When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I don't think they want the Republicans doing a very public investigation of both the methods or the truth. There are way too many dirty hands in the swamp.
I saw Ted Cruz interviewed last week. He said that the trial in the Senate could easily go for 4-6 weeks, maybe more, due to procedural rules. Also, that such an important event would require 10-hour days, 6 days a week, and every senator had better be there. It’s just unfortunate that it would coincide with primary campaigning and the Iowa caucuses when so many Democratic senators are running.
He even managed to mostly contain how happy he was to point that out.
As someone who actually is "the media," in the sense that I am in management at the #1 rated TV station in Chicago, I can assure you that I am not a democratic senator, nor are any democratic senators on our news staff, our management team, or our board of directors.
As someone who actually is "the media," in the sense that I am in management at the #1 rated TV station in Chicago, I can assure you that I am not a democratic senator, nor are any democratic senators on our news staff, our management team, or our board of directors.
If you believe that I am lying, PM me.
Did you run the story that an unseen video on YT triggered people without internet access to attack and kill a US ambassador?
I saw Ted Cruz interviewed last week. He said that the trial in the Senate could easily go for 4-6 weeks, maybe more, due to procedural rules. Also, that such an important event would require 10-hour days, 6 days a week, and every senator had better be there. It’s just unfortunate that it would coincide with primary campaigning and the Iowa caucuses when so many Democratic senators are running.
He even managed to mostly contain how happy he was to point that out.
At this point they all appear to be opining on the matter so that they can say "See, I told you so" when the actual event unfolds.
Newt Gingrich did an interview that I watched last night on YouTube where he laid out why he feels it will be a short review and aquittal in the Senate.
He used some of the same points mentioned on this thread.
My sense is that it will be blind luck if anybody reads the future correctly.
Braineack has as good a chance as anybody of being right.
On a side note it looks like Ginsberg might still be breathing when the ball drops in Times Square in a few days.
A year ago I would have bet money that her death certificate would have been signed by now.
That is one tough old lady.
If you want to see an ugly mess just wait till they try to appoint her replacement.
It will make the Kavanaugh hearings look like a good time.
Been thinking it might be best to hike the Appalachian Trail for a month or two when that is taking place.
No, because that's tinfoil hat territory. Believe it or not, the actual mainstream media does have done editorial sense. Not saying we never make mistakes, but we try to avoid obviously unfounded conspiracy theories.
A working clock has 100% chance of being correct at least twice a day.
I hope you are tossing a mis-statement out there on purpose because it is wrong on so many levels.
The actual parable is something like;
A broken clock is right twice a day.
When you think on the subject you figure out that a working clock that is off is probably always incorrect every minute of every day and night.
If it is running 24 minutes slow, it is ALWAYS off by 24 minutes and therefore never correct.
Toss military 24 hour cycle into the mess and you would be down to being correct once every 24 hours for an old school clock with hands.
New digital clocks are usually just blank when broken so the whole saying goes out the window.
They would be either right all the time, or wrong all the time, or just blank.
All this rolls your 100% down quite a bit.
You did get me to scratching my head as I was reading your post.
No, because that's tinfoil hat territory. Believe it or not, the actual mainstream media does have done editorial sense. Not saying we never make mistakes, but we try to avoid obviously unfounded conspiracy theories.
Say what?
Is no one going to mention the 800lb. gorilla in the room?
(hint: it rhymes with Russian confusion)
Holy **** Joe -- the left can't meme. also was that from 2016? You're ******* obsessed with Flynn. He's the most nobody of all the procedural crimes used to distract you from the truth.
So... 50 years? I read many articles that say plus or minus the same thing... based on "current reserves", that's the best guess. But, "current reserves" continue to increase based on new extraction methods and better measuring... but the rate of technology increase is slowing, so nobody expects the amount to double, but I think all roads point to a 10-15% increase over the next 20-30yrs. In any case, maybe we've got 2trillion barrels left that encompass every drop we'll ever be able to economically extract... which may push the end out to 2060'ish. I'm spitballing based on 30 minutes of Lougle'ing. All this of course is taken with a grain of salt because through my entire public school education (80's, early 90's), every one of my teachers said we'd be out of oil by now.
So 50 years from now is well within my lifetime... modern medicine improvements should mean I'm the #1 stunnah at the old-folks home where the Betties form a line outside my door... and I pondered the rough cost of the Ferrari 288 GTO around 2070 or so when they become paperweights... thinking maybe the price would come down since you can't drive them anymore and I could afford to have one just to sit in and make vroom-vroom sounds.
Holy **** Joe -- the left can't meme. also was that from 2016? You're ******* obsessed with Flynn. He's the most nobody of all the procedural crimes used to distract you from the truth.
I think it was 2017. Like I said, it was an oldie.
Has nothing to do with Flynn. I've just been going through the archives of some self-loathing white liberal cuck who draws a lot of this kind of stuff, and felt a Brainey vibe when I saw this one. He mostly focuses on making it seem that all conservatives are literally *****, but also spends time mocking democrats who aren't socialists (he seems to loathe Biden in particular.)
And, honestly, I think I'd have preferred to be in the previous '20s, despite the prohibition, and the great depression, and the Polio, and the rise of communism, and the fact that Ayn Rand hadn't died yet.
Because the complete and total normalization of stuff like this* is what we have to look forward to in the coming decade:
* = think I'm exaggerating? Go back in time a hundred years, to Dec 27, 1919, and ask how crazy it would be if women could vote. Go back 50 more years and ask the same about Negroes. Given enough time, things which seem absurdly radical to the previous generation seem obviously correct to the next.
also remember, the premise of all this impeachment business is that he's doing it for his own personal benefit in the election -- and what they are doing is purely political for personal benefit in the elections.
also consider, there must actually be election-opponent, damaging-worthy **** to uncover that the democrats dont want you to know about.
also remember, the premise of all this impeachment business is that he's doing it for his own personal benefit in the election -- and what they are doing is purely political for personal benefit in the elections.
also consider, there must actually be election-opponent, damaging-worthy **** to uncover that the democrats dont want you to know about.
I honestly don't know what that means (is it quanon stuff?), but here's a picture none the less:
Any takers on how long before that baby starts transition? You know damn well they picked a name that goes both ways or in the middle (Pat would have been too obvious) and are praying hard to the Flying Spaghettin Monster it won't just be another straight white male.
12-23-2019, 04:47 PM
0
