|
|
| |||||||
| From | Message | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 impeachmentor not to impeach trump. Those that do not agree to impeach, are saying that perhaps it may not be a good idea at this time, because it would not serve any useful purpose. To me, personally, the objection is a flimsy excuse that originates out of fear that it may fail, and then make trump look better if it does. I believe that an attempt to impeach would be the way to go, even if it does not fail, why?, because it would not make trump look better, it would show the American people that have the need to at least see that something was tried, to expose some of the things that trump has done against the people and violations and crimes that he has committed. Anyway, I do not think that the impeachment process will ever become a reality, because all those that have the final authority to decide and approve whether there are sufficient grounds to do so, will not ratify the process, because the justice department is biased, and it would be like asking the parent of a boy who has broken a window to punish the boy. What we have at present, is not a justice department at all, what we really have is a department that is run by people that do not care about justice at all, they are only concerned about trying to keep the republican party looking as intact, and impeccable as a church choir. Since trump took over the office to which he is not worthy to hold, he, and all the rest of those that are republicans have protected trump, even during the time when it has been obviously transparent to all that have seen the damage this president has done to our country. And the reason that this has been done, is that now our system is corrupt. trump is a symbol of money and racial unrest that he (trump) has found imperiously useful for his purpose to boast about, since he is an egotistical example of the worst kind of how his kind of people with his problem behave. I do not think we will ever return to the basic intentions that this country was founded on, which is Justice, equality, happiness, and goodwill to all. |
||||||
|
easy... |
||||||
|
chaz but then, that is what he feels all the time anyway, so it does not make any difference, I fight anyone (verbally) for your right to disagree, But the fact here is that we, the people, including those that defend trump vehemently, know the truth. Therefore it does not matter either whether he is impeached or not, as you say yourself, it is like throwing dice but without any kind of risk. The only reason I see for the attempt to impeach is that we would at least see that there are still measures that are followed by the justice dept. that are taken in a case where the people want to see at least a feeble attempt. As I wrote before, I do not think it will even happen. |
||||||
|
If something is not done Democracy requires the constant attention and devotion of all citizens. There is a story, often told, that upon exiting the Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin was approached by a group of citizens asking what sort of government the delegates had created. His answer was: "A republic, if you can keep it." |
||||||
|
It seems like many folk are just bent on impeachment, no matter what. It seems no one is thoroughly examining the unintended consequences that could backfire. I'm not in disagreement at all with being religiously adamant about getting to the truth about all this as well as making sure the process is done correctly. This need not be about vengeance. |
||||||
|
stalhandske 22-Apr-19, 20:47 |
|
||||||
|
I don't think... I also think that it is wrong-headed anyhow. There are plenty of issues upon which the Democrats could act like an effective and responsible Parliamentary Opposition. Why are they not? It is my belief that the only thing with Trump's 'policies' (in the Democrat view) is that they are being carried out by Trump's administration. Some of those policies are utterly fat-headed, no error - the latest being to threaten sovereign nations with US sanctions if they show any kind of independence. What we are looking at it the arch-Capitalist nation finding itself being out-competed and resorting now to cheating. The sanctions against Iran are illegal in International Law, and (I believe) unconstitutional in terms of restraint of trade. The US dollar being the international reserve currency for trade in oil, is being used by the US as a weapon against other nations. No wonder they want out from under. The US has demonstrated several times now a willingness to use military force to maintain the US dollar suzerainty. It was the threats by Iraq, Libya and Iran, in turn, to trade in currencies other than the dollar that led to the first two being utterly destroyed, and Iran threatened with destruction. This is how the United States demonstrates the form of capitalism that Mr Pompeo demands that all countries adopt: bow to US overlordship or your balls will dro--- or else. If the Democrats had any objection to this policy, they ought to be jumping up and down and yelling about it. Are they? The impression I get is that the Democrat policy would be no different. All we are seeing is the tit-for-tat childishness that is becoming the trademark of US politics, domestic and global. The threat of impeachment is more of the same. |
||||||
|
