Speaker Pelosi Rolls Out Plan-D: “Bribery”…

Plan-A  “collusion” didn’t work, because it never happened; no Americans colluded or conspired with Russia.

Plan-B “obstruction” didn’t work, because it never happened; the FBI and Robert Mueller completed their investigations without impediment.

Plan-C “whistleblower” doesn’t work, because the hearsay claims never happened.  The request to investigate corruption and potential Ukraine interference with the 2016 U.S. election was actually requested by many U.S. officials prior to President Trump.

Today Speaker Poli-Grip Pelosi moves to Plan-D, “bribery”.  See if you can make heads-or-tails of this logic:

 

.

ps. Please don’t point out to Pelosi (or Lawfare) that “bribery” as defined under the constitution for impeachment speaks to the President receiving cash or value to take an action for the benefit of a foreign power.  [Pelosi has the entire thing reversed]

If paying for, or threatening to withhold payment of, taxpayer money to a foreign power in order to change their behavior was considered “bribery”; then the entire foreign policy of the United States for the past century was built on bribes.

Think about it….

What was the Obama delivered pallets of cash to Iran for?  An obvious bribe.  Why do we send money to any country?  Why do we give money to NATO or the U.N?  To get them to do something we want… and that, according to Pelosi, is a bribe.

D’oh

She’s a dingbat.

Please let them push this plan-D.  This is too darned funny

 

This entry was posted in Big Stupid Government, Impeachment, Legislation, Nancy Pelosi, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

255 Responses to Speaker Pelosi Rolls Out Plan-D: “Bribery”…

  1. delighteddeplorable says:

    Exactly, Sundance. They are strongly encouraged to keep up their stellar work. Theater of the absurd on steroids.

    Liked by 9 people

    • WhiteBoard says:

      hi delight.

      Bottom line – correct me if im wrong… but,

      if ukraine wants aid , they dont have to be afraid of trump, right? they can simply go along with the impeachment, have him removed, and the DEMS will give them whatever they want and more? Correct?

      the dems talking point is that the Ukrainian president is to afraid to say anything because they are dependant or AID for their safety from Russia. my POINT ABOVE DESTROYS THAT.

      Liked by 6 people

      • delighteddeplorable says:

        WB, my understanding is aligned with yours. Further, I’ve read that Ukraine has received more aid and has been treated better by POTUS than they ever were by Zero. He withheld $$ and sent blankets or some damn thing, I believe.

        So yes, this is the latest specious argument from the demented loons. Good grief. Grasping at straws, much?

        Liked by 3 people

        • Delighted, that is true. National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien said in his Oct. 27th MTP interview with Chuck Todd that in 2014, the Ukranians told him that they couldn’t get bullet-proof vests, kevlar or offensive weapons; they couldn’t defend themselves. Instead Obama sent them blankets and MRE’s (meals ready-to-eat). No wonder the Ukranians love President Trump almost as much as we do!

          Liked by 4 people

    • Pale rider says:

      “President Trump used two squares of toilet paper ‘IMPEACH’ it’s in the constitution, promise.”

      Liked by 6 people

      • James Carpenter says:

        Two scoops ice cream, two squares of toilet paper. An obvious case for impeachment as the clear and present danger Trump is to a large number of rice bowls..
        But after plans “A” thru “D”, what’s to follow?
        Plan ZED. Kill the SOB.
        I doubt this conceptual leap is anything new to some of the deeper State and assorted actors.

        Liked by 1 person

    • milktrader says:

      She is a complete idiot

      Liked by 5 people

    • Fubu says:

      Poli-grip Pelosi…Sundance when you aren’t making me educated, you’re making laugh. Thanks for what you do.

      Liked by 6 people

  2. Free Speech says:

    D as in dumba$$.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. LouisianaTeaRose says:

    Hey, Sundance….here’s your “logic”….

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    😏😉😒

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Shyster says:

    Yeah, when candidate Trump promised to build a wall on the Southern border in return for a vote I guess he bribed me. Rut Roh!

    Liked by 12 people

    • chipin8511 says:

      The person who wrote this is a college (law) student. Perhaps there is hope for us after all.

      Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al:

      We have stuck together since the late 1950’s for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.
      Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let’s just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.

      Here is our separation agreement: –Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

      –We don’t like re-distributive taxes so you can keep them.

      –You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU

      –Since you hate guns and war, we’ll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA, and the military.

      –We’ll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and the coal mines, and you can go with wind, solar and bio-diesel

      –You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, and Rosie O’Donnell. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them.

      –We’ll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart, and Wall Street.

      –You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, hippies, druggies, and illegal aliens.

      –We’ll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEOs, and rednecks

      We’ll keep Hannity, Carlson, and Bibles, and give you NBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, and Hollywood

      –You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we’ll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us.

      –You can have the peaceniks and war protesters.

      –When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we’ll help provide them security.

      -We’ll keep our Judeo-Christian values.

      –You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness and Shirley McClain. You can also have the UN. but we will no longer pay the bill.

      –We’ll keep the SUV’s, pickup trucks, and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Volt, Tesla, and Leaf you can find.

      –You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors.

      –We’ll keep “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” and “The National Anthem.”

      –I’m sure you’ll be happy to substitute “Imagine,” “I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing,” “Kumbaya “or” We Are the World.”

      –We’ll practice trickle-down economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.

      –Since it often so offends you, we’ll keep our history, our name and our flag.

      Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I’ll bet you might think about which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.

      Sincerely,

      John J Wall, Law Student and American!

      P. S. Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin & Charlie Sheen, George Clooney, Barbara Streisand, and (Hanoi) Jane Fonda with you.

      P.S.S. And you won’t have to press 1 for English when you call our country.

      Forward This Every Time You Get It! Let’s Keep This Going, Maybe Some of It Will Start Sinking In!

      Liked by 16 people

      • PinotNoir says:

        Totally disagree with “similar landmass” point. Libs live in city hives. Conservatives live in the country. No conservative should have their farm “given” to the left. Divide the land by county vote, better yet by precinct. The myth of the “left coast” needs a stake driven through it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Derek D. says:

        What a wonderful article. If I’d had a few more students like this, I might’ve kept on teach-ing college political science. As it was, I walked away from my teaching position 18 years ago when the students were so dumbed down they weren’t worth saving anyway.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Bendix says:

    Imagine how bad whatever she’s in up to her neck in is, to keep her in front of the public doing this?

    Liked by 14 people

  6. ALEX says:

    Keep it up Nancy. These congressional hearings never live up to the hype and the more they push this one the better.

    I think she completely snapped after walking out of the last White House meeting and quickly started this charade.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Mo says:

    Remind the twitterverse why Devlin Barrett is concerned that IG is not allowing those in his upcoming report to take notes and only review parts relevant to their actions in a SCIF.

    Liked by 1 person

    • WhiteBoard says:

      good catch Mo!

      We all know who this guy is because of this site. . . its kinda fun to watch the conspirators (that think they are anonymous) as they out their groups intentions right? =]

      Maggiehaberman is the biggest dunce… she shouldnt write a single thing in public …

      Liked by 4 people

    • Jederman says:

      So devin is obviously not a lawyer. He’s just a must corrupt poodle prancing around in a “journalist” costume.

      devin, if the report contains “inaccurate” information that is the IG’s problem, and it should be easy for you to prove it when you appear before the judge, right.

      Like

  8. trapper says:

    Hahahahahahahaha. They got nothing.

    The impeachment “inquiry”

    Liked by 7 people

  9. lotbusyexec says:

    Can’t fix crazy or bad dental work work. My Plan D is for PDJT/Barr/Durham to DROP the Dang Hammer (11/15/19). Tomorrow would suit me just fine. How bout y’all?–

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Preppin247 says:

    Everytime ya think the sims couldn’t dig their hole any deeper they grab a bigger shovel.. Congrats San Fran you can really pickem

    Liked by 1 person

  11. spoogels says:

    Glen Beck has an EXCELLENT ANALYSIS

    OBAMA, SOROS AND HILLARY ENGINEERED A COUP IN UKRAINE USING USAID
    $5BILLION WENT MISSING

    Liked by 3 people

  12. Emuuuu says:

    Poli-Grip Pelosi … guaranteed to get water shooting out of my nose when I read that one!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  13. hokkoda says:

    Actually, the articles of impeachment will contain all of those things.

    Like

    • Mark Wilson says:

      Was just about to post the same. Things are getting interesting.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Mark Wilson says:

        My favorite comment below the article.

        PortlanDon • 17 minutes ago

        President Trump: This will drive the press nuts. It was a good Idea Bill.

        AG Barr: Yeah. I like screwing with the press. They’re so stupid. I’m going to wave my arms around a little. Make them freak out.

        President Trump: (audible laugh) They’re gullible. Aren’t they? How’s the family? Everybody good?

        AG Barr: All fine. Did you catch that 49’ers Seahawks game? Wow. That was squeaker, huh?

        Liked by 6 people

  14. Somebody's Gramma says:

    I actually felt sorry for Nancy in that clip. She sounded like someone I love dearly who has dementia, remembers things completely the opposite of what they are, confuses terms and ideas, but stubbornly insists she is right. She should retire. But, on the other hand, if she’s that stubborn, may she go down in flames.

    Liked by 4 people

    • snellvillebob says:

      Nancy really is not looking well.

      Liked by 2 people

      • We the people know says:

        Here’s a shout out to Nancy’s plastic surgeon, who pulled her eyebrows up way too high, thereby making Nancy look perpetually surprised and more than a little crazy.
        She’s really falling apart. Sad, not sad.

        Liked by 1 person

    • ristvan says:

      Somebody’s Gramma, I am somebody’s Grandpa times two kids for three grand grandkids at present.

      Just so you know, have been there and done that, twice, personally, with my elders. Pelosi has all the symptoms of onset vascular dementia, caused by multiple ministrokes. Dyskinesia. Fumbling mumbles.

      Liked by 6 people

      • amwick says:

        Silly ristva, uber wealthy elites do not get dementia, they do not have strokes. Nope, money buys health and mental acuity. They just shorten the speeches, and inject more botox. Nan is fine…
        😵😵😵😵😵😵

        Liked by 2 people

    • RobInPA says:

      Perhaps ‘ole Nervous Nancy has doubts about mandatory attendance to Crooked’s Jim Jone’s themed send-off party?! All of the D-Rats and RINO’s are expected to be there, or else!

      Like

  15. Disgusted says:

    This is the beginning of the push for her to become their 2020 candidate! Got nobody else! She’s been trying for two years for this latest recognition, and she thinks she is WONDER WOMAN! And she ain’t all that!

    Liked by 2 people

  16. John55 says:

    So we’ve gone from “Trump must be impeached because he did not release the aid to Ukraine” to “Trump must be impeached because he DID release the aid to Ukraine”, and therefore “bribed” them?

    Does Nancy know that Obama sent pallets of cash to the Iranians? Presumably that was just a “gift” and not a “bribe”.

    Liked by 4 people

  17. Grassleysgirl/Breitbartista says:

    Rumors abound that another 25th amendment push might be being scripted . This time a cache of Shinks will be paraded out to confirm ‘their’ suspicions that “Orange Man is not only Bad, but he’s certifiable !!

    Like

  18. Raptors2020 says:

    They are paving Trump’s express lane to re-election. Running on an anti-foreign aid platform is far more appealing than an anti-immigrant platform. Illegal immigrants can claim they’re here to work. What justifies pure handouts? Why not insist on getting something in return for foreign aid? (quid pro quo!). Only the far left thinks transferring American wealth overseas is an appealing idea.

    Like

  19. I think they were having better luck back when they were trying to convince themselves the President was a Russian spy working with Putin to “take down America”

    Liked by 4 people

  20. Rose says:

    Is she really alive or have the demorats sacrificed enough murdered babies so the devil can speak through her?

    Liked by 2 people

  21. Kc says:

    Obama bribed Ukraine with blankets…boy did he suck at that

    Liked by 1 person

  22. Justin Green says:

    Shlobbering, shtuttering Pelothi just got her quids and her pros and her quos all mumbo-jumbo’ed up, then tried to give us a Latin lesson…

    Her argument today:

    1) “E pluribus unum” and “quid pro quo” and “bribery” are all Latin terms,
    ergo
    2) Peachmint!!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  23. joshashland says:

    The Dems will use pretzel logic whenever they can. On another note :
    Why is Nancy so shiny?

    Liked by 3 people

    • PInky1920 says:

      I think she’s got a coat of glue on to hold her together.

      that woman, minus the makeup, dyed hair, nose job, facelift(s), boob job(s), designer duds, Botox, dental implants, would look like Granny from the Beverly Hillbillies.

      She needed to be gone 25 years ago, along with 95% of the rest of them; nothing but a bunch of thieves, liars and straight up criminals.

      Liked by 6 people

  24. L4grasshopper says:

    The over-reactors at GP are getting all excited:

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/11/its-happening-breaking-president-trump-meets-with-ag-bill-barr-in-oval-office-then-delays-departure-and-calls-in-top-aides-and-communication-team/

    Hoft thinks something’s up. Hoft is way more wrong than right. But I keep remembering that a judge gave the DOJ until Nov 15 to do something regarding McCabe…….

    Like

    • steph_gray says:

      As said in “Independence Day,” that’s not _entirely_ accurate. Pretty sure I read here recently that the 11/15 deadline on McCabe was for only one type of charge – any others could be brought whenever…

      Unfortunately I can’t cite which comment amongst the thousands lately it was…

      Liked by 1 person

    • Grassleysgirl/Breitbartista says:

      The 15th is another deadline. All NGOs have to turn in their accounting. Too much to explain in short term. See Charles Ortels incredible ,detailed expose’s ;Sundays With Charles on the Utube. He’s an Ivy Educated Financials Numbers guy. He’s done 188 downloadable presentations now.With ALL the documentary evidence that the “MidYearExam” pupils shoved under the rug and more importantly Hillarys minions hoovered up at State Dept., Bill’s Hill’s and Chelseas various Foundations and offshouts.,
      A great start in learning how Charity Fraud has robbed and decimated our ‘American Dreams’ and mightily enriched the political class.

      Liked by 1 person

    • BitterC says:

      It’s all about Rudy is my 1st guess and I’m sticking to it

      Like

  25. RJ says:

    Nancy is nothing more than an old broad (old rich broad) who carries in her mind a feminist attitude where Donald Trump is way more than just a chauvinist pig, he is the “stand in husband” every hate filled woman wants to destroy!

    If she can’t destroy him she will settle for nothing less than total control of him…bet me!

    Like

  26. jusflipthescript says:

    My goodness these people make no sense 😳 The bad news is that we are surrounded by them 🤦🏼‍♂️..they are everywhere, jus plum dumb, help me Lord….

    Like

  27. sunnyflower5 says:

    Nancy’s running back to use Adam Schitt’s Faux Phone Script which he portrays Godfather Thuggery. She’s on dope— I mean, she’s a dope.

    Like

  28. Les Standard says:

    A nearly 80 year old alcoholic slurring her words and talking like a loon. Yep, those are the Dim’s 2019

    Liked by 6 people

  29. deepdivemaga says:

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Rick says:

    This is what one refers to as throwing schiff against the wall to see what sticks. Unfortunately, she has the power to continue to do precisely that. The only way to stop this mess from continuing is to take action against them (for a change). For example, the so-called “whistleblower”, isn’t. What he is is a felon. It is a felony to bypass the ICIG and approach anyone else with a complaint while working int he IC. The whistleleaker did exactly that. Now, the communists are aiding and abetting a felony by protecting him. Not to metnion misprison of felony. See 18 USC I.1.4. That, too, is a felony which the communists are committing on a daily basis.

    The way to rid ourselves of these traitors is to arrest them for their own crimes.

    Liked by 7 people

  31. Johnny Boost says:

    Pelosi is the dumbest democrat out there, except for all the others.

    Liked by 6 people

    • RobInPA says:

      Maybe that Cohen clown can break out another bucket of fried chicken, just to prove beyond a reasonable doubt once and for all that Orange Man Bad?!

      Like

  32. Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

    The socialist democrats have been desperately trying to get a new phony narrative to stick. Representative Castro droned on trying to equate “attempted murder” with “attempted bribery” during Wednesday’s hearing. He even repeated his point later in the day, afterwards with journ0lists in the halls of Congress. “Either he committed extortion and bribery of a foreign official, or he committed attempted extortion and bribery of a foreign official … and that’s still a crime,” Castro claimed.

    Meanwhile it is being reported that AG Barr was at the White House today for an unscheduled meeting with the president, followed by a huddling of his closest confidants. His departure for Louisiana was delayed a bit. Something’s up and hopefully it is the long awaited IG FISA Report to be released tomorrow… or Monday?

    Liked by 2 people

  33. sir4576 says:

    I know she’s part of the Uniparty, but has she forgotten they want to keep Trump out???

    I swear it’s like she wants to help him!

    Like

  34. Charlie says:

    Feeling sorry for the “dingbat”. All her years in public service to end her career as someone who will be remembered as The Speaker with “lack of candor” and “Schiff” on her hometown streets.
    Well… maybe not that sorry.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Magabear says:

    By the time she reaches Plan Z the accusation will be that PDJT and Melania once engaged in Neogamy. 😉😄

    Like

  36. Jimmy says:

    There is a certain kind of panic that causes stupidity. If a 300-pound man with a large, sharp axe has you cornered and is about to chop you, who weighs 125 lbs soaking wet, into pieces, you might, in your panic, reach for something – anything – to throw at him. A book. section of the newspaper. A paper clip. Some dust. It makes no sense to do these things but you must stop him and you have nothing else. You are hysterically crying and reaching for anything to throw and the man slowly descends upon you for the kill.

    I think Nancy and Adam are panicking. I don’t know what their exposure is. Embezzlement? Gun running to various countries around the world? Pay-for-play? It’s something. Have they been making a lot of money fomenting chaos in Ukraine and Syria?

    Nancy might even call a vote, which, if it succeeds, will cost her the house. She must stop the investigations by stopping Trump. Durham’s?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Ma McGriz says:

      I’m thinking they should rightly be looking at war crimes for what they did in Ukraine, and possibly elsewhere.

      It’s unlikely they’ll ever be charged, but that’s not because they’re innocent.

      Liked by 1 person

  37. Retired USMC says:

    She better hope she doesn’t get to “r”…as in REBELLION.

    Liked by 1 person

  38. MDNA I says:

    I have a great deal of respect for both Professor Turley & Andrew McCarthy, so I don’t pretend to be at their level; but I don’t pretend to be a total slouch about CLaw…

    Both have repeated a sentiment that “impeachment is a political process, not a legal one.” I think that’s a good phrase to have handy for the purpose of criticizing or contesting another sort of talking point, which is drawing too strict analogy b/w an impeachment & a criminal prosecution

    I take their point b/c it’s valid but differ, or feel need to supplement. My (imperfect) understanding & reading is that while articles of impeachment ultimately do cite political “crimes” that aren’t in any criminal code, impeachment w/o an underlying crime is not only a bad case but against the “spirit,” if not the “letter”

    I grant, nothing in the “latter” may prevent an entirely political impeachment BUT there’s textual evidence for a strong argument based on the Federalist Papers the framers did not intend for such a thing to occur & took some care to prevent it

    Liked by 1 person

    • MDNA I says:

      I would add: When Professor Turley says the basis for the current impeachment is so narrow he compares it to “planned obsolescence” printer ink cartridges & calls it “Pelosi’s collapsible impeachment” he’s acknowledging something close to what I said

      McCarthy’s been very clear there’s nothing impeachable & has argued POTUS should basically use a defense of “quid quo pro? maybe, but so what? not impeachable” but most of what I’ve read from him is concerned with (a) framing a good defense, (b) countering what he feels are mistaken approaches to defense…. but still, defining what is an impeachable offense is hard for anyone to do…. it’s a “spirit AND letter” thing (like most things IMO)

      Like

    • John55 says:

      >>“impeachment is a political process, not a legal one”

      I don’t find that line to be nearly as clever as the people saying it seem to think it is. Political processes are (if done properly) legal processes, and legal processes are legal only because and to the extent that they are in accordance with political decisions, aka laws passed by political bodies known as legislatures.

      The Founding of America and the ratification of the Constitution were both political and legal actions. Impeachment, if done properly, is both a political and legal act. So far the Dems have gone to enormous efforts to get the law enforcement apparatus of the US, the FBI, DOJ, courts etc, to weigh in on their side. They would not be doing that if they truly believed that impeachment is a process which need not even pretend to concern itself with legal niceties. They’d simply and honestly say “We’re going to impeach Trump because we don’t like him!”

      But they’re not willing to say that. Instead they try really, really hard to make their actions be, or seem to be, all about legality. That’s because political and legal acts are not really separable and distinct, in countries with a functioning rule of law they are tightly intertwined.

      Liked by 1 person

      • MDNA I says:

        “I don’t find that line to be nearly as clever as the people saying it seem to think it is.”

        Right b/c while it’s partially true it doesn’t mean there’s no such thing as an illegitimate impeachment…. it’s still theoretically possible to take an impeachment to the SCOTUS

        An election is a political process too. But it’s one that involves legal framework & boundaries. & in 2000 the election went to the SCOTUS

        Liked by 1 person

  39. Jase says:

    By Dem logic, any and all foreign aid given for a specific purpose – with concomitant demand for verification of use – is bribery.
    No surprise there, given that Dems appear to view foreign aid as one big money laundering operation.
    Raises an interesting question: is suspending aid to, say, Honduras, until that country takes steps to halt its citizens from flooding into the US illegally, bribery?
    What about secretly giving billions in cash to Iran to get them to pretend to sign a phoney deal to make Obama look good? Is that bribery?

