Dems of the board, was impeachment a good idea?

[IM2]

Oh yet a other "He is a billionaire, but bad at business".

Who actually swallows this nonsense?

The facts show that he's lived off his daddy's money.

 

[j-mac]

There was not much of a choice.... they were left with no choice when the DOJ refused to investigate the complaints of staffers who reported the CHEATING, and lawlessness.....

Trump was always going to get off, for his high crimes.... but History, facts, what was done by him, needed to be recorded..... And it was.....

READ:

Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...

He is a very bad person.... I'm not gonna lie about it, or cover my eyes, and cover my ears, and pretend he's some kind of hero or messiah..... he's not. He's an awful, disgraceful, disgusting, lowlife of a person from head to toe. I don't think anyone can argue otherwise.

but but but he's the chosen one & so called christians sold their soul for him.

I see you can't cite the code I asked for play....All you can do is hit the "funny" rating....Care to show the board that you have the chops to back up your claim?

 

[j-mac]

Oh yet a other "He is a billionaire, but bad at business".

Who actually swallows this nonsense?

The facts show that he's lived off his daddy's money.

Jealous?

 

[DBA]

And what Trump policies would be the cause of this upcoming recession?

1) Trade War choking international trade.
2) Not keeping an eye on Wall Street as they run up inflated values. this is how 2008 happened, no one was watching the store.

More long term, we aren't investing in the education and infrastructure to keep us competitive.

1) The trade war has had little affect other than uncertainty on Wall Street. Inflation remain very low. The big trade wars are coming to a close and the US wins out in the end.
2) Dodd-Frank has been modifed, not repealed.

Money is not the issue with public education, the DoE and its liberal leadership is. More school choice, which the Democrats hate as well as tax credits for those choosing to send their kids to private schools, which are not only more efficient by a large margin, but do a better job of educating our children, would be a good start.

Both parties want infrastructure.

 

[playtime]

From the Russia gate to the Kavanaugh false accusations and then to the shampeachment. What is next?

To those who are not yet participating in an American party, do you believe the impeachment was a good idea? President Trump won again, didn't he?

What is the thought process behind the choices the party is making? Hate is going to defeat president Trump, no good candidates required?

On the assumption that you are capable of a nuanced debate.

Impeachment is the only remedy our system has for a law breaking president. It's a flawed one, since no Senator before Mitt Romney has ever voted to remove a president of his own party.

No, we never thought we could remove Trump, not because most of the REpublicans really thought he was innocent, but because they are too terrified of their own voters. But we did put it on the historical record that he broke the law.

No you didn't, douchebag. There were no actual laws listed in the impeachment articles.

1) no 'actual' laws need to be broken for impeachment.

2) when the framers wrote the constitution - there were no federal crimes 'on the books', so they worded it in such a way that 'breaking the public trust' is a pathway to impeachment.

1) What the hell are you talking about here...Please cite the exact statute in the US Code that Trump broke.

2) What an extraordinary display of ignorance of how the framers of the constitution came up with the document.

there is no exact statute in the US code because there was....no read slowly.....

NO


US


CODES


at the time the constituion was written.

2) how utterly ironic that you actually wrote that.

Origins
Impeachment comes from British constitutional history. The process evolved from the 14th century as a way for parliament to hold the king’s ministers accountable for their public actions. Impeachment, as Alexander Hamilton of New York explained in Federalist 65, varies from civil or criminal courts in that it strictly involves the “misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust.” Individual state constitutions had provided for impeachment for “maladministration” or “corruption” before the U.S. Constitution was written. And the founders, fearing the potential for abuse of executive power, considered impeachment so important that they made it part of the Constitution even before they defined the contours of the presidency.
Impeachment | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives

"In fact, ‘high Crimes and Misdemeanors’ is not defined in the Constitution and does not require corresponding statutory charges. The context implies conduct that violates the public trust—and that view is echoed by the Framers of the Constitution and early American scholars."

In his tweet, Amash noted that the definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors" in the Constitution is relatively fluid, but that it has generally been seen as a breach of the public trust:

"In fact, ‘high Crimes and Misdemeanors’ is not defined in the Constitution and does not require corresponding statutory charges. The context implies conduct that violates the public trust—and that view is echoed by the Framers of the Constitution and early American scholars."

In fact, “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is not defined in the Constitution and does not require corresponding statutory charges. The context implies conduct that violates the public trust—and that view is echoed by the Framers of the Constitution and early American scholars.

— Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 20, 2019

PolitiFact - What counts as a high crime or misdemeanor for impeachment? Justin Amash got it right

 

[playtime]

You trump cultists sound like the people who predicted that San Francisco was going to win the super bowl before the game was played. We have not gotten to the presidential campaign and you guys are talking about victory. It's easy to do that when trump has no opposition, but the game will change when he does and when that happens, trump is done.

With the party that can't figure out who won Iowa.

You realize more people now claim to be Republicans than Democrats, right???

you didn't realize that the 2012 (R) caucus in iowa was even more screwed up, huh suze? yep... & it wasn't because of a failed app combined with a bunch of trumpanzees clogging up the system like what just happened. looks cheating is all you deplorables can count on to 'win' even when it's not really your race right now..

For Iowa, a second caucus debacle in eight years

This isn’t the first time in the past decade that the process has failed to produce a timely result, which in turn arguably affected what happened next (which, after all, is what makes Iowa important).

In 2012, it was the Republican caucus that was a mess. Back then, Mitt Romney was named the winner of the caucuses by eight votes — a narrow victory, yes, but still a victory for the favorite to be the Republican nominee.
[...]
Except eight days after that New Hampshire win, we found Romney actually finished second in Iowa. The Iowa GOP announced, 16 days after the caucuses, that Rick Santorum had actually finished first — by 34 votes. But even that result was tinged by uncertainty:

Santorum’s strange, belated victory also served to embarrass the Iowa GOP — which had to admit that it had misallocated some votes, and simply lost some others, in a razor’s-edge election where every vote mattered.

It also cast an unflattering light on the old-fashioned and convoluted system that the party uses to collect and count caucus votes.
[...]
Given the irregularities and problems, in fact, the party even after the recount declined to declare either Romney or Santorum the actual winner:

… Iowa Republican leaders seemed to cast doubt on their own results, saying Thursday that it was hard to declare a “winner” without knowing what happened in those eight precincts....
Eventually, amid pressure, the party decided to just declare Santorum the winner in a statement released just before midnight on a Friday night — prime news-dump time.

“To clarify conflicting reports and to affirm the results released Jan. 18 by the Republican Party of Iowa, Chairman Matthew Strawn and the State Central Committee declared senator Rick Santorum the winner of the 2012 Iowa Caucus,” the party wrote.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/04/iowa-second-caucus-debacle-eight-years/

'Clog the lines': Internet trolls deliberately disrupted the Iowa caucuses hotline for reporting results
Several officials at caucuses attended by NBC News reporters struggled with lengthy hold times that made it impossible for them to report results over the phone.

Iowa Democrats say they were inundated with outside calls that clogged caucus results reporting

Doesn't matter if it was the app or phone lines or a mix of the two. The process was flawed from the beginning. A properly designed process would not fail. Much like why ARPA net was so successful. The roots of the internet were designed to withstand a nuclear war. Now I'm not saying the process needed that level of vetting, but it was certainly not designed with enough forethought or insight as to potential failures that may occur.

Essentially - they fucked up.

the iowa caucus is flawed ( & i suppose others are as well) no matter what because it (they) are demonstrably undemocratic.

 

[IM2]

the dude who had several bankruptcies - that were casinos - where the house is designed to win - who wall st had to put on an allowance - who proudly proclaimed to be the 'king of debt' - created a good economy allllllll by himself....

I don't know who is calling the shots, but I do know that the steps he has taken has made the economy thrive. We would NOT be where we are had Hillary won the election. She would have created more regulations and increased taxes. Trump has done the opposite. If a Democrat wins and implements those policies, along with the Green New Deal, our economy will absolutely tank(worse than 2008) but ignorant folks will blame it in Trump.

His steps have not made the economy thrive. We would be here if not better under Hillary. It is the ignorant who keep giving trump credit for this economy.

 

[Care4all]

From the Russia gate to the Kavanaugh false accusations and then to the shampeachment. What is next?

To those who are not yet participating in an American party, do you believe the impeachment was a good idea? President Trump won again, didn't he?

What is the thought process behind the choices the party is making? Hate is going to defeat president Trump, no good candidates required?

On the assumption that you are capable of a nuanced debate.

Impeachment is the only remedy our system has for a law breaking president. It's a flawed one, since no Senator before Mitt Romney has ever voted to remove a president of his own party.

No, we never thought we could remove Trump, not because most of the REpublicans really thought he was innocent, but because they are too terrified of their own voters. But we did put it on the historical record that he broke the law.

No you didn't, douchebag. There were no actual laws listed in the impeachment articles.

1) no 'actual' laws need to be broken for impeachment.

2) when the framers wrote the constitution - there were no federal crimes 'on the books', so they worded it in such a way that 'breaking the public trust' is a pathway to impeachment.

1) What the hell are you talking about here...Please cite the exact statute in the US Code that Trump broke.

2) What an extraordinary display of ignorance of how the framers of the constitution came up with the document.

He was correct.... You do not need to have a statutory crime, to impeach.... the founders made it clear by using the term 'high crimes and misdemeanors' which was common place at the time to mean basically, any loss of the public's trust, abusing their power, that we, the public, gave them as president.... it could be an actual crime, to breaking his oath of office, to misusing his power and a number of other things like cheating, that are not necessarily statutory crimes.

The founders could not possibly list as offenses, all the offenses or foreseeable offenses, that a president could do, to abuse their power and lose the public's trust, so they used the common law term, meaning such for officials in high places of govt... 'high crimes and misdemeanors'

 

[Ken Mac]

the dude who had several bankruptcies - that were casinos - where the house is designed to win - who wall st had to put on an allowance - who proudly proclaimed to be the 'king of debt' - created a good economy allllllll by himself....

I don't know who is calling the shots, but I do know that the steps he has taken has made the economy thrive. We would NOT be where we are had Hillary won the election. She would have created more regulations and increased taxes. Trump has done the opposite. If a Democrat wins and implements those policies, along with the Green New Deal, our economy will absolutely tank(worse than 2008) but ignorant folks will blame it in Trump.

His steps have not made the economy thrive. We would be here if not better under Hillary. It is the ignorant who keep giving trump credit for this economy.

That wasn't the position of the article no the intent of your post. The article wanted to push responsibility off to trolls. Typical liberal position - no personal responsibility or accountability.

 

[playtime]

They left out the word "uh" and repetitions of the same word and a cough. So it's not an exact copy of what was said. They only way you could have an exact copy is to have an electronic recording.

You morons keep harping on this nothing because you have no evidence. None.

It' just an excuse....There was no way they were going to accept anything other than removal by the Senate.

You gotta give it to them though, even when they have no power to inflict their will, they believe that the party in power should do it for them...That takes real arrogance.

The sad part is that there are always gullible Republicans who are willing to do it for them.

OH yeah...RINO's have plagued the party for decades...

Thing is that currently Trump has shown them that the way to win against Democrats is to fight them on their own terms...

1. They can't handle it

2. They get irrationally mad when they lose at their own games...

' RINO ' to basket dwelling deplorables means 'country & conscience over party'.

So, you're saying that you're a "basket dwelling deplorable"?

I agree.

dude - that doesn't even make sense. a real (R) is conservative - but not an extreme nutter like y'all & how it's shown here everyday.

 

[IM2]

How many times did Obama's businesses file for bankruptcy? Oh that's right, the guy couldn't even run a lemonade stand before being elected into Congress. He was a smooth talker though and it doesn't take much more than that to trick the ignorant folks, which is the Democrats main demographic.

Obama didn't inherit the equivalent of a billion dollars from his father. And he turned around one of the worst economic situations in our history so well that the next president is benefitting from it. He created a record expansion. So your post shows your retardation.

 

[playtime]

There was not much of a choice.... they were left with no choice when the DOJ refused to investigate the complaints of staffers who reported the CHEATING, and lawlessness.....

Trump was always going to get off, for his high crimes.... but History, facts, what was done by him, needed to be recorded..... And it was.....

READ:

Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...

He is a very bad person.... I'm not gonna lie about it, or cover my eyes, and cover my ears, and pretend he's some kind of hero or messiah..... he's not. He's an awful, disgraceful, disgusting, lowlife of a person from head to toe. I don't think anyone can argue otherwise.

but but but he's the chosen one & so called christians sold their soul for him.

I see you can't cite the code I asked for play....All you can do is hit the "funny" rating....Care to show the board that you have the chops to back up your claim?

are you illiterate? you must be.

 

[playtime]

From the Russia gate to the Kavanaugh false accusations and then to the shampeachment. What is next?

To those who are not yet participating in an American party, do you believe the impeachment was a good idea? President Trump won again, didn't he?

What is the thought process behind the choices the party is making? Hate is going to defeat president Trump, no good candidates required?

On the assumption that you are capable of a nuanced debate.

Impeachment is the only remedy our system has for a law breaking president. It's a flawed one, since no Senator before Mitt Romney has ever voted to remove a president of his own party.

No, we never thought we could remove Trump, not because most of the REpublicans really thought he was innocent, but because they are too terrified of their own voters. But we did put it on the historical record that he broke the law.

No you didn't, douchebag. There were no actual laws listed in the impeachment articles.

1) no 'actual' laws need to be broken for impeachment.

2) when the framers wrote the constitution - there were no federal crimes 'on the books', so they worded it in such a way that 'breaking the public trust' is a pathway to impeachment.

1) What the hell are you talking about here...Please cite the exact statute in the US Code that Trump broke.

2) What an extraordinary display of ignorance of how the framers of the constitution came up with the document.

He was correct.... You do not need to have a statutory crime, to impeach.... the founders made it clear by using the term 'high crimes and misdemeanors' which was common place at the time to mean basically, any loss of the public's trust, abusing their power, that we, the public, gave them as president.... it could be an actual crime, to breaking his oath of office, to misusing his power and a number of other things like cheating, that are not necessarily statutory crimes.

The founders could not possibly list as offenses, all the offenses or foreseeable offenses, that a president could do, to abuse their power and lose the public's trust, so they used the common law term, meaning such for officials in high places of govt... 'high crimes and misdemeanors'

just an FYI - - i am female.

 

[Norman]

From the Russia gate to the Kavanaugh false accusations and then to the shampeachment. What is next?

To those who are not yet participating in an American party, do you believe the impeachment was a good idea? President Trump won again, didn't he?

What is the thought process behind the choices the party is making? Hate is going to defeat president Trump, no good candidates required?

On the assumption that you are capable of a nuanced debate.

Impeachment is the only remedy our system has for a law breaking president. It's a flawed one, since no Senator before Mitt Romney has ever voted to remove a president of his own party.

No, we never thought we could remove Trump, not because most of the REpublicans really thought he was innocent, but because they are too terrified of their own voters. But we did put it on the historical record that he broke the law.

No you didn't, douchebag. There were no actual laws listed in the impeachment articles.

1) no 'actual' laws need to be broken for impeachment.

2) when the framers wrote the constitution - there were no federal crimes 'on the books', so they worded it in such a way that 'breaking the public trust' is a pathway to impeachment.

1) What the hell are you talking about here...Please cite the exact statute in the US Code that Trump broke.

2) What an extraordinary display of ignorance of how the framers of the constitution came up with the document.

He was correct.... You do not need to have a statutory crime, to impeach.... the founders made it clear by using the term 'high crimes and misdemeanors' which was common place at the time to mean basically, any loss of the public's trust, abusing their power, that we, the public, gave them as president.... it could be an actual crime, to breaking his oath of office, to misusing his power and a number of other things like cheating, that are not necessarily statutory crimes.

The founders could not possibly list as offenses, all the offenses or foreseeable offenses, that a president could do, to abuse their power and lose the public's trust, so they used the common law term, meaning such for officials in high places of govt... 'high crimes and misdemeanors'

They need to impeach him again for Orange Man Bad.

 

[IM2]

the dude who had several bankruptcies - that were casinos - where the house is designed to win - who wall st had to put on an allowance - who proudly proclaimed to be the 'king of debt' - created a good economy allllllll by himself....

I don't know who is calling the shots, but I do know that the steps he has taken has made the economy thrive. We would NOT be where we are had Hillary won the election. She would have created more regulations and increased taxes. Trump has done the opposite. If a Democrat wins and implements those policies, along with the Green New Deal, our economy will absolutely tank(worse than 2008) but ignorant folks will blame it in Trump.

His steps have not made the economy thrive. We would be here if not better under Hillary. It is the ignorant who keep giving trump credit for this economy.

That wasn't the position of the article no the intent of your post. The article wanted to push responsibility off to trolls. Typical liberal position - no personal responsibility or accountability.

You guys don't take responsibility/accountability for shit. Trump fucks up and your default response is "what about Obama." You don't have the intelligence to discern my intent son.

 

[IM2]

So if you give him a second term and watch him erode your freedoms as he expands his power, you will learn that you lost.

This mad me laugh. "Erode [our] freedoms"? He has deregulated. Do you know what that means? He DOESN'T want government in control of our healthcare. He DOESN'T want to disarm us. He is in favor of tax cuts, meaning people keep more of THEIR money. Just some examples...there are many more.

You are very, very confused. The Democrats want complete control and they prey on the gullible, poor and least informed. Democrats have proven to be less politically informed in every single study I have ever seen.

I am not the one confused. And every study shows that the trump supporter is low educated and misinformed.

 

[Ken Mac]

the dude who had several bankruptcies - that were casinos - where the house is designed to win - who wall st had to put on an allowance - who proudly proclaimed to be the 'king of debt' - created a good economy allllllll by himself....

I don't know who is calling the shots, but I do know that the steps he has taken has made the economy thrive. We would NOT be where we are had Hillary won the election. She would have created more regulations and increased taxes. Trump has done the opposite. If a Democrat wins and implements those policies, along with the Green New Deal, our economy will absolutely tank(worse than 2008) but ignorant folks will blame it in Trump.

His steps have not made the economy thrive. We would be here if not better under Hillary. It is the ignorant who keep giving trump credit for this economy.

That wasn't the position of the article no the intent of your post. The article wanted to push responsibility off to trolls. Typical liberal position - no personal responsibility or accountability.

You guys don't take responsibility/accountability for shit. Trump fucks up and your default response is "what about Obama." You don't have the intelligence to discern my intent son.

Ad hominem attack. Typical.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

There was not much of a choice.... they were left with no choice when the DOJ refused to investigate the complaints of staffers who reported the CHEATING, and lawlessness.....

Trump was always going to get off, for his high crimes.... but History, facts, what was done by him, needed to be recorded..... And it was.....

READ:

Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...

He is a very bad person.... I'm not gonna lie about it, or cover my eyes, and cover my ears, and pretend he's some kind of hero or messiah..... he's not. He's an awful, disgraceful, disgusting, lowlife of a person from head to toe. I don't think anyone can argue otherwise.

That is the thing with you Never Trumpers. It is either one extreme or the other.
If you say one single thing about Trump that even looks positive - you are a "Trumper"...you worship the very ground he walks on... "your messiah"
That is ridiculous.
Trump is neither a messiah or the devil himself. He is not a great President, nor is he even close to the worst. Not even in the bottom 10. And not in the top 10 either.

 

[Care4all]

There was not much of a choice.... they were left with no choice when the DOJ refused to investigate the complaints of staffers who reported the CHEATING, and lawlessness.....

Trump was always going to get off, for his high crimes.... but History, facts, what was done by him, needed to be recorded..... And it was.....

READ:

Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...Orange man bad... blah blah...

He is a very bad person.... I'm not gonna lie about it, or cover my eyes, and cover my ears, and pretend he's some kind of hero or messiah..... he's not. He's an awful, disgraceful, disgusting, lowlife of a person from head to toe. I don't think anyone can argue otherwise.

but but but he's the chosen one & so called christians sold their soul for him.

It seems that the Godly route to accomplishing God's word, was too slow for them, so they took it and put it in to their own hands and chose to make a pact with the Devil, to get what they wanted expeditiously....? (not necessarily what God wanted) Time for me to double down on prayers for them!

 

[IM2]

And what Trump policies would be the cause of this upcoming recession?

1) Trade War choking international trade.
2) Not keeping an eye on Wall Street as they run up inflated values. this is how 2008 happened, no one was watching the store.

More long term, we aren't investing in the education and infrastructure to keep us competitive.

1) The trade war has had little affect other than uncertainty on Wall Street. Inflation remain very low. The big trade wars are coming to a close and the US wins out in the end.
2) Dodd-Frank has been modifed, not repealed.

Money is not the issue with public education, the DoE and its liberal leadership is. More school choice, which the Democrats hate as well as tax credits for those choosing to send their kids to private schools, which are not only more efficient by a large margin, but do a better job of educating our children, would be a good start.

Both parties want infrastructure.

You are incorrect. In my state alone we've had the most farm bankruptcies filed in the country. The suicide rate for farmers have increased as a result of trumps trade war. Private school overcrowding will create the same problems you see in some public schools today. Money is the issue because it takes money to buy the equipment needed and private school teachers will demand more money when they have to teach more students in a classroom. On top of that, all private schools are not better than public schools.