2aHawaii
General Topics => Political Discussion => Topic started by: drck1000 on February 05, 2020, 07:04:53 AM
-
Who watched? Your reactions?
I watched most. I thought it was more neutral than in past speeches. Obvious that he’s softened and speaking to different (even targeted) groups. Don’t really care for the “look who is here tonight”, but he did tie them into relevant messages and it’s something that past Presidents had been doing more and more.
Things that stuck with me:
1) Pelosi’s actions. Regardless of who you support or are against, her actions here super disrespectful on so many levels and many instances. How people were paying attention to her and her fellow “white coats”. Many comments on HNN roasting her, which is surprising.
2) No matter if Trump does things that Dems have pushed or supported in the past, they’ll fight him in it.
3) Tlaib and Omar need to go...
-
All 435 Reps are up for re-election.
I would love to see Nancy's reaction if Republicans won a super majority. I watched it and laughed at the reactions of the Dems at parts of Trump's speech.
-
All 435 Reps are up for re-election.
I would love to see Nancy's reaction if Republicans won a super majority. I watched it and laughed at the reactions of the Dems at parts of Trump's speech.
Something is seriously off/wrong with her. At times, acting like a petulant child. Other times, the overbearing mother to her band of "white coats". Other times, as if she's completely spacing.
I mean I get when the Speaker is at odd with the President. I haven't paid that close attention to all of the SOTU, but I don't recall that outward disdain to be put on display like that. To me, it shows how much pressure she's under and frustration that things aren't going well.
-
#PelosiTantrum :rofl:
-
I saw one of the parkland fathers got removed for interrupting the address
he is being praised by the left
when the congressman said "you lie" during Obama's address, it was disrespectful...
Who watched? Your reactions?
I watched most. I thought it was more neutral than in past speeches. Obvious that he’s softened and speaking to different (even targeted) groups. Don’t really care for the “look who is here tonight”, but he did tie them into relevant messages and it’s something that past Presidents had been doing more and more.
Things that stuck with me:
1) Pelosi’s actions. Regardless of who you support or are against, her actions here super disrespectful on so many levels and many instances. How people were paying attention to her and her fellow “white coats”. Many comments on HNN roasting her, which is surprising.
2) No matter if Trump does things that Dems have pushed or supported in the past, they’ll fight him in it.
3) Tlaib and Omar need to go...
-
some of us outgrow tantrums but I guess as we age its a vicious circle of life as we return to an adolescent stage - Pelosi is there. SHe should recuse herself and go into adult daycare. I think she should red flag herself too. That was an act of violence.
-
I watched as much as I could. It was just more of his rally speeches. It's okay. My takeoffs:
1. Pelosi did not announce Trump in the traditional way. Shows disrespect
2. Trump turned away without shaking Pelosi's outstretched hand
3. Pelosi talked all throughout the speech. When asked this morning what she was saying, Pence said he didn't know. He wasn't paying attention to her
4. Baby Pelosi ripped up her copy of the speech
There was nothing wrong with the speech. Trump did not attack the Dems which I think is appropriate for the SOTU speech. He showed some class tonight and Pelosi with most of the white coats did not.
-
To be honest, Trumps snub of Pelosi's handshake is taken out of proportion. He quickly turned away after giving her his speech. So he may not have saw it. But I'm sure he planned it that way. Compared to looking at her and down at her hand, then turning away.
Pelosi tearing up the speech in front of the cameras is classless, but I don't expect any less, so it's all G. Kind of like how she tears up the constitution.
TBH, I think it's unneeded to stand up every few minutes and clap. It also looks bad when only 1 side stands up and claps. Did they do the same when Barry was president? GOP sat, while DNC stood up?
-
I watched as much as I could. It was just more of his rally speeches. It's okay. My takeoffs:
1. Pelosi did not announce Trump in the traditional way. Shows disrespect
2. Trump turned away without shaking Pelosi's outstretched hand
3. Pelosi talked all throughout the speech. When asked this morning what she was saying, Pence said he didn't know. He wasn't paying attention to her
4. Baby Pelosi ripped up her copy of the speech
There was nothing wrong with the speech. Trump did not attack the Dems which I think is appropriate for the SOTU speech. He showed some class tonight and Pelosi with most of the white coats did not.
2. Missed that part, but I can see it both ways. As an intended snub and simple oversight as Trump has already turned.
3. She was muttering to herself many times. One of the main reactions that stuck with me was her shoulder shrugs on a couple of points that I would've thought would be supported by both sides. She wasn't paying attention a lot of times, sort of like a teenager in a restaurant with her parents playing on her phone. A further indicator that no matter that Trump had to say, she was against it. . .
4. I was shocked that she did that. While I'm not all "she should be censured" level, something that should be noted. Sadly, I think many TDS'ers will continue to praise her for it.