    Liked by 2 people

    • steph_gray says:

      You forgot a key phrase that answers all your questions.

      By Dem logic, any and all foreign aid given by a Republican for a specific purpose – with concomitant demand for verification of use – is bribery.

      Fixed it for ya – no charge ☺️

      Liked by 4 people

  40. Tseg says:

    You know it’s bad when the day after the blockbuster Impeachment Inquires the Daily Mail’s first mention of it or any Democrat spokesperson is 4 or 5 sections down.

    Like

  41. John Davis says:

    It’s like the democrats are ordering crimes from a menu.
    Sorry! We no longer serve collusion. We are out of obstruction. Our quid pro quo went bad yesterday.
    Can we offer you some delicious bribery?

    Liked by 6 people

  42. Minuteman says:

    Plan X: Returning videotapes without rewinding.

    Plan Y: Using the wrong fork to eat a salad.

    Plan Z: Ketchup on steak.

    Liked by 1 person

  43. John55 says:

    In fairness to Nancy, she’s just obediently repeating the words which Lawfare told her to say.

    Liked by 4 people

  44. MaineCoon says:

    Just a wee slip o’ the tongue by Piglosi. She meant to says it fake bribery – no $$ exchange in a purrfect conversation.

    Piglooser…

    Like

  45. ATheoK says:

    “Pelosi moves to Plan-D, “bribery”

    I don’t believe the correct word is “rolls”.
    Flops is better where Pelosi is concerned. Flaccid fallacious fanciful flop.
    With the emphasis on ‘flop’.

    Liked by 1 person

  46. Jim in TN says:

    Quick, Wasn’t this aid mandated by law? Didn’t Trump have to deliver this aid by date certain?

    Is Nancy accusing Congress of colluding with Trump to bribe Ukraine?

    Liked by 1 person

  47. mptc says:

    Does anyone here smell desperation? I just read some of the transcripts of the Joel Pollak and Nick Akerman debate. Akerman was a Watergate prosecutor. He claimed that Impeachment does NOT center on whether an action is legal or illegal. Sounds like he and Schiff went to the same correspondence law school. Now we have Pelosi trumpeting (no pun intended) out bribery? I can’t decided if these people were always that stupid or if they just all drank stupid koolaid recently. And all this after the disaster that was the Mueller investigation. I mention desperation because it appears this is all they have left… to somehow, someway divert everyone’s attention away from the release of the investigations from Horowitz and Durham.

    Is there really an ace up their sleeve that no one knows about? Or are they all just that willing to go down with the ship?

    Liked by 1 person

    • They are almost all punched-out and all of our powder is still dry….
      Nice..

      Liked by 1 person

    • steph_gray says:

      Is there really an ace up their sleeve that no one knows about?

      Well – given the way they run around with hair on fire about all sorts of unicorn tales – what makes anyone imagine they wouldn’t have flashed an ace in a microsecond on the day after election in 2016 if they had one?

      Liked by 2 people

    • MDNA I says:

      You said a thing or two I’m thinking about in that post…. for one:

      “Akerman was a Watergate prosecutor. He claimed that Impeachment does NOT center on whether an action is legal or illegal. Sounds like he and Schiff went to the same correspondence law school.”

      I think their reasoning is brutally cynical. Viz, b/c the text of Constitution does not a appear to prevent impeachment w/o an underlying crime, such an impeachment is not technically unconstitutional

      But they have to avoid being explicit that if a crime is not literally criminal, it can only be political, at least re: an impeachment. Acknowledging that if impeachment is not based on criminality or illegality would force also make explicit that it’s purely political which would ofc would be an obscene admission that in fact it is purely political

      Liked by 1 person

      • Jim in TN says:

        They spent the last three years campaigning on TV that impeachment is a political act.

        A few Never Trumpers have joined in with editorials saying the same.

        I keep wanting Paul Harvey to chime in with the rest of the story.

        You can’t leave politics out of it, but it is much more than a political act. It explicitly is for removal in case of high crimes and misdemeanors.

        It is a protection to be used only when in need.

        Anything else is getting the politics wrong.

        Liked by 2 people

  48. by the time Nancy’s plan Z she will be dead.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s