Gun Tweet of the Day: Major League Umpire Rob Drake is Buying an AR-15

fear horror cartoon

Bigstock

The mainstream sports media is having a collective aneurysm over this tweet from MLB umpire Rob Drake:

As ESPN is reporting . . .

The tweet, which was deleted soon after it was posted, followed one earlier in the night regarding the House of Representatives’ impeachment proceedings with President Donald Trump.

The other tweet read: “You can’t do an impeachment inquiry from the basement of Capital Hill without even a vote! What is going on in this country?”

Drake deactivated his account Wednesday. He did not return phone and text messages.

Look for Drake to be calling balls and strikes in the Arizona little league next spring.

comments

  1. avatar Steve Eisenberg says:

    It’s not okay to be right anymore.

    1. avatar Mad Max says:

      We could turn this around if everyone who truly supports the Bill of Rights would do everything possible to make the saying “Get Woke, Go Broke” true.

    2. avatar Scott C. says:

      Exactly, if you say or do anything that goes against the left main stream media, you are a racist, Misogynistic, and a bunch of other bad “…ists” because you… for the children.

    3. avatar Hannibal says:

      Impeachment is a legal process set out by the Constitution. Threatening civil war over it is stupid as hell. It’s not as though impeachment changes the political makeup of the government. Just rotates out the orange doofus.

      1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        Legal? I thought impeachment was a *political* action.

        There’s no prison time for being impeached, just an early retirement…

        1. avatar Specialist38 says:

          There is impeached, and then there is impeached and removed.

          BiG difference. Clinton was impeached. Didnt really affect him too much.

          Impeachment Is a legal process. We magnet to see of they have the votes to do it.

          Removing will be another matter and I am guessing that wont happen.

      2. avatar Arc says:

        Except there isn’t a legitimate reason to impeach, making any impeachment illegitimate. Regardless of success or failure of this faux impeachment, I take my orders from President Donald J Trump, Command and Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States of America and the officers he has appointed over me.

        -Retired 0311 . . . standing by for word from higher.

      3. avatar Merle 0 says:

        Political process. And you can’t sit there and act surprised that a lot of people would be mad, even to the point of violence, over a political attempt to remove a legally elected president who won fair and square, who committed no crimes and is being removed only because a lot of politicians don’t like him, and think they know better then American people. Hell, the left threatens violence simply because they lost the election.

        1. avatar Big Bill says:

          Exactly.
          After all, people were (and continue to be) mad, even to the point of violence, that Hillary didn’t get elected.
          Whether this will become a civil war or not, I’m not too sure. I doubt it, personally.

      4. avatar pwrserge says:

        1. There are specific causes that justify impeachment. The demokkkomies refuse to pick a story and stick to it.
        2. The concept of secret testimony is anathema to our system of government.
        3. There was no threat. Get a dictionary.

        1. avatar Big Bill says:

          “2. The concept of secret testimony is anathema to our system of government.”

          Not really. Grand Jury activities are held in secret, and the prosecutor gets to present any evidence he sees fit (while ignoring any he doesn’t want the GJ to see), calls witnesses that will bolster his case (ignoring those who don’t), and doesn’t allow cross examinations, or even allow the accused to have representation.
          Which is exactly what the House committees are doing. A big difference is that the committees are leaking snippets of testimony (taken out of context), labeling them as “explosive,” “smoking gun,” etc.
          What happened to the whistleblowers, anyway? They were supposed to be exactly what was going to get Trump impeached.
          Watch for “open” investigations to come later, after the Dems craft their questions properly to bring out what they consider to be damning “evidence,” carefully making sure to exclude and evidence that would make Trump appear to be doing what he is allowed to do.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Bull shit.

          1. Grand Jury deliberations are sealed and the DNC publishing the contents of those deliberations or even alluding to them would itself be a crime.
          2. You need authorization to convene a Grand Jury. That authorization, in this case, needs to be provided by the full House. No such authorization exists.
          3. A Grand Jury indictment can be quashed by a preliminary evidentiary hearing. In the impeachment system, there is no “Grand Jury”. What you have is the equivalent of a preliminary evidentiary hearing where the full house votes on sufficiency of evidence rather than a judge. In such proceedings, the defense has a right to cross-examine witnesses, and call witnesses of their own.

          If I was on the relevant committee, I would leak the full transcripts and dare the Demokkkommies to do anything about it. Secret “investigations” are anathema to our justice system.

        3. avatar Miner49er says:

          “ the DNC publishing the contents of those deliberations or even alluding to them would itself be a crime.“

          Total BS, would you please cite the law that is being broken by the house Democrats.

          These committees investigating if there is a cause for impeachment is not an impeachment trial, you people don’t know a thing about the constitutional process.

          This is not a grand jury, so whatever you think you know about grand jury’s is irrelevant to the procedure being followed by the house of representatives.

          The rules being followed by the house of representatives are the rules put in place by the Republicans in 2015 during their Benghazi investigation’s.

          And the sham trespass into the SCIF where the hearings were being held was nothing but a dog and pony show. The Republican members of the relevant committees were already in the room hearing the testimony and asking questions.

          The Constitution sets out the process for impeachment and gives full authority to the house of representatives to conduct their impeachment inquiry and formal hearing as the Republican did with Clinton’s impeachment..

          Just because you worship your messiah Don the con, doesn’t somehow give you the right to ignore the United States Constitution.

        4. avatar pwrserge says:

          Sorry commie, the Constitution doesn’t grant Congress the right to execute an illegal coup. The entire DNC caucus needs to be charged with treason and thrown in GITMO. You can join them.