-
2. Missed that part, but I can see it both ways. As an intended snub and simple oversight as Trump has already turned.
3. She was muttering to herself many times. One of the main reactions that stuck with me was her shoulder shrugs on a couple of points that I would've thought would be supported by both sides. She wasn't paying attention a lot of times, sort of like a teenager in a restaurant with her parents playing on her phone. A further indicator that no matter that Trump had to say, she was against it. . .
4. I was shocked that she did that. While I'm not all "she should be censured" level, something that should be noted. Sadly, I think many TDS'ers will continue to praise her for it.
I just get perturbed and annoyed at the pettiness of her actions. To me it is more business as usual for her and the Dems.
-
I just get perturbed and annoyed at the pettiness of her actions. To me it is more business as usual for her and the Dems.
True. I just don't see how people don't see her as unstable at best. Even on HNN, Hirono was getting roasted for her comments on Pelosi's actions. I have been seeing more and more comments against Hirono and Schatz for a while now and hope that continues and is reflected in the polls, eventually. Not holding my breath. . .
-
I watched as much as I could. It was just more of his rally speeches. It's okay. My takeoffs:
1. Pelosi did not announce Trump in the traditional way. Shows disrespect
2. Trump turned away without shaking Pelosi's outstretched hand
3. Pelosi talked all throughout the speech. When asked this morning what she was saying, Pence said he didn't know. He wasn't paying attention to her
4. Baby Pelosi ripped up her copy of the speech
There was nothing wrong with the speech. Trump did not attack the Dems which I think is appropriate for the SOTU speech. He showed some class tonight and Pelosi with most of the white coats did not.
I watched on CSPAN to get around pundits plus I don't get regular TV reception here, I'm
all Satellite for TV, internet, and radio.
#1 is correct.
#2 Normally he'd shake the VP's and and then the Speakers hand Trump did neither.
#3 I've been learning to lip read because years of aircraft flight lines and shooting without hearing protection
have taken their toll on my hearing. She mumbled Fbombs a few times( it wasn't "Vacuum" which looks the same).
#4 That "fit" of hers is actually a violation of Federal law. That was an official Federal document. But like most all
Democrat party members nothing will come of it.
I'll add a note, they focused on Crazy Mazie a few times. Perfect representative for Hawaii, an out of control nutcase.
I couldn't keep up with the lip reading but, we should be afraid, very afraid of our representatives.
-
Good old Nancy
Completely preplanned
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7970209/It-felt-like-Mike-Pence-accuses-Nancy-Pelosi-planning-rip-speech.html?fbclid=IwAR2Y-OjLcsETQjE8PEnGTUd0Bzk7KIXFgqmghyhh13iiGfn6Ea8FAvhQnB4
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/02/05/18/24357276-7970209-image-m-23_1580928106466.jpg)
-
To be honest, Trumps snub of Pelosi's handshake is taken out of proportion. He quickly turned away after giving her his speech. So he may not have saw it. But I'm sure he planned it that way. Compared to looking at her and down at her hand, then turning away.
Maybe Trump didn't want to dignify Pelosi's behavior from his last SOTU address?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77ziSHFJPj8
-
Next year, the copy of Trump's SOTU address handed to Speaker Pelosi (assuming she's still in that job) should be made of Revlar or some other indestructable "paper".
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
** He should be sure Pence has a fire extinguisher handy, though. :wacko: :popcorn:
-
Good old Nancy
Completely preplanned
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7970209/It-felt-like-Mike-Pence-accuses-Nancy-Pelosi-planning-rip-speech.html?fbclid=IwAR2Y-OjLcsETQjE8PEnGTUd0Bzk7KIXFgqmghyhh13iiGfn6Ea8FAvhQnB4
Interesting. With each side hawking on things the other side does, I'm not surprised. I was more expecting coverage to show more reactions of others in the room, which it did. Catching some practically falling asleep.
When I watched the #PelosiTantrum live, it did seem "off". Like she was confused and seemed like she was looking for how to rip the paper, but not this make sense if there were "pre-tears". She can't even tear paper without it. . . :facepalm:
-
Next year, the copy of Trump's SOTU address handed to Speaker Pelosi (assuming she's still in that job) should be made of Revlar or some other indestructable "paper"
Your fish eye guy is notably absent from the merriment here.
Waiting for instructions how to respond to this?
-
Your fish eye guy is notably absent from the merriment here.
Waiting for instructions how to respond to this?
Undoubtedly he's cruising the forums frequented by Liberals and Socialists to get their take on things.
You know .... for "objectivity."
-
Interesting. With each side hawking on things the other side does, I'm not surprised. I was more expecting coverage to show more reactions of others in the room, which it did. Catching some practically falling asleep.
When I watched the #PelosiTantrum live, it did seem "off". Like she was confused and seemed like she was looking for how to rip the paper, but not this make sense if there were "pre-tears". She can't even tear paper without it. . . :facepalm:
If you watch the very start of the tantrum, it's apparent she started, then the camera changed to a wide angle shot of the floor. Once the camera was back on her, she started ripping.
Maybe she has trouble tearing more than 2 pieces of paper at a time, but it seems more like she was repeating the rip over and over just to make sure the cameras caught it.
She totally blew any issue disagreements the Dems will try to discuss now. They don't care about anything Trump said -- only about regaining power by any means necessary.
I really hope a Republican is sitting next to Pence at the next SOTU address.
-
To be honest, Trumps snub of Pelosi's handshake is taken out of proportion. He quickly turned away after giving her his speech. So he may not have saw it. But I'm sure he planned it that way. Compared to looking at her and down at her hand, then turning away.
TBH, I think it's unneeded to stand up every few minutes and clap. It also looks bad when only 1 side stands up and claps. Did they do the same when Barry was president? GOP sat, while DNC stood up?
I agree. It could have been Trump did not see her out stretched hand. But how could he miss so much sagging skin? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I like the standing up and clapping. For me it's a tradition that shows relative patriotism. If both both sides do it. Otherwise watching the Dems mostly sit when good things are announced that both sides support, to me just shows lack of respect. And of course it is tradition that the SCOTUS and the Armed Service guys do not clap nor stand at all.
-
If you watch the very start of the tantrum, it's apparent she started, then the camera changed to a wide angle shot of the floor. Once the camera was back on her, she started ripping.
Did not watch it, but from the video replays, it lloks like she keeps looking down at a monitor or maybe a cellphone to know when the camera was on her.
Very staged, very fake, the usual demorat play.
-
If you watch the very start of the tantrum, it's apparent she started, then the camera changed to a wide angle shot of the floor. Once the camera was back on her, she started ripping.
Maybe she has trouble tearing more than 2 pieces of paper at a time, but it seems more like she was repeating the rip over and over just to make sure the cameras caught it.
She totally blew any issue disagreements the Dems will try to discuss now. They don't care about anything Trump said -- only about regaining power by any means necessary.
I really hope a Republican is sitting next to Pence at the next SOTU address.
Didn't notice the camera angle thing. It did seem "off" somehow from what I recall from previous SOTU, where they seemed to quickly try to capture who all is there and rushing to shake hands with POTUS. Maybe I was watching MSBNC, CNN, etc years back. . .
Agree with the "they don't care" part. I don't post political stuff on SM, but after #PelosiTantrum, I did post some. Don't care which side you're on, her actions were despicable. They argue upholding the Constitution on one hand (impeachment), but then crap on it otherwise. It's just a piece of paper to her to use to her advantage when it suits her, and crap on it when it doesn't. . .
-
I agree. It could have been Trump did not see her out stretched hand. But how could he miss so much sagging skin? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I like the standing up and clapping. For me it's a tradition that shows relative patriotism. If both both sides do it. Otherwise watching the Dems mostly sit when good things are announced that both sides support, to me just shows lack of respect. And of course it is tradition that the SCOTUS and the Armed Service guys do not clap nor stand at all.
You have PDS ;D
There were a few times when the SCOTUS and the Joint Chiefs (and other .mil leaders) did standing ovations. Not often, but I was watching if there were time when they did acknowledge, but the "white coats" behind them didn't. . .
-
The entire Pelosi tantrum was pre-planned.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi apparently made tiny tears in her copy of President Trump’s State of the Union address —
so that her speech-ripping moment could go off without a hitch.
As Trump introduced cancer-stricken radio host Rush Limbaugh — who received the Medal of Freedom during the speech —
Pelosi could be seen grabbing the pages off the table.
Video shows her making what seemed to be a tearing motion and then placing the pages back on the table.
Photos of the sheets of paper show them face down on the table with small slits on the side, near where Pelosi would
eventually rip them into pieces.
https://nypost.com/2020/02/05/nancy-pelosi-pre-ripped-pages-of-trumps-sotu-speech-video-shows/
House Republicans have introduced a resolution to condemn Pelosi's lack of decorum, rudeness and for intentionally destroying an official government document.
She can't defend her actions as a spontaneous emotional response to the speech. Not only was it obviously staged, but she received the text of the speech well in advance, as do all members of Congress and the press. Speeches are released ahead of time to allow for news print agencies to include actual quotes in their stories immediately after the event, and to allow any rebuttals to have prepared comments immediately afterward.
-
Pam Bondi on FOX News this morning made an interesting point.
The copy of the speech Pelosi ripped on camera was an original of the speech that was signed by the President. That copy is supposed to be entered into the Congressional record, and as such it belongs to the Congress, not Pelosi.
FL Congressman Matt Gaetz not only filed an ethics complaint claiming Pelosi violated House and Senate rules regarding decorum, but he also referred her to the DOJ for an investigation into whether she violated federal record law.
It's about time the GOP started hitting back using the Dem's own tactics.
-
Pam Bondi on FOX News this morning made an interesting point.
The copy of the speech Pelosi ripped on camera was an original of the speech that was signed by the President. That copy is supposed to be entered into the Congressional record, and as such it belongs to the Congress, not Pelosi.
FL Congressman Matt Gaetz not only filed an ethics complaint claiming Pelosi violated House and Senate rules regarding decorum, but he also referred her to the DOJ for an investigation into whether she violated federal record law.
It's about time the GOP started hitting back using the Dem's own tactics.
4D chess. Why use indestructible paper. Then cannot charge for destroying a record.
-
Things that stuck with me:
1) Pelosi’s actions. Regardless of who you support or are against, her actions here super disrespectful on so many levels and many instances. How people were paying attention to her and her fellow “white coats”. Many comments on HNN roasting her, which is surprising.
In light of some of the disrespectful things Trump has done in the past I find no reason to be upset at this. Republicans can't be fine with Trump's unique style then become so offended because she ripped up a speech copy. That is snowflake level action.
-
In light of some of the disrespectful things Trump has done in the past I find no reason to be upset at this. Republicans can't be fine with Trump's unique style then become so offended because she ripped up a speech copy. That is snowflake level action.
I didn't say anything about defending Trump or Rep position. I said it was disrespectful regardless of which position you are (Rep/Dem/whatever). They must respect the Office and their position, including the traditions. Many politicians don't, but that's a different story. My comments was on Pelosi's actions and not anything beyond. Please read and don't add your opinion to what I said. . . If you want to defend Pelosi, have at it. If you can't see the hypocrisy in her actions, then whatevers. . .
-
I wish Trump would respect the office and their positions a bit more.
I am of the mindset that the right thing to do is show respect even when it wasn't shown to you but I also know how tempting it is to respond in kind.
The biggest hypocrisy I see is republicans getting butt-hurt because she tore up a speech. I mean seriously, Trump has used juvenile insults on other congressman, insulted veterans, and said other numerous disrespectful things, and his supporters have the balls to complain Nancy was rude?
-
I wish Trump would respect the office and their positions a bit more.
I am of the mindset that the right thing to do is show respect even when it wasn't shown to you but I also know how tempting it is to respond in kind.
The biggest hypocrisy I see is republicans getting butt-hurt because she tore up a speech. I mean seriously, Trump has used juvenile insults on other congressman, insulted veterans, and said other numerous disrespectful things, and his supporters have the balls to complain Nancy was rude?
Mr. "What-About-Trump" thinks he has a valid point.
Pelosi doesn't get a pass for disrespecting the Chamber of which she is speaker.
Pelosi doesn't get to destroy a signed original copy of a speech SHE invited the President to give to the nation. The copy belongs to the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES and is part of the official record. She destroyed a government document.
Trump would already be facing two more articles of impeachment (at least) if he tore up an official record on national TV in a choreographed fake tantrum.
-
Mr. "What-About-Trump" thinks he has a valid point.
Knows, not thinks. I can get a dictionary if you can't tell the difference between those two words
Pelosi doesn't get a pass for disrespecting the Chamber of which she is speaker.
But Trump does?
Pelosi doesn't get to destroy a signed original copy of a speech SHE invited the President to give to the nation. The copy belongs to the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES and is part of the official record. She destroyed a government document.
Nope, not in this day and age. This was a copy of a speech, she wasn't required to keep it, maintain it, or file it away somewhere. Plus documents are electronic and they can print up a new one. It's not like someone hand-wrote it and it is the only one. It was not an archival record. You gotta really be drinking a lot of kool-aid to fall for this one.
Trump would already be facing two more articles of impeachment (at least) if he tore up an official record on national TV in a choreographed fake tantrum.
Wrong.
-
Knows, not thinks. I can get a dictionary if you can't tell the difference between those two words
But Trump does?
Nope, not in this day and age. This was a copy of a speech, she wasn't required to keep it, maintain it, or file it away somewhere. Plus documents are electronic and they can print up a new one. It's not like someone hand-wrote it and it is the only one. It was not an archival record. You gotta really be drinking a lot of kool-aid to fall for this one.
Wrong.
Everything you just posted is 100% opinion -- your opinion.
Gaetz filing ethics complaint against Pelosi for 'destroying' Trump speech
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) announced that he is filing an ethics complaint against Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)
for “destroying” a copy of President Trump’s speech after his State of the Union address.
“BREAKING: I'm filing an ethics complaint against @SpeakerPelosi for destroying @realDonaldTrump's State of
the Union speech,” Gaetz tweeted late Wednesday. “Her conduct was beneath the dignity of the House, and a
potential violation of law (18 USC 2071).”
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/481796-gaetz-files-ethics-complaint-against-pelosi-for-destroying-trump-speech
As usual, I share facts, you only have your unsupported opinions.
-
Everything you just posted is 100% opinion -- your opinion.
Gaetz filing ethics complaint against Pelosi for 'destroying' Trump speech
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/481796-gaetz-files-ethics-complaint-against-pelosi-for-destroying-trump-speech
As usual, I share facts, you only have your unsupported opinions.
It is your job to prove it is a crime, not mine to prove there was no crime.
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/02/07/us/politics/ap-us-trump-pelosi-fact-check.html
"Heidi Kitrosser, a law professor at the University of Minnesota, said: “This is not an archival document. ... This is one of many, many, many copies of President Trump's speech and Nancy Pelosi is free to do with it whatever she will.”
By the way, the article you posted is basically just snowflake Gaetz' opinion so you get an "F" for providing so called facts. The only facts in the article is that Gaetz filed a complaint.
-
It is your job to prove it is a crime, not mine to prove there was no crime.
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/02/07/us/politics/ap-us-trump-pelosi-fact-check.html
"Heidi Kitrosser, a law professor at the University of Minnesota, said: “This is not an archival document. ... This is one of many, many, many copies of President Trump's speech and Nancy Pelosi is free to do with it whatever she will.”
By the way, the article you posted is basically just snowflake Gaetz' opinion so you get an "F" for providing so called facts. The only facts in the article is that Gaetz filed a complaint.
Who are you telling to prove a crime? Me?
LOL!!! You're living in an alternate reality. You didn't address the facts in the article I linked. Why is that?
Trollin ......
-
Who are you telling to prove a crime? Me?
LOL!!! You're living in an alternate reality. You didn't address the facts in the article I linked. Why is that?
Because the article didn't contain any facts to support your claim of a crime. It only said Gaetz requested a criminal referral for a "potential violation"
Plus my article thoroughly rebutted your claim.
:closed:
-
Because the article didn't contain any facts to support your claim of a crime. It only said Gaetz requested a criminal referral for a "potential violation"
Plus my article thoroughly rebutted your claim.
:closed:
Read the statute Gaetz referenced. Not my job to spoon-feed you the truth.
-
Pam Bondi on FOX News this morning made an interesting point.
The copy of the speech Pelosi ripped on camera was an original of the speech that was signed by the President. That copy is supposed to be entered into the Congressional record, and as such it belongs to the Congress, not Pelosi.
FL Congressman Matt Gaetz not only filed an ethics complaint claiming Pelosi violated House and Senate rules regarding decorum, but he also referred her to the DOJ for an investigation into whether she violated federal record law.
It's about time the GOP started hitting back using the Dem's own tactics.
The original given to Pelosi is the original that is supposed to be entered into the congressional record. Pelosi is supposed to enter that original into the congressional record. If Gaetz had not entered a copy (Not Pelosi’s original as required) there would be no congressional record of the speech. Trump’s speech did not go on the attack towards the Democrats. I expected he would have. I’m glad he didn’t. There is a time and a place for it and the SOTU is not that time nor place. Trump actually showed some class and came out as the bigger person that night. Especially over Pelosi and most of the Dems. He looked and sounded absolutely presidential. It’s not the first time, and I hope it’s not the last. I think he is learning (albeit slowly) when it is beneficial to be on the attack and when to be the bigger person.
As Ben Shapiro says in his podcast, that night he was “Good Trump”.
Reagan started these more partisan SOTU speeches where the president recognizes people and accomplishments of his party and not the government (both parties) as a whole. The SOTU used to be quite different before Reagan. While I enjoy the speeches I wonder if we should go back to the more non-partisan type of speech that we used to have.
-
The original given to Pelosi is the original that is supposed to be entered into the congressional record. Pelosi is supposed to enter that original into the congressional record. If Gaetz had not entered a copy (Not Pelosi’s original as required) there would be no congressional record of the speech. Trump’s speech did not go on the attack towards the Democrats. I expected he would have. I’m glad he didn’t. There is a time and a place for it and the SOTU is not that time nor place. Trump actually showed some class and came out as the bigger person that night. Especially over Pelosi and most of the Dems. He looked and sounded absolutely presidential. It’s not the first time, and I hope it’s not the last. I think he is learning (albeit slowly) when it is beneficial to be on the attack and when to be the bigger person.
As Ben Shapiro says in his podcast, that night he was “Good Trump”.
Reagan started these more partisan SOTU speeches where the president recognizes people and accomplishments of his party and not the government (both parties) as a whole. The SOTU used to be quite different before Reagan. While I enjoy the speeches I wonder if we should go back to the more non-partisan type of speech that we used to have.
Many people have labeled Trump's speech as the best SOTU in modern history, at least as good as -- if not better than -- Reagan's speeches.
The first SOTU address in an administration is meant to preview the policies and objectives of the new President.
The SOTU address given in the year the President is running for reelection is always a review of accomplishments, and a proposal to accomplish more in the second term.
Yet, the Leftist MSM decried this SOTU as a "campaign rally".
You can't fix stupid. EVERY SOTU address given when the president is running for reelection contains the exact same thing. What set Trump's speech apart from his predecessors' was:|
a. He has SO MANY achievements and successes to talk about, one speech doesn't allow time for all the minor ones -- only the really big ones, and
b. He spent so much more of his time recognizing others in attendance, and not as much time saying "I", "me" and "my" -- unlike the previous President's speeches.
People have tallied the number of times Obama used personal pronouns in his speeches, and the contrast with Trump's speeches is staggering.
-
According to LAWYERS, not only is Pelosi possibly subject to House rules and ethics violations, the federal statute she willfully violated on national television carries several potential penalties:
1. fine
2. imprisonment up to three years
3. removal from her position as speaker and removal from office
4. disbarment from ever holding a government position in the future
If the Speaker is god going to grasp at the thinnest of straws to try and remove the President, it's only fair that members of the House likewise use this stunt to remove Pelosi.
It's a brave, new world, where the GOP is no longer afraid to play by the Democrat's rules.
BREAKING, Nancy Pelosi FELONY Notice – Dems Scrambling For Answers
https://youtu.be/EIEJAI17hpc
-
Many people have labeled Trump's speech as the best SOTU in modern history, at least as good as -- if not better than -- Reagan's speeches.
The first SOTU address in an administration is meant to preview the policies and objectives of the new President.
The SOTU address given in the year the President is running for reelection is always a review of accomplishments, and a proposal to accomplish more in the second term.
Yet, the Leftist MSM decried this SOTU as a "campaign rally".
You can't fix stupid. EVERY SOTU address given when the president is running for reelection contains the exact same thing. What set Trump's speech apart from his predecessors' was:|
a. He has SO MANY achievements and successes to talk about, one speech doesn't allow time for all the minor ones -- only the really big ones, and
b. He spent so much more of his time recognizing others in attendance, and not as much time saying "I", "me" and "my" -- unlike the previous President's speeches.
People have tallied the number of times Obama used personal pronouns in his speeches, and the contrast with Trump's speeches is staggering.
While the speech itself might be one of the best, if not the best, I still think no one can deliver a speech better than Reagan. He just had a delivery that was so unique that he could literally convince everyone in the US that Pelosi is a tea totaler.
While I really liked Tuesday’s speech I think he could have included the house in the few things they did. And he could have given more credit to his administration. And he could have given more credit to Mitch and the senate. But overall “Good Trump”.
-
While the speech itself might be one of the best, if not the best, I still think no one can deliver a speech better than Reagan. He just had a delivery that was so unique that he could literally convince everyone in the US that Pelosi is a tea totaler.
While I really liked Tuesday’s speech I think he could have included the house in the few things they did. And he could have given more credit to his administration. And he could have given more credit to Mitch and the senate. But overall “Good Trump”.
He praised Mitch and lots of people in his admin in his post-acquittal press conference.
If he tried to squeeze in every single thing people want or expect to hear, we'd be hearing Oscar ceremony attendees going, "Oh my god! Is this address ever going to end???" :rofl:
-
According to LAWYERS, not only is Pelosi possibly subject to House rules and ethics violations, the federal statute she willfully violated on national television carries several potential penalties:
1. fine
2. imprisonment up to three years
3. removal from her position as speaker and removal from office
4. disbarment from ever holding a government position in the future
If the Speaker is god going to grasp at the thinnest of straws to try and remove the President, it's only fair that members of the House likewise use this stunt to remove Pelosi.
It's a brave, new world, where the GOP is no longer afraid to play by the Democrat's rules.
BREAKING, Nancy Pelosi FELONY Notice – Dems Scrambling For Answers
https://youtu.be/EIEJAI17hpc
...
I vote for 1,23 and 4. :rofl:
-
Read the statute Gaetz referenced. Not my job to spoon-feed you the truth.
Doesn't qualify, already proved it to you. Stop being a snowflake
-
Doesn't qualify, already proved it to you. Stop being a snowflake
Begone, Troll.
-
The original given to Pelosi is the original that is supposed to be entered into the congressional record. Pelosi is supposed to enter that original into the congressional record. If Gaetz had not entered a copy (Not Pelosi’s original as required) there would be no congressional record of the speech. Trump’s speech did not go on the attack towards the Democrats. I expected he would have. I’m glad he didn’t. There is a time and a place for it and the SOTU is not that time nor place. Trump actually showed some class and came out as the bigger person that night. Especially over Pelosi and most of the Dems. He looked and sounded absolutely presidential. It’s not the first time, and I hope it’s not the last. I think he is learning (albeit slowly) when it is beneficial to be on the attack and when to be the bigger person.
As Ben Shapiro says in his podcast, that night he was “Good Trump”.
Reagan started these more partisan SOTU speeches where the president recognizes people and accomplishments of his party and not the government (both parties) as a whole. The SOTU used to be quite different before Reagan. While I enjoy the speeches I wonder if we should go back to the more non-partisan type of speech that we used to have.
You're another butt-hurt? [sarcasm\]
Nevermind that there are policies and procedures to follow that are based on years of precedence. There are those would write it off as "just a piece of paper". Same probably think the Constitution are just "friendly suggestions".
As for the speech itself, I think Trump did throw many barbs in there. I haven't had a chance to fact check, but there were many times that Trump brought up things that I thought both sides could agree and support, but the camera just showed sour faces, particularly many wearing white coats. Even when Pelosi gave standing ovations, the white coats sat and sulked.
I hate politics in general, but when people are so deranged for the irrational hate for someone that they don't see the positives that they have achieved. . .
-
You're another butt-hurt? [sarcasm\]
Nevermind that there are policies and procedures to follow that are based on years of precedence. There are those would write it off as "just a piece of paper". Same probably think the Constitution are just "friendly suggestions".
As for the speech itself, I think Trump did throw many barbs in there. I haven't had a chance to fact check, but there were many times that Trump brought up things that I thought both sides could agree and support, but the camera just showed sour faces, particularly many wearing white coats. Even when Pelosi gave standing ovations, the white coats sat and sulked.
I hate politics in general, but when people are so deranged for the irrational hate for someone that they don't see the positives that they have achieved. . .
Yeah, I’m a butt-hurt triggered snowflake. And Taco Bell is real Mexican food. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I’m actually in the class of not really caring very much. But after the impeachment waste of taxpayer dollars I just want her punished in some way because if she isn’t then she will continue. If it were not for the impeachment I would have said big deal.
Trump and Pelosi are thin skinned little babies. Instead of rising above this they keep jabbing at each other. Only this time Trump took the high road. I agree he should have given credit where credit is due for things like USMCA. But I don’t consider it a snub that he left them out. I just think he should have included them. Because the better man/woman did it for our country and not recognition. I just think it would have been a nice gesture if he had.
-
Yeah, I’m a butt-hurt triggered snowflake. And Taco Bell is real Mexican food. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I’m actually in the class of not really caring very much. But after the impeachment waste of taxpayer dollars I just want her punished in some way because if she isn’t then she will continue. If it were not for the impeachment I would have said big deal.
Trump and Pelosi are thin skinned little babies. Instead of rising above this they keep jabbing at each other. Only this time Trump took the high road. I agree he should have given credit where credit is due for things like USMCA. But I don’t consider it a snub that he left them out. I just think he should have included them. Because the better man/woman did it for our country and not recognition. I just think it would have been a nice gesture if he had.
Mmmm. . . Taco Bell you say? ;D
I also don't care much either way. However, just like when I see BS being spewed here, I take notice. However, doing so tends to provide food for the trolls. Can't tell you how many times I typed up a long response and said to myself "fcuk it, it's not worth it" and didn't post. . . Mostly stayed away from the political section in 2a this past weekend and it was awesome. ;D
Keep me posted on how your wife is doing. Happy hour time!
-
Mmmm. . . Taco Bell you say? ;D
I also don't care much either way. However, just like when I see BS being spewed here, I take notice. However, doing so tends to provide food for the trolls. Can't tell you how many times I typed up a long response and said to myself "fcuk it, it's not worth it" and didn't post. . . Mostly stayed away from the political section in 2a this past weekend and it was awesome. ;D
Keep me posted on how your wife is doing. Happy hour time!
I agree. Certain politics really bother me so I stop. Or I just answer those I know won’t spew some shit (Conservative or Liberal). When I have had a few beers I try to troll a few certain people who frequent the political section. Just to watch their responses. :rofl:
My wife transferred to a rehab hospital late last week. She is coming along quite well. But the place she is at is in town and I live Makakilo. It makes spending time with her difficult. I am hoping she will be able to come home next week. Thanks for asking.
-
Viral Video of Pelosi Ripping Up Trump's SOTU Address Has Dems Demanding Big Tech Step In
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) made waves when she decided to shred up President Donald Trump's State of the Union address before he even finished giving his speech. Shortly after the incident, conservatives took to social media to criticize Pelosi for her actions. After all, it was rude to completely disregard the people mentioned in Trump's address, like Tuskegee Airman Charles McGee, and Sergeant First Class Townsend Williams who is on his fourth deployment to the Middle East. It was later revealed that Pelosi had preplanned the move. It wasn't a "courteous thing to do considering the alternatives," as she claimed.
Turning Point USA, the conservative college group, decided to edit a video of Trump's speech acknowledging various people who have benefited from the president's policies, along with Pelosi shredding the speech.
The video has received more than 20 million views across various platforms, including Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. President Donald Trump even tweeted it himself.
And because of the massive attention the video has received, Pelosi's congressional staff and fellow Democrats are demanding Big Tech pull the plug on the video.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/02/10/viral-video-of-pelosi-ripping-up-trumps-sotu-address-has-dems-demanding-big-tech-n2561099 (https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/02/10/viral-video-of-pelosi-ripping-up-trumps-sotu-address-has-dems-demanding-big-tech-n2561099)
Not this part is classic. . .
What makes this even more unbelievable: one of Facebook's communications team members, Andy Stone, even chided Hammill for making the claim. And just for clarification, Stone is a fellow Democrat. He's worked for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), the House Majority PAC and even Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Andy Stone
@andymstone
Replying to @Drew_Hammill
Sorry, are you suggesting the President didn't make those remarks and the Speaker didn't rip the speech?
When even the super left biased FB is essentially saying "she did it, what's your problem?"
I watched the video and I get the comments on the editing, but is that different from other politicians? Yes, I realize the leanings of the sources cited in the article. But I guess I now know where some here get their information. Rep. Ro Khanna stated "Social media platforms are a place where people come for news & information". Sadly, that's where I think many folks stop and take those postings as truth. . .
-
I agree. Certain politics really bother me so I stop. Or I just answer those I know won’t spew some shit (Conservative or Liberal). When I have had a few beers I try to troll a few certain people who frequent the political section. Just to watch their responses. :rofl:
My wife transferred to a rehab hospital late last week. She is coming along quite well. But the place she is at is in town and I live Makakilo. It makes spending time with her difficult. I am hoping she will be able to come home next week. Thanks for asking.
:rofl:
I admit to a response here or there that were the result of coming online after a night of drinking. ;D
Good to hear Mrs. Inspector progress and completely understand the location challenges of rehab facility. Went through those processes many times with my dad. Hope she continues to improve. :thumbsup:
-
Viral Video of Pelosi Ripping Up Trump's SOTU Address Has Dems Demanding Big Tech Step In
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/02/10/viral-video-of-pelosi-ripping-up-trumps-sotu-address-has-dems-demanding-big-tech-n2561099 (https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/02/10/viral-video-of-pelosi-ripping-up-trumps-sotu-address-has-dems-demanding-big-tech-n2561099)
Not this part is classic. . .
When even the super left biased FB is essentially saying "she did it, what's your problem?"
I watched the video and I get the comments on the editing, but is that different from other politicians? Yes, I realize the leanings of the sources cited in the article. But I guess I now know where some here get their information. Rep. Ro Khanna stated "Social media platforms are a place where people come for news & information". Sadly, that's where I think many folks stop and take those postings as truth. . .
The funny part is how STUPID Democrats believe everyone on Social Media is. If someone seeing that video can't recognize that Pelosi wasn't ripping up paper for the entire length of the SOTU address, either because (1) they actually watched the speech, (2) they heard the news that the ripping only happened at the end of the speech or (3) the editing is so obvious simply based on common sense, then those people are 100% gullible and just too stupid to vote anyway.
I remember an ad that showed Romney and Ryan pushing grandma off a cliff. Political ads use various editing and framing techniques to paint their narratives. Are they saying now that continuing to lie that Trump made fun of the handicapped, attacked Gold Star families and invited Russia at a rally speech to hack Clinton's emails are now off limits? :sleeping:
-
The funny part is how STUPID Democrats believe everyone on Social Media is. If someone seeing that video can't recognize that Pelosi wasn't ripping up paper for the entire length of the SOTU address, either because (1) they actually watched the speech, (2) they heard the news that the ripping only happened at the end of the speech or (3) the editing is so obvious simply based on common sense, then those people are 100% gullible and just too stupid to vote anyway.
I remember an ad that showed Romney and Ryan pushing grandma off a cliff. Political ads use various editing and framing techniques to paint their narratives. Are they saying now that continuing to lie that Trump made fun of the handicapped, attacked Gold Star families and invited Russia at a rally speech to hack Clinton's emails are now off limits? :sleeping:
Agree. Similar with looking into gun stuff. Folks are so lazy and just take what media or other sources convey as truth/fact. Remind you of anyone here? :hmm:
I honestly do see both sides and it doesn't take much effort or intelligence to see both sides. Now if someone takes the time to look into things and base their opinion on facts, then we can have a discussion. Again, there seem to be those here who either aren't willing to do so, blindly follow (like the example above), just argue for the sake of being obtuse, or all of the above. . .
-
Agree. Similar with looking into gun stuff. Folks are so lazy and just take what media or other sources convey as truth/fact. Remind you of anyone here? :hmm:
I honestly do see both sides and it doesn't take much effort or intelligence to see both sides. Now if someone takes the time to look into things and base their opinion on facts, then we can have a discussion. Again, there seem to be those here who either aren't willing to do so, blindly follow (like the example above), just argue for the sake of being obtuse, or all of the above. . .
why you gotta talk like that about me?
i'm right here, I can hear you, you know
-
why you gotta talk like that about me?
i'm right here, I can hear you, you know
#comeatmebro
"Can hear the words that are appearing on your monitor?" :rofl:
-
Begone, Troll.
Oh look, the snowflake got triggered.
-
don't know why you guys still arguing over stupid crap...we just got screwed over by our legislators :grrr: focus energy there
-
don't know why you guys still arguing over stupid crap...we just got screwed over by our legislators :grrr: focus energy there
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: