Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh > The Sandbox - Pittsburgh
test
The Sandbox - Pittsburgh The Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here. If it's NOT an adult-themed topic, then it belongs here

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 646
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 396
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 279
George Spelvin 265
sharkman29 255
Top Posters
DallasRain70793
biomed163231
Yssup Rider60927
gman4453294
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48648
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42577
CryptKicker37215
The_Waco_Kid37006
Mokoa36496
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-19-2022, 02:10 PM   #16
The_Waco_Kid
AKA Admiral Waco Kid
 
The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: The MAGA Zone
Posts: 37,006
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HDGristle View Post
Really. Typically doesn’t mean can't. Bipartisan doesn't mean impartial to Trump. There were 2 Republicans on the panel who participated. Nothing token about them

it's unusual. and if you consider either Cheney or Kinsinger impartial to Trump then you aren't aware of their views.


Quote:
Originally Posted by eyecu2 View Post
The_waco_kid "without proper minority representation, no rebuttal witnesses and even a television producer brought in to "produce" a tv hearing, this committee is perhaps the largest political hack job in US history..."

Was the above written by just FOX news ala Mark Levin? Haha ...fucking such bullshit



just one example is needed. the testimony of a second hand account that Trump tried to grab the steering wheel of his car. the secret service denied this happened and offered to testify. no offer was extended.



there are plenty of other examples. this was never about a fair bipartisan fact finding. it was about presenting a one sided "opinion" tailored by the Democrats.


When the assertion of charges and detail of information is being gathered, that is not the time for ANY defense. A defense happens once someone is charged, vs. referred for charges. This whole notion of the right not able to question the accusers or mount a defense shows just how stupidly ill-informed they are about the process of how courts work. It doesn't make a defense unavailable- but the GOP has yet again, pulled the wool over the eyes of the Republicans who don't understand how the court system works.



wasn't asking for a defense. just something other than the obviously engineered one-sided parade of mostly heresay second hand accounts.


Relative to TV production...tell me all about it while there are people like Kari Lake was awashed in flattering portrait scape and warm lighting. Her producer hubby was responsible for that....and yep, she still lost.


that's a campaign. not a congressional committee. false equivalence.


While this won't ever end up with a court-case, it's good to show the cowardice of Trump and his supporters who would cheat to steal an election at any cost

then what other than political grandstanding did this serve? scratch rebuttal. replace with others who were actually there to present testimony. "IF" this had been a court of Law both Cheney and Kinsinger would have been stricken from a jury pool due to known prejudicial comments. as so-called bipartisan representation their known bias makes them no more than tokens of the Democrats and their agenda.
The_Waco_Kid is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 02:16 PM   #17
HDGristle
The Man (He/Him/His)
 
HDGristle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 7, 2019
Location: The Box... Indeed
Posts: 4,920
Encounters: 9
Default

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...dam-kinzinger/

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...re/liz-cheney/

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...lise-stefanik/

Thry both voted more consistently on items Trump supported than Stefanik. She's a RINO, too... eh?
HDGristle is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 02:17 PM   #18
HDGristle
The Man (He/Him/His)
 
HDGristle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 7, 2019
Location: The Box... Indeed
Posts: 4,920
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid View Post
it's unusual. and if you consider either Cheney or Kinsinger impartial to Trump then you aren't aware of their views.
Read it again. I didn't say they were impartial to Trump.
HDGristle is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 02:26 PM   #19
The_Waco_Kid
AKA Admiral Waco Kid
 
The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: The MAGA Zone
Posts: 37,006
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HDGristle View Post
Read it again. I didn't say they were impartial to Trump.

they are openly hostile about Trump. meaning they weren't bipartisan representation nor interested in anything other than a one-sided show.
The_Waco_Kid is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 02:30 PM   #20
berryberry
Valued Poster
 
berryberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 11, 2012
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 16,225
Encounters: 98
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HDGristle View Post

Thry both voted more consistently on items Trump supported than Stefanik. She's a RINO, too... eh?


Ancient history - she went full RINO mode midway through 2020. And I guess you missed how the voters rejected her RINO ass by an embarrassingly huge margin
berryberry is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 02:46 PM   #21
IMGTH58
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Mar 17, 2018
Location: W. PA.
Posts: 186
Encounters: 1
Default

RINO being strictly defined as not being a Trump puppet.
IMGTH58 is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 02:53 PM   #22
1pittsburgh
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 9, 2019
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,754
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HDGristle View Post
Neither one is a RINO. Utter horseshit.
Any politician who hasn't joined Trump's cult of ignorance is now considered a RINO by these folks.
1pittsburgh is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 02:58 PM   #23
HDGristle
The Man (He/Him/His)
 
HDGristle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 7, 2019
Location: The Box... Indeed
Posts: 4,920
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid View Post
they are openly hostile about Trump. meaning they weren't bipartisan representation nor interested in anything other than a one-sided show.
They were there as Republicans. McCarthy could have had 3 more. His choice. His failure.

Bipartisanship has nothing to do with Trump loyalism or animosity.

Country before party. Country before loyalty to one man.
HDGristle is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 03:24 PM   #24
The_Waco_Kid
AKA Admiral Waco Kid
 
The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: The MAGA Zone
Posts: 37,006
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HDGristle View Post
They were there as Republicans. McCarthy could have had 3 more. His choice. His failure.

