Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

apparently

Posted on: October 15, 2019 at 15:47:20 CT
TigerJackSwartz MU
Posts:
64113
Member For:
16.79 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
it does
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

Why, again, is the House Intelligence Committee running - Sal MU - 10/15 15:10:09
     RE: Why, again, is the House Intelligence Committee running - MOCO SON MU - 10/15 16:38:30
     RE: Why: Let's see, Cummings, Nadler and Schiff. Who - None**** MU - 10/15 16:01:22
     Alexandria occasional-Kotex told them to. Duh. Nm - hokie VT - 10/15 15:48:02
     It is a plot to ensure Dems are never elected again - 615Tiger STL - 10/15 15:40:08
          They will not recover from this....how can they? Who will - MUGuy2004 STL - 10/15 15:42:02
               Tic Toc - 615Tiger STL - 10/15 15:48:51
     RE: Why, again, is the House Intelligence Committee running - ToughRichard MU - 10/15 15:36:04
     Nadler is not as good a leaker and liar as Schiff - mu7176grad MU - 10/15 15:23:18
          Schiff is from Cali, where the actors are from(nm) - MUGuy2004 STL - 10/15 15:31:28
               Hey---Reagan was an actor - mu7176grad MU - 10/15 15:34:45
                    Reagan was **** - pickle MU - 10/15 15:45:05
                    Former Dem too(nm) - MUGuy2004 STL - 10/15 15:38:21
                    Nah, you're old. There've been better actors(nm) - Mormad MU - 10/15 15:36:04
                         Better actors for sure - mu7176grad MU - 10/15 15:38:42
     They have to choose between Cummings, Nadler and Schiff - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 10/15 15:16:48
          Cummings is very low IQ. nm. - MUTGR MU - 10/15 15:34:30
               RE: Cummings is very low IQ. nm. - ToughRichard MU - 10/15 15:38:34
     Is there an impeachment committee? (nm) - MrBlueSky MU - 10/15 15:15:16
          Study what happened previously. You won't like or - tman MU - 10/15 15:24:33
               RE: Study what happened previously. You won't like or - MrBlueSky MU - 10/15 15:25:24
                    Starr was not hired to start an impeachment inquiry (nm) - Sal MU - 10/15 15:35:38
                         Where did the evidence come from? (nm) - MrBlueSky MU - 10/15 15:37:29
                              Not from an impeachment inquiry conducted by Starr (nm) - Sal MU - 10/15 15:38:17
                                   So the Starr evidence was produced for impeachment without - SparkyStalcup MU - 10/15 17:35:52
                                        Starr wasn't hired as an IC for an impeachment inquiry (nm) - Sal MU - 10/15 18:29:35
                    And then what occurred. Keep following the - tman MU - 10/15 15:28:59
                         Then a whole house vote.. - MrBlueSky MU - 10/15 15:34:47
                              And they set up the committee and the protocol - tman MU - 10/15 16:06:09
                              So it's just oversight, and has nothing to do - Sal MU - 10/15 15:37:34
          it falls under the judiciary committee (nm) - Sal MU - 10/15 15:19:26
               It doesn't have to. - MrBlueSky MU - 10/15 15:23:16
                    Probably end up in Agriculture Comm before all over - mu7176grad MU - 10/15 15:28:28
                         Where better to talk about bullsh*t(nm) - MUGuy2004 STL - 10/15 15:28:58
                    Under the desk in the Oval Office? (nm) - JeffB MU - 10/15 15:26:18
                    That was used as the basis for impeachment proceedings - Sal MU - 10/15 15:26:06
                         The little progressive dems are just tired of losing - MUGuy2004 STL - 10/15 15:28:40
          And won't be one(nm) - MUGuy2004 STL - 10/15 15:15:40
     Because the dems have a court smack down fetish(nm) - MUGuy2004 STL - 10/15 15:14:51
     because they can? (nm) - TigerJackSwartz MU - 10/15 15:12:09
          why not the judiciary committee? - Sal MU - 10/15 15:19:58
               to trigger you and the other Trumpologists? (nm) - TigerJackSwartz MU - 10/15 15:28:17
                    why not the judiciary committee? (nm) - Sal MU - 10/15 15:30:47
                         RE: why not the judiciary committee? (nm) - TigerJackSwartz MU - 10/15 15:32:14
                         Because it doesn't have to start there (nm) - MrBlueSky MU - 10/15 15:32:01
                              A phone call with the President and another foreign leader - Sal MU - 10/15 15:34:55
                                   apparently - TigerJackSwartz MU - 10/15 15:47:20
                                        It does not fall under the purview of the IC - Sal MU - 10/15 15:52:22
                                             apparently - TigerJackSwartz MU - 10/15 15:58:19
                                                  So you believe Maguire broke the law? (nm) - Sal MU - 10/15 16:00:39
               RE: why not the judiciary committee? - MrBlueSky MU - 10/15 15:22:52
                    So this isn't an impeachment inquiry at all? - Sal MU - 10/15 15:27:03
                    Go the next step. After they found initial facts - tman MU - 10/15 15:25:48
          This will provide nothing but drama - MUGuy2004 STL - 10/15 15:13:13
     Because they can keep it behind closed doors - MUGuy2004 STL - 10/15 15:11:53
          Exactly, it allows them to leak, control everything. - RHAYWORTH MU - 10/15 15:19:35




©2024 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard