The Q Anon types on the home board point to this and say he’s a deep state agent that use blackmailing people for gov purposes.
You will not find me in a single political thread, but it is absolutely unfathomable that Donald Trump was elected POTUS. Incomprehensible.
One of his former bodyguards sold his little black book to an undercover FBI agent He got a longer sentence than epstein
https://nypost.com/2019/07/09/trump...-from-mar-a-lago-over-sex-assault-court-docs/ Seems like something you go to the police over, but I suppose I'm a stickler.
The crazy days and nights blog (think “QAnon” for Hollywood’s sleazy underbelly) had a post in 2017 about Epstein and claimed that one of his most famous counterparts would insist on being blown blindfolded and would then guess where in the world said blowee was from based on technique - many commenters claim this person was Bill.
Went to a palm reader last week. The reading took about an hour. She told me many, many things. One thing she told me is that I like to watch sports. She's obviously tapped into the spiritual realm.
not that i doubt the evilness of any of these ppl but what kind of fucking weirdo earnestly reads zero hedge
hopefully epstein blows open the story on moon people being pedophiles and then I’ll give credence to qanon
Just follow the bread crumbs, know that patriots are in control, and that “these people” are sick...all of the clues you need to prove this are buried inside gibberish 4chan posts
While you may be right that Democrats are not going to do anything with Acosta, an informal offer to provide testimony to the HJC generally precedes a formal subpoena. And since Lieu is a majority member of the HJC, that tweet may serve as an informal offer, though I'd expect a letter soon sent to Acosta if the HJC does actually want Acosta to provide testimony. In the meantime, if Acosta is going to use Twitter for a public appeal, I don't at all mind Lieu clapping back.
And yet on Thursday this week the HJC is voting to subpoena Kusher, Sessions, Flynn, Kelly, Rosenstein, Lewandowski, and others. I understand the skepticism and cynicism regarding Pelosi, but it's not as though the House Democrats have been shy about issuing subpoenas since January.
I started reading it about a decade ago for cynical market/economy takes. I venture back now and again for the absurdity.
So you’re upset at Lieu for using social media because he’s not out there enforcing stuff he can’t enforce individually?
I’m not saying you shouldn’t want that. We all do. I was meaning it seems off to say Ted Lieu shouldn’t tweet because subpoenas aren’t being enforced.
Different committee, but here's the letter to Acosta requesting testimony before congress. Trump has been adamant that he won't fire Acosta, which, in my opinion, is because as long as Acosta remains as Labor Secretary, Trump can use the full weight of the executive and especially legislative branch to deny the forthcoming subpoena. I expect this process to be drawn out and very contentious. Will the Democrats actually seek to jail a current executive member for failure to comply with a subpoena? edited for formatting
And yet the Democrats just didn't do the nothing that you assumed last night they would. You do understand that seeking testimony before congress is a substantive measure, right? Again, I understand the doubt and the skepticism, but considering they just did something, I don't think it's quite the time to claim they're doing nothing.
The subpoenas the Democrats on the Oversight Committee have been handing out lately remind me of one of my favorite Mitch Hedberg jokes: