bostonangler

Republicans speaking out in support of President Donald Trump during this week’s impeachment hearings are using a tactic straight out of “The Simpsons,” a former writer on the show said. The GOP argument is that Trump’s attempt to use foreign aid to pressure Ukraine into investigating his political rivals wasn’t a crime because it wasn’t successful. Fox News host Laura Ingraham even said on her show this week that bribery was specifically named as an impeachable offense in the Constitution, but “attempted bribery is not.” Bill Oakley, a writer and showrunner on “The Simpsons,” wrote in The Washington Post that this argument calls to mind the defense used by the malevolent cartoon character Sideshow Bob when he was jailed for attempted murder. He quoted the character: Wow you know it's bad when you are using cartoons for your defense... LOL B/A

I agree... the democrats are doing everything for votes. But I guess the republicans are guilty of the same thing. They just use corporate welfare to keep multi-nationals paying for their campaigns... It's a dirty game and the only ones who get screwed is the American working class. And please don't come back corporations are using tax cuts to help workers... The truth is they used tax cuts to buy back their stock and prop up the share prices while giving their executives bonuses... It like when the banks crashed and we bailed them out. Their executives got big fat checks and not one went to jail... It's a scam. B/A

Yup.... Rudy is a lawyer and they usually know where the bodies are buried. B/A

Rudy Giuliani has said – apparently in jest – he has “insurance” on Donald Trump, should the president and his aides decide to try and blame him for the mounting controversy over the administration’s dealings with Ukraine. A day after Democrats on Capitol Hill called their public witnesses to testify about Mr Trump’s July phone call with the leader of Ukraine and Mr Giuliani’s private outreach to Kiev, the former New York mayor said he believed the president would remain loyal to him. Asked by the Guardian if he was concerned about being “thrown under the bus”, Mr Giuliani replied: “I’m not, but I do have very, very good insurance, so if he does, all my hospital bills will be paid.” The report said Mr Giuliani. who has been serving as Mr Trump’s personal attorney, spoke with a slight laugh in his voice. It also said Mr Giuliani’s own lawyer, Robert Costello, whom he retained as the impeachment pressure intensified, interjected into the interview: “He’s joking.” Mr Giuliani was asked about how confident he was that Mr Trump would not ditch him, amid reports senior Republicans were considering seeking to use him a scapegoat, as a means of protecting the president. Axios said the plan would be to say outreach to Ukraine, in which Kiev was asked to launch an investigation into Joe Biden in exchange for the release of military aid and a state visit, was the work of Mr Giuliani. “So the point is as long as this is a step removed, he’s in good shape,” a Republican member of one of the committees said. “If it’s a step removed from the president, he doesn’t lose any Republicans in the House.” In the weeks since a whistleblower alleged Mr Trump had improperly sought a “quid pro quo” in his July 25 with Volodymyr Zelensky, more and more information has emerged of the role of Mr Giuliani in pushing for such a probe to be launched. Republicans have accused Mr Biden of improperly using his position as vice president to oust an anti-corruption prosecutor who they allege represented a threat to Mr Biden’s son, Hunter. There is no evidence to support the claim. After the whistleblower made the accusation, Democrats launched a formal impeachment investigation. As the probe has advanced, Mr Giuliani has removed himself from the television networks, though he is said to be considering hosting a podcast. He also wrote an op-ed for The Hill, denouncing the investigation as “unprecedented, constitutionally questionable, and an affront to American fair play”. Mr Trump was previously asked Mr Giuliani remained his personal lawyer and appeared reluctant to back him entirely. “I haven’t spoken to Rudy,” he said last month. “I spoke to him yesterday, briefly. He’s a very good attorney and he has been my attorney, yeah sure.” https://www.yahoo.com/news/rudy-giuliani-jokes-insurance-trump-191853483.html Never trust a lawyer.. B/A

Let's start with the people on the call... Oops Trump won't let them talk.... Hmmm I wonder why. Don't you wonder why he won't let the people on the call talk? B/A

If I was accused of something and had prove of my innocence I surely wouldn't hold it back. If I was on a phone call and accused of wrong doing I surely wouldn't edit it. If I was a CEO and the board of directors had voted a decision to make a payment, I wouldn't hold it up so my kid could get in college and then make the payment 2 weeks after the board starting looking into the hold up. That's the problem with Trump, he thinks he owns the company... He has a board of directors and he has been caught with his hand in the cookie jar, then he lied about it. Basically he is running his administration like the mob... If he was innocent he would send his people in to clear him, but instead he stops them... It is like watching the Teflon Don plead the 5th.. For the president to act this way is pathetic and based on the number the American people are beginning to understand you can't believe anything he says. His numbers are shrinking. Even in the end there are always a few people still supporting the evil ruler. Trump is down to his few remaining cult members. B/A

