Offthemat

It’s likely that they are hearing the feedback on their ridiculous rantings in the earlier hearings. I expect them to try to formulate their last gasp for Kennedy and Gabbard.

Is Bartlett colorblind? Shoes?

You guys can learn to address him as Secretary Hegseth.

Not a good idea.

Because people keep recognizing his leadership qualities.

He’s not considered a backbencher by anyone not afflicted with TDS. Quite the opposite, he’s been considered an up and coming, promising candidate for bigger and better positions for years. You’ve never met him, have you? You don’t know him, do you. You just allow your affliction to take over and spout off revelations of your own ignorance, dragging your own shredded credibility down further.

I’ve been hearing Pete Hegseth’s accolades for better than two years. He’s been a guest on many shows that I don’t suppose you watch. A recurring theme is his being a soldier’s soldier and an excellent candidate for a high position, especially involving the military. We’d be better off with a drunk Hegseth than a sober Loyd Austin, who was AWOL and unreachable for at least two extended periods during his term. When Lincoln received reports that Grant was a drunk, he said find out what he’s drinking and send some to all my generals. Your opinion that he’s a nobody, a backbencher, picked for his looks, is entirely fabricated and you couldn’t support it if you had to.

I didn’t see property, sales, car tags, excise, licensing and permitting, etc, on the list.

I can’t see that anything has changed.

I’m not a lawyer either, but I read a lot on it and listen to podcasts where lawyers discuss both current and historic cases. The one line that I keep in the back of my mind, forget who it is attributed to, is you might not get justice, but you will get a decision. Byron York reports that the Smith report admits that he wasn’t sure he could get a conviction on insurrection, even in an adversarial DC court, so he didn’t charge anyone with it.

I can assure you, Jack Smith is not a straight shooter. Turley is, to a fault. It would be my preference to read opinions of lawyers who have taken cases before the Supreme Court and won, not one who has been rejected unanimously.

Jack Smith and his associates misrepresented facts and evidence in the proceedings, and lied to the judge. What do you think he did in his ‘report?

I caught her telling Shiff he was doing the same thing he’d been censured for.

I don’t see any issue with providing links. Or quoting from them, like this: Byron York ”In the end, Smith failed all around. He ran out of time. He was not able to put Trump on trial, and then, worst-case scenario for the prosecutor, the defendant was elected president of the United States. The case is over. But the nation learned something from the man the Justice Department chose to pursue Biden's political opponent. They learned that the prosecutor would never, ever admit what he was doing, even if everyone could see it, plain as day. The country knew what Jack Smith, cheered on by Democrats and their allies in the media, was trying to accomplish, and a winning margin of the voters put an end to it on Election Day.” http://jewishworldreview.com/0125/york011525.php

I don’t recall any of your little chats working out well. With anybody.

I thought he was describing Jack Smith.

I’m not going to engage your personal attacks. Given the difficulty of defending your position and your chronic denial to do so, anyway, I understand why you would resort to it. But it only weakens your already diminished credibility.

Shallow and delusional. Jack Smith, following his rejection, was wallowing at the bottom of the barrel at the Hague when they went looking for someone to lead the election interference campaign. The perfect candidate - had already been destroyed by the Court - and dumb and hungry enough to repeat the performance. Go on, educate yourself.

But I understand education. Jack Smith has been unanimously rejected by the Supreme Court. He is no more reliable than Chris Steele. I would pursue a different course.

And that verdict was returned on Nov. 5.

Jack Smith

Reading Jack Smith is what you consider an education? That explains a lot.

@mspart has the correct take. If you are doing your job then you see to it that the plan includes a replacement, a substitute water source. California has been wrong on the environment for fifty years, at least.

How have #33 seeds done?