youtu.be Chilling to say the least. Even well before the clash of 2016 presidential election. Normal citizens of both parties were disenfranchised. Which in my opinion lead to a very low amount of people making donations to the coffers of those parties. Now after the reality TV star took the stage. We have a Jerry Springer reality TV shit show. Now pick a Jersey and double down on your team/tribe. Ah another reason to fight each other. Republicans and Democrats are two different wings on the same Bird. The system is working as intended. Social engineering at it's most Machiavellian. This is why despite which party is in office our foreign policy remains essentially the same. |
||||||
|
@apatzer - John Pilger had it right. It doesn't really matter who is president of the United States: the policies and programmes remain the same. I believe Barack Obama to have been as well-meaning and personally decent as Donald Trump is self-serving and venial. But the difference in personal character, and even their presidential style, made no difference to their presidential character. |
||||||
|
Only Two Presidents Were Ever Impeached A third president WOULD have been both impeached and most likely removed, had he not first resigned in ignominy. Andrew Johnson fired Secretary of War Stanton. This so enraged Republicans they drafted articles of impeachment over it. The senate trial acquitted him by one vote. Other charges were tried about a week later, with the same result. (A two-thirds majority is required for a guilty verdict in the senate). Johnson remained in office, despite being widely unpopular with the public. They were even MORE opposed to the impeachment proceedings. The second impeachment was of William Jefferson Clinton, for the high crime (or misdemeanor) of lying about receiving fellatio (oral sex--generally upon a man). This act so enraged Republicans they drafted articles of impeachment against the president, but once again the senate trial could not conclude with a guilty verdict. Clinton's senate victory was by a larger margin than Johnson's, and he while he was already popular with the public his approval ratings rose after the fiasco. Starr's investigation routinely leaked information to the press, unlike the Mueller investigation. Starr also immediately published his report on the internet, with long juicy details of sexual scenarios lacking any relevance or connection to his investigation. Mueller's investigation was conducted very appropriately. Yet Republicans now insist Mueller is a closet Democrat, and agree with the President Trump's effort to obstruct justice in claiming the entire affair was a "witch hunt." A REAL witch hunt is one that costs seventy million dollars ($70,000,000) over a failed real estate deal and culminates with the discovery a semen strained dress. If the investigation of our horrible commander-in-chief was a witch hunt which ended with dozens of indictments of guilty pleas, then it was the most successful witch hunt since the Wizard of Oz. |
||||||
|
Destruction of Libya The only real question was how many civilians were going to die. In the end best estimates are that fewer than ten thousand (10,000) lost their lives, roughly split between pro-Qaddafi forces and rebels. Qaddafi had been gearing up for far worse mayhem--a Syrian sized conflict that would have dragged on for years. Granted, civil war erupted again in 2014, and continues to this day--with undetermined casualties. Much of this conflict appears to be inspired by ISIL terrorists hoping to annex Libya in their caliphate. Their antics are as legitimate as the Sri Lanka atrocities. In other words--not at all. Our congress passed a bill to prevent any further US arms shipments to Saudi Arabia for their use in the wholesale slaughter of Yemeni citizens. President Trump (which I sometimes call him though only under duress) vetoed that bill in his eagerness to see more Muslims murdered. |
||||||
|
stalhandske 23-Apr-19, 20:16 |
|
||||||
|
stalhandske 23-Apr-19, 20:21 |
I agree with most of this assessment. However, there are several political details that Trump has fought through which Obama would never have done, for example certain international agreements. On the other hand, the comparison also shows that the POTUS - though having much power - cannot get everything done that he wishes. |
||||||
|
lord_shiva Libya would have survived pretty much intact the US incited Benghazi-centred uprising, and it was that very fact that decided the US and its Western vassals to up the ante. First by the no-fly zone that was always intended to weaken the Libyan government's ability to fight the rebellion, then the indiscriminate bombing by NATO (blamed, as per spec, in Col Qaddafi). Why was Libya destroyed and its head of state murdered with extreme prejudice? Humanitarian reasons? Don't give me the tom-tits. US/NATO had less to do with humanitarianism than a cannibal's diet. What had the destruction of the 'man-made river' to do with humanitarianism? What had the theft of Libya's oil resources to do with 'freedom', as that oleaginous fat-berg David 'Porky' Cameron smirked at his Libyan listeners? What price free education, free health care, subsidised housing, women's rights? They have gone. What have the slave markets of Tripoli to do with freedom or humanitarianism - the freedom to engage in human trafficking? Qaddafi predicted that with his demise and the destruction of Libya, Europe would be inundated by floods of refugees not only from Libya itself, but also from from countries south of there. Sure enough... Libya was destroyed to prevent Col Qaddafi's call for an African political/economic bloc independent of the United States, and for moving towards oil trades in currencies other than the US dollar, or possibly in gold. The United States is hell-bent on retaining that US dollar hegemony, and has demonstrated its willingness to destroy nations to compass that retention. To demonstrate just how pointless was the dismantling of Libya as a viable state, I'm hearing talk of looking for another 'strong man' to pull the nation together. Judging by the US/NATO noises anent General Khalifa Haftar, he's not their man. Presumably he has been resistant, as Saddam Hussein became, to carrying out orders from Washington DC. |
||||||
|
chaz writes: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In my opinion, vengeance has little to do with anything. This is an independent issue which has nothing to do with the past. This president has caused so much unrest and division, that cannot be compared with any other president before. The republican party is no longer hiding the embarrassing fact that they will do anything to hide, and protect trump. Even disobeying orders that are so insidious that his staff has refused to follow his direction, although only those that they see will be the kind that will cause him embarrassment, or maybe evern self destruction. The fact remains that if any other democrat president in the past had done what this president has done, and is still doing, the republicans would have, not only impeachmed, they would have prosecuted, and seen to it that he would have been incarcerated and fined to the utmost, or maximum penalty. However, the republicans have control of the justice department at this time, and for that reason, they will protect this man up to the very end, to see that no impeachments proceedings will even be considered, because that would reflect on their own party. That is what it's about, not revenge, the main reason that I as a citizen would like for impeachment to be at least attempted or initiateted, is to show the people of this country that there is at least one spark of decency in this country that will not allow what this president has done to be ignored, as if nothing at all had happened. One of the worst things this man has done is to invite a known hostile, and adverse country with which he has been involved with in the past, before, and during his campaign and even in his inauguration which he welcomed the Russian government to fund and assist in the financial support, so that he would be selected for the position which he now holds. And the inhumanity which he is not only callous about, but is using to feed his own egotistical pleasure is the incarceration of innocent people from other countries that have come to ask for asylum, and ordered them to be separated from their children, and put in cages, without even documenting which children belong to which parents. The false allegations he has used to commit this crimes, is that they are all armed and dangerous drug dealers that want to come into this country to rape, murder, steal and commit those crimes, which he himself has probably done, but that the majority of these people are families that are trying to flee from their countries that have been killing, hurting, or threatening, and starving those families, so they are trying to find a place where they can work and not be as miserable as where they come from. This country needs some of these people to do the work that our citizens shun, not because we are lazy, but ony because these type of employments are not what most of us do not want for our children, or ourselves, since the work is very hard, and the type that has to be done out in bad weather, such as farm work. Therefore, this has nothing to do with any kind of vengeance, but is an action that should at least be attempted for the good of our country, and to show any other person that we the American people seek justice, and it would serve the purpose of discouraging any other person that seeks to become the president of this great nation, to be just, humane, and deserving of the highest office in the country. |
||||||
|
Singularilty is Spot On time.com How could he have been facing impeachment for two years now without understanding how the process works? |
||||||
|
Dumb trumb for some unknown reason. The reason some people believe that to be true, is that they have place some written material in front of him, and he will not read it. The reason I believe it may be true, is that since he has stated he know more than anyone else, anything that has been written may not be of interest to him since in his mind, since he knows everything already, he has no use to read any material that may be written by people that he considers as being less intelligent than he. So when he was selected by a bunch of politicians which he considers are very limited in knowledge, compared to his expanded cognitive abilities, he convinced himself that he was in a position to do whatever he wants, and needs. However, a person that has this condition, who believes he is superior to all, can be diagnosed by psychiatrists with cognitive dissonance, which is a serious problem that actually prevents a person from learning important information which may prove beneficial to anyone that wants to improve their deficient understanding of laws, rules, and instruction that can be useful to ANYONE. Therefor, this person has been surrounding himself with people that he thinks will do his bidding, and will feel obligated to help him anytime he needs them to do what he wants. That is the reason he has been hiring people like Bill Barr, Brett Kavanaugh, Stephen Bannon, and others that he feels will be grateful for being accepted, and especially those Supreme court justice judges which he has confidence will be able to free him of any accusations, like those lawyers he had around him that defended him against any crimes he committed in his private life before he became president. Unfortunately, he is sadly mistaken, as these people that he has placed his hopes on will not be able to defend him against the constitutional violations and the acts of treason to this country by inviting a country that has long been and adversary, plus the act of obstruction by removing those involved in an investigation of his lewd conduct. He is under the impression that they will be able to save him from any problem stemming from his criminal acts which he has shamelessly committed because he believed as president he is immune and invulnerable to anything and every- thing that he felt he could do without having to answer to any unlawful acts. |
||||||
|
Dunning Kruger Windmill noise causes cancer. Finlanders rake their forests to supress fires. Californians are diverting rivers into the ocean. Immigrants raise crime rates. His glaring ignorance is extensive and stupendous. |
||||||
|
Empeachment due to political mistakes ? You do not empeach political leaders for decisions that turn bad (no country does that) ! By the way, the American foreign policy doesn't change much on years, whatever president is on might (this is Putin's opinion and, I believe he is right on this point). What changes is the appearance, the words, the clothing of the interventions. Trump retreats from Syria, Obama attacked Libya... None of them attacked North Korea. Between Trump and Obama, none is less aggressive than the other, except in speeches. |
||||||
|
Impeaching Leaders Bush engaged in war crimes, but the House refused to enact articles of impeachment against him. While the Bush War was not a mistake--the lies were intentional--congress did not feel the actions constituted an impeachable offense. Lindsey Graham pointed out that the president need not commit a crime to be impeached, all that is required is that they lose the support of the nation, or demonstrate gross incompetence. Our present commander in chief remains intensely popular, though his rating as never exceeded 50% and he has had the lowest approval since Truman, who on his worst day was far a far superior president in every respect. Truman was unpopular because the US was much better informed back then--with independent newspaper circulation at its highest rates. Since then media consolidation, contraction, and the emergence of propaganda networks like Fox and Sinclaire have combined to create a core of support whereby the man of God can do no wrong. He honestly could shoot a man in the face without losing any support--just as Dick Cheney did. |
||||||
|
Lord Shiva If you work in the NSA and did exactly what he did. You would be terminated. If you were an officer in our military and did what he did. You could be court-martialed, or imprisoned. In essence you loose your Job. You could also be fined. So are you saying, because of who he is and what position he holds. That he should be held to a lower standard than person's beneath him? He repealed glass-steagall He paved the way for mass incarceration and private prison's. As so many person's we're incarcerated during his tenure that other options needed to be looked at. |
||||||
|
stalhandske 25-Apr-19, 07:00 |
apatzer Whatt? For the fellatio or for lying about it? |
||||||
|
The Senate vote To vote is to give an individual opinion, yay or nay. Technically a president could kill someone and when he faces Impeachment for it. If he had enough nay votes. He can keep his job despite what he did. Guilt or innocence, as well as deserves. Have very little roll other than the formation of an opinion. Then that opinion or position leads to a vote. |
||||||
|
Stalhandske, yes--as a military officer Bill Clinton would have faced dishonorable discharge BOTH for receiving fellatio and for lying about it. The president is a civilian, not a member of the military, despite the fact he is commander-in-chief. The Secretary of Defense (formerly Secretary of the Department of War) is historically NOT from the ranks of our military, though Comrade Trump did not break precedent in violating this tradition. We have had Secretaries of Defense from the military before now--just not so directly. Previous secretaries had spent years in civilian life before being tapped for that position--if they ever served at all. Clinton's behavior was inexcusable, and he deserved some sort of reprimand for it. Would we fire an employee who got a little nookie on the side? Truck drivers routinely stopped at brothels in Nevada before those little GPS gadgets kept track of their position. States with statutes against fornication and adultery pretty much never enforce the adultery statutes, and only enforced those against fornication in the event a guilty party applied for public assistance or couldn't be charged with some other offense. The president is the employee of the people. Except the Dotard Trump, who is servile to Putin and a lackey of Wall Street. It turns out there is now pretty solid evidence the pee tapes DO exist. Trump's leash is as short as the leash on a studded S&M dog collar, and Vladimir holds both it and a soft diamond studded carriage lash. |
||||||
|
Impeachment... |
||||||
|
Political Opinion & Jury Nullification But what if the law itself is unjust? We have no specific law stating the president cannot enjoy fellatio in the Oval Office or nearby. That remains true today--no one has passed any legislation prohibiting presidential sexual misconduct. Now, we DO have a law against LYING about infidelity, or about anything else. But in this case, why was the question asked? Of what relevance was Clinton's behavior to the failed real estate deal that occurred twenty years before he was elected? The Dotard Trump complains bitterly about "witch hunts" and engages in all manner of obstruction, despite the fact the investigation delved solely into matters of his collusion and obstruction. It is apparent that evidence gathered by the investigation regarding his many other crimes and fraud have been given to other agencies--Trump is the subject of about twenty on going investigations. Deutsche Bank has begun supplying the New York Attorney General documents of Trump's crimes, including money laundering for his Russian and Iranian business associates. While the opinion of the senate is that a Republican president is free to engage in any crime whatsoever, once Trump leaves office he may expect to serve the remainder of his days in prison, where he belongs. www.cnn.com |
||||||
|
I write unfortunately, is because a president who has all those facets of government in this country, can indeed be guilty of criminal acts that are blatantly committed, can be exonerated. Is this correct? of course not, but in this country it happens to be true. It is commonly called a double standard, and I believe it is absolutely wrong. trump himself announced to a large audience that he could kill a person in front of thousands of people for no reason at all, and get away with it. And again, it is the sad truth. However, there are exceptions to the rule, and a president of this country, can be held responsible for acts of treason, obstruction of justice, and violations of inhumanity, and injustice. What I, and any normal person has witnessed in this country that this president has done, only to satisfy his ego, and to pleasure himself, is place innocent people that come to ask for asylum in jail, using the excuse that they entered in this country illegally, and have violated the law by being in this country, after having been invited by his own administration, which he controls. By using this pretext, he is guilty of placing thousands of innocent people that have come to this country pleading for something they thought was possible, and legal. Not to be separated from their children, and be incarcerated, for coming into this country, and not only asking, but pleading to be allowed to come in and earn a decent living. I understand that there are probably undesirable people that may be criminals, but this is an excuse that trump is constantly in a blanket reference to all the people that are asking for asylum. I believe that the money being used to put so many of these people in jail, and take responsibility for keeping them and their children alive, and have to take care of whatever health problems they bring with them, is much more expense, than to just pay for the price of returning them to where they came from. Possibly costing much less than the billions of dollars trump has been demanding that this country provides only to feed his ego in being able to place his name all over sections of the fence, to immortalize himself for what he imagines eternity. Another thing I see that this country needs to change is the power to pardon criminals for crimes that they have committed. The money spent for investigating, trying, and convicting many of those that were placed in jail, in a fair and just trial, and found guilty, should remain in jail to pay for whatever it was they were convicted for, and not give any other person whether it be the president or anyone else the power to pardon on a whim, for no reason except that the person has the power to do so, and again, this is using a double standard which should be unconstitutional. In summation, the gravity of the violations and the blatant acts that have been committed, and are still being committed by this president or any future president, should not be tolerated. This president has been using the power of a president to commit unreasonable and unjust acts that should not be ignored, and although as I have written before, probably this president will be exonerated not because he is not guilty, but because of the yays and nays. |
||||||
|
With so many of our presidential standards and ethics. Many of which are left up to interpretation. Enforcement is also seemingly arbitry. Held to the whim's of politics etc. Because of this current state of affairs, IMHO can and will lead to undue influence and could also lead to quid pro quo, very easily. Congress can choose at whim weather or not they do their job, or enforce their roll and rules. All depending on the political climate at the time. IMHO This is unacceptable. However I am of the opinion our rule of law has been eroded for quite some time. Impaticuarly by, lobiests and private interest groups. As well as the too big to fail Banks, wall Street etc etc. On a side note, having sex or pornography while on the Job is an offense that anyone would be fired for. For the exception of the porn industry, brothels etc. There is far to little public oversight in Government |
||||||
|
An answer to some statements made What changes is the appearance, the words, the clothing of the interventions. Trump retreats from Syria, Obama attacked Libya... None of them attacked North Korea. Between Trump and Obama, none is less aggressive than the other, except in speeches ____________________________________________________________________________ Whatever Putin, or any other leader or president of another country does, is not something that this country needs to change. Each country does whatever they might decide is right, without having to please other people. trump was not allowed to retreat from Syria, and if Obama interfered with the problems of Libya, it was probably for a reason that others may object to, but that does not make it wrong. North Korea, is not the same as other countries, there is South Korea next to that country, where much of our military is present, and common sense can be used to see that if there were another war between the United States and our allies, there against that country, then China, Russia, and other countries the world over would or probably might become involved, which is not something to be ignored easily, since much more destruction not only to those areas, but the world over, because we know that we are not dealing with a reasonable person who is the leader of that country, but a man that has been known of killing his own brother, therefore it may be expected that if such a man has already been testing nuclear weapons on and around that part of the world, he is unpredictable to the point that he might decide to be reckless enough to destroy much of the world, even if it would mean the end of his own country. This is not even a dumb person would opt to contemplate. There is a world of difference between trump and President Obama. President Obama did not commit shameless acts or violations such as trump has done, and is doing. trump wants to change and destroy whatever President Obama did only because of how he feels, in that he wants to show he is superior and not because what Obama did was right or wrong. trump wants to give as much as he can to the rich, and take away as much as he can from the poor, and the working class of our country. |
||||||
|
122 House Democracts Nancy Pelosi fears proceedings will hurt Democrats the way irrational Republican proceedings against Bill Clinton over lying about oral sex turned out to hurt Republicans. I think our nation is beyond that. No one cares whether someone polished Trump's mushroom. No one really cares that he paid off porn stars and Playboy Bunnies to keep quiet about his many infidelities. What we care about are his craven attacks on the children of minorities, he corrupt practices, constant lying, divisiveness, obstruction of justice (10 documented instances), violating the foreign emoluments clause (numerous instances), abuse of the power to pardon (suggesting he will pardon himself for his many crimes), recklessly threatening nuclear war against North Korea and Iran, endeavoring to turn the FBI into his personal secret police, and undermining the freedom of the press. impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org Quote Instead [of faithfully executing the duties of his office and defending our constitution, Trump] has mounted a concerted challenge to the separation of powers, to the rule of law, and to the civil liberties enshrined in our founding documents. He has purposefully inflamed America’s divisions. He has set himself against the American idea, the principle that all of us—of every race, gender, and creed—are created equal. This is not a partisan judgment. Many of the president’s fiercest critics have emerged from within his own party. Even officials and observers who support his policies are appalled by his pronouncements, and those who have the most firsthand experience of governance are also the most alarmed by how Trump is governing. www.theatlantic.com Quote (continued): The oath of office is a president’s promise to subordinate his private desires to the public interest, to serve the nation as a whole rather than any faction within it. Trump displays no evidence that he understands these obligations. To the contrary, he has routinely privileged his self-interest above the responsibilities of the presidency. He has failed to disclose or divest himself from his extensive financial interests, instead using the platform of the presidency to promote them. This has encouraged a wide array of actors, domestic and foreign, to seek to influence his decisions by funneling cash to properties such as Mar-a-Lago (the “Winter White House,” as Trump has branded it) and his hotel on Pennsylvania Avenue. Courts are now considering whether some of those payments violate the Constitution. |
||||||
| |||||||
