So, simultaneously she was recommended to file a civil enforcement action against OneWest, and there was also nothing wrong with it legally? Nice changing of the argument.

So, basically “It would’ve been hard and unsatisfying to hold rich, white men to the standard of the law, so why bother, and btw she did cool stuff too so it doesn’t really matter.”

You know, I would ask you to explain how she “handled” Steve Mnuchin, but the fact that I even have to ask means you don’t know, and yet you’re trying to use him as some sort of albatross to hang around her neck.

He is a gem.

Adam Schiff is my rep, and has never pulled any punches when it comes to Trump. She’s going down.

It’s not supposed to, which is why I said “by default.” The statute was amended fairly recently specifically to take out language that prohibited state agencies from seeking “outside counsel,” now the choice is up to the agency who represents them, as I previously stated, and any agency that does not wish to be…

What’s unclear about it? Gov § 11040 - 11045, are statutes passed by the CA legislature, it’s literally the law. It’s written to be interpreted by judges, lawyers and other court officials to determine the goals of legislators at the time of a bill’s passage, but the language is rather plain. § 11040 (a) requires the…

Gov § 11040 - 11045

Even funnier are the ones essentially taking credit for her victories via “pressure from the left,” as if the loudest voices advocating her ouster as speaker weren’t moderate dems to her right.

what you’re presenting is a grossly oversimplified narrative of what went on

People who support her have argued she was required to do that as AG, but the California Constitution does not explicitly require it

I don’t think she needs to examine anything other than how she’s explaining her thoughts - but that’s just a matter of opinion.

Yep, Hillary and Kamala are vastly different. The debates were much easier for Trump when he didn’t have a record to run on, now he does, and he will be confronted with all his failures and broken promises, not to mention all the shady dealings and the various investigations into him and his campaign, that have lead…

Of course it’s favoritism, and they’re trying to attract people who don’t normally watch.

While I won’t paint Gina as a virulent racist, I think a moment of introspection and active listening would do her worlds of good in refocusing her “But What About Me”ism into a more productive cause.

According the one of the senators behind this bill, the money for contractors has already been allocated in the budgets of the federal agencies they work for, which just simply hasn’t been doled out yet, due to the shutdown. The bill would allow for agencies to pay out what they were already going to pay anyway.

Also, as much as people bring up Kamala’s history as a prosecutor or “cop” as a negative, I think her experience there would be the very thing that would destroy him in a debate (if it even gets that far).

Not necessarily, there was a bill introduced in the Senate last week that would allow for contractors to get back pay. With the shutdown “over” and Trump conceding, there’s a good chance for it get passed.