        5. avatar Miner49er says:

          So Sergei, you know more about constitutional law then a nationally recognized judge and fox commentator:

          “ FOX NEWS JUDGE SAYS HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY ‘CONSISTENT WITH THE RULES’ THAT ‘REPUBLICAN MAJORITY’ SIGNED INTO LAW

          Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said Thursday that Republican complaints about the “secrecy” of closed-door impeachment hearings don’t hold water because the process is “consistent with the rules” that a “Republican majority” signed into law.
          Trump and his Republican supporters have repeatedly argued that the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry has been conducted improperly because the testimony of witnesses has been carried out in close-door hearings. On Wednesday morning, a group of GOP representatives, some of whom did not serve on the investigating committees, stormed one of those secure depositions, chanting “let us in.” This delayed the hearing, but it eventually went forward in the afternoon with only the Democrats and Republicans serving on the relevant committees permitted to attend.

          “As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors…they are consistent with the rules,” Napolitano, who previously served as a New Jersey Superior Court judge, explained during a segment of the Fox News morning show Fox & Friends.”

        6. avatar pwrserge says:

          Cunt, putting something in quotes does not make it a citation. Link the article or STFU.

          Oh, and I definitely know more about constitutional law than a drugged out commie traitor like you.

        7. avatar Miner49er says:

          Ivan, why don’t you address the content of my citation? Are you maintaining that it is somehow fake news, that judge Andrew Napolitano did not make that statement?

          Do you have any factual information that is contrary to the statements by Judge Napolitano, or do you just have more angry, empty speech to spout?

        8. avatar pwrserge says:

          I would argue that a partial citation with no reference to the underlying context has no probative value. Why don’t you try linking your propaganda so we can all laugh at what sort of left-wing conspiracy sites you go to to get your “news”?

      5. avatar DJ says:

        Democrats are ungovernable. They seek the destruction of the Republic.

        This impeachment is just another attempt at a coup.

      6. avatar NH Guy says:

        The democrats and never Trumpers are trying criminalize political differences. They’re trivializing the impeachment process and they think they can disenfranchise 63 million citizens all because they don’t like those voters and the choice they made in 2016. An impeachment is only legitimate when it has broad, bipartisan support in Congress, and broad support among the people. We have never seen an impeachment like this – run in secret using anonymous sources, fomented in large part by deep state democrat partisans.

        There are more people than you might think who are seething at what’s going on and the unfairness of the process the democrats are using to reverse the election. Rob Drake is just one of them. I don’t know about you, but I’m pretty damned tired of a cabal of elitists running this country for their own interests. It’s especially scary that federal law enforcement agencies and the intelligence services have become so involved in our politics. This is real 7 days in May stuff.

        Drake has the perfect right to express himself on his personal account. You can bet if he was extolling Black Lives Matters, MLB wouldn’t say a thing.

      7. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

        Yea, except that the Democrats and neverTrumpers have been talking of impeachment since before Trump took office.

        There’s nothing ‘constitutional’ about these proceedings. This is just an effort to appeal to the lunatics in their base, as well as curry favor with the neocons in DC.

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          “This is just an effort to appeal to the lunatics in their base”

          ****
          Fortunately, this is becoming more and more obvious to the voting public as we move closer to Election 2020.

        2. avatar Big Bill says:

          “Fortunately, this is becoming more and more obvious to the voting public as we move closer to Election 2020.”

          Correct.
          Fewer and fewer people want to watch the Dem ‘debates’ as they proceed, as more and more realize these idiots are trying to appeal to the lunatic fringe of the Democratic party (which is exactly what they accuse Trump of doing with the Republican party).
          And none of them even give lip service to the constitution.

      8. avatar Carl B. says:

        @Hannibal

        What an ignorant statement. You haven’t a clue. But then, you’re a Leftist.

        1. avatar Miner49er says:

          Fox News says you people are full of shit.

          “FOX NEWS JUDGE SAYS HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY ‘CONSISTENT WITH THE RULES’ THAT ‘REPUBLICAN MAJORITY’ SIGNED INTO LAW

          Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said Thursday that Republican complaints about the “secrecy” of closed-door impeachment hearings don’t hold water because the process is “consistent with the rules” that a “Republican majority” signed into law.
          Trump and his Republican supporters have repeatedly argued that the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry has been conducted improperly because the testimony of witnesses has been carried out in close-door hearings. On Wednesday morning, a group of GOP representatives, some of whom did not serve on the investigating committees, stormed one of those secure depositions, chanting “let us in.” This delayed the hearing, but it eventually went forward in the afternoon with only the Democrats and Republicans serving on the relevant committees permitted to attend.

          “As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors…they are consistent with the rules,” Napolitano, who previously served as a New Jersey Superior Court judge, explained during a segment of the Fox News morning show Fox & Friends.”

      9. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

        It’s not a threat. It’s a warning.

      10. avatar Phil Wilson says:

        I agree, it is within the authority of the House to bring articles if they can get the votes. I don’t think the founders would have envisioned the process being conducted by only one party in the basement. I’m sure they would have hoped that the process would not be driven by political animus more than genuine concern over crimes (regardless of whether Trump actually has done anything worthy of impeachment, some Dems have been screaming about impeachment since before Trump was even inaugurated). But my inexpert eyes see nothing in the Constitution that would clearly prevent the House Dems from doing what they are doing. At least the founders built in the 2/3 vote requirement in the Senate to convict, so if the Dems want to remove Trump they’ll have to convince a bunch of the other party. The Dems will need very solid evidence of actual crimes to do that. So for now, the safeguards appear to be holding.

        Regardless, I can understand Drake’s frustration, but his tweet was ill advised at best. If he thinks the Dems are crooks, just call them filthy crooks. ‘Cause, you know, they are filthy crooks. Regardless of whether or not Trump has done anything wrong.

      11. avatar Owen says:

        The current “inquiry” is not an impeachment. They did’t follow House rules for impeachment. It was never voted on by the full House. So at the end of this they’ll still have to have a vote on impeachment to start an “impeachment inquiry”. It’s a complete waste of time.

        1. avatar Big Bill says:

          The House does not have an inquiry into impeachment. There aren’t enough votes for it, and Pelosi has said so.
          What’s happening now is a few House committees running their own independent inquiries, which allows them to set their own rules. (Like doing these in secret with nobody to question the way they run the questioning.)
          The hope is that these separate inquiries will come up with the crime with which they can convict the accused. This is not the way investigations are supposed to be done; first comes the crime, then the investigation to find convincing evidence of who did it. Here we have a different scenario: we have the guilty party (Trump), but no crime. The current inquiries are another attempt to find a crime. Since Russian collusion didn’t pan out, and the following failure to find obstruction, the Ukraine call is only the latest attempt to find a crime to pin on Trump. So far, they’ve got squat on that attempt, too, regardless of what they’ve leaked to the media. If they had anything, secrecy would be lifted, the “evidence” would be presented to the full House, and a formal House inquiry would start. Since that hasn’t happened, they haven’t found the “evidence” yet.
          But never fear, if this Ukraine thing doesn’t pan out, they will find another “crime” for which they will look for evidence of.

  2. avatar Topher says:

    Look for him to say the account was compromised.

    1. avatar napresto says:

      By someone who can’t spell “civil” apparently.

  3. avatar Jablome says:

    The GOP: Because fat pasty cowards who cannot get laid without paying for it need a political party, too!!!

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Yeah. That’s why combat arms are 10:1 pro Trump.

      1. avatar Arc says:

        Indeed.

        There are subjects I wish he would take a more conservative approach on, environment, and be more constitutional on gun rights, but so far hes doing great. Build that wall!

      2. avatar DJ says:

        What I find amusing is the guys without the guns are going to take the guns away from the guys with guns.

        120 million gun owners with 400-660 million firearms and they want to start a violent revolution. Say when.

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          If those 120 million gun owners are anything like the guys in my little local club, they have also stockpiled an amount of ammunition that sends my calculator into overflow.

        2. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Mine would send a Dem’s mind into overflow.

        3. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Honestly, how much does that really take?

        4. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Mine would also send a Fudd’s mind into overflow. And a RINO’s.

        5. avatar Miner49er says:

          To take arms against a duly constituted government, following constitutional process, would be treason.

          Even the Fox News commentators are agreeing that the house of representatives is following the correct constitutional process.

          Of course, if you think you know more about the law then a nationally recognized judge, feel free to take up arms.

          “FOX NEWS JUDGE SAYS HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY ‘CONSISTENT WITH THE RULES’ THAT ‘REPUBLICAN MAJORITY’ SIGNED INTO LAW

          Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said Thursday that Republican complaints about the “secrecy” of closed-door impeachment hearings don’t hold water because the process is “consistent with the rules” that a “Republican majority” signed into law.
          Trump and his Republican supporters have repeatedly argued that the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry has been conducted improperly because the testimony of witnesses has been carried out in close-door hearings. On Wednesday morning, a group of GOP representatives, some of whom did not serve on the investigating committees, stormed one of those secure depositions, chanting “let us in.” This delayed the hearing, but it eventually went forward in the afternoon with only the Democrats and Republicans serving on the relevant committees permitted to attend.

          “As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors…they are consistent with the rules,” Napolitano, who previously served as a New Jersey Superior Court judge, explained during a segment of the Fox News morning show Fox & Friends.”

        6. avatar pwrserge says:

          Can we banhammer Miner the commie already? He’s spamming the same comment no less than a dozen times.

        7. avatar Miner49er says:

          Hey Ivan, I understand that your training in colloquial American slang was probably rather poor given the bankrupt state of the Russian intelligence apparatus.

          On this side of the pond we have an expression ‘the truth bears repeating’.

          I understand it gives you a queasy feeling in your belly to know how wrong you are about constitutional process in the United States. Maybe you should have had uncle Putin pipe school house rock into your training academy so you’d have a better idea about American civics.

        8. avatar pwrserge says:

          So… let’s see if I can get this straight…

          Demokkkommies “investigating” “Russian interference” in the election with zero evidence, Good.
          Trump, investigating blatant collusion between the last Ukrainian regime and the DNC to interfere with the election, Bad.

          So I guess electoral interference isn’t a crime when Obama, Hillary, and Biden do it?

      3. avatar matt says:

        I’d say its somewhat less than that. Now, maybe its that I live in a heavily liberal state, but I live in a rural part of the state. I am a liberal gun owner and quite appalled at my state and democrat attempts to limit gun rights.

        At the same time, Trump is absolutely a criminal and needs removal. The vast majority of my neighbors are gun owners and at least 3:2 conservatives (sure, many of them RINOs compared to today’s Republican party). I can think of 1 who lukewarm supports Trump and he isn’t the AR type, definitely FUDD (but a nice one). The couple of other guys I go shooting with who own “multiple fully semi-automatic black death assault cannons” think Trump needs to go and is a criminal. They just don’t want to see dems running things.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Ok, I’ll bite. I’m what way is Trump “criminal”? Because nobody on the let has actually mentioned a crime.

        2. avatar burley says:

          You made this asinine comment: “Trump is absolutely a criminal” and made no attempt to validate your pronouncement of guilt. Name one crime(actual crime, mind you, not words you disagree with) committed by Trump; just one, that has not become a regular habit of the democrats.

        3. avatar Miner49er says:

          The testimony of William Taylor makes clear that Trump is running a criminal enterprise, utilizing United States government policy to attack political opponents.

          William Taylor spoke the truth and made it clear that the Trump administration was extorting the Ukrainian president to get a public announcement of an investigation in attempt to smear Trump’s political opponent, this is abuse of power.

          William Taylor is a man of integrity, he is a West Point graduate who was an infantry airborne company commander in Vietnam.

          He was first appointed by Saint Ronald Reagan, served George HW Bush, Clinton, George W Bush and Barack Obama.

          Most of you posters are not fit to hold his jockstrap.

        4. avatar pwrserge says:

          Hey Miner, what you’re describing is…
          1. Not a criminal act.
          2. In the interests of the United States

          If Biden didn’t do nothing, he has nothing to be concerned about. You can’t claim that muh’ Russia was a legitimate investigation, but then object when Trump does the exact same thing with Ukrainian interference in the US election.

        5. avatar Miner49er says:

          Yes, it is a criminal act, one aspect is in regard to federal election laws.

          It is a crime to solicit help from a foreign government in a political campaign.

          And the impeachment process is not limited to criminal violations, abuse of power and obstruction of justice or two of the main articles of impeachment it will be preferred against President Trump.

          So again, do you disagree with nationally recognized judge Napolitano in his assessment that the House of Representatives is following the correct procedure, rules set by the Republican majority?

          What legal authority will you cite to support your conclusions?

        6. avatar pwrserge says:

          So… when can I expect to see Hillary, Obama, and Biden in chains for their use of the Ukrainian government to interfere in the 2016 and 2018 elections?

          I hate to break this to you, but getting a foreign government to enforce their own laws is not a crime. Being the political opponent of the guy in charge does not shield you from a criminal investigation. You’re basically arguing that I can shoot you in the face and then just run for office to avoid criminal charges.

          FYI, I don’t have to cite jack shit. You have yet to link your source so you haven’t cited anything.

        7. avatar Miner49er says:

          “when can I expect to see Hillary, Obama, and Biden in chains for their use of the Ukrainian government to interfere in the 2016 and 2018 elections?“

          Another of your bullshit claims, with zero facts or citations to back up your empty speech.

          How about a quote from some legal scholar or law school professor or judge?

          Would you care to share the evidence or sworn witness testimony to support your claim, or is this more of your sad attempts at propaganda?

        8. avatar pwrserge says:

          Hey redneck, I hope your name doesn’t come up in Barr’s criminal investigation of the Russia hoax. I’d hate to see you them show up outside your trailer with a SWAT team at 0300…

      4. avatar Miner49er says:

        Hey Ivan, you scream at me if you think I don’t have my post properly cited, where did you come up with this empty bullshit of 10 to 1 combat arms endorse trump.

        William Taylor, West Point graduate and infantry airborne company commander in Vietnam is not pro Trump. As a matter of fact, he testified under oath to the truth of trumps corruption regarding the Ukraine ‘drug deal’ as John Bolton national security advisor put it.

        Oh, and did I mention, William Taylor has a bronze star for displaying courage on the battlefield. Of course, you would know a little about courage, hiding behind your keyboard to hurl insults like a small child.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          I find it interesting that you’re the disgusting inbred redneck civilian in this conversation.

        2. avatar Miner49er says:

          Is that all you got?

          Sad.

    2. avatar Huntmaster says:

      Say’s the guy who’s seen every episode of “Say yes to the dress”

    3. avatar GS650G says:

      Heywood jablome. The name says it all.

    4. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

      Right, left, republicrat, democon, fat, skinny, pasty, tanned doesn’t matter. Men always pay for sex. One way or another. 😉

      1. avatar S R says:

        Yep. That true. Always

  4. avatar Merle 0 says:

    Too bad for him we no longer have a 1st amendment in this country. How many liberals have routinely threatened both Trump and numerous republicans, yet keep their jobs and never face any repercussions. I hope this guy can get a good job elsewhere.

    1. avatar matt says:

      We do. Where is there government retaliation for speech?

      Because that is all the 1st does. You’ve never been protected from the social or employment consequences of your speech. Nor should you be. That’s how we as a society figure out what is right and wrong. Unpopular speech is marginalized. Popular speech is reward. Heinous speech is socially punished.

      That is how ALL societies work. It is just when what much of the civilized world considers heinous speech isn’t socially punished, you know that society is messed up.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

      1. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

        All of the major social media companies have major funding from government, and all have claimed common carrier status in various law suits against them. They are government shops and all of their censorship is therefore a violation of the 1st amendment.

      2. avatar Merle 0 says:

        No matt, you’d be correct about 29 years ago, but as the above poster noted, it’s not that simple anymore. Also, outside of 1A issues, do you really think it’s ok for a cabal of media and social elites to run a country where only one political party’s line of thought is considered correct? I get you live in a liberal state, so you don’t see many different points of view. You don’t really understand how heavily censored conservatives are these days. I know, I’ve lived in a liberal state before. Just because certain speech is socially inexcusable doesn’t make it wrong. You keep hearing us conservatives bitch about censorship on social media because it’s bloody true, and getting worse by the week. If the shoe was on the other foot you liberals would be screeching beyond all imagination about “big evil censoring right wing corporations”.

        1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

          Equating everyone who disagrees with leftist Current with evil has been a go-to tactic to shut down debate for a long time. It’s just ramping up recently. It does serve the intended purpose of protecting leftist rhetoric from close examination and rebuttal, and it has been frighteningly effective in several important forums, including social media and higher education. But if you try to silence and marginalize people, they are going to get angry. The leftists (at least the self-aware ones) know this very well, which is why they are almost as keen to disarm as they are to censor.

          As an aside, I hear some leftists point out all kinds of “far right” or “reactionary” statements they’ve read on social media as evidence of lack of censorship. What they fail to appreciate, or perhaps acknowledge, is that the platforms are much more likely to censor limit, etc. when the poster has a large or growing audience.

  5. avatar DrewR55 says:

    But everyone knows umpires are blind!

    1. avatar RGP says:

      And considering that throughout history, both sides want to kill the umpire, I’m surprised he wasn’t already armed.

  6. avatar chuckers says:

    Shiff needs to be charged with treason, convicted and put in front of a firing squad of M 16’s, a true military weapon.

  7. avatar Swarf says:

    Dude doesn’t seem to understand how secure testimony works.

    Any Republican on the committee was welcome to attend.

    I mean, good for him for buying a gun, I guess, but normal Congress stuff is a dumb thing to threaten to kill people over.

    1. avatar George Washington says:

      Are you smoking fkn crack or something you BRAINDEAD MORON??????? ARE YOU BLIND??????? DO YOU SEE WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THIS COUNTRY YOU IMBECILE?

      1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

        Easy. I won’t answer for the poster, but I will say many people see it very clearly. But I’m personally much more concerned about the misbehavior of senior federal law enforcement and intelligence officials, and about the behavior of powerful (unelected) bureaucrats more generally. I find the antics in the House distasteful, and if any of them have committed crimes in the process by all means have at them. But you have to expect political stunts out of Congress critters, especially in the House. Politicians are going to play politics. The people who run the alphabet soup should be totally neutral and dedicated to the public good (har har; they are human, but we still need to at least try to hold them to those standards). Start with apparent FISA abuses. Pull on that string until we get to the end of it. Stay calm about the House BS. I’m about 99% sure that’s just hot air and extremely unlikely to get past the fire wall of the Senate (for now).

      2. avatar Miner49er says:

        There were no secret, closed hearings. The Republican members of the committees having the closed-door hearings were already in the room, listening to testimony and asking questions.

        The high drama of the Republican representatives breaching the SCIF was nothing but a TV show for the uneducated.

        The Democrats are just following a process put in place by the Republican House of representatives in 2015. Even Fox News thinks you people are wrong.

        FOX NEWS JUDGE SAYS HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY ‘CONSISTENT WITH THE RULES’ THAT ‘REPUBLICAN MAJORITY’ SIGNED INTO LAW

        Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said Thursday that Republican complaints about the “secrecy” of closed-door impeachment hearings don’t hold water because the process is “consistent with the rules” that a “Republican majority” signed into law.
        Trump and his Republican supporters have repeatedly argued that the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry has been conducted improperly because the testimony of witnesses has been carried out in close-door hearings. On Wednesday morning, a group of GOP representatives, some of whom did not serve on the investigating committees, stormed one of those secure depositions, chanting “let us in.” This delayed the hearing, but it eventually went forward in the afternoon with only the Democrats and Republicans serving on the relevant committees permitted to attend.

        “As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors…they are consistent with the rules,” Napolitano, who previously served as a New Jersey Superior Court judge, explained during a segment of the Fox News morning show Fox & Friends.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Don’t care. There is a right to a public hearing. No amount of “rules” makes denying one anything less than an illegal coup which makes the actions in question TREASON.

        2. avatar Miner49er says:

          Fear not Ivan, when the articles of impeachment are filed and the impeachment hearing begins in the house of representatives, everyone will have the opportunity to participate.

          The evidence will be made public and everyone will have the opportunity to participate fully in the process.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          The only “process” should be Trump declaring martial law and ordering the entire DNC stood up against a wall and shot.

        4. avatar Phil Wilson says:

          “The high drama of the Republican representatives breaching the SCIF was nothing but a TV show for the uneducated.”

          As are these impeachment inquiries, or whatever they are calling them. Like I said, politicians are going to play politics. I don’t pay much attention to the bluster anymore.

      3. avatar Miner49er says:

        “There is a right to a public hearing.”

        Once again, you make a crazy assertion with no citation or source to back it up, then you attack me claiming I don’t cite my sources.

        Yes, I gave Judge Napolitano as the source for the quote I posted from Fox News, the judge is an impeccable source on legal questions because he has much training and experience and behind his name he has the letters JD which, as you point out, means he has a college education.

        As cited testimony from William Taylor, giving his full name and relevant training and experience.

        Sergei, you are the one making bullshit assertions with zero evidence or citations to back them up, just more empty speech.

        Then you make your hateful, angry attacks calling me treasonous scum, hiding behind your keyboard.

        You make your attacks from the safety of red square, 10,000 miles from the good all USA.

        Come on over here to the hills of West Virginia, and spout your nonsense.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          You put an assertion in quotes with no evidence it came from anything other than your deranged lunatic mind. Go home redneck, you’re drunk.

        2. avatar Complete Disapproval says:

          Miner49er:
          Why don’t you pack up your pickaxe and sluice box and go home. Enough is enough already. You’re as bad as Vlad Tepes.

          pwrserge:
          Quit egging him on!

    2. avatar Merle 0 says:

      I challenge the notion he threatened to kill anyone. He stated that he will buy an AR, and that a Trump impeachment would lead to civil war. Even if he said he bought the gun to use I said civil war, he’s really not saying anything everyone who’s purchased a gun protection or carrying has said. He didn’t say “if they impeach trump I’m coming after *insert name* with this AR”. But that’s why the MSM will paint it as.

    3. avatar pwrserge says:

      So we have secret trials as “normal congress stuff”. Please. This is nothing less than yet another attempted coup. FYI. Nothing in that tweet constitutes a threat.

      1. avatar TickTalk says:

        You are really showing off that third grade education, aren’t you?
        An impeachment is NOT A TRIAL.
        It is a grand jury. These are purely tools FOR THE PROSECUTION. They gather evidence, they take depositions. They investigate. They are SECRET, so the subject can’t coach and intimidate the witnesses on what to lie about. Lieing to a grand jury is not legal. The subject gets absolutely no say in anything to do with it.
        What comes out of an impeachment inquiry is ‘articles of impeachment’ which is politics speak for the criminal charges, along with all relevant data collected. That goes to the Senate, where there is an actual “trial”, and trumpy will get to answer questions and lie all he wants, as usual. I use the term trial with air quotes, because it is doubtful that the Republicans there will pull their heads out of fatdonny’s ass long enough to do their sworn jobs.

        1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “…it is doubtful that the Republicans there will pull their heads out of fatdonny’s ass long enough to do their sworn jobs.”

          They will be doing their sworn job by keeping the president from being railroaded out of office, son.

          Ever heard the expression “all enemies, foreign and domestic”?

          This falls squarely on a domestic enemy.

          What’s gonna be hilarious is watching jerk-wads like you going apeshit over 4 more years of Trump…

          *Snicker* 😉

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          You do realize that there is no law that says defense counsel can’t make a presentation to a grand jury? Right? It’s called a cross grand jury notice.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          I’ll do you one better.

          This isn’t a Grand Jury proceeding not even a preliminary hearing. Why? Because the House has yet to vote to authorize an actual inquiry. Without such authorization, the House committees have no right or authority to pantomime “grand jury” proceedings.

        4. avatar TickTalk says:

          Haha.. so you are referencing NY cpl 190…
          That is for an arrested defendant to make a statement to the grand jury. Without a lawyer present. In NY state. Only.
          You have to stop trying to learn law from TV shows…

          Really though.. what has trump done? Sputter.. gasp.. choke.
          But but judges!
          Conman trump doesn’t even know what a judge is.. he gets a name from the secret right wing nut cabal federalist society, flaccidly rubber stamps it, and passes it to Moscow mitch to be rubber stamped again.
          The ones that have failed are when he pulls a different name out of his cavernous ass..
          ANY Republican would be doing the same. Just like Any Republican could win in a primary against him.. at this point, Sarah Palin could beat him.. she may be approaching gw Bush level of stupidity, but at least she’s an honest kind of stupid.. like gw was.. why do you think the GOP is trying to shut down all the primaries throughout the country? They know even the orange monkey’s methhead followers would vote for anyone else.. then they can go back to beating their wives and abusing their kids in peace…

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          CPL 190.50 Section 5 to be exact. CPL 190 covers all Grand Jury proceedings, but you should have already known that. The reality is that the the impeachment process is not a grand jury. There is no right to hold secret proceedings, as such, the 6th amendment confrontation clause applies.

        6. avatar Miner49er says:

          Sergei, why do you think New York State lawwould have anything to do with an impeachment inquiry conducted by the house of representatives?

          The house of representatives is empowered by Congress to conduct an impeachment hearings, as set forth by the rules adopted by the house of representatives.

          Don’t worry though, New York State law will be brought to bear on the trumpet ministration, it’s already happening. You know the entire Trump family has been barred from having any position in any nonprofit corporation because of their misappropriation of corporate funds.

          You haven’t said what letters are behind your name, but I’m pretty sure it’s not JD because you show a complete ignorance of Federal Law.

        7. avatar pwrserge says:

          Hey Miner… I find it surprising an inbred welfare sucking commie redneck would know what JD stands for.

      2. avatar matt says:

        The Benghazi investigations were held behind closed doors and the GOP attempted to keep them secret and leak only damaging information (which was also sometimes fabricated information).

        Grand Jury proceedings are done behind closed doors and later anything not classified is released. Dems have at least claimed that’s what they’ll do. I’ll join the uproar if they move for an actual impeachment vote and do NOT release the transcripts. It isn’t like none of the GOP are present and have a say in the hearings.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          The Benghazi hearings were open to the public and weren’t being used to attempt a coup. Try again. You commies are disgusting. The DNC has no right to impeach Trump for anything. Nobody with a -D after their name is a legitimate holder of their office.

        2. avatar burley says:

          This is nothing but whataboutism. You either care about proper application of the law or you don’t.

        3. avatar Miner49er says:

          FOX NEWS JUDGE SAYS HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY ‘CONSISTENT WITH THE RULES’ THAT ‘REPUBLICAN MAJORITY’ SIGNED INTO LAW

          Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said Thursday that Republican complaints about the “secrecy” of closed-door impeachment hearings don’t hold water because the process is “consistent with the rules” that a “Republican majority” signed into law.
          Trump and his Republican supporters have repeatedly argued that the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry has been conducted improperly because the testimony of witnesses has been carried out in close-door hearings. On Wednesday morning, a group of GOP representatives, some of whom did not serve on the investigating committees, stormed one of those secure depositions, chanting “let us in.” This delayed the hearing, but it eventually went forward in the afternoon with only the Democrats and Republicans serving on the relevant committees permitted to attend.

          “As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors…they are consistent with the rules,” Napolitano, who previously served as a New Jersey Superior Court judge, explained during a segment of the Fox News morning show Fox & Friends.

        4. avatar pwrserge says:

          Hey Miner, stop being a cunt and link your “sources”. “Consistent with the rules” doesn’t mean “legal”. What the DNC is doing in this case is a flat out coup. There’s no set of rules that makes it legal.

        5. avatar TickTalk says:

          Pwrserge.. Vlad, is that you? I didn’t know you were bi! Seems you can straddle the bipolitical donkey with the best of them…

        6. avatar Miner49er says:

          Sergei, did you say no closed door hearings for Benghazi hearings? Looks like you’re fibbing again.

          “But the biggest problem with Republican critiques is that Democrats in the House are following a playbook for investigations that was first written by Republicans in large part over the past several years.
          Depositions held behind closed doors? That’s what happened with the congressional investigation into the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya.
          “Of the 50-some odd interviews we have done thus far, the vast majority of them have been private,” said Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., who chaired the House Select Committee on Benghazi, in 2015.
          “The private ones always produce better results,”Gowdy said.
          Gowdy also kept a close hold on transcripts rather than releasing them, as House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, the California Democrat overseeing the inquiry, is doing now.
          Subpoenas issued without consultation with the minority?**** That too was part of the Republican playbook. Most committee chairs didn’t even have the power to do that until Republicans held control of the House from 2010 to 2018. In their zeal to investigate the Obama administration, House Republicansdoubled the number of committees where the chair could issue unilateral subpoenas demanding witnesses come to testify or be deposed.”

          That’s what we call a double standard, pretty much how it’s done in mother Russia, right?

    4. avatar Arc says:

      He didn’t name any specific person, places, things, or groups of people, he didn’t threaten anyone. He said civil war and while that could imply leftists, its a pretty big stretch of the imagination.

      Not guilty.

  8. avatar Ed Schrade says:

    His first amendment right to speak his mind and give his observations.

  9. avatar Russian Bot #2 says:

    He can just pretend to come out as a gay trans woman and the left will forgive him.

    1. avatar Paid Halliburton Troll says:

      That’s not a bad idea.

    2. avatar Arc says:

      Being “Gay” is good for your career, just say you are “gay” but mean “happy”.

      Gay all the time!

  10. avatar George Washington says:

    All he did was point out the fact that these dirty Democrats are gonna cause a fkn civil war if they continue on this path of total destruction of the country…
    So essentially what he said was he’s going to start preparation to PROTECT HIS FAMILY AND HIMSELF because of what the Democrats are doing….. PRETTY GD SIMPLE….. NOTHING HE SAID WAS A THREAT TO ANYONE….. PERIOD!!!

  11. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    BOO, HISS, screw the World Series. Nothing illegal or even immoral so what’s the problem, Manfred? Many, Many, Many baseball fans are gun owners and supporters of the Constitution.

  12. avatar Imayeti says:

    Your president says he’s building a beautiful wall in Colorado! Either find a brain for your scare crow or stfu!

    1. avatar TickTalk says:

      Well, president RunAway is probably going to pull all US forces out of New Mexico, handing it over to the cartels, Iran, and Russia. We never promised to protect them New Mexicans forever.. they are all too dark skinned anyway.. so we need that wall, even if paying for it means letting 117 US military bases crumble due to lack of funding..

      1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        “…is probably going to pull all US forces out of New Mexico, handing it over to the cartels, Iran, and Russia.”

        Fvckwit, New Mexico is half a planet away from the middle east, son.

        Did your mother drop you on your head as a baby? 😉

        1. avatar Miner49er says:

          Donald Trump said he’s building a wall in Colorado, just who is that wall designed to keep out or keep in?

          Will he have next taco pay for this wall as well?

          And when is Mexico going to pay for the wall that hasn’t been built yet on the southern border? I mean, it’s three years later and the right shit happening.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Yes commie… It’s called the USMCA… that’s how Mexico is paying for the wall. Now if only we could arrest the Demokkkommie traitors in the House holding up ratification. I think it’s long past time Trump labeled the DNC a terrorist organization and had every member charged with treason.

        3. avatar TickTalk says:

          Geoff.. golly, strange isn’t it that one of fatdonny’s talking points for a wall is to keep out the terrorists… so why a wall in Colorado unless he is letting them into new mexico?

      2. avatar pwrserge says:

        Funny… why is the left anti-war until the right tries to keep us out of a conflict between goat rapists and commie goat rapists?

        1. avatar Swarf says:

          So now abandoning our allies, freeing ISIS fighters and ceding Syria and Turkey to Russian control is no big deal because Trump did it? Remember when ISIS was bad?

          Jesus man, you’re a real piece of… work.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          ISIS is dead and mostly gone. What’s left is a problem for the locals. Not us. If the Russians want to get stuck in a middle-eastern quagmire, so much the better. The Kurds are not out “allies” they were only marginally better than ISIS. Now, they are somebody else’s problem.

        3. avatar Merle 0 says:

          Where was all this left wing “let’s stay and get the job done” talk when Obama abandoned Iraq? Are Iraqi Kurds lives worth less then Syrian Kurds?

        4. avatar Miner49er says:

          Obama did not abandon Iraq, he followed the force withdrawal schedule sit by George W Bush.

          And why were we in Iraq in the first place, as Don the con said it was a big mistake.

          The real culprit that we were looking for was Osama bin Laden, and Barack Obama is the man who gave the order to kill the terrorist who had slain 3000 Americans on 911.

          Remember, one year after 911 Republican George W. Bush said I don’t really know where Osama bin Laden is and I don’t really care.

        5. avatar Miner49er says:

          So Merle, do you agree that the invasion of Iraq was the biggest mistake ever made?

          “The worst single mistake ever made in the history of our country: going into the Middle East, by President Bush,” the president said during an exclusive interview with Hill.TV. “Obama may have gotten (U.S. soldiers) out wrong, but going in is,to me, the biggest single mistake made in the history of our country.”

    2. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

      Well that wall is probably to protect Obama’s 54th state.

  13. avatar NORDNEG says:

    A umpire with balls , who’d a thought???

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      Comedy gold.

  14. avatar Dan says:

    Just buy it then. Why do you need to tell everyone about it. He will probably get denied now because you know someone is going to say that’s a death threat or he’s been radicalized. Lol.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Good luck with that. Fortunately we don’t live in a country where he needs to ask anybody’s permission. Oh, and being outraged at secret proceedings being used to undermine a lawful election is not “radical”.

