Take This Impeachment And Shove It...

[Teallaura]

I'm just reporting what I was told. That's why I put "misquoted" in quotation marks.

Jimminy Christmas keep your knickers on.

Yeah - no. You called my source into question so I addressed it - and ended up calling your source into question. Fox or Politico could have made an error - but it hasn't been shown. But Feinstein's office? Are you really okay with that?

[Teallaura]

The democrats all walked back their comments today and put their confidence in Pelosi.

Democrats got cowtowed into bowing to Pelosi's insanity, more like.

[Teallaura]

Yes, democrats can have and voice differing opinions as to political tactics, but ultimately they'll also put their trust in the hands of she who they respect the most.

Are you okay? Seriously, this is creepy.

[Mountain Man]

Are you okay? Seriously, this is creepy.

I think it's his attempt at mimicking firstfloor's wit, but he's not nearly as clever a wordsmith.

[DivineOb]

Yeah - no. You called my source into question so I addressed it - and ended up calling your source into question. Fox or Politico could have made an error - but it hasn't been shown. But Feinstein's office? Are you really okay with that?

I called Feinstein's office because I'm a constituent who wanted to hear what they had to say. I reported what they said because I thought it would be of general interest. If they had said they stand by the quote I would have reported that as well as a matter of general interest. If they had said she will put out a clarifying statement later today I would have reported that as a matter of general interest etc.

I just called her office and here is what I was told.

The senator was "misquoted" in that article.
The Senator has always and continues to support Pelosi on her handling of impeachment.
An impeachment trial must include all relevant witnesses and documents.

Make of that what you will.

If you think I called your source into question then quote me, exactly, where I did that.

[Tassman]

If the articles never make it to the Senate then they're effectively voided, so if the Senate votes to dismiss before Nancy can make up her scattered mind, then it will be like impeachment never happened.

[rogue06]

Yes, democrats can have and voice differing opinions as to political tactics, but ultimately they'll also put their trust in the hands of she who they respect the most.

So you're saying that effectively the Democratic Party is a cult.





Well they certainly have drank the Impeachment Kool-Aid

[rogue06]

But it sure exposes the constantly repeated claim that it must be done post haste with no delay as nothing more than yet another lie.

[rogue06]

I think it's his attempt at mimicking firstfloor's wit, but he's not nearly as clever a wordsmith.

He's simply, as he said, "not the brightest bulb in the socket."

[Teallaura]

Since this is in direct response to my post about the quote and it uncategorically disputes that quote, it very definitely calls my source into question.

I just called her office and here is what I was told.

The senator was "misquoted" in that article.
The Senator has always and continues to support Pelosi on her handling of impeachment.
An impeachment trial must include all relevant witnesses and documents.

Make of that what you will.

You posted it so it follows that you have brought the question. I later noticed that MM had posted the same quote from a tweet so I suppose you could have been responding to his post but either way, you brought the authenticity of the quote into question.

But this is what should be of concern, especially to a constituent:

By BURGESS EVERETT and HEATHER CAYGLE

01/08/2020 01:52 PM EST
Updated: 01/08/2020 03:34 PM EST

Copied approximately 4:55 am CST on 1/10/20 Note no change from the previous - does Feinstein's office not know how to contact Politico?

[firstfloor]

Lock him up -
WaPo

[rogue06]

Since this is in direct response to my post about the quote and it uncategorically disputes that quote, it very definitely calls my source into question.




You posted it so it follows that you have brought the question. I later noticed that MM had posted the same quote from a tweet so I suppose you could have been responding to his post but either way, you brought the authenticity of the quote into question.

But this is what should be of concern, especially to a constituent:

By BURGESS EVERETT and HEATHER CAYGLE

01/08/2020 01:52 PM EST
Updated: 01/08/2020 03:34 PM EST

Copied approximately 4:55 am CST on 1/10/20 Note no change from the previous - does Feinstein's office not know how to contact Politico?

Apparently she is not saying that she was misquoted but rather that "I did not mean to say that."

[rogue06]

Apparently she is not saying that she was misquoted but rather that "I did not mean to say that."

And she isn't the only Democrat yesterday who has walked back their criticism of Pelosi for refusing to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate.

The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Adam Smith (D-WA) told CNN's John Berman on New Day yesterday that "it is time" for Pelosi to send the articles to the Senate but has since retracted his call.

In any case, a number of Democrats in Congress are getting tired of Pelosi's games and are telling her to stop:

But some Senate Democrats are getting restless after Congress returned this week and an end to the stand-off over the impeachment articles did not appear imminent. McConnell ticked off comments from several rank-and-file Senate Democrats on Tuesday advocating for Pelosi to transmit the articles to the Senate, urging Schumer to "listen to his own members" and start the impeachment trial.

[One Bad Pig]

Well yeah, that's the point, OBP. You said "more accurately, she got the idea from watching John Dean on CNN" but you simply repeated what the article said which was that "she got the idea from watching John Dean on CNN." Just sayin!

Why, then, did you accuse me of "obviously" not having read the article? Derp.

[Mountain Man]

Lock him up -

WaPo

The Huber head-fake.

It would be interesting to see the actual details of the investigation. I wonder if it's another case of "Despite there being clear evidence that crimes were committed, no reasonable prosecutor would press charges"?