-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
US PoliEra 2020 |OT 1| THE ANTI BENGHAZI (Read Staff Post)
- Thread starter TheHunter
- Start date
- Status
Yeah this Warren v Bernie shit is fucking annoying now. Stupidity and name-calling for like the last 40 pages. Maybe I'll vote steyer now 😆
I was under the impression that he was extremely respected in the senate, but maybe that changed after 2016
At the end of the day he's not a Democrat, and his policies are not in line with those in the Senate
You know, thinking back on the DNA thing since it's being brought up as a point that Warren has a history of dishonesty or whatever... doesn't it really imply the opposite? Like she told the truth about the DNA report she did because she honestly thought she had native american heritage despite the fact that the results themselves were damning. Doesn't say anything positive about her political instincts, but it does show she's willing to tell the truth when there's negative benefit to her.
He actually does have quite a few people that would defend him in Congress. Though, Warren would usually be among them.
OP
OP
Again, I would like to point out here and in OT "BERNIE WARREN SATURDAY NIGHT SMACKDOWN"
"Oh by the way Trump mighta had some people on his watch plot to murder our own citizen(s)".
Why is this not resonating Dear Christ in Heaven.
"Oh by the way Trump mighta had some people on his watch plot to murder our own citizen(s)".
Why is this not resonating Dear Christ in Heaven.
It's huge, for sure. On the other hand, I'm not really surprised at this point.
I really don't think you want to go down the path of assuming that all of Bernie's 40 year old statements remain his beliefs to this day.
Yeah this sort of seems like something that should be talked about more
It's a dumb point in the first place - Bernie didn't have to beat an incumbent Republican after his 1990 election because none could actually challenge him in Vermont. The one who comes across as pedantic is Warren with her bizarre gotcha technicalities.
'You people'
Warren and Sanders are and have been fluid for my number 1 slot as I quite like both of them, a lot. I don't think that either candidate is lying. I'm sorry if you dislike that, but there's no call for this kind of posting.
I mean I'm finding it harder and harder to separate the serious from the parody. So I have no idea if what you posted was parody or weird serious Bernie stanning.
No? Everything she says is in service to her point - that women can win, and that she is a winner:
It's a fantastic soundbite, which is what politics is about, at least in great part. The fact that the Warren campaign had their best hour of fundraising post-debate after this debate says that it - and her performance generally - hit home.
And who in the general electorate is actually going to dig around to find it's a technicality. Someone who's trying to find reasons to not vote for her, sure. But everyone else? Ehhh.
I would like to point out that I see these snakes as green gooses.
BOMBA data dump.
Even if it doesn't get much traction in the news cycle in the next 24 hours, it's going to be a part of the record for the Senate impeachment trial. It'll make it even harder for GOP Senators to refuse witnesses.
Also this latest news almost single-handily kills the narrative of "Trump was interested in fighting corruption" because this sounds like straight-up mob behavior and a lot of it is in writing. I mean one of those text messages it sounds like they were flirting with the idea of doing bodily harm to the ambassador.
The GOP Senators in swing states will pay a heavy price when they acquit Trump after these revelations and possible witness testimony.
Even if it doesn't get much traction in the news cycle in the next 24 hours, it's going to be a part of the record for the Senate impeachment trial. It'll make it even harder for GOP Senators to refuse witnesses.
Also this latest news almost single-handily kills the narrative of "Trump was interested in fighting corruption" because this sounds like straight-up mob behavior and a lot of it is in writing. I mean one of those text messages it sounds like they were flirting with the idea of doing bodily harm to the ambassador.
The GOP Senators in swing states will pay a heavy price when they acquit Trump after these revelations and possible witness testimony.
OP
OP
It's literally Mob hit status.
They were following her every move practically. When she logged off machines and used security doors.
I've long said that nothing could ever surprise me with this administration anymore. This is.... borderline stretching that opinion.
She was the one who testified she feared for her physical safety, ya? Hard to imagine it could have been this bad at the time I heard it.
i will say that while i'm more than fucking critical of how warren and her campaign have handled it since, it's not improbable to me that both parties have a genuine difference of recollection of what was said
Fraud Guarantee really does more groundwork on their frauding than I expected.
They tracked her and then asked if they could do something about her position? That's an assassination plot.
OP
OP
Yeah...which is why I'm shocked the thread in OT and the panic in here isn't bigger.
He was gonna have his murder on 5th avenue moment.
Besides, the core point was that in the modern era, as in the last several election cycles, women have done pretty damned well taking on Republicans. Bernie claiming his seat ages ago doesn't reflect much of anything about the current dynamics.
OP
OP
I mean...it's kinda right there in the whatsapp convo.
The only thing missing is the word "assassinate".
I don't know how you can interpret "contact with security team" any other way
yeah remember her testimony that she was suddenly pulled out of ukraine and sent on the next flight home amid "concern" about her security. what the hell.
The only gullible possibility that even the biggest of Trump supporters can be give is that they were only going to physically harm her, but not kill her. Because the status quo was already intimidation. The only step beyond that is physical harm, and then outright killing her. Thing is, physical harm would implicate them with her telling her side of the story so the only way to prevent that is outright killing her.
Trump supporters would just write it off as a joke and the logic would be "why bother, they were going to get her fired anyway?". They'd also conveniently ignore the surveillance part of it.
OP
OP
Yup. Which is another reason why the "But 29 years and some months isn't 30 years" argument is so flawed - if you're down to arguing those semantics then you've already lost the wider debate of electability in the modern era.
Is Natasha Bertrand going to run for president one day? The work she's done in the press the last few years has been *chef's kiss*
OP
OP
I mean...this is pretty blatant in what it is.
She feared for her safety and was pulled by our own diplomatic core for "security". This lines up with those explanations.
i'm struggling to still understand the implications of this where like
the president of the united states is possibly implicated in a multi-national conspiracy to assassinate one of his own employees
said employee, the united states ambassador to ukraine, was saved because of a department's unilateral actions that directly went against the intentions of the president of the united states to prevent said multi-national conspiracy from successfully assassinating said ambassador
were they tipped off by noticing that she was being stalked? or did they, in march 2019, see these very texts we saw? y'all please tell me i'm fucking wrong?
the president of the united states is possibly implicated in a multi-national conspiracy to assassinate one of his own employees
said employee, the united states ambassador to ukraine, was saved because of a department's unilateral actions that directly went against the intentions of the president of the united states to prevent said multi-national conspiracy from successfully assassinating said ambassador
were they tipped off by noticing that she was being stalked? or did they, in march 2019, see these very texts we saw? y'all please tell me i'm fucking wrong?
OP
OP
It's not setting in yet, but this whole thing is massively disturbing.
- Status