we need to stop with the paralysis of analysis and get some convictions/impeachments... we need to get dominoes falling and not more being set up for "someday"!
She talked about this during this interview too. She said there are so many issues they hardly know how to prioritize and where to start. I was actually pretty impressed with her. Three times when she was trying to make the point about the judges Bannon interrupted her. Instead of allowing that to steer her off her point, she repeated until she got her point out. Bannon should know sometimes instead of trying to push an interview along, just shut up and let them talk.
Anyway, we can perhaps help by emailing the good few and some of the bad ones like McCarthy and telling them where to start.
A lot of them do it. Most reporters will interrupt with a question when someone is rattling on and on or is non-answering a question in order to move the interview along. But it's easy to do that when they trying to say something important. This is more common in broadcasting because they have time constraints.
It can wreck and interview when they lose their train of thought or get sidetracked. She didn't do that, which was impressive.
I've considered the possibility of the house impeaching these judges, notwithstanding the unlikelihood of the senate removing them. It would force these judges to hire lawyers to defend themselves. They don't have campaign money they can spend. And it would seem pretty far fetched that the DOJ ought to represent them for this. They'd have to go on the record with this bullshit and I am certain none of them want to do it.
The problem I have not been able to reconcile is the impact on the prosecutions of defendants by those judges while these proceedings are going on. One could good faith argue that this taints the process. But what is the fix? Of course everyone will say that they should drop the charges. Except that is short sighted without thinking of the implications. If democrat friends are facing trial, a dem controlled house could cause chaos by simply voting to impeach the judge. That isn't exactly the smartest process for us to pursue for obvious reasons.
So I have not been able to walk all the way down this path to an ending that seems better than doing nothing yet. There might be some way, but someone else will have to try their mind at finding it.
we need to stop with the paralysis of analysis and get some convictions/impeachments... we need to get dominoes falling and not more being set up for "someday"!
She talked about this during this interview too. She said there are so many issues they hardly know how to prioritize and where to start. I was actually pretty impressed with her. Three times when she was trying to make the point about the judges Bannon interrupted her. Instead of allowing that to steer her off her point, she repeated until she got her point out. Bannon should know sometimes instead of trying to push an interview along, just shut up and let them talk.
Anyway, we can perhaps help by emailing the good few and some of the bad ones like McCarthy and telling them where to start.
Hannity hasn't learned to shut up and let his guest talk yet either.
That's cuz he only has a sleep button and a shill button.
A lot of them do it. Most reporters will interrupt with a question when someone is rattling on and on or is non-answering a question in order to move the interview along. But it's easy to do that when they trying to say something important. This is more common in broadcasting because they have time constraints.
It can wreck and interview when they lose their train of thought or get sidetracked. She didn't do that, which was impressive.
I've considered the possibility of the house impeaching these judges, notwithstanding the unlikelihood of the senate removing them. It would force these judges to hire lawyers to defend themselves. They don't have campaign money they can spend. And it would seem pretty far fetched that the DOJ ought to represent them for this. They'd have to go on the record with this bullshit and I am certain none of them want to do it.
The problem I have not been able to reconcile is the impact on the prosecutions of defendants by those judges while these proceedings are going on. One could good faith argue that this taints the process. But what is the fix? Of course everyone will say that they should drop the charges. Except that is short sighted without thinking of the implications. If democrat friends are facing trial, a dem controlled house could cause chaos by simply voting to impeach the judge. That isn't exactly the smartest process for us to pursue for obvious reasons.
So I have not been able to walk all the way down this path to an ending that seems better than doing nothing yet. There might be some way, but someone else will have to try their mind at finding it.
What action do you suggest if those responsible are either complicit, compromised, coercible or blackmailed?