The Trump Presidency

cajunrevenge said:
When the crime is attempting to cheat in the 2020 election we can not simply have an election to settle it. How about the President getting half of the other parties voter registration removed so they cant vote. Would we have an election to settle that? The president is using the US government to aid Russias disinformation campaign. There wont be a fair election in 2020 with Trump in charge.



How someone thinks Trump is a crazy person with dementia and should not be removed is beyond me. Do you not value national security?
Click to expand...

You're missing what I'm saying on a couple points. If a significant number of Republicans were willing to back impeachment and removal from office was a real possibility, I say go ahead with it. Whether the underlying conduct was bad enough is a question of whether or not members of Congress should support impeachment. My issue is going forward with impeachment without that support. That's what does the damage.

If you don't have enough bipartisan support and removal isn't going to happen, censure would be appropriate. The same symbolic stance without weakening impeachment.

As for the early stage dementia thing, impeachment is not the correct tool there. The 25th Amendment is the tool for that. If that was invoked tomorrow, I'd be okay with it.
 
striker42 said:
You're missing what I'm saying on a couple points. If a significant number of Republicans were willing to back impeachment and removal from office was a real possibility, I say go ahead with it. Whether the underlying conduct was bad enough is a question of whether or not members of Congress should support impeachment. My issue is going forward with impeachment without that support. That's what does the damage.

If you don't have enough bipartisan support and removal isn't going to happen, censure would be appropriate. The same symbolic stance without weakening impeachment.

As for the early stage dementia thing, impeachment is not the correct tool there. The 25th Amendment is the tool for that. If that was invoked tomorrow, I'd be okay with it.
Click to expand...


The problem is, the Republicans still abide by the Reagan Rule and Hastert Rules. Although I believe Pelosi bailed out Boehner a few times with the Hastert Rule. They'd never support impeachment in a bipartisan manner unless the evidence was so blatantly in your face and I'm not even sure that would convince them then. Our politics are so polar partisan right now that so many of the GOP establishment have retired or are gonna retire next year.

You said you're worried about our institutions... I'm pretty sure the GOP letting the likes of McConnell do things like block Garland and hold that SCOTUS position hostage started this way before the House Dems sought impeachment.

It's not fair for the Dems to have to play by two sets of rules for the GOP. Like impeachment, McConnell didn't do anything illegal by not allowing Garland to go to the Supreme Court, but now he's set that precedent and if the Dems get a majority in the Senate and Schumer wants to do the same thing, you'll have no tears from anyone on the left about it.

It's the same hypocrisy about the national debt and ballooning deficits. Not a peep from any GOP leaders about it now that Trump has increased both. Frankly, the Dems have been playing in these mud fights with the GOP far too long with one hand behind their back. And I don't see it getting any better now that the GOP is quietly embracing Trump's brand of politics at a national level.
 
Dems playing too nicely? With their propaganda machine attacking this administration and all republicans on a minute by minute basis. Please
 
Let's ignore using the surveillance capabilities in an illegal manner to spy on the Republican president. You're right. Dems are too soft
 
The Chosen One said:
The problem is, the Republicans still abide by the Reagan Rule and Hastert Rules. Although I believe Pelosi bailed out Boehner a few times with the Hastert Rule. They'd never support impeachment in a bipartisan manner unless the evidence was so blatantly in your face and I'm not even sure that would convince them then. Our politics are so polar partisan right now that so many of the GOP establishment have retired or are gonna retire next year.

You said you're worried about our institutions... I'm pretty sure the GOP letting the likes of McConnell do things like block Garland and hold that SCOTUS position hostage started this way before the House Dems sought impeachment.

It's not fair for the Dems to have to play by two sets of rules for the GOP. Like impeachment, McConnell didn't do anything illegal by not allowing Garland to go to the Supreme Court, but now he's set that precedent and if the Dems get a majority in the Senate and Schumer wants to do the same thing, you'll have no tears from anyone on the left about it.

It's the same hypocrisy about the national debt and ballooning deficits. Not a peep from any GOP leaders about it now that Trump has increased both. Frankly, the Dems have been playing in these mud fights with the GOP far too long with one hand behind their back. And I don't see it getting any better now that the GOP is quietly embracing Trump's brand of politics at a national level.
Click to expand...

You're essentially explaining why I'm disgusted with everyone in Washington.

I will say that I don't buy the argument that the Dems are just stooping because the Republicans are and that we can't expect the Dems to uphold the rules when Republicans aren't. First, I want my political leaders to stick to their principles even when the other side is fighting dirty. I don't believe in winning at any cost.

Next, the Garland thing is a good example. Suppose that had never happened. Now suppose the Dems control the Senate and Ginsburg dies. Do the Democrats let Trump appoint a justice to take her seat? Of course not. Not in this atmosphere. They pull the same thing McConnell did. There are no angels in Washington. It's a race to the bottom.

The radical partisan politics repulses me. These people are hired to represent their constituents, not play partisan games.
 
striker42 said:
You're essentially explaining why I'm disgusted with everyone in Washington.

I will say that I don't buy the argument that the Dems are just stooping because the Republicans are and that we can't expect the Dems to uphold the rules when Republicans aren't. First, I want my political leaders to stick to their principles even when the other side is fighting dirty. I don't believe in winning at any cost.

Next, the Garland thing is a good example. Suppose that had never happened. Now suppose the Dems control the Senate and Ginsburg dies. Do the Democrats let Trump appoint a justice to take her seat? Of course not. Not in this atmosphere. They pull the same thing McConnell did. There are no angels in Washington. It's a race to the bottom.

The radical partisan politics repulses me. These people are hired to represent their constituents, not play partisan games.
Click to expand...

The people want partisanship now. Everyone that votes for trump wants his policies implemented just the same when someone votes for AOC.
 
striker42 said:
You're missing what I'm saying on a couple points. If a significant number of Republicans were willing to back impeachment and removal from office was a real possibility, I say go ahead with it. Whether the underlying conduct was bad enough is a question of whether or not members of Congress should support impeachment. My issue is going forward with impeachment without that support. That's what does the damage.

If you don't have enough bipartisan support and removal isn't going to happen, censure would be appropriate. The same symbolic stance without weakening impeachment.

As for the early stage dementia thing, impeachment is not the correct tool there. The 25th Amendment is the tool for that. If that was invoked tomorrow, I'd be okay with it.
Click to expand...

I think there is a real chance if the dam breaking in terms of Republican Senators protecting him. I think this needs some time for the public to take in and there are more damaging witnesses that could testify. Let's see how public opinion swings in this time. I think Republicans killing impeachment in the Senate when the crimes are so obvious is going to backfire on them badly. Its unprecedented to have a President who is facing 3+ indictments and that's not even counting the Ukraine stuff. His personal lawyer is in prison for crimes he has admitted he did on Trumps order and has also testified that Trump comitted tax fraud. Steve Bannon has implicated him for perjury based on his testimony in the Stone trial. And he would also be facing obstruction of justice on multiple counts from the Mueller investigation. Are we really going to re-elect a guy who needs the office to shield himself from prosecution? That's mind boggling considering the beating Hillary took for just being investigated.




What happens if and when Googliani is arrested. I cant imagine then firestorm if any other Presidents personal attorney was indicted.
 
Last edited:
cajunrevenge said:
I think there is a real chance if the dam breaking in terms of Republican Senators protecting him. I think this needs some time for the public to take in and there are more damaging witnesses that could testify. Let's see how public opinion swings in this time. I think Republicans killing impeachment in the Senate when the crimes are so obvious is going to backfire on them badly. Its unprecedented to have a President who is facing 3+ indictments and that's not even counting the Ukraine stuff. His personal lawyer is in prison for crimes he has admitted he did on Trumps order and has also testified that Trump comitted tax fraud. Steve Bannon has implicated him for perjury based on his testimony in the Stone trial. And he would also be facing obstruction of justice on multiple counts from the Mueller investigation. Are we really going to re-elect a guy who needs the office to shield himself from prosecution? That's mind boggling considering the beating Hillary took for just being investigated.




What happens if and when Googliani is arrested. I cant imagine then firestorm if any other Presidents personal attorney was indicted.
Click to expand...

One thing I have learned is to never count on swings of public opinion. People will believe things that confirm their own bias and disbelieve things that present the chance of cognitive dissonance.

People formed their opinions about Trump long ago and getting people to break from those opinions is nearly impossible.
 
Runnin said:
Prominent Evangelical Magazine Calls for ‘Grossly Immoral’ Trump to Be Removed

“His Twitter feed alone—with its habitual string of mischaracterizations, lies, and slanders—is a near perfect example of a human being who is morally lost and confused,” editor-in-chief Mark Galli wrote in the editorial.

How long before Mark Galli is looking for another job?
Click to expand...


He's retiring. CT will maintain their constituency. There's a sizable Evangelical market in alignment with Galli.
 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presiden...ssion-law-enforcement-administration-justice/



IMPOTUS just signed an executive order to set up a commission to study law enforcement and the administration of justice. Sounds good on the surface but with the OG AG staffing this thing I can only assume this commission will find that the problem is we aren't trying the failed policies hard enough. I do wonder what happens if this report suggests legalizing marijuana. I expect it to blame everything from aids to global warming on legal pot. One of the stated goals is about respect for Law Enforcement.... I bet they find the solution is to be able to charge people with crimes for saying bad things about police..... because that will totally win people over.




Until we see who is on this thing and who they want to testify I am going to try and keep an open mind. The due date on this is 1 year from now which will be an interesting time. AG is supposed to give a report to the President 60 days after that year is up so that could be awkward.
 
Last edited:
LMAO silly thethe.

Yes the dems "evil" plan was to realize the demographics switch and cater to minorities. It's almost like every projection over the last decade has painted the immigrant picture given the declining birth rates in the US and theneed forcheap farm labor due to supply side economics and government controlled commodity trading.
 
zitothebrave said:
LMAO silly thethe.

Yes the dems "evil" plan was to realize the demographics switch and cater to minorities. It's almost like every projection over the last decade has painted the immigrant picture given the declining birth rates in the US and theneed forcheap farm labor due to supply side economics and government controlled commodity trading.
Click to expand...

No it was to dramatically shift their immigration ideology from 10-20 years ago from pro-american worker to immigrants are better than the US citizens (as nsacpi echoed himself).

The establishment Republicans like the Koch brothers just want to drain the country of money and ensure a steady supply of cheap labor.
 
has anyone considered the possibility that chosen one is a deep state agent under the control of soros and the clintons
 
nsacpi said:
has anyone considered the possibility that chosen one is a deep state agent under the control of soros and the clintons
Click to expand...

The only one that had the guts to fight them and we see what corruption has already been discovered.

Its ok for you to continue to mock. Easier than admitting how foolish you were this whole time to a simpleton like me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top