 
    Michale wrote:

    Dang it, what happened to my ?

    Did you look under your keyboard??

  100. [100] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trying to dig up dirt on opponents (oppo research) is perfectly lawful -- provided it's done in lawful ways. Soliciting the aid of a foreign entity in a US political campaign is illegal,

    Facts to support??

    No one here said Boo when Hillary solicited the Ukraine or the British or the Russians..

    Why is it a problem only when it's done by a person with a -R after their name???

  101. [101] 
    Michale wrote:

    WHISTLE BLOWER REGISTERED DEMOCRAT

    Oh wow!! Who could have POSSIBLY predicted this!!???

    The "Whistle Blower" was a Democrat plant.. Coached by Schiff-head.. His entire claim is suspect and has NO FACTS to support it..

    THAT is what ya'all are basing IMPEACHMENT on!!???

    BBBBBWWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH

    Shirley, you jest... :D

  102. [102] 
    Michale wrote:

    Docs turn focus on Ukraine dealings, claim Hunter may have made ‘millions’
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/documents-heighten-scrutiny-on-biden-ukraine-dealings-indicate-hunter-may-have-made-millions

    As I said it would..

    Now that it's been PROVEN that the "whistle blower" is nothing but a Democrat plant, coached by Schiff-head with absolutely NO CORROBORATING WITNESSES...

    NOW the focus turns to Biden and his son..

    Who could have POSSIBLY predicted this!??

    Oh... Wait. :D

  103. [103] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bombshell audio emerges in De Niro harassment lawsuit
    https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/de-niro-lawsuit-the-irishman-actor-claiming-harassment-gender-discrimination

    Trump/America haters are scumbags.. Pure and simple..

    THIS is what Democrats are all about.. :eyeroll:

  104. [104] 
    Michale wrote:

    The media failed the public on collusion, and they're failing again on Ukraine
    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-media-failed-the-public-on-collusion-and-theyre-failing-again-on-ukraine

    It's simple..

    Democrats **HAVE NO FACTS** to support impeachment..

    NONE....

    If they did, ya'all would be answering each and every one of my comments with FACTS...

    But ya'all have none.

    And, so the FACTS always win out...

    At least, here in Weigantia..

  105. [105] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    In your haste to prove hypocrisy under every rock and to attribute everything to whether there is a 'D' or 'R' involved, you have obliterated the facts to the point where you believe there is more than one set of facts. Which is preposterous on its face.

    As such, your credibility here is not, how shall I put it, not what it could be.

    With regard to Biden and Trump, there is only one fact to consider: vice president Biden followed all of the ethics rules and norms and was completely transparent with regard to Hunter Biden's role in the Ukrainian energy company Burisma.

    I know this to be true because several people in whom my trust is well placed have said this is true.

    President Trump, on the other hand, has not followed these rules and norms.

  106. [106] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Okay, one too many nots there … don't infer a double negative :)

  107. [107] 
    TheStig wrote:

    EM-93

    Here's the flaw:

    Rudy Giuliani is one of Trump's personal lawyers. Giuliani's lawyer job is to keep his client out of legal trouble. Trump gives him another job...roving ambassador, operating outside of formal diplomatic channels...stretching the law to the breaking point. In this role, Giuliani is operating as Trump's fixer, not as a lawyer. Client Attorney privilege does not apply when your lawyer is helping you conduct a criminal enterprise(See Michael Cohen). Asking Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden can be construed as an abuse of power. Asking the Ukrainians to exchange judicial services for weapons can be construed as bribery. Bribery is an explicit impeachable offense.

    When you open up the gates and let down the drawbridge, that is a pretty weak defense. It could work, but if I were Trump, I'd prefer to try something else.

  108. [108] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I see.

  109. [109] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    No one, especially Trump, thought he would be elected,

    And, as usual, you have NO FACTS to support this claim..

    You thought he would be elected. You are the biggest NO ONE I have ever encountered. These are both FACTS!

  110. [110] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    81

    Trump has refused to kowtow to Democrat or partisan norms...

    Newsflash for you, Mike: What you are flippantly referring to as "Democrat or partisan norms" are laws indubitably contained within the United States Constitution.

    THAT'S WHAT AMERICANS HIRED HIM TO DO...

    The only reason he was "hired" by a minority of voters is because of those very laws contained in the United States Constitution regarding the electoral college.

    To give a big mighty FRAK YOU to the establishment..

    The "establishment" isn't "Democrat or partisan." It's the Constitution of the United States.

    And THAT is what President Trump is doing.

    Trump is breaking laws contained within the Constitution and Federal Statute, and that is impeachable as defined in that very same Constitution.

    And THAT is why he will AGAIN, defeat this Democrat coup attempt..

    Impeachment is not a coup; it too is contained within the laws of the United States Constitution that unfortunately made a criminal and con artist the leader of this country, and you can wallpaper this forum with your misinformation, outright lies, and conspiracy theory bullshit until your cow comes home, but there is no amount of your repetitive spew that will change that fact. Full stop.

  111. [111] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    85

    No one, especially Trump, thought he would be elected, so I am just asking as a “what if they were removed” to be cautious.

    Yes, sir... that's what I figured. :)

    If they were both removed — seeing how Trump appears that he plans on throwing anyone he can under the bus to save himself — then Nancy Pelosi becomes President. But I see what you are saying — there would separate impeachment hearings so that if Trump is removed, Pence would have time to select his own VP before his impeachment hearing begins. The only way they both are out at the same time would be due to a tragedy.

    Or a general election wherein they were on the ballot together and lost via the electoral college count as outlined in the US Constitution, which wouldn't be such a tragedy, in my opinion.

    Here’s another question for you: if tragedy struck and the designated survivor is a Cabinet member who is a lifelong Democrat that a Republican President chose for his Cabinet, would President Survivor still be considered as representing the Republican Party since he was designated by the President to take the office — or would they just NEVER allow a member of the opposing party to be the designated survivor? Again, this is a “but if they DID” kind of question.

    Wow! Good question. Politicians designate their Party via a multitude of Federal Forms. If President Survivor was a Democrat on paper, the tragedy wouldn't change the Party designation. Looking at a list of the past designated survivors shows that not so much happening:

    https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/StateUnionCabinet.pdf

    So I think you're correct that the Party holding the White House isn't going to choose outside their Party... at least not anytime soon. :)

  112. [112] 
    Kick wrote:

    TheStig
    89

    Forget what you heard on Perry Mason. On second thought, if you are old enough to remember Perry Mason, you have probably already forgotten what you heard.

    https://www.cbs.com/shows/perry_mason/

    Of course, there are streaming reruns as an age "cover"... *wink*

  113. [113] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    94

    Yep!

    Ukraine’s President mentions that his country is looking forward to purchasing more weapons from the US to defend itself from Russian aggression, and Trump responds that he has a favor that he needs them to take care of for him, THOUGH! That is a crime.

    Yes, sir.

    Hey, Russ, it's like we discussed last week, these bozos are abusing their power by travelling the globe and using taxpayers' dollars trying desperately to enlist multiple foreign entities to disparage Joe Biden while at the same time trying to rewrite the Mueller report in order to "clear" themselves... and want to hear something really funny, Russ?

    Australia told Lindsey Graham to "pound sand" -- of course, in as "diplomatic" a way as is possible:

    In your letter you made mention of the role of an Australian diplomat. We reject your characterization of his role.

    As you have requested, we will work closely with the Attorney General to resolve any misunderstandings in this matter."

    https://twitter.com/JoeHockey/status/1179699937623379969

    continued ...

  114. [114] 
    Kick wrote:

    ... continued

    They're seriously using taxpayers' dollars in order to purchase dezinformatsiya -- disinformation -- that will disparage Joe Biden while at the same time attempting to rewrite history/the Mueller Report. So Lindsey Graham's contribution to this farce is a letter to Australia attempting to promote the right-wingnut conspiracy theory that Alexander Downer was an anti-Trump agent who played an orchestrated role along with a myriad of global entities in starting the Russia inquiry. In other words, pure unadulterated dumbshit bollocks!

    Senator Lindsey Graham has controversially suggested that Mr Downer, the former high commissioner to the United Kingdom, was "directed" to seek a meeting with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos.

    He wrote that "US intelligence communities" accepted "information from an Australian diplomat who was also directed to contact [Mr] Papadopoulos and relay information … to the Federal Bureau of Investigation".

    That meeting, in a London wine bar, helped spark the Mueller inquiry into Russian election interference, which was repeatedly denounced as a "witch hunt" by the US President and his supporters.

    Donald Trump's supporters often cite a conspiracy theory that the intelligence services of several countries, including Australia, had a secret plan to derail Mr Trump's election, and the origins of the Mueller inquiry are now the subject of a Department of Justice investigation under Mr Trump's Attorney-General William Barr.

    In a letter to Senator Graham, published on Twitter, Mr Hockey pledged Australia's continued support for the Justice Department investigation but rejected the senator's characterisation of Mr Downer's role.
    ...

    Mr Morrison said Mr Downer had acted appropriately in his deals as high commissioner.

    "We've got nothing to hide, we're not the subject of this investigation nor are we a party to it."

    After the May 2016 meeting, Mr Downer said Mr Papadopoulos was confident that Mr Trump would win the upcoming presidential election, because the Russians might use damaging material they had on his rival Hillary Clinton.

    Mr Downer sent this information in a cable back to Canberra, and Australia later passed it on to US intelligence agencies when it became known that the FBI suspected that the Russians had hacked Mrs Clinton's emails.

    Mr Downer has rejected claims he was part of a conspiracy to discredit Mr Trump.

    "This sort of idea that there is a kind of a ASIS-ASIO-MI6-MI5-FBI-CIA-Ukrainian Government conspiracy to bring down the Trump administration, that this is treason, that I should be in Guantanamo Bay … I mean it's a little bit sad that people take that kind of thought seriously," he told the ABC's Russia If You're Listening podcast.

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-04/donald-trump-mueller-inquiry-alexander-downer-conspiracy-theory/11573476

    Buying into this entire line of bollocks requires a person to believe so much bullshit that it's certifiably insane.

    Repeating for effect:

    This sort of idea that there is a kind of a ASIS-ASIO-MI6-MI5-FBI-CIA-Ukrainian Government conspiracy to bring down the Trump administration, that this is treason, that I should be in Guantanamo Bay … I mean it's a little bit sad that people take that kind of thought seriously. ~ Alexander Downer

    Bill Barr and company can move heaven and Earth to rewrite history in their pathetic attempts at a shakedown and cover-up, but it won't change the fact that AIVD -- General Intelligence and Security Service of the Netherlands -- have film of the GRU/Russia hacking the United States, and they informed US just like Australia did because, of course, that's how it works with our allies.

  115. [115] 
    Kick wrote:

    FIFY

    Mike
    98

    The MAJORITY of Weigantians believe that President Trump is going to be re-elected..

    The MAJORITY of Weigantians believe that President Trump is going to be impeached .

  116. [116] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    107

    Well said.

    When you open up the gates and let down the drawbridge, that is a pretty weak defense. It could work, but if I were Trump, I'd prefer to try something else.

    So you're saying you're not an inveterate liar and a criminal? I had a feeling you weren't. :)

  117. [117] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Kick,

    Bill Barr and company can move heaven and Earth to rewrite history in their pathetic attempts at a shakedown and cover-up, but it won't change the fact that AIVD -- General Intelligence and Security Service of the Netherlands -- have film of the GRU/Russia hacking the United States, and they informed US just like Australia did because, of course, that's how it works with our allies.

    SPOT ON! I cannot remember if it was the Guardian or the LA Times that ran a multi-part report on Christopher Steele and the dossier, but I remember being blown away at the number of foreign intelligence agencies that they had verified had alerted the US of Russia’s focus on Trump in the months leading up to our election. They reported countless conversations naming Trump or his campaign staff in recorded conversations of high ranking Russian officials.

    Personally, I think Christopher Steele deserves a medal for his work. He put himself at great risk professionally — and his and his families’ wellbeing — by coming forward and wanting to make sure our intelligence agencies were made aware of what he had uncovered. Yes, much of what he uncovered had been reported by other agencies; but he felt it was his duty as a world citizen to bring it forward because he feared Russia had an asset in Trump. That took a lot of courage!

Comments for this article are closed.