Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

SharonClark

(10,014 posts) Wed Jan 24, 2018, 10:24 AM Jan 2018

Nan Hayworth (R-Crazytown) on Stephanie Ruhl now

Talking conspiracies within FBI. She's a motor mouth and Ruhl lets her blather too long, IMHO, before the other two guests are allowed brief responses.

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Nan Hayworth (R-Crazytown) on Stephanie Ruhl now (Original Post) SharonClark Jan 2018 OP

Conspiracy theories to undermine Mueller and our law enforcement agencies. IluvPitties Jan 2018 #1

If these people don't do it... kentuck Jan 2018 #2

She's Back... Grassy Knoll Jan 2018 #3

This nut is my former Congresswoman. Zoonart Jan 2018 #4

IluvPitties

(3,181 posts)

1. Conspiracy theories to undermine Mueller and our law enforcement agencies.

Reply to SharonClark (Original post)

Wed Jan 24, 2018, 10:26 AM

Jan 2018

We live in very dark times.

kentuck

(111,076 posts)

2. If these people don't do it...

Reply to SharonClark (Original post)

Wed Jan 24, 2018, 10:31 AM

Jan 2018

...then Trump would have to do it himself. He much prefers others to defend his lies and criminality.

Grassy Knoll

(10,118 posts)

3. She's Back...

Reply to SharonClark (Original post)

Wed Jan 24, 2018, 10:48 AM

Jan 2018

...Now Defending a Perv. FFS.

Zoonart

(11,845 posts)

4. This nut is my former Congresswoman.

Reply to Grassy Knoll (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 24, 2018, 11:02 AM

Jan 2018

She keep trying to get back into NY politics. YUCK! I guess she figured that she would rather pursue the Jeanine Piro rout; Westchester County was never so happy to see anyone disappear down the FOX rabbit hole.

Reply to this discussion