Saying they are hoping to have a vote by the end of the year is way different than promising a vote by the end of the year as you stated.
You are not going to find a quote of her promising that because she is way too experienced a politician to say something like that.
Sally Vixxxxxxens wrote:
agip wrote:
Did you all know that trump junior was booed off the stage in LA by....by....wait for it....not leftists....but right wingers?
The young fascists wanted to ask trump some penetrating questions on white supremacy and ethno-nationalism but even jr is smart enough to know that is not a good look. So they refused to take questions from the audience.
the revolution is eating its own, on the right this time.
So his girlfriend called the kiddie fascists incels and both of them ran off the stage.
Would be very interesting if the alt-right resurrects itself as a force to pull the GOP even more toward Nazism. I don't know how that would end up. But maybe the alt-right isn't going to be quiet and take trump's white supremacy as a blessing - they want more.
The GOP, outside of a few radical fringe nut jobs, want nothing to do with Nazism, or Neo-Nazism or white supremacy. Most are hard-working who fear the crazy socialist ideas that Warren or Sanders might bring to the country. You really think Warren has a chance in Helll in beating Trump when her Medicare-for-all makes it mandatory for those having private insurance to lose that private insurance? You really think Middle America is going to go for that?
dude, c. half of republicans believed that Obama was born in Kenya. Just stop it.
Ciro wrote:
“...it’s like people who go and watch professional wrestling and don’t realize it’s fixed. If they can’t see it when it’s right under their nose, I have no idea how they’re going to realize how wrong they are.”
https://news.yahoo.com/john-cleese-trump-fox-news-100932301.html
Excellent analogy. I think it fits trumpanzees even better.
Here is an example of why I'm leaning to support Elizabeth Warren. Her latest proposal is as wonky as it gets. But it's really important. In her proposal released today entitled, "Fighting Corporate Perjury", she writes:
It is illegal to lie to Congress. It is illegal to lie to a court. It’s even illegal to lie to your shareholders. But corporate interests are regularly and knowingly peddling false claims in order to stop regulatory agencies from acting in the public interest.
And she goes on to explain:
That’s right. Industry players and their allies knowingly submit false and misleading information to regulatory agencies — and instead of being held accountable for lying, that false and misleading information is used as an excuse to block agencies from acting.
This will end in a Warren administration.
I didn't even know about this. I never knew that it was perfectly legal to lie to government agencies.
So corporations sponsor bogus studies and then submit them as evidence to regulators.
Under Warren's proposal, a CEO could go to jail if he lies to the government. That's a big step in the right direction.
Fat hurts wrote:
Here is an example of why I'm leaning to support Elizabeth Warren. Her latest proposal is as wonky as it gets. But it's really important.
In her proposal released today entitled, "Fighting Corporate Perjury", she writes:
It is illegal to lie to Congress. It is illegal to lie to a court. It’s even illegal to lie to your shareholders. But corporate interests are regularly and knowingly peddling false claims in order to stop regulatory agencies from acting in the public interest.
And she goes on to explain:
That’s right. Industry players and their allies knowingly submit false and misleading information to regulatory agencies — and instead of being held accountable for lying, that false and misleading information is used as an excuse to block agencies from acting.
This will end in a Warren administration.
I didn't even know about this. I never knew that it was perfectly legal to lie to government agencies.
So corporations sponsor bogus studies and then submit them as evidence to regulators.
Under Warren's proposal, a CEO could go to jail if he lies to the government. That's a big step in the right direction.
Adam Schiff had the phone transcript in front of him but instead chose to lie to Congress when he mischaracterized its contents. Should he go to jail since he lied?
Another lie, it wasn’t verbatim, because fat boy wouldn’t release a verbatim record. Which is convenient for liars & tr8rs like you.
Trollminator wrote:
jesseriley wrote:
Maybe we should nickname her Haley’s Comet. Comes in from outer space occasionally to enlighten us. During these long nights of the trump era, she acts like she’s the fvcking sun!
This was good, thx. She’s not fooling many. She forgot that these days you are either on the trump train or you aren’t. Getting on it and hopping off still stains you badly. She’s $hit stained for good.
The reason three Trump Administration "officials" stabbed her in the back is because it is so obvious, that by groveling to Trump, that she is angling to be Trump's running mate in 2020. It should come as no surprise that Pence will not be on the 2020 ticket. So, knives are out. Pandering is in.
Fat hurts wrote:
Here is an example of why I'm leaning to support Elizabeth Warren. Her latest proposal is as wonky as it gets. But it's really important.
In her proposal released today entitled, "Fighting Corporate Perjury", she writes:
It is illegal to lie to Congress. It is illegal to lie to a court. It’s even illegal to lie to your shareholders. But corporate interests are regularly and knowingly peddling false claims in order to stop regulatory agencies from acting in the public interest.
And she goes on to explain:
That’s right. Industry players and their allies knowingly submit false and misleading information to regulatory agencies — and instead of being held accountable for lying, that false and misleading information is used as an excuse to block agencies from acting.
This will end in a Warren administration.
I didn't even know about this. I never knew that it was perfectly legal to lie to government agencies.
So corporations sponsor bogus studies and then submit them as evidence to regulators.
Under Warren's proposal, a CEO could go to jail if he lies to the government. That's a big step in the right direction.
Wouldn't you like to hear the other side of this before you buy a politician's argument?
I sure would.
Usually in these situations a more accurate representation of the facts of the case is eye-opening.
Fat hurts wrote:
I didn't even know about this. I never knew that it was perfectly legal to lie to government agencies.
So when you read that statement from Warren, did you even bother to think if it passed the smell test at a minimum?
Knowingly lying to government agencies is called fraud and includes such charges as :
-misleading investors;
-securities fraud;
-criminal conspiracy;
agip wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
Here is an example of why I'm leaning to support Elizabeth Warren. Her latest proposal is as wonky as it gets. But it's really important.
In her proposal released today entitled, "Fighting Corporate Perjury", she writes:
And she goes on to explain:
I didn't even know about this. I never knew that it was perfectly legal to lie to government agencies.
So corporations sponsor bogus studies and then submit them as evidence to regulators.
Under Warren's proposal, a CEO could go to jail if he lies to the government. That's a big step in the right direction.
Wouldn't you like to hear the other side of this before you buy a politician's argument?
I sure would.
Usually in these situations a more accurate representation of the facts of the case is eye-opening.
Oh agip, don't you know? It's the other side that buys into everything they hear. Not me of course. I can't be tricked or told what to think! It's the other side that falls victim to that!
Trump Admin "Officials" wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
This was good, thx. She’s not fooling many. She forgot that these days you are either on the trump train or you aren’t. Getting on it and hopping off still stains you badly. She’s $hit stained for good.
The reason three Trump Administration "officials" stabbed her in the back is because it is so obvious, that by groveling to Trump, that she is angling to be Trump's running mate in 2020. It should come as no surprise that Pence will not be on the 2020 ticket. So, knives are out. Pandering is in.
She would take a huge risk being his VP when he would be neutered in a second term. Don’t think she would be that dumb. Could you imagine how crazy unhinged he would be when everyone starts to put him in the back burner as they look ahead? She would make a run for POTUS in 2024 though.
Sally Vix wrote:
X-Runner wrote:
When you start a post with a lie, how to you expect people to read the rest of the post or respond to it?
Here is where she is "hoping" to have a House vote by end of year. I have heard a few times how she has promised but still trying to find that.
https://www.wnd.com/2019/09/heartbroken-pelosi-fast-tracks-impeachment/
You have been told this already. She did not promise, you fool.
Trollminator wrote:
Trump Admin "Officials" wrote:
The reason three Trump Administration "officials" stabbed her in the back is because it is so obvious, that by groveling to Trump, that she is angling to be Trump's running mate in 2020. It should come as no surprise that Pence will not be on the 2020 ticket. So, knives are out. Pandering is in.
She would take a huge risk being his VP when he would be neutered in a second term. Don’t think she would be that dumb. Could you imagine how crazy unhinged he would be when everyone starts to put him in the back burner as they look ahead? She would make a run for POTUS in 2024 though.
I’ll add that Pence never had a shot at POTUS unless it was through a trump removal, so for him it made total sense.
I watched Nikki’s NBC interview this morning and it was quite disappointing. She’s really no different than Graham or Ryan.
On the topic of her snitching on Kelly and Rex, she was asked directly about whether she told them to say something to trump and she completely danced around the question. Obviously she did not.
She then claimed trump is a truthful person, which is just dumb and factually wrong.
On Ukraine the most she could say is that it’s not a good “practice” to ask a foreign country to investigate an “American”. That is just poor quality hedging. I predict she will be publicly all-in on trump soon and will just blame the media for being harsh and unfair.
This move with the book is just fkn dumb. The things seemingly intelligent people will do for money and power. Left the admin to shield her reputation in hopes of obtaining power again and then she flushed whatever goodwill she had down the toilet overnight with the crazy a$$ kissing. No backbone and no principles, just another instant lapdog. There is a total of like 3 people on the right who are willing to call out trump.
What will be of all these a$$kissers once Trump is out?
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
https://saraacarter.com/horowitz-report-will-be-damning-criminal-referrals-likely/
Good luck with that.
Tr8r!
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
https://saraacarter.com/horowitz-report-will-be-damning-criminal-referrals-likely/
Fox News host Sean Hannity has ignored calls from network execs that he stop promoting frequent guest Sara Carter as an “investigate reporter.”
Network executives have made the request in response to her reporting not being vetted or meeting the network’s editorial guidelines, according to Mediaite.
at the roger stone trial, Gates just directly contradicted Trump's sworn testimony to Mueller that Trump never spoke about Wikileaks before the election.
they are both liars, gates and trump, but hey there's your collusion/conspiracy if gates is right.
right there. And perjury.
add obstruction. Add abuse of power and he's the ideal GOPer.
He did it. All of the crimes. You chose well, GOP, You got your man.
From Congressman Dan Bishop NC-9th District:
https://twitter.com/jdanbishop/status/1194060811116957696
And now this:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/icig-complaint-ukraine-whistleblower.amp?__twitter_impression=true
agip wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
Here is an example of why I'm leaning to support Elizabeth Warren. Her latest proposal is as wonky as it gets. But it's really important.
In her proposal released today entitled, "Fighting Corporate Perjury", she writes:
And she goes on to explain:
I didn't even know about this. I never knew that it was perfectly legal to lie to government agencies.
So corporations sponsor bogus studies and then submit them as evidence to regulators.
Under Warren's proposal, a CEO could go to jail if he lies to the government. That's a big step in the right direction.
Wouldn't you like to hear the other side of this before you buy a politician's argument?
I sure would.
Usually in these situations a more accurate representation of the facts of the case is eye-opening.
Of course I would.
What facts are in question here?
Do you have a more accurate representation to present?