I never heard she was in her sleep. I think that is just paraphrasing or a figure of speech. Wasn't it 5AM?  I think that's due to her 'being asleep' then woken up by gunfire. What moron believes someone can sleep thru gunshots in their own apartment.

The issue isn't the police didn't knock, it's that they didn't announce themselves as 'Police open up'. They interviewed 20 neighbors and only 1 claims they heard them say 'Police' once. However, one officer testified they did not announce 'Police' then later changed his tune, say we didn't, but then we did after we broke the door down. Kinda late for that.

I don't hear much if any dispute she wasn't involved, my issue is more the judge issuing the warrant under seemingly bad reasoning, and a likely overzealous drug task force for requesting it. If they ex didn't live there, yet it seems he was getting packages shipped there, isn't it only a short period of time she's in posession of it? Couldn't they stop her on her way to work, detain her, and execute the search warrant then?  They'd still have access to the house.

And the BF shot 'blindly' at the people breaking his door down at 5am, unknowing it was police, since as stated above, they did not announce. Also, why no body cameras??  Its 2020, this isn't a minor traffic stop, give these break down your door officers cams. Again, this case did not require a 5am break down your door raid. Secondly, when you issue something like that, you cannot be wrong on it. You cannot be wrong.

They were wrong on it. Nothing found. Period.

Honestly, I'm starting to think, we can all agree that covid & covid deaths are gonna get worse as it gets colder.  And the SC nom will definitely be asked about 'Do you think ACA should be voided, eliminating pre-existing conditions in the midst of a pandemic?' 

She'll give a non-answer (I can't comment on hypothetical cases etc) and they'll say its not hypothetical, and is she aware of the ACA court case, which saying 'No I am not' will also be a bad look. It's just gonna run its natural course. She'll get thru, and Dems should just allow it, but it'll expose alot and some voters will question the logic to it. A small number likely, as trumpers always gonna trump. Same with Roe v Wade, just ask the question, and demand an answer. She's obviously pro-life, but  'Would you vote to overturn it?  Yes or No' and leave it go, again, Dems need to accept she's getting put thru.

This. Essentially he might go crazy and ask state legislators to insert their own EC. Something about there's nothing verbatim stating that each states EC must be based upon its popular vote. Doesn't say exactly but probably something like 'Based upon the will of the people"

https://theweek.com/speedreads/939191/t … on-results

It's fucking crazy.

It's plain & simple Rocky, Mitch McConnell said in 2016 there was no need for the Senate to hold hearing it needs to wait until election day.

In 2020 he says its the Senates obligation to hold hearings.

Everybody else is just pointing out McConnells hypocrisy, they're not being hypocritical themselves.  It'd be like someone saying Tom Brady sucks, and saying no he isn't he's great. Then when he goes into the HOF that same person says 'He's the greatest of All Time' and pointing out that they said he sucked 4 years ago, and you claiming I'm a hypocrite because I'm not supporting your stance that he's the greatest of All Time, so I'm the hypocritical one.

You need to take back your words that Brady "sucks".  McConnell needs to pussy up and admit he was wrong in 2016.

RBG didn't retire because McConnell wasn't going to hold hearings. She should have implied she intended to retire soon, to get the Hillary vote helped out, pretty sure she did or at least that was pretty much known.  But again, she couldn't retire because McConnell wouldn't hold a hearing for Obama's replacement.

Chris Gaines