|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On June 08 2017 00:03 Sermokala wrote: How about instead of posting the shitty response tweet to a response tweet you post the link that has the actual content on it? he says insultingly, forgetting to provide not only the content in question but also any content at all.
|
|
It's like the Ron Paul gif. It's really happening. I don't even know what to expect really. I feel like Red Dawn is just moments away. For some reason, I'm excited.
|
On June 08 2017 00:12 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2017 00:03 Sermokala wrote: How about instead of posting the shitty response tweet to a response tweet you post the link that has the actual content on it? he says insultingly, forgetting to provide not only the content in question but also any content at all. He responds to a post suggesting a that a frequent tweet poster post a link with the real content while providing content and warning to people that they have to click twice before reaching anything relevant. Also he says misunderstanding the basis of the word content and should probably refrain from third person battles in the future.
|
Canada13389 Posts
Yeah that doesn't really strike me as confident
|
It seems it is basically a Yes but I don't want to be in perjury territory that could cost me years in jail/lawyer fees that will be astronomical.
|
Yeah this is not looking for the Trump Admin in the answers given so far.
Anyways...
|
On June 08 2017 00:22 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2017 00:12 brian wrote:On June 08 2017 00:03 Sermokala wrote: How about instead of posting the shitty response tweet to a response tweet you post the link that has the actual content on it? he says insultingly, forgetting to provide not only the content in question but also any content at all. He responds to a post suggesting a that a frequent tweet poster post a link with the real content while providing content and warning to people that they have to click twice before reaching anything relevant. Also he says misunderstanding the basis of the word content and should probably refrain from third person battles in the future. what content did you provide? what battle? and lastly who are you that you think you're going to tell other people to butt out of a thread lol. calling out a garbage post garners a garbage response. i shouldn't have been surprised.
|
Canada13389 Posts
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/07/trump-wants-to-start-charging-stores-to-accept-food-stamps.html
A surcharge for grocery stores that accept food stamps.
That seems like a really terrible policy idea for me.
Forcing small stores to not take stamps because they probably can't afford it, force people to go to larger chains, force people to potentially get less food because of higher food costs or force poor people to commute further to grocery stores that actually take the food stamps.
|
It's as if he's doing as much horrible shit as he can, just to see how far he can go before he either quits or is impeached. It's incredible that the GOP can just sit back and let this continue to happen. No matter who is next in line, there is a ton of work to repair respect abroad and at home.
|
United States42738 Posts
On June 08 2017 00:35 ZeromuS wrote:http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/07/trump-wants-to-start-charging-stores-to-accept-food-stamps.htmlA surcharge for grocery stores that accept food stamps. That seems like a really terrible policy idea for me. Forcing small stores to not take stamps because they probably can't afford it, force people to go to larger chains, force people to potentially get less food because of higher food costs or force poor people to commute further to grocery stores that actually take the food stamps. It doesn't even make sense. Trying to increase government revenue by increasing the prices of food for food stamps so that people who use food stamps can't buy as much food. Why not just cut food stamps and give out less money in the first place. The entire idea is about as smart as stealing from your own wallet.
|
|
Seriously everyone should be watching this hearing. This has gotten very ugly but historical in nature.
|
Canada13389 Posts
I'm currently trying to get some work done but refreshing this page every 10 15 for developments. tomorrow thoough, hoooo boy will it be hard to get work done
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On June 08 2017 00:45 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Seriously everyone should be watching this hearing. This has gotten very ugly but historical in nature. I'd love to if I didn't have work to do. Certainly wish I could watch though, this definitely looks eventful.
|
I would not be surprised if someone is fired/resigns after this.
Mike Rogers looks ready to punch somebody.
|
A lot of the non-statements by these guys are less bad than they seem (but still not great for Trump or them). It's not a great idea to comment on an ongoing investigation in a public session.
Edit: I think it might get Trump upset enough to do something stupid, though, so there's that.
|
I thought Sessions was the main person in the White House who actually did anything, if only to turn the USA into a police state. I hope he is gone quickly, but in comparison to some of Trump's other cronies he has more to lose: his ability to enact his ideological vision, because he will never have this much power again.
|
Senator: "what is the legal basis for your refusal to answer my questions" coats: "I don't have a legal basis, i think it's inappropriate to discuss conversations w/ president in public setting" senator: "in few hours we will have another closed private hearing, will you commit to answer my questions unequivocally then" coats: very fidgety, and after delays saying some bs, says he has to speak to general counsel before committing to answer. Lol wtf
|
Gonna go to work soon, will be able to have image but not sound as a result, could use a LR =)
|
|
|
|