Bipartisanship has nothing to do with Trump loyalism or animosity.

Country before party. Country before loyalty to one man.

i don't disagree McCarthy might have made a tactical mistake. i also disagree that just because Cheney and Kinzinger are elected Republicans it means they qualify as bipartisan given they were hand picked by Adam Schiff. that's like asking the Devil to pick some angels.



McCarthy's tactic at the time was to give it no credence given the Democrats wanted to "hand pick" who the Republicans were on the committee. he wasn't entirely wrong. but if Schiff was going to continue to strike every person McCarthy wanted boiling it down to Cheney and Kinziner as "fill-ins" given their known bias it has no credence in the end.



and it wouldn't surprise me that certainly Cheney and probably Kinzinger both "flipped" on Trump only due to what they thought was political expedience making them "political waffles".
The_Waco_Kid is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 03:36 PM   #25
String Nutts
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 9, 2015
Location: yinzer land
Posts: 132
Encounters: 1
Default

The Jan 6th committee uncovered a lot of things that everyone should not condone or at least question. For instance, Congressman and Trump's family members for pleading with Trump to publicly call things off. But Trump delayed three hours. If that can be proven in a court of law, that would be aiding the people performing the illegal acts. Trump, if he knows about the charge, has had time to give his side, but he hasn't. He has not coherently made a case for anything.



Now it's up to the Justice Dept to either file charges or not. If they do, whoever is charged will get their day in court. I can guarantee that all this not fair retort won't mean anything. What will mean something is the evidence presented. That is what I'd like to talk about. I know it won't happen.
String Nutts is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 03:40 PM   #26
HDGristle
The Man (He/Him/His)
 
HDGristle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 7, 2019
Location: The Box... Indeed
Posts: 4,920
Encounters: 9
Default

Disagree as you feel fit, TWK. Bipartisanship on that committee had nothing to do with pro-Trump or anti-Trump. It had to do with majority party and minority party. Both were represented and bipartisan consensus was found.

Unfortunately, what you're complaining about went out the window when McCarthy picked up his ball and went home instead of fielding a team.

And it was ultimately Pelosi that vetoed Banks and Jordan. Schiff wasn't Speaker
HDGristle is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 03:59 PM   #27
The_Waco_Kid
AKA Admiral Waco Kid
 
The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: The MAGA Zone
Posts: 37,006
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by String Nutts View Post
The Jan 6th committee uncovered a lot of things that everyone should not condone or at least question. For instance, Congressman and Trump's family members for pleading with Trump to publicly call things off. But Trump delayed three hours. If that can be proven in a court of law, that would be aiding the people performing the illegal acts. Trump, if he knows about the charge, has had time to give his side, but he hasn't. He has not coherently made a case for anything.

not even close. and the so-called charge is prior to riot, inciting insurrection. nothing in Trump's speech can even remotely be called "inciting insurrection".

Now it's up to the Justice Dept to either file charges or not. If they do, whoever is charged will get their day in court. I can guarantee that all this not fair retort won't mean anything. What will mean something is the evidence presented. That is what I'd like to talk about. I know it won't happen.

when Trump did speak and urge the rioters to leave twitter immediately took the tweet down.



again, refer to Brandenburg V Ohio now known as "The Brandenburg Test" for a reason and compare what Clarence Brandenburg said, where he actually did call for unlawful acts against the Government and compare to Trump's speech on Jan 6th. nothing in Trump's speech can be construed as calling for a violent overthrow of a starbucks let alone the Government.



based on Trump's speech no one not even the most ardent sufferer of TDS can make a case for inciting an insurrection. not even Adam Schiff.
The_Waco_Kid is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 04:03 PM   #28
The_Waco_Kid
AKA Admiral Waco Kid
 
The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: The MAGA Zone
Posts: 37,006
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HDGristle View Post
Disagree as you feel fit, TWK. Bipartisanship on that committee had nothing to do with pro-Trump or anti-Trump. It had to do with majority party and minority party. Both were represented and bipartisan consensus was found.

Unfortunately, what you're complaining about went out the window when McCarthy picked up his ball and went home instead of fielding a team.

And it was ultimately Pelosi that vetoed Banks and Jordan. Schiff wasn't Speaker



and since Pelosi is as biased as Schiff what's the point? same result. speaking of Schiff, still waiting for that evidence he's seen with his own two bugeyes of "Russian Collusion".
The_Waco_Kid is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 05:26 PM   #29
String Nutts
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 9, 2015
Location: yinzer land
Posts: 132
Encounters: 1
Default

If anyone is interested:


https://s3.documentcloud.org/documen...-committee.pdf
String Nutts is offline   Quote
Old 12-19-2022, 05:43 PM   #30
HDGristle
The Man (He/Him/His)
 
HDGristle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 7, 2019
Location: The Box... Indeed
Posts: 4,920
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid View Post
and since Pelosi is as biased as Schiff what's the point? same result. speaking of Schiff, still waiting for that evidence he's seen with his own two bugeyes of "Russian Collusion".
Accuracy matters. You're ascribing power and action to someone that didn't have it.
HDGristle is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved