How predictable. Mitch flip flops again.

Looking much like the senile old fool his actions suggest he is, McConnell, in Paducha,  says the Senate would confirm a Supreme Court nominee in 2020, a complete and shameless reversal of his position on the Garland nomination.

Comments by Democrats seem to suggest they are astonished at this hypocrisy.  Why am I not astonished at these "revelations"?

McConnell, being well past the point of any rational thinking, appears oblivious to any possible repercussions from his hypocrisy on this issue and his utter obstructionism of bills presented to the Senate.


Add a comment

McGahn, No Legal Requirement?

So, the Trump defense team, AKA, somewhat generously, "the Justice Department", claims there is no legal requirement for McGahn to testify before Congress?

Neither is there a prohibition that he cannot testify.  

So, being a Private Citizen now, he can do as he wishes.   He can do the right thing, for the Country.


Add a comment

Mueller? Mueller?

What is Mueller and Congress waiting for?

How difficult can it be to set a date?  Certainly Mueller can become a private Citizen at any point and become a "free man" and set his own schedule and permissions?

Oh, and should you like to read and search the released redacted report, you may follow this link:  Link to report


Add a comment

Treason, you say?

So, Trump, the mis-director in Chief, is tweeting about Treason.

In the United States, Treason is narrowly defined by the US Constitution.   

Article 3 - The Judicial Branch
Section 3 - Treason

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Now, perhaps you can tell me how it is that Law Enforcement agencies, doing their due diligence, meet that criterion?  

Can't?  Not astonishing.  

Now, perhaps we can take another look and see what persons actions more closely align with that definition?  

Do I see a show of hands?   

Add a comment