Because they like diversity? I don't know, but I do know Obama didn't call then good people. Like Trump called the Nazis in West Virginia. B/A

Isn't it ironic that Trump won't let his people testify under oath who were actually in the room... What is this guy afraid of? First they edit the phone call transcript, now they won't let his people talk.... He is really backing himself into a corner. When they asked the Republicans coming out of the hearing, don't you want to interview Trump's people who were there, they said no. They don't want to hear the truth they are hiding it... People need to vote all these clowns out. B/A

Why do you suppose the KKK went being democrats to Trump supporters? I would love to hear the reasoning. B/A

That's what I say about the RVVVVVVVVVVvvvvvvvvvvvv!!!! Not soon enough. B/A

I guess we will see. Either way this is coming to an end... B/A

Yup people are looking for ways to hit the lottery. If I was on a jury for one of these cases they wouldn't get a dime. B/A

Well at least we know Sandy Hook isn't fake news... Or some crazy conspiracy by George Soros... B/A

One trillion in debt in 9 months... Boy he really understands economics. B/A

Yeah Trump says a lot of things. Obviously people are beginning to understand you can't believe anything he says. B/A

Obviously the event was real.. Only a fool would say otherwise. However I don't think people should be able to sue the gun maker. That's like saying I can sue a car maker because a drunk hit me... That needs to change. B/A

On Oct. 11, President Trump announced a “phase one” trade deal with China. A month later, it looks more like a phase zero deal. There is, in fact, no trade deal with China. Trump’s negotiators haven’t even agreed among themselves what they want from China, making it a three-way negotiation between China and two factions in the White House. Trump keeps pumping out smoke, saying at a speech in New York City on Nov. 12, “we’re close. A significant phase one trade deal with China could happen. It could happen soon.” But Trump has been peddling false hope about a China trade deal for nearly a year, and like a desert mirage, this alleged deal is always just out of reach. Last December, after meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Trump said, “It’s an incredible deal. It goes down, certainly, if it happens, it goes down as one of the largest deals ever made.” If you’re wondering what deal that was, well, yes—there was no deal. A major tell on the hollow of Trump’s trade taunts is dissension in the White House. Hard-liners such as White House economist Peter Navarro want tariffs on Chinese imports indefinitely and a permanent decoupling between the U.S. and Chinese economies. Moderates such as National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin want to wind down the trade war and get back to normal. Trump himself is a hard-liner who’s in a weak negotiating position and can’t get everything he wants because it would hurt the U.S. economy too much, if he did. Markets are still optimistic about some kind of de-escalation, because … Trump said so? Stocks have drifted up to new record highs lately, in part because of happy feelings on trade. But it’s worth pointing out that there have now been 13 negotiating rounds between U.S. and Chinese diplomats, and several claims of a breakthrough by Trump. The only thing that has come of it all has been escalating U.S. tariffs matched by intensified retaliation by China. Deutsche Bank chief economist Torsten Slok lists the trade war as the top threat to the economy, while pointing out that it has depressed not just manufacturing activity in the United States, but also service sector growth, business spending and CEO confidence. Trump’s China tariffs are now costing the U.S. economy about $75 billion on an annualized basis, according to the American Action Forum. Tariffs due to hit a new class of Chinese imports Dec. 15 would raise the annual cost to around $100 billion. Retaliatory measures by China cost the U.S. economy at least $87 billion more. Farmers and factory workers are bearing the worst of it. Timing a deal around impeachment There’s been one small breakthrough. Trump called off a tariff hike that was supposed to go into effect Oct. 15, as a contribution to the “phase one” agreement. He had already raised tariffs by 25% on $250 billion worth of Chinese imports, and threatened to raise it to 30% on Oct. 15. He didn’t. But the 25% tariff is still there. Nov. 6, 2019, visitors chat near American and Chinese flags displayed at a booth for an American company promoting environmental sensors during the China International Import Expo in Shanghai. (AP Photo/Ng Han Guan) A Chinese trade spokesman recently said the two sides had agreed to roll back tariffs, if a bunch of things fell into place. The U.S. side gave conflicting reactions to that statement, with Trump himself finally saying there’s been no deal to scrap tariffs. There is a deal. There isn’t a deal. There is a deal. There isn’t a deal. The only constant in the whole trade debacle is American shamology. The thinking inside the Beltway now is that Trump may want to ink a starter deal with China around the time Congressional impeachment hearings are likely to culminate, to distract from that lousy news. "We think that impeachment politics will drive President Trump to reach a trade deal with China to give voters something tangible to coalesce around,” consulting firm Sandhill Strategy told clients recently. “A late 2019 deal would likely time well to correspond directly with timing of a House impeachment vote. The president could juxtapose a deal with China as a policy accomplishment against Democrats’ political ‘witch hunt’ against him.” That would only work, however, if Chinese President Xi Jinping agrees to go along with Trump’s timeline. And as impeachment intensifies, Xi may feel emboldened to demand more from his embattled American counterpart. “Phase one” could be a long time coming. https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/trumps-phase-one-trade-deal-with-china-is-a-phantom-144712522.html B/A

A new whistleblower.... But we don't believe whistleblowers, right Trump folks? Fact is, even the Republicans are telling Bevin to let it go. B/A

I think the democrats are in complete disarray... B/A

Look I got negged for saying I don't neg... There are some really sad people out there if this is the highlight of their day.... Geeez B/A

I'm with you Umbertino... I don't neg... If I don't like something or disagree I state my opinion and why... I guess I'm not a snowflake or buttercup hiding in the tall weeds... B/A

I know that... I just try to keep it light... I can't help it if they don't like facts. I know it hurts their feels to see truth. I like your idea, but they would neg anything I put out. There are those who hide and hate. I find it funny that people act tough then hide behind negs... If you don't like me or something I post just say it. There are a few of us on here that get negged even when we agree with the neggers.. Weird stuff. B/A

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Pete Buttigieg has pulled to the top of the pack of Democratic presidential candidates in Iowa for the first time after drawing increased support from nearly every demographic group, according to a Monmouth University poll released on Tuesday. Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, leapfrogged past former Vice President Joe Biden since Monmouth's Iowa poll in August to lead in the state that will in February host the first nominating contest. Buttigieg gained 14 percentage points during that time and now has support from about 22% of likely Democratic caucusgoers. During the same time period, Biden dropped 7 points to 19% support; U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts dropped 2 points to 18% support; and U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont gained 5 points, with 13% support, according to the poll. "While he has made nominally bigger gains among older caucusgoers, you really can't pigeonhole his support to one particular group. He is doing well with voters regardless of education or ideology," Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute, said of Buttigieg's rise. But, with fewer than three in 10 likely caucusgoers saying they are firmly decided on their candidate, Murray said the race remains "extremely fluid" ahead of Iowa's Feb. 3 caucuses, which act as an initial proving ground for U.S. presidential candidates. Sixteen percent said there is a "high possibility" that they could change their minds and another 37% said there is a moderate possibility they could switch allegiances, according to the poll. Other candidates in the crowded field of Democrats vying to take on Republican Donald Trump in November 2020 registered single-digit support in Iowa, the Nov. 7-11 telephone poll of 451 likely caucusgoers showed. The poll also asked voters to pick a second-choice candidate and, when their first and second choices were combined, Buttigieg led the field with 37% support to Warren's 35% support. Among Buttigieg's supporters, Warren and Biden were the second and third choices, with 21% and 20% support respectively. Among Biden's voters, Buttigieg and Warren were the second and third choices, with 22% and 20% support. Among Warren's supporters, 33% chose Sanders as their second choice and 26% chose Buttigieg as their third. https://www.yahoo.com/news/buttigieg-rises-iowa-lead-democratic-185005984.html I've said before I don't think Biden will be the nominee... B/A

I would have never guessed there were Biden supporters here... LOL B/A

Well Scotty, you want to play site police. I'm just telling you, I'm not going to go back and find all your posts filled with name calling, your posted tweets of hate towards other people, religions, etc. But starting now, I'm going to view each post and report anything that is offensive, anything that is derogatory towards someone's religious beliefs and every time you call people rude and undesirable names. The funny thing is I had just put you on ignore two minutes before I got a mod notification. Now I will not laugh off your offensive posts, or pretend they don't hurt people. I will simply report them as you have shown me how to do. B/A