      1. avatar Dan says:

        When I say denied I’m talking about the background check. He should get his AR but do we need to know about it?

        1. avatar Dave G. says:

          @Dan:
          In a word, NO.

        2. avatar Someone says:

          If people tweeted only stuff we need to know it would be a really quiet place.

  15. avatar DJ says:

    Civil War is inevitable.

  16. avatar jwtaylor says:

    The biggest problem is the statement that he was “buying an AR15”.
    He should have said he was “buying another AR15”.
    And seriously, bro, do you even battle rifle?

    1. avatar Merle 0 says:

      Great point. PTR 91 is where it’s at for me personally.

      1. avatar DJ says:

        I’m not an a fan of the AR.

        M1A. 7.62 is where I’m at.

        1. avatar Merle 0 says:

          I absolutely love bringing a battle rifle to a range these days. Everyone’s shooting smaller and smaller calibers. So when you open up with a semi auto .308 it’s a real head turner and people say “what the hell is *that*”.

        2. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          @Merle,

          I like shooting a mag of supersonic .300 BLK. The extra loud report literally stops everyone along the line and turns heads. Always gets me a “what is THAT”, as they can see by the mag size that it’s not the larger .308. I explain that it’s the same .30-cal bullet in a slightly smaller package.

        3. avatar Dave G. says:

          @DJ:
          I sold my M1A. My .44 Magnum Henry Big Boy makes plenty enough noise for me.

  17. avatar Southern Cross says:

    It would have been easier to tweet “I’m buying an AR-15 because I can!”

    Think before you tweet.

    1. avatar Merle 0 says:

      And include your going to clean it with Liberal Tears lube.

  18. avatar Phil LA says:

    Well congrats on your new AR-15. But what took you so long?

  19. avatar Edgar Gomez says:

    My oh my were his written words transformed into murder, racism, and then the final straw of forcing all americans to believe he cant do his job. The left is lost in the world they need to be hung for treason

  20. avatar JUST HARD FACTS says:

    Impeachment is not a political process by terrorist/communist who hate America who have been butt hurt since Nov 2016!

    Its suppose to be a legal process with facts but, they don’t have any… nor could they find any in nearly 4 years!

    They wanted to impeach trump on the night of his winning the election by the will & common sense of American people & God who knew Killary would destroy America & cause a civil war were more than a 100 million people would die!

    Please keep going demondumbcrats its too late to stop ur demise now.

  21. avatar goldenblackcowboybrady66 says:

    Another of Trump’s boys,Rob Drakkke’s kkkontrakkkt should be immediately terminated,and he should join the Klan and/or the Republikkkan Party,which on Oct.24,2019 have many similarities . Civil Rights icon Rosa McCauley Parks,92,died in Detroit Oct.24,2016.

  22. avatar goldenblackcowboybrady66 says:

    Third-grade education ?I was a Business Administration student at my hometown University of Windsor ,Ont. Just because you fugly redneckkkks are borderline illiterate,don’t project your failures on your intellectual and aesthetic better,dude !!!!

    1. avatar Bill B says:

      Wow triggered much, eh?
      Take off, hoser.

    2. avatar Bill B says:

      So what? I WAS a graduate student in theoretical seismology at a major midwestern U.S. university. Doesn’t mean sh!t. I heard you can buy an MBA from BCC in Ft. Lauderdale for the price of tuition. Beauty, eh?

    3. avatar pwrserge says:

      Business Administration? Congratulations, you’re barely qualified to be my secretary.

      You’ll notice that conservatives tend to have letters after their names…

      PhD
      MD
      JD
      PE

      Those letters mean things. Like the fact that we went to college to learn practical skills, not how to be made obsolete by an electronic organizer.

      1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

        Depends on the MBA program. Some are pretty rigorous (including a requirement for calculus based statistics and other quantitative methods). Managing a successful business, especially a large one, is definitely an adult job.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          “calculus based statistics”? Lol… Yeah… we called that “freshman year”

      2. avatar Bill B says:

        Made me spit up my coffee with that one. I’ll have to get my Business Admin student to clean it up. If they can figure it out without a spreadsheet.

    4. avatar Someone says:

      You need more ‘k’s! Four in “redneckkkks” is not nearly enough to show how bad we are.

  23. avatar Jim22 says:

    What a foolish man. A sure way to lose any battle is to tell your enemy your intentions. Has he never heard of OPSEC?

  24. avatar Ralph says:

    Impeachment my @ss. This is an ongoing coup d’état.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Exactly. Which is why it’s long past time Trump just declared martial law and sent in the Marines.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        Maybe in mother Russia Putin can declare martial law and take away the peoples’ rights but here in America we have the Constitution to protect our liberties.

        Like a good little agent provocateur, you are attempting to bully people into craving Martial law with a suspension of constitutional rights.

        Silly rabbit, we don’t protect our rights by allowing a presidential executive order to take them away.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          You mist have missed everything that happened between 2009 and 2016…

          In any case, rights are for people. Sub-human commie vermin aren’t people.

        2. avatar Miner49er says:

          Between 2009 and 2016?

          You mean when a democratically controlled Congress and President Barack Hussein Obama lifted gun restrictions on hundreds of thousands of acres of national Forest and bureau Land management properties?

          You mean when President Barack Hussein Obama prioritized apprehension of Osama bin Laden, responsible for killing thousands of Americans during the Bush administration?

          Yes, I do remember those great days, it’s really sad that now we have a self-serving sociopathic corrupt businessman in the White House.

          “Why don’t we just take the guns and worry about due process later “

          You have been duped by don the con…

          Again.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email