It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

House Dems '''Rules, we don't need no stinking rules"

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Ironic you bring up Chappelle, I'm literally sitting in my office fighting off laughter because of the newest thread talking about Condoleeza Rice... I can't hear her name without laughing about the bit Dave did saying "Condoleeza rice... Condoleeza rice sounds like a Mexican dish."




posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: KYRick
I agree
I would like to see them follow congressman green's example and follow the house rules
He is nuts, but he has integrity



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Oh, you mean like reparations the Dems keep promising?



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:19 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

They are forging ahead on investigations and hearings.
Not on impeachment....



YET.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody

They are forging ahead on investigations and hearings.
Not on impeachment....



YET.



Not according to your hero Nadler.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker



and



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Hey here's an idea.... just dont get an abortion... problem solved for you.

Anyone else... is nobodies business but there own.

You dont need a law about it to live it you know.

And you should not care if someone else does because its none of your business.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

Eleven hearings on Benghazi.

Let me know when we get near that number.


Wake me up.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody

They are forging ahead on investigations and hearings.
Not on impeachment....



YET.


which they should have had a vote on the house floor for
they do not have the votes for that so nadler is setting precedent



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

No one is planning on that. LOL
That is some joke there.

Blue wave coming for the second time.

When a republican wins by only 2% against a democrat in a red state the party is in trouble.
And don't think that outcome is not concerning them because it is.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU2018




posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: seeker1963

Eleven hearings on Benghazi.

Let me know when we get near that number.


Wake me up.

the fact that you do not understand the difference between the two is not surprising
law of thelema follower and all



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme



No one is planning on that. LOL That is some joke there.

so then you admit the witch hunt from the house judiciary committee?
nice
thanks for that



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody

No one is planning on that. LOL
That is some joke there.

Blue wave coming for the second time.

When a republican wins by only 2% against a democrat in a red state the party is in trouble.
And don't think that outcome is not concerning them because it is.


You are something else. This thread is about how you Dems cant win so you have to change the rules but you want to go abortion and when that doesn't work you run to a race that the GOP just WON to hold a seat that all MSM said they'd lose. Keep it up,

How about the rule changing thing they are trying to do. Any comment on that or just more deflecting?
edit on 12-9-2019 by KYRick because: phone typing



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

They agree on having hearings.

They agree on getting the story out in front of the American people.

They agree that this is necessary. Cover it enough that everybody hears the testimony.

It's more likely American will speak with their votes and impeachment wont even be necessary.
The obstruction of justice fact is still out there.
When he is no longer president he won't be exempt from being charged.
Cohen is spilling all to NYS. They are also waiting for him.
And this crowd will still be crying foul.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

Facts like trump obstructed justice over and over again?

No one is ignoring that fact. Much to the chagrin of djt.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

One step at a time.

No one wants to rush this.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:33 AM
link   
All the problems in this country they could work on solving, but no. Let's start impeachment with no evidence and not even enough votes to support it.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Did anyone recognize the woman who was standing behind Nadler during his press conference who was snickering the whole time? I'm surprised any of them was able to keep a straight face.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme



They agree on having hearings.

who agreed? nadler?



They agree on getting the story out in front of the American people.

mueller testified
in public on the magic picture box
still not enough support for impeachment



They agree that this is necessary. Cover it enough that everybody hears the testimony.

who again nadler?
repeating the lie over and over wont make it any more true.
why is a simple floor vote so hard for you people?
perhaps because even your own party doesnt think an actual crime has been committed? you know the thing required for impeachment?



It's more likely American will speak with their votes and impeachment wont even be necessary.

thats not what the odds makers are saying
www.oddsshark.com...
trump +110
warren +425
so it is not more likely, you are wrong again



The obstruction of justice fact is still out there.

no it is not or the house dems would take a floor vote
even the house dems dont believe that bs




top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join