Day 2......Emoluments clause is just one of the many conflicts this man will have....

He didn't release his tax returns because he knows the trouble that will cause...and he never will until they subpoena them and I'm sure that will happen at some point

Voters knew about potential conflicts and tax returns before the election and he still won. The time to stop him was on Election Day.

I fail to see how the voters only get one occasion to act. Is this a rule you made up?

No, but that's the most effective and surefire way to handle it.

Now we get to see how the Democrats really feel about "fake scandals" and "witch hunts" Not to mention "obstruction."

Will they set an example and match actions with words, or end up looking like phonies?

So, Trump is exempt from criticism and laws. How do you conclude that so easily? I'm kinda jealous of being able to do that.

Day 2......Emoluments clause is just one of the many conflicts this man will have....

He didn't release his tax returns because he knows the trouble that will cause...and he never will until they subpoena them and I'm sure that will happen at some point

Voters knew about potential conflicts and tax returns before the election and he still won. The time to stop him was on Election Day.

I fail to see how the voters only get one occasion to act. Is this a rule you made up?

No, but that's the most effective and surefire way to handle it.

Now we get to see how the Democrats really feel about "fake scandals" and "witch hunts" Not to mention "obstruction."

Will they set an example and match actions with words, or end up looking like phonies?

So, Trump is exempt from criticism and laws. How do you conclude that so easily? I'm kinda jealous of being able to do that.

And I'm a little jealous as a normal citizen not being exempt from laws the way politicians are. We both know laws only apply to certain people. It is what it is.

Day 2......Emoluments clause is just one of the many conflicts this man will have....

He didn't release his tax returns because he knows the trouble that will cause...and he never will until they subpoena them and I'm sure that will happen at some point

Voters knew about potential conflicts and tax returns before the election and he still won. The time to stop him was on Election Day.

I fail to see how the voters only get one occasion to act. Is this a rule you made up?

No, but that's the most effective and surefire way to handle it.

Now we get to see how the Democrats really feel about "fake scandals" and "witch hunts" Not to mention "obstruction."

Will they set an example and match actions with words, or end up looking like phonies?

So, Trump is exempt from criticism and laws. How do you conclude that so easily? I'm kinda jealous of being able to do that.

And I'm a little jealous as a normal citizen not being exempt from laws the way politicians are. We both know laws only apply to certain people. It is what it is.

So, then, to be clear, you are adopting the "by any means necessary" approach when it comes to Trump?

Besides the fact he's a disgusting human...and unfortunately we can't impeach for that alone....I think he has long deep ties to Russia and Putin

You don't run a Ms Universe pageant there without greasing the palms of the government....who knows what other backdoor deals went down during that time.....

Its amazing how his supports have no problem with Russian interference at any level with any party

His approval rating is 32%....so I would say 68% of the people want to see his tax returns and the other 32% continue to bury their heads in the sand....hoping for the government to get them a job...which of course is socialism

His approval rating is 32%....so I would say 68% of the people want to see his tax returns and the other 32% continue to bury their heads in the sand....hoping for the government to get them a job...which of course is socialism

They 32% will all head to West Va when Trump Makes America Great Again by reopening coal mines that have closed and rejuvenating the coal industry with 1000's of jobs.

Day 3

So yesterday he goes to the CIA and blames the media for the so called "fight" between him and the Intelligence community

Yet he somehow forgot he tweeted that they were Nazi's

This has nothing to do with right or left....Republican or Democrat it has to do with that he is a disgusting person with zero values or ability to tell the truth.

Ever wonder why he has no public service at 70 years old....because he doesn't give a chit....and never did and never will

The man should be pulling a wagon and have a little gibbon monkey dressed up in a red and gold suit selling his snake oil

Just show how far behind we really are...we put Archie Bunker in the white house

So…Trump would remain in office even if he was impeached. It would take a conviction by the senate (two thirds majority) for him to actually be removed from office. This is extremely unlikely to happen…in fact, I don’t think it (removal of a president) has ever happened in the history of our country…but someone correct me if I’m wrong? But let’s say for the sake of argument that Trump is removed. If that happens, the vice president takes the spot vacated by Trump. Now…I assume most (if not all) of the folks screaming for impeachment are liberals, or at least fall somewhere left of center in the political spectrum. Trump is not a conservative. He was a liberal for most of his life until he decided to run for prez under the GOP banner. But Mike Pence is a conservative. So even though Trump is a “disgusting human” as someone so eloquently put it, he probably aligns much more closely with the center /left of center folks than Mike Pence does. Just curious if the folks on the left have thought this through …by eliminating Trump they actually put a much more conservative president in the white house…so what do they gain?

No, but that's the most effective and surefire way to handle it.

Now we get to see how the Democrats really feel about "fake scandals" and "witch hunts" Not to mention "obstruction."

Will they set an example and match actions with words, or end up looking like phonies?

Everyone knows these hypocricies exist on both sides, so what are you offering here? McConnel and Boehner openly admitted they were going to block Obama no matter what he put forward, without even hearing or reading it. They said that. If the Democrats do that with Trump, they are equally as dispicable. So aside from pointing out an example of hypocrisy on the left, what else are you saying?

by eliminating Trump they actually put a much more conservative president in the white house…so what do they gain?

Trump's hostile, exclusive, and dangerous rhetoric could inflame emotions domestically and internationally, and escalate tensions. To eliminate this potentional risk is worth it alone. I think Pence has a much less chance of starting WW3. Pence may believe in gay-conversion therapy, but I do not worry about him attempting it. He won't ban gay marraige, he won't do anything of the sort, so as I was saying in the other thread, a conservative President at the end of the day won't change my day. Trump's rhetoric doesn't fall into conservative or liberal - it's just irresponsible, immature, emabarrassing, unprofessional, and potentiall very dangerous. And if his thin-skin and short temper get the best of him, I'd hate to see what happens after he antagonizes another country via Twitter. Gimme Pence all day.

I don't know if anyone saw SNL last night, but Aziz Ansari made a comment during his monologue that mirrors what I've been saying about Bush. He wasn't so bad. He was in fact a great President. He and his family showed just as much class and dignity as the Obamas, and faced just as much hostility and opposition, but never wavered and was never un-Presidential. He did what he thought was right in the face of adversity, and allowed history to judge him, and looking back I think he did a pretty good job for his character if nothing else. That's how bad Trump is. When liberals are reminscing about how we long for Bush.

[Edited on 1/22/2017 by BoytonBrother]

No, but that's the most effective and surefire way to handle it.

Now we get to see how the Democrats really feel about "fake scandals" and "witch hunts" Not to mention "obstruction."

Will they set an example and match actions with words, or end up looking like phonies?

Dismantling the agency that keeps politicians in check is an effective way to hide violations of ethics? Sounds, I don't know, CROOKED.

Interesting to see you hold Democrats to a higher standard.

Time will tell....

I don’t think it (removal of a president) has ever happened in the history of our country…but someone correct me if I’m wrong?

You are correct. Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton are the only two that have been impeached. Nixon resigned from office, of course.

Now…I assume most (if not all) of the folks screaming for impeachment are liberals, or at least fall somewhere left of center in the political spectrum.

People can scream all they want. Given the current makeup of Congress, Trump won't get investigated for...anything.

Trump is not a conservative. He was a liberal for most of his life until he decided to run for prez under the GOP banner. But Mike Pence is a conservative. So even though Trump is a “disgusting human” as someone so eloquently put it, he probably aligns much more closely with the center /left of center folks than Mike Pence does.

Donald Trump aligns with whatever is best for Donald Trump. This should be pretty obvious to most people by now.

Just curious if the folks on the left have thought this through …by eliminating Trump they actually put a much more conservative president in the white house…so what do they gain?

As much that is wrong with our government, as many changes need to be made, some of the radical, immediate changes being made or planned are, in some ways, more anarchistic to the traditional political order than any black bloc idiot breaking the window of a coffee shop. There is a difference between the transitional and evolving matters in our society that government makes correct or incorrect, hands-off or intrusive, and the traditions of an orderly state that are carried on for the common good.

The daily business of politics, government and bureaucracy, when running correctly, is incredibly mundane and boring, and that's a good thing. The simple matter of governance should be carried on so the citizens can go on about their day.

Mike Pence is a career politician. No matter who or what or how someone likes or dislikes career politicians, we have a ton of them. Until we (never) discuss term limits and such, we will always have career politicians. There once was a time when the majority of the folks in Congress were lawyers, but that has changed over time. Last session, only 39 percent of the House and 57 percent of the Senate had a JD. On one hand, seems like nobody likes lawyers (until they need one, of course), but on the other hand, electing experts in law to work on and create and amend laws doesn't sound that out of the realm.

If you do a lot of reading about the behind the scenes in Washington, there's a lot of folks scared (Republicans too!) by Trump...in that did-we-really-put-Homer-Simpson-in-charge-of-a-nuclear-reactor way. Platitudes and populism work to get one elected (obviously), but winning an election has absolutely nothing to do with governing.

I can only speak for myself, but given that this morning we entered a new world of "alternate facts," I'd take President Pence right now.

Bhawk - Well said. It's an interesting scenario...I think Pence is much more of the typical conservative type (pro-life, anti-LGBT, etc.) than Trump. So it seems Pence as president would be much more of a threat when it comes to those types of issues...the very issues that brought thousands of protestors out into the streets yesterday. So the "Love Trumps Hate" crowd is so blinded by and driven by their hysterical hatred of Trump, that they would actually prefer to put their political agenda at an even GREATER risk by removing Trump from office. They have actually put their hatred of Trump and his removal as a higher priority than protecting their own rights.

A threat to what? What rights would Pence take away that we have now?

[Edited on 1/22/2017 by BoytonBrother]

What rights would Pence take away that we have now?

I have no idea. And I noticed that not one person interviewed at the protests yesterday was able to clearly articulate what exactly they were protesting or what they were afraid of. But apparently women, the LGBT community, and some minority groups (BLM) fear that the Trump administration is going to roll back their rights and erase the many decades of progress that has been made in civil/human rights. My point was that Pence (as a conservative) is more of a threat (in theory at least) to their rights than Trump, but for some reason they still want Pence as president. It is an irrational - bordering on hysterical - hatred that these people have for Trump such that their primary goal is his removal, not human/civil rights.

I think Pence is much more of the typical conservative type (pro-life, anti-LGBT, etc.) than Trump. So it seems Pence as president would be much more of a threat when it comes to those types of issues...the very issues that brought thousands of protestors out into the streets yesterday.

Again, Pence is a career politician. All of the Republican Congressional leadership are career politicians. There's a Republican senator from my home state that hasn't actually lived here in 20 years. There's a long way between saying and doing. In the end, a career politician is beholden to his or her desire for re-election. Radical changes and ideas don't always come out and they don't always have the full partisan weight behind them. If they, did, for example, Harriet Miers would be a Supreme Court Justice.

So the "Love Trumps Hate" crowd is so blinded by and driven by their hysterical hatred of Trump, that they would actually prefer to put their political agenda at an even GREATER risk by removing Trump from office. They have actually put their hatred of Trump and his removal as a higher priority than protecting their own rights.

"Blinded by hate." The tired hypocrisy angle. In your zeal to call it from both sides, you're discounting one whole side.

Look, the guy is on tape saying "grab them by the p***y," has kids by three different women and has said that if Ivanka wasn't his daughter, he'd do her. If you think that's not going to cause a reaction, especially considering that he's now the President, I don't know what to tell you.

"They are all just blinded by their hate! Trump is a saint! Practically Jesus! Look at all these idiot liberals and their hate!"

Pretty transparent trolling-lite here, and one that's been used many times before. Lacks punch, IMO.

I have no idea. And I noticed that not one person interviewed at the protests yesterday was able to clearly articulate what exactly they were protesting or what they were afraid of.

Oh irony, thou art a cruel mistress...

Yeah, you're right...there was no hatred or displays of vulgarity from the "p***y power", "nasty women", "F**k Trump", dressed like vaginas, thoughts of blowing up the white house crowd yesterday. Classy, intelligent bunch of folks. And I'm just a dishonest troll now? Got it. 😉

Yes Trump is disgusting

His taped p***sy commnet...pretty disgusting

His comment on how a judge can't be fair because he's "Mexican"...pretty disgusting

His ban on Muslims...pretty disgusting

His use of twitter....pretty disgusting

His comments about his daughter....pretty disgusting

His attack and calling our intelligence community Nazi's...pretty disgusting

Yes he is a disgusting person with zero values....sorry I thought you liked him because of his straight talk...well I have no problem with straight talk

He's a disgusting person

[Edited on 1/22/2017 by goldtop]

Yeah, you're right...there was no hatred or displays of vulgarity from the "p***y power", "nasty women", "F**k Trump", dressed like vaginas, thoughts of blowing up the white house crowd yesterday. Classy, intelligent bunch of folks. And I'm just a dishonest troll now? Got it. 😉

Motivations on message boards are usually made quite clear by what people do and don't respond to. Your refusal to acknowledge any of Trump's behavior as a reason for, well, anything is a pretty clear tell.

Apparently, your overriding theme here is: American liberals are hate-filled hypocrites, hate-filled for no reason. They should sit down, shut up, and let the right wing, perfect in every way, have the final say on anything and everything. No one on the right wing has ever said or done anything hateful, ever. This is an extremely common theme that has been recurring on this particular board now for several years, almost always by the same people.

If that's what you mean to say, just come out and say it. Trying to set up hypocritical "gotchas" has been and is an obsession by many, and it's almost always started off with the "I despise both sides, but, the left..." approach.

I could post a hundred hateful signs from Tea Party rallies and Obama being burned in effigy, but you'd just ignore them, because apparently they don't exist. Odd one-way hypocrisy standard you have.

My point was that Pence (as a conservative) is more of a threat (in theory at least) to their rights than Trump, but for some reason they still want Pence as president. It is an irrational - bordering on hysterical - hatred that these people have for Trump such that their primary goal is his removal, not human/civil rights.

Bhawk stated it perfectly. I'll add that some people worry about the potential dangers of a hostile, short-tempered, thin-skinned President who behaves like a child. Many of us are concerned he could start international conflicts over petty reasons. So that's why we'd rather have Pence - we're not afraid of the big bad other side and don't consider opposing views a threat, like you do. We know America has enough resources that will allow us to do anything we want. The only thing irrational and hysterical is your paranoia of having no choice but to succomb to the big bad politicians that "affect you by force", and somehow dictate what happens to you in life. Please. Since you confuse laws with political idealogy, and couldn't understand why Meryl wasn't fired despite not working for anyone, you haven't done anything to gain an ounce of credibility, and if you have, please show us. I disagree with Bhawk in one sense. Trolls know what they are doing. I just think you don't have the capacity to know any better.

goldtop - I agree that those things that Trump did are disgusting.

However...Bhawk will be along soon enough to explain to you how I really don't believe that...I am just a liar, and a troll. Apparently ol' Bhawk has me figured out, and knows my mind, my motivations, and my political philosophy even better than I do.

goldtop - I agree that those things that Trump did are disgusting.

However...Bhawk will be along soon enough to explain to you how I really don't believe that...I am just a liar, and a troll. Apparently ol' Bhawk has me figured out, and knows my mind, my motivations, and my political philosophy even better than I do.

I don't care if a republican or democrat is in the white house. I don't want a disgusting person in the white house

I also have a disabled grandson so his mocking of the palsy of the disabled reporter is the height of disgusting

What the "Right" doesn't get....He's a disgusting dangerous person...How can anyone see anything positive in that or him???

If Rubio or Kasich was in I would not feel like this at all...and do you think there would have been marches world wide if they were elected or if Hillary was elected

those marches happened for 1 reason only

*********>>>>>>DONALD TRUMP IS A DISGUSTING PERSON<<<<<<<<<<<<**********

it was zero to do with republican or right wing...so that can never be the argument

Pretty transparent trolling-lite here, and one that's been used many times before. Lacks punch, IMO.

That isn't calling anyone a troll. That's an observation that a post is light trolling to illicit an emotional response, something that everyone including myself has done many times before. It's not like trying to get someone to lose their cool is restricted to this tiny corner of the internet.

I never called Redfish7 a troll or a liar. But, I have no control over how people process things.

I disagree with Bhawk in one sense. Trolls know what they are doing. I just think you don't have the capacity to know any better.

Well...that's not fair, really. Redfish7 hasn't been posting in the WP long enough to make a conclusion like that. Benefit of the doubt still in clear play from my chair.

If Rubio or Kasich was in I would not feel like this at all...

I liked (and still do) Marco Rubio a lot. Kasich too. I'd happily take back 95% of the negative things I've ever said about Mitt Romney. Their common thread...all decent, honorable men with admirable records of public service.

Hillary was a terrible candidate from the get-go and she lost.

Apparently, somehow, we're here...

"You guys WON! Get over it!"

there was no hatred or displays of vulgarity from the "p***y power", "nasty women", "F**k Trump", dressed like vaginas, thoughts of blowing up the white house crowd yesterday. Classy, intelligent bunch of folks. And I'm just a dishonest troll now? Got it. 😉

Let's not forget that the "P___ Power" and "Nasty Women" signs at these incredibly peaceful protests (by millions nation- and worldwide), are in direct response to vulgar comments made by Trump himself. To paraphrase the judges on Law & Order, "you opened the door, counselor, I'm allowing it..." These aren't born in a vacuum.

BoytonBrother - so laws aren't based on political ideology? Laws and world events exist in a vacuum and are in no way determined by political ideology? Obamacare was not an outcome of a certain political ideology? The Iraq war was not the outcome of a political ideology? And laws are not enforced by the power/force of the government? I can simply choose to ignore laws rather then "letting" them dictate what happens to me?

Fascinating. And good to know. All this time I've been under the impression that political ideology informs and shapes the laws of a society, and that those laws then dictate what is legal or illegal behavior for the members of said society, and that these laws are then enforced by the government of that society. But I like your way better...(if only it existed).

Someone really should have let all those protestors in on this theory of yours..."political beliefs do not affect you, laws don't dictate what your rights are...this march is a waste of time...just don't LET Trump affect you...you can all go home now"...lol.

there was no hatred or displays of vulgarity from the "p***y power", "nasty women", "F**k Trump", dressed like vaginas, thoughts of blowing up the white house crowd yesterday. Classy, intelligent bunch of folks. And I'm just a dishonest troll now? Got it. 😉

Let's not forget that the "P___ Power" and "Nasty Women" signs at these incredibly peaceful protests (by millions nation- and worldwide), are in direct response to vulgar comments made by Trump himself. To paraphrase the judges on Law & Order, "you opened the door, counselor, I'm allowing it..." These aren't born in a vacuum.

So I guess that makes it OK? Didn't we just have the double standard/hypocrisy discussion? If these folks thought it was vulgar, shouldn't they have tried to rise above that vulgarity and have a higher standard? If Trump thinks that some women are nasty and vulgar...well, I would have to say that many of them proved him right yesterday. Would it not have been better to come out and be classy, intelligent, and articulate as a response to Trump? Instead they protested vulgarity by being equally vulgar. And my questions/comments are directed at the ones who acted that way. I realize that they are not representative of all women or all of the protestors.

Pretty transparent trolling-lite here, and one that's been used many times before. Lacks punch, IMO.

That isn't calling anyone a troll. That's an observation that a post is light trolling to illicit an emotional response, something that everyone including myself has done many times before. It's not like trying to get someone to lose their cool is restricted to this tiny corner of the internet.

I never called Redfish7 a troll or a liar. But, I have no control over how people process things.

OK...let's split hairs. To be fair to Bhawk. He never called me a liar, he just drew a conclusion that I was being dishonest. So he accused me of being dishonest, but he never used the "L" word.

And he never directly called me a troll. He just said that my post was an example of "trolling-lite", which also implied that my question was not a sincere/honest one, but rather just an attempt to piss people off.

So...according to Bhawk...I am dishonest, but not a liar. And I am the author of posts motivated by trolling, but I am not a troll.

BoytonBrother - so laws aren't based on political ideology? Laws and world events exist in a vacuum and are in no way determined by political ideology? Obamacare was not an outcome of a certain political ideology? The Iraq war was not the outcome of a political ideology? And laws are not enforced by the power/force of the government? I can simply choose to ignore laws rather then "letting" them dictate what happens to me?

You consider a difference in political ideology to be a problem that creates some sort of threat to you, and takes away your rights. I don't feel that way.

Someone really should have let all those protestors in on this theory of yours..."political beliefs do not affect you, laws don't dictate what your rights are...this march is a waste of time...just don't LET Trump affect you...you can all go home now"...lol.

Now you get it. This is truly exactly how I feel. I respect their right to voice themselves, but I don't think women's rights will ever be in jeopardy under Trump, but I certainly don't blame them for being outraged by his comments.