Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
saoirse

All Episodes Talk: TRMS 2018 Season

Recommended Posts

I now want to have Susan do a call in show.  It would be a nice change from the depressing news every night. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Was this something from the Monday show?  I saw most of it, but apparently missed something about a call-in?

1 hour ago, M. Darcy said:

I now want to have Susan do a call in show.  It would be a nice change from the depressing news every night. 

 

1 hour ago, attica said:

Susan could take calls while Rachel mixes cocktails.

Share this post


Link to post

So was Rach being overly dramatic last nite?  Is Rosenstein "giving the store away"?  Idk, Rosenstein seems to know what he's doing.  Rach, your commentary on the meeting with Rosenstein, Wray & Trump was appreciated, but, sheesh, it was really long.  

I'd rather Rach spend more time on Erik Prince & his sinister shit.  I mean, talkin'  Erik Prince & Jared, Jared, Jared could fill at least an hour for Rach.

Edited by ScoobieDoobs

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

Was this something from the Monday show?  I saw most of it, but apparently missed something about a call-in?

If I remember correctly, I think Susan told Rachel that the next time she wasn't appreciative of the amazing job that she has, that Susan was going to take over the show and do a phone in show answering questions about (I think) gardening. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, jjj said:

Was this something from the Monday show?  I saw most of it, but apparently missed something about a call-in?

Just before the toss, Chris announced that his next podcast guest would be attorney Kate Shaw, who is also his wife. At the toss, Rachel was "I did not know you could DO that!" and then they joked about what it would be like if Susan came on TRMS, which included what @M. Darcy says above. 

#tossjokes

Edited by attica · Reason: hashtags
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

2 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

So was Rach being overly dramatic last nite?  Is Rosenstein "giving the store away"?

At first I thought she was, doing that big build up about how this was so unprecedented and who lets the subject of an investigation know the evidence before filing an indictment. But then she kinda did a right turn and wrapped it up with exactly what you said- Rosenstein knows what he is doing, he isn't going to give anything away. Then she said they called the DOJ and were given the statement that "information isn't documents". She got that sly grin on her face and let that sit there for a moment. Later in the show she had guests on that basically backed up what she was implying, that Rod wasn't going to hand over any documents, the DOJ was going to play along just enough to shut Trump and Plumbers up enough for another week or so and prevent anyone from being fired or having to quit for the moment.

It is really sad that the top officials in our government are now having to play this marionette show for Trump, his plumbers and his base rather than being able to just go about their jobs. But they know that Mueller is coming down the stretch and they have to do whatever is necessary to keep themselves and him in their positions, and keep the government around them form imploding, before he is done. 

I just have to take deep breaths every day and remember that Mueller is an excellent investigator (inside info here) and his has an amazing team assembled. Whatever results he comes up with in the end, will be the absolute right and just recommendations.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I get the feeling Adam Schiff just used Rachel's show to dare the Republican leadership not to allow him and other Democratic leadership into the briefing tomorrow.  "Can't reveal" who told him he was invited, "But no one called me to say I was not invited".  Keep your phone on, I have the feeling a call is coming. 

Oh, the Adlai Stevenson commercial from 1952!  It really was a simpler time.  (Before my time, but it was.)

Edited by jjj
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, jjj said:

I get the feeling Adam Schiff just used Rachel's show to dare the Republican leadership not to allow him and other Democratic leadership into the briefing tomorrow.  "Can't reveal" who told him he was invited, "But no one called me to say I was not invited".  Keep your phone on, I have the feeling a call is coming. 

If what the congressman said is correct on its face, it's completely contradictory to every news item I've read and heard about the upcoming briefing, and it would be a real scoop for Rachel.

2 hours ago, jjj said:

Oh, the Adlai Stevenson commercial from 1952!  It really was a simpler time.  (Before my time, but it was.)

As for the outreach by the USSR to Stevenson in 1960, back then everyone on both sides instinctively understood that the Soviets were bad guys.  And for those who think Republican anti-intellectualism began in the 1970s or 80s, Stevenson was widely derided by his critics as an 'egghead;' i.e., too smart and well-educated to be president.

If Rachel ever decides to tagline her show, it should be Santayana's line, those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.  She's doing her best to make sure the hard lessons of history are not forgotten.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, jjj said:

I get the feeling Adam Schiff just used Rachel's show to dare the Republican leadership not to allow him and other Democratic leadership into the briefing tomorrow.  "Can't reveal" who told him he was invited, "But no one called me to say I was not invited".  Keep your phone on, I have the feeling a call is coming. 

Oh, the Adlai Stevenson commercial from 1952!  It really was a simpler time.  (Before my time, but it was.)

Mmmmm, no, I don't agree.  Schiff is pretty straight forward.  He's not one to lie or pull tricky moves.  Uh, he's the anti-Nunes.  When he said the gang of 8 will be at the meeting, he said others heard his source say this.

This meeting is certainly one to watch.  Will there be a confrontation?  Shrugging hard cuz I think it's gonna be yet another nothing-burger that loser-Nunes gets going, which goes nowhere.  Nah, Rach is over-dramatizing & I get a bit impatient with her when she does this.

The Clapper interview was OK, but as with most of Rach's interviews, not especially incredible or memorable -- EXCEPT for that moment where he said he thought Russia did influence the election in Trump's favor.  You coulda missed the rest of the interview, but this part was great.  Rach was absolutely right to repeat it again tonite & question why this hasn't caught on at all with the rest of media.  I agree with you, Rach.  It's weird.

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Mmmmm, no, I don't agree.  Schiff is pretty straight forward.  He's not one to lie or pull tricky moves.  Uh, he's the anti-Nunes.  When he said the gang of 8 will be at the meeting, he said others heard his source say this.

This meeting is certainly one to watch.  Will there be a confrontation?  Shrugging hard cuz I think it's gonna be yet another nothing-burger that loser-Nunes gets going, which goes nowhere.  Nah, Rach is over-dramatizing & I get a bit impatient with her when she does this.

Sounds like Rachel did get a scoop, because there is a separate meeting with Schiff and the "Gang of Eight".  But still there is a smaller meeting with just Republican leadership. 

11 hours ago, meowmommy said:

If what the congressman said is correct on its face, it's completely contradictory to every news item I've read and heard about the upcoming briefing, and it would be a real scoop for Rachel.

Share this post


Link to post

Senator Flake can lambast trump all he wants at graduation and other speeches.  but as long as he continues to vote for things trump wants, his verbal tirades are a big nothingburger.

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, jjj said:

Sounds like Rachel did get a scoop, because there is a separate meeting with Schiff and the "Gang of Eight".  But still there is a smaller meeting with just Republican leadership. 

It had already been reported that there would first be a meeting with Nunes/Gowdy and no Democrats, and a second meeting with the Gang of Eight.  So, no scoop.  :(

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, meowmommy said:

It had already been reported that there would first be a meeting with Nunes/Gowdy and no Democrats, and a second meeting with the Gang of Eight.  So, no scoop.  :(

Oh, I had not heard about the second meeting until this morning.  Now I am not sure what meeting Schiff was talking about.  

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, meowmommy said:

It had already been reported that there would first be a meeting with Nunes/Gowdy and no Democrats, and a second meeting with the Gang of Eight.  So, no scoop.  :(

It's being reported now that Schiff will be in the meeting with Nunes, Gowdy and Ryan.  I'm not sure if that's what he was referring to, or if he meant the Gang of Eight meeting.  This is what happens when an administration is incompetent and unconstitutional - there should be one bipartisan meeting, period.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

It looks like the earliest Rachel will be back is Wednesday; there is a special in her time slot on Tuesday with Chris Hayes and Joy Reid.  

Share this post


Link to post

I really liked Richard's stories tonight! I bet Rachel enjoyed the Iran files "heist." Richard's digging into Netanyahu's PowerPoint ploy, Black Cube, and the MEK's influence in the Administration (terrifying!) were all really well done. The only part that seemed a little thin was the North Korea talks back and forth at the end. It seemed tacked on in a hurry.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The TRMS Memorial Day show was a recap of Dem's electoral progress this year, which, it turns out, I found really cheering after such a bleak news week. That, coupled with the Irish constitution thingy (2 to 1! I doubted it up until they announced the results!) reminds me to keep up the fight. The bastards can't keep us down if we fight!

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/25/2018 at 9:30 PM, jjj said:

It looks like the earliest Rachel will be back is Wednesday; there is a special in her time slot on Tuesday with Chris Hayes and Joy Reid.  

I interned at 30 back in the way and one of the best things about RM, CH, JR is how much they like and respect each other. Everyday Racism was so good and necessary and glad it streamed live and free on twitter. I hope rachel is back to hear her take on all this.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

Glad to have you finally back again, Rach.

Loved Rach's poke-poke-poking at Manafort's shady-sounding . . . er, "defense-fund".   But sorry, Rach, I hated you playing Trump.  Had to mute that shit.  Thank goodness I now know I have to keep my remote nearby & ready to mute Rudy or Trump at any moment, when watching MSNBC or CNN.  Thought I didn't have to do that when watching you, Rach.  Guess I was wrong about that, eh?   Oh, I get it.  Rach was trying to make a point about Trump's bullshit on immigration, but sheesh, I hate watching or listening to him (& Rudy).  Please avoid playing Trump (& Rudy), Rach.  Please?

I also enjoyed Rach's coverage of slimeball Greitens.  She seemed to really enjoy revealing to us just why he finally resigned.  Heh, heh, good stuff, Rach.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

But sorry, Rach, I hated you playing Trump.  Had to mute that shit.  Thank goodness I now know I have to keep my remote nearby & ready to mute Rudy or Trump at any moment, when watching MSNBC or CNN.  Thought I didn't have to do that when watching you, Rach.  Guess I was wrong about that, eh?

Isn't that funny that I had the exact same reaction.  I have taken to muting or FFing any clips of Drumpf, and I had thought TRMS was a safe space.  Especially since she never focuses on what he says, but only on what he does.  I can't repeat the words I use when I see his visage on the screen, or I'd be in as much hot water as Samantha Bee is right now.  As for Rudy, I know that whatever comes out of his mouth will be a lie and/or comic relief, so Rachel can play that if she wants.  But she's (mercifully) never been big on sound bites, unlike LOD whose interviews often seem to be nothing but running a clip and turning to the guests for a reaction.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

Mmmm, kay, so Rach spent nearly a half hour dragging on endlessly about Watergate --- uh, and just what the heck was her point anyway?

After she spent the endless half hour on Watergate, she seemed to give a satisfied smirk & said that since Nixon didn't give Haldeman a pardon, then how could Trump give one to Cohen.  Er, huh???  Was she kidding here?  Cuz I'm sure Trump would absolutely give Cohen a pardon without a second of hesitation -- which made me really nauseaus to think about.  I didn't get her comparison of Trump/Cohen to Nixon/Haldeman or why she spent a half hour on Watergate.

Man, Rachel has mentioned that "I'll make your life so f-ing disgusting" Cohen line so many times, I figured she'd play it.  And as LOD said to her in the signoff, it does have more significance hearing Cohen saying this shit, rather than Rach reading it, even if the f-words are bleeped.

Well, as far as I'm concerned, she can play this Cohen tape every nite.  It gets funnier every time I hear it.  Musta been required for EVERY MSNBC host to play it tonite.  Cohen's attempt to impersonate Phil Leotardo is a riot.  I give that reporter credit for not bursting out laughing.  I woulda.

Edited by ScoobieDoobs

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Mmmm, kay, so Rach spent nearly a half hour dragging on endlessly about Watergate --- uh, and just what the heck was her point anyway?

I don't know, but her snark about "you know you don't have to make a tape of absolutely everything" and the snickering in the background was just inappropriate.  I'm sorry she wasn't born yet during the Watergate era and only has historical records to reference.   Has she also not been alive during the current era where people put every random thought, no matter how mundane or offensive, on social media?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Mmmm, kay, so Rach spent nearly a half hour dragging on endlessly about Watergate --- uh, and just what the heck was her point anyway?

I don't say this often about TRMS, but it was just a bad show tonight.  Thirty minutes of Nixon and Haldeman?  Seriously? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I actually enjoyed it. I guess I didn't know Haldeman was a 'Jack Handey' type diarist. I was fascinated by how he described the events caught on WH tape: much more dispassionate, and really none of what I would be doing (i.e. fuming and fussing into the tape about what a shitshow this all is).

9 hours ago, meowmommy said:

Has she also not been alive during the current era where people put every random thought, no matter how mundane or offensive, on social media?

My interpretation of her comment was that it was omnidirectional in that regard. :) I mean, if you've got stuff that's better hidden, maybe... hide it?

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, attica said:

I actually enjoyed it. I guess I didn't know Haldeman was a 'Jack Handey' type diarist. I was fascinated by how he described the events caught on WH tape: much more dispassionate, and really none of what I would be doing (i.e. fuming and fussing into the tape about what a shitshow this all is).

My interpretation of her comment was that it was omnidirectional in that regard. :) I mean, if you've got stuff that's better hidden, maybe... hide it?

I agree 100%.  I enjoyed it too.  She does stuff the other hosts don't do and I love her for it.  Loved her snark about recording everything, even stuff you really didn't want anyone else to know.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Forgot to say how much I enjoyed the coverage of VA's medicaid expansion, and how nice it was to see Danica Roem's talking head. Yay progressives getting elected!

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, SierraMist said:

I agree 100%.  I enjoyed it too.  She does stuff the other hosts don't do and I love her for it.  Loved her snark about recording everything, even stuff you really didn't want anyone else to know.

I didn't hate it, but I'm not a huge fan of the historical stuff.  Look, in small doses, with the right relevance, it's what I expect from Rach & it's fine & can be interesting.  I did not know about the Aspen in Camp David reference.  But she went overboard spending a half hour on it.  And her ending climax, which I assume was her ultimate point of spending a half hour on this, was totally lost on me.  So why use a half hour of precious TV time, when 10 minutes (at most) would have sufficed & there are a billion other things to talk about?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I may have been bored to distraction by the Watergate stuff last nite, Rach, but tonite you were great!  I was really creeped out to see Pompeo yukking it up with spooky Kim Yong Chol.  But then to see Trump with him too?  Eek!  So thanks for your great sum-up on Kim Yong Chol, Rach, on just why we should all be really disturbed by what we're seeing here -- that is, the weird chumminess of Trump & Pompeo with this truly sinister character.

I enjoyed Rach's snarkiness on the shady Manafort "defense fund".  But while it gave Rach a funny bit . . . um, is there anything illegal about it?  Sounds like it's no diff than someone setting up a GoFundMe page, right?  Uh, yet another "lawful, but awful" thing from everyone related to the Trump gang, eh?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Another prepared show out the window.

Wow,  Tampering with witnesses.  Is Manafort that stupid or that desperate. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, M. Darcy said:

Another prepared show out the window.

Wow,  Tampering with witnesses.  Is Manafort that stupid or that desperate. 

Yup, and what's the emoji for witness tampering? Two fists wrapped around prison bars.  Heh, heh, not mine, but too delish not to pass along.

Rach seemed to think between this Manafort stuff & the Michael Cohen ruling -- that's why Trump was going on the pardoning himself rants.  ITA.  

You know, Rach was the ONLY one in the MSNBC lineup to talk about what happened with Michael Cohen.  Everyone else was repeating the same stuff & playing the same freakin' Sanders, Trump & Rudy clips.  Not Rach.

Not sure I bought Rach's theory about the 13 Russians Mueller indicted would be the ultimate thing to stop Trump from pardoning himself.  But it's possible & it was clever dot-connecting from Rach. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Not sure I bought Rach's theory about the 13 Russians Mueller indicted would be the ultimate thing to stop Trump from pardoning himself.

She wasn't saying that would stop the pardon; she was saying that would stop him from shutting down the investigation. He's been pretending that the investigation is only about him colluding, and that hasn't been proven, so it's all a fake and should go away. If that were true, Republicans would probably let him do it tomorrow. But if he did actually shut down the investigation, he would be saying that we don't need to know what those 13 Russians were up to (bless Rachel for attempting their names). Most Republicans are not so far gone that they would be willing to let that sort of foreign attack slide.

Share this post


Link to post

Rachel's discussion of the Chick-fil-a drama was amazing.  I am an attorney, in house with a corporation, and I was picturing the scramble that would happen if the head of a federal agency - that doesn't directly seem to involved with our business - suddenly reached out to the CEO to talk.  There would be a huge mobilization of resources in legal and operations to try to figure out what may have happened that they would be investigating us.  For it then to turn out that he just wanted preferential treatment?!  Yeesh.  These guys.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

Anyone catch the signoff?  LOD asked her if she covered the Eagles stuff & she pretty much said no -- and that she thought it was merely a distraction.  See, this is why I luv Rach.  While all the other boobs on MSNBC (& CNN) were spending ALL their time on the Eagles stuff, Rach knew better.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Anyone catch the signoff?  LOD asked her if she covered the Eagles stuff & she pretty much said no -- and that she thought it was merely a distraction.  See, this is why I luv Rach.  While all the other boobs on MSNBC (& CNN) were spending ALL their time on the Eagles stuff, Rach knew better.

Agreed. If i didn't already love her that would have sealed it for me.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

OMG I absolutely loved the look on Rachel's face after she ran the clip of the State Department blonde bimbo mangling US-German history on the anniversary of D-day.  It was totally, "Can you believe anyone on this planet still breathing air could be this thunderingly stupid?"

8 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

Agreed. If i didn't already love her that would have sealed it for me.

The entire incident was all about something 45 said, so it's irrelevant to her.  I think also she realizes she's on in mid-prime time and all that could be sensibly said about that manufactured kerfuffle, had already been said and she would have nothing new to add.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, meowmommy said:

all that could be sensibly said about that manufactured kerfuffle, had already been said and she would have nothing new to add.

Or it could be that it actually left her speechless, as it did me.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

OMG I absolutely loved the look on Rachel's face after she ran the clip of the State Department blonde bimbo mangling US-German history on the anniversary of D-day. 

Next someone will say that the Germans never attacked Pearl Harbor.  I was a little surprised that she didn't sneak in the fact that Trump thinks Canada burned down the White House during the War of 1812.  (though I fell asleep - she might have mentioned it later).  

I really enjoyed Rachel's mention that Ivanka is connected to the Russian story...ish (well, to the money part of Russia and Trump).   Though, its not a shocker - she went on vacation with Wendi Deng Murdoch, who is Putin's girlfriend, during the campaign. 

Edited by M. Darcy
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

 I thought Rach was really respectful about the Ivanka story.  She said this has already been reported in Buzzfeed & it's out there, but she said we don't really know what to make of it . . . yet.  Sounds fair to me.

And that ex-Fox Cameron Diaz knockoff moron?  Oh, Rach has had that idiot/fool on her radar for quite a while.  I luv that she points out the ridiculousness of the incompetence of this woman every time she can.  You know every time Rach shows her, she's thinking -- how the heck is this dum-dum the spokesperson for the State Dept.?

I thought Rach was gonna start giving us a history lesson on D-Day.  Nuh-uh, it was way better than that.  She was just pointing out yet again what a big moron Ms. Cameron Diaz-wannabe is.  Awesome, Rach!  Keep on her.

And I luved Rach's reaction to that reporter being called "trash" for merely asking about the latest of Pruitt's awful non-stop corruption.

Edited by ScoobieDoobs
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, the opening segment in Thursday, about the architectural firm that closed down eight hours after being approached about links to the Trump intrigue.

I am watching the repeat show, and as she is talking about the Justice Department seizing NYT reporter emails, I am reading that the Senate aide whom she referenced was just arrested, hours after Rachel was reporting on the story.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, M. Darcy said:

Next someone will say that the Germans never attacked Pearl Harbor.

The Germans didn't attack Pearl Harbor.  I think you meant the Japanese.  (Or were you being snarky and I missed it?)

BTW, I binge watched all 4 episodes of The Fourth Estate on Showtime last night, a documentary series on how the New York Times covered the first 16 months of the Trump presidency.  It's quite riveting and several MSNBC shows show up, Morning Joe and Rachel especially.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Quote

The Germans didn't attack Pearl Harbor.  I think you meant the Japanese.  (Or were you being snarky and I missed it?)

Its a line from Animal House - which I messed up.  Its should have been bombed Pearl Harbor.

"Bluto: Hey! What's all this laying around shit?/Stork: What the hell are we supposed to do, ya moron?/D-Day: [to Bluto] War's over, man. Wormer dropped the big one./Bluto: What? Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!/Otter: [to Boon] Germans?/Boon: Forget it, he's rolling.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

Anyone notice how coy Rach was in talking about Broidy?  I liked it.  She didn't say outright (as other media sources have) that Broidy could merely be providing a cover for Trump for yet another scandal.  I wonder if she knows anything or just assumes that once more of the Michael Cohen stuff breaks, this is one more scandal waiting to burst open.

Great coverage on the Trump architect, Rach.  I never even heard of this guy.  Leave it to Rach to focus on someone nobody else is covering.  Keep shining your spotlight on the roachies, Rach!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Anyone notice how coy Rach was in talking about Broidy?  I liked it.  She didn't say outright (as other media sources have) that Broidy could merely be providing a cover for Trump for yet another scandal.  I

She was soooo close to saying Broidy is obviously covering for a Trump-funded abortion, but not quite.  We still know what she was thinking!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Who is responsible for the graphic on tonight's show -- dainty little notecard on a pretty floral background, printed in script:  "You're Indicted"?  Hooray for eccentricity!  (And the apostrophe is used correctly!)

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

That was a bright blouse (dress?) that Juia Ioffe was wearing.  I wondered whether there was a drink with a little umbrella in it just off camera, since it sort of looked like they called her in from the Lido Deck to do that segment with Rachel.  And now someone will inform me that it was a designer outfit and cost more than my first car.

Remember Fridays when Rachel would mix up a cocktail at the end of the show?  I miss that.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I think there was a reference to G7 being reported on over the weekend as events unfold and then Rach signed off with "Unless you're a trout, I'm not going to see you until Monday Night."

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/8/2018 at 12:45 AM, jjj said:

Wow, the opening segment in Thursday, about the architectural firm that closed down eight hours after being approached about links to the Trump intrigue.

Checked out the architect's web site, and there is a single page indicating that John Fotiadis has been working at SNS Architects and Engineers, PC since April 23, 2018 -- but he could just be covering things up.  But that's not suspicious at all that after one phone call from the media and he closes up shop after 10 years in business.

Heck, I'm intrigued to find out more about George Nader and the PSY-Group (and the Qatari princes he represented) who approached the Trump Campaign about a covert multi-million dollar online manipulation campaign to help Trump.  I can't see Trump Jr. saying no to that.

Edited by ottoDbusdriver
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Is Rach back tonite?  Poor Rach.  MSNBC musta forced her to cover that hoo-hah & horseshit last nite.  I didn't have the stomach to watch that nauseous-making crap.  Clearly, neither did Rach.  She was asking really good questions, with a suspicious bent on what was going on.  But she had a permanent stink-eye on her face.  And I hate to see Rach with stink-eye, so I checked out very quickly.  Ew to all of it.  Why did that shit have to be on instead of a regular Rach show?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size