Man, how through the roof pissed is Mets going to be when the dems win the presidency and Senate in 2020 and increase the court size to 13?

Ya know, except in the last year of a term*


*for some reason we have no capacity to explain

Holy **** in Metsy world this somehow makes that farce better

Here is bookers interview with anderson cooper last night, where he doesnt deny he was told this morning, but is claiming he broke the rules on wednesday

yet his spartacus speech was yesterday

please dwetzel, calling bs is hurting your case

booker did know, and cornyn didnt at that point.

it was grandstanding

so his answer is at 8 pm last night

cooper: so when you released the emails, is it true that they were clear?
booker: when i broke the comittee rules last night (wed which was before he sent any emails), they had not been clear

lol dwetzel

its actually more funny that he thinks this is helpign his 2020 campaign

Because Biden supported doing it like that in 1992, I'm learning so much here

and your current senate minority lead supported doing it in 07 18 months before the election

im glad you are learning

so kokiri and all

if the mueller investigation concludes no collusion and no obstruction, will you let that topic go?

Are you saying it's good that there's no filibuster anymore?

for judge confirmations i think so

because its not like the fiibuster is being used to convince anyone anyway

when its used on an important bill it used to be interestign but i dont know if it has any purpose anymore

i think comittees are part of the problem

there has to be a better way to get bills onto the floor

.

Mets, I believe this is what the Booker timeline is:

1.) Booker reads aloud from a classified email on Wednesday.

2.) The material Booker already made public is approved for release overnight.

3.) Cornyn complains on Thursday that Booker broke the rules the previous day, referring to step one.

4.) In response to Cornyn, Booker argues his actions were justified, says he will post more classified material online, and invites Cornyn to "bring it".

5.) Reporters confuse the further releases Booker promised on Thursday with the original release on Wednesday, which obviously would no longer have been a rules violation on Thursday.

To be fair, Booker's comments on the matter in response to Cornyn on Thursday weren't all that clear. I didn't quite get it, either, before you posted that video of Booker explaining it.

he did not send out one classified email. they were all declassified before he sent them, he tried to say they werent

yes he broke the rules on wed.

we all know that

this whole time i've been seeing "corbyn" when people write "cornyn"

now that i understand this, things make more sense, but seem less interesting

at 337 in the video, he says he is now going to release the email with knowledge that it is against the rules and it may cause hi to lose his seat

but releasing the email at that point was not against the rules at all and he know that

at 445 he says he is now releasing committee confidential documents but he was told they were declassified at 4 qam and he knows that

then at 600 he says he didnt violate a senate rule but he violated a process -- now this part can be about wednesday

but that doesnt take away from when at 445 he says he is going to send emails in violation when he knew they werent

cornyn was being a douche too, no doubt.

and if they did press charges against them it would kill the republicans but he did break a rule on wed

i said months ago in this thread that booker was the best dem candidate if they want to win but again i dont think this helps him unless he somehow does become a martyr

like if he got kicked out of the senate hed win the nomination in a landslide lol

obama admits that economy is good, takes credit but admits its going well!

so at worse, all of the tarrifs and horrible deals didnt hurt the economy

Nothing more interesting than a 200 page argument on congressional procedure

Rather than nominating booker, Dems should just cut out the middle man and nominate a pharmaceutical CEO directly

booker, harris, warren, biden i assume will be top 4

i think bernie will run with warren as her vp

Depends a bit what you mean by “that topic” but broadly yes.

I think trump’s business ties to Russia are well worth a white collar crime investigation, and I would anticipate journalists digging further there, but that’s sort of tangential to his presidency. Edit: unless it isn’t, ofc.

In essence, I want to see something of substance from mueller before any talk of impeachment. And I feel like ‘no collusion but obstruction of justice’ probably doesn’t get there for me. likewise the porn star payoff probably doesn’t either. In essence it’s a bit dumb that the president can only be convicted of all or nothing.

But also it’s nuts that we’re in a scenario where we’re saying “sure he broke campaign finance laws to pay off a porn star he ****ed while his wife was nursing, and sure he admitted he fired comey to take the heat off him, and sure his son and campaign team met with agents of the Russian state about his election rival, but is any of that really high crimes and misdemeanours?”

Even as I write that I’m close to changing my mind.

its apparantly not illegal to get dirt on your opponents from the russians, otherwise hillary would be in jail

its all just been a waste of time, but if the result puts some sort of closure on it ill be happy

but i dont think it will

Like, in what world is the best person to run the country a serial philandering pathological liar who surrounds himself with a court of petty grifters and whose inferiority complex has driven his failing businesses into a mix of bilking suppliers, partnering with people other more reputable businesses wouldn’t touch, and running end arounds the charity laws.