Why the fuck would she not care that ~1000 underage girls were being raped and abused?
post
That's nice but it means nothing if she doesn't do something about it. Release the files and impeach Trump. Anything less is just putting on a show to try to sway voters for the midterms.
Impeachment does nothing, he was impeached 4 times his first term and still finished it out.
That's because Impeachment tis only half of the process, and occurs in the House. The Senate chose not to remove him from office... This article is about a Senator changing their position.
And would of course require yet another impeachment to remove him.
Lummis, 71, told Capitol Hill reporter Pablo Manriquez on Monday, Feb. 9, that while she previously had said, “I don’t care” about Congress’ efforts to force the release of Epstein evidence, she now believes the issue was “worth investigating.”
The cynic in me thinks she ignored pages and pages of trump named referenced crimes and saw Clinton's name at least once, so now she's wants to make political hay only against Clinton.
God does it suck that what you're saying makes so much sense.
Worst fucking timeline ever
I dunno. The Crusades were super fucked up.
I mean that was this timeline too?
The church didn't have complete informational awareness, computers in every hand that can be compromised, giving location, every word spoken, every interaction recorded and sifted by AI. Bots, drones, ai kill systems, it gets dark from here on out, that is why so many governments are reaching for absolute power right now, with the tech they can crush resistance if they get into a position to put it all into use.
A 71 year-old Senator who's brain failed during the last election! Retire and GTFO!
Well, at least a critical thought did happen
More like she had to admit a thing she was conveniently for her career ignoring. She is a nihlist, believing in nothing. There was no conscience at work here, no appeal to justice. Just a cold calculation of positions.
Alternate title:
Ancient GOP Senator says there is enough visibility now for it to affect her career so she is considering acknowledging and maybe at a future date having something meaningful to say about it.
Amazing how they all grow spines after announcing that they're not running for reelection.
I feel like the words “I don’t care” should never escape a politician’s mouth. Their entire job is to care. Why are they representing us if they don’t?
You don't care about illegal bombings of boats in the ocean, ICE's cruel treatment of immigrants and the US citizens who care about them, nor massive sexual assault against underage girls until your face is smeared in it. What do you care about? The Republican party are monsters.
So there's about 3 million files and Trump appears on more than 1/3 of them? They should probably be called the Trump/Epstein files
i thought it was 10 million total files. i have been paying as little attention as possible tho because i don't want to get enraged or horribly depressed or something like that. i'll accept your numbers over mine any day. is there a current authoritative set of statistics about the trump/epstein files?
She can see that its going to be impossible to completely ignore this and has to finally admit that its pretty damning.
See, that's why they redact the shit, so they can skirt responsibility. It's sad it took this long for people to open their eyes, but at least it seems to be starting to happen?
It is probably effecting the voting numbers for her and therefore she needs to pretend again to get the sweet sweet suckers to vote for her again come next cycle.
It is probably effecting [sic] the voting numbers for her
Dude, she's a senator from Wyoming who isn't running for reelection in 2026. Did you even check before you speculated about this?
Aah, so a peaceful retirement where she can say she changed her mind so the people with pitchforks and torches don’t camp out the residence.
Okay, so instead of an "oops, my bad; maybe I'll back off on this one", you're just going to make up literally whatever feels right to you regardless of evidence – and I say this as someone who, unlike you, knows anything at all about Cynthia Lummis and therefore has the capacity to hate her for the terrible things she's done.
This is pathetic. Do better.
Okay, in more polite terms: it's fine to be uninformed, and it's fine to be wrong. What's not fine is to be confidently incorrect on a subject you know nothing about, get shown that you have no idea what you're talking about, and then (the wrong part) instead of reflect on that and try to learn more so you can develop an informed opinion, just kneejerk pivot to whatever idea pops into your head next – just keep throwing spaghetti at the wall.
For you, that's the quickest way to never learn anything, and for the people around you, it's just polluting the discussion with uninformed, unsubstantiated noise.
I don’t know you’re right.
Have the wonderful day you want and please don’t give me another thought. Take care love.
I don’t know you’re right.
I'm not making a claim about her motives in that comment. I'm saying that this commenter is just making shit up that sounds true to them, evidenced by the comment about an alleged contentious vote in a solid Republican state in an election she's not even participating in. Anything they're saying is paper-thin, and anything true they say is only true accidentally.
Edit: You removed a substantial portion of your comment speculating on Lummis' motives, and so I was under the impression while writing this that you meant "I don't think you're right [about her motives]".
No, no, no.
I, as in myself, don’t know enough about this Republican official.
That you are right about your assumptions and that should go about your day in as wonderfully as you can make it.
Don’t give me some random asshat on the internet another thought.
Take care and enjoy yourself. ❤️
Try to imagine the worst thing you can. It's so much worse than that.
Stuff that, once seen, can't be un-seen.


top 67 comments