Thread: Now we can impeach him - How long will it take

goldtop - 1/20/2017 at 05:17 PM

Day 1

The professor that said he would win now says he will either be impeached or step down

I can only hope he's correct again


goldtop - 1/20/2017 at 05:25 PM

To watch a sociopath liar put his hand on the bible is a sad day

We went from dignified to disgusting in a moments time

We have a disgusting pimp for a president


OriginalGoober - 1/20/2017 at 05:33 PM

Impeach? For what? Rigging elections? Getting debate questions illegally? Manipulate the press by getting to pre-review MSM articles?

Your gals behavior would have made any KGB agent proud.


jkeller - 1/20/2017 at 05:45 PM

quote:
Impeach? For what? Rigging elections? Getting debate questions illegally? Manipulate the press by getting to pre-review MSM articles?

Your gals behavior would have made any KGB agent proud.


Hillary lost. What she did isn't relevant, but I guess it is all you have.


Bhawk - 1/20/2017 at 05:53 PM

quote:
Impeach? For what? Rigging elections? Getting debate questions illegally? Manipulate the press by getting to pre-review MSM articles?

Your gals behavior would have made any KGB agent proud.


How can you impeach someone from an office she never held?

That's just weird.


OriginalGoober - 1/20/2017 at 05:53 PM

Yes HILLARY LOST. He is OUR PRESIDENT. Wishing for him to fail is like wishing the pilot misses the runway BUT we all are on the plane. I would be rooting for Hillary and Whoville-Mayor whats his name if they won.


Bhawk - 1/20/2017 at 05:56 PM

quote:
I would be rooting for Hillary and Whoville-Mayor whats his name if they won.


LOL, at least be honest. No, you wouldn't.


BIGV - 1/20/2017 at 06:32 PM

quote:
Hillary lost. What she did isn't relevant, but I guess it is all you have.


Felt the need to save this


nebish - 1/20/2017 at 09:20 PM

There is enough grey area or potential conflict of interest that cases will be made. The administration will deflect or dispel. The strength and validity of said cases yet to be determined. Impeachable? I don't know you tell me.


OriginalGoober - 1/20/2017 at 09:56 PM

Nebish, THis is a typical Trump hater response to the election results, with very derogatory name calling language sprinkled in about our next President. This is why there has been a decline in activity here, not something I posted.


pops42 - 1/20/2017 at 10:01 PM

Trump will be impeached for multiple ethics violations, and several of his staff will be facing prison sentences for various crimes.


2112 - 1/20/2017 at 10:03 PM

quote:
Trump will be impeached for multiple ethics violations, and several of his staff will be facing prison sentences for various crimes.


But the GOP holds both houses on congress for at least 2 years. Kind of early to consider impeachment.


Dan - 1/20/2017 at 10:22 PM

not fast enough!!!


pops42 - 1/20/2017 at 10:27 PM

quote:
quote:
Trump will be impeached for multiple ethics violations, and several of his staff will be facing prison sentences for various crimes.


But the GOP holds both houses on congress for at least 2 years. Kind of early to consider impeachment.
True, but id say within 18 months if the press and the people hold their feet to the fire [congress] I'm sure the pitchforks will come out, when trump voters realize he won't /can't deliver what he ran on. and trump can't help being trump.


goldtop - 1/21/2017 at 04:34 AM

Treason would be the first reason

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNa2B5zHfbQ

See when you ask a foreign government to interfere and then they do that's an act of treason

I believe his campaign was closely connected to Russia....The man has a fascination with the country and its leader....

2 of his wives come from that part of the world....his daughter has a very "Slavic" first name....he ran his miss universe pageant there

There is a connection and it will be brought out to light....its just a matter of time


nebish - 1/21/2017 at 06:08 AM

quote:
Treason would be the first reason

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNa2B5zHfbQ

See when you ask a foreign government to interfere and then they do that's an act of treason

I believe his campaign was closely connected to Russia....The man has a fascination with the country and its leader....

2 of his wives come from that part of the world....his daughter has a very "Slavic" first name....he ran his miss universe pageant there

There is a connection and it will be brought out to light....its just a matter of time


Well, the fact that he has or doesn't have a fascination with the country of Russia or if his daughter has a slavic name means nothing.

What does mean something is if there were actual collusion of some sort between his campaign and the Russian government. I will be disappointed if that is the case, but if proven, it is a very significant event. No doubt you will find Republicans ready to take action against Trump if it is shown he had communication with the Russians that lead to or asked them for any assistance during the campaign season.

So I believe this investigation is ongoing, right now.

But if the result of the investigation is the worst, Trump is impeached or resigns, then you'd be left with Pence, who I suspect most principled liberals don't like either. Some may even like him less?


Chain - 1/21/2017 at 01:40 PM

Trump is in violation of the Emoluments clause of the Constitution. The only question is whether the members of Congress will do their due diligence as required by their own oath of office and move to impeach him. Given Congress is controlled by the Republicans, it's probably a long shot.

I would suggest anyone curious about this potential Constitutional crisis listen to and read what these two ethics lawyers have been loudly proclaiming since Trump was elected. They are Richard Painter and Norm Eisen (George W. Bush's ethics lawyer and Barrack Obama's ethics lawyer respectably).


Here's a link to more info. on the Emoluments clause:

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/68/emoluments-cla use

[Edited on 1/21/2017 by Chain]


nebish - 1/21/2017 at 03:29 PM

quote:
Trump is in violation of the Emoluments clause of the Constitution. The only question is whether the members of Congress will do their due diligence as required by their own oath of office and move to impeach him. Given Congress is controlled by the Republicans, it's probably a long shot.

I would suggest anyone curious about this potential Constitutional crisis listen to and read what these two ethics lawyers have been loudly proclaiming since Trump was elected. They are Richard Painter and Norm Eisen (George W. Bush's ethics lawyer and Barrack Obama's ethics lawyer respectably).


Here's a link to more info. on the Emoluments clause:

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/68/emoluments-cla use

[Edited on 1/21/2017 by Chain]


Legitimate issue, it is going to be a cloud over his Presidency. I don't know how he could divest all business interest foreign and domestic being he is so unique in this area compared to other politicians. The standard of the blind trust seem too simplistic for a case of the holdings and interests of Trump? Maybe not. Smarter people than I can weigh in.

They talk about the lease agreement on the post office and an elected official ineligible to hold such a lease, although this should just violate the lease rather than create an issue for the office of President I think.

I will look up comments by Painter and Eisen.


goldtop - 1/21/2017 at 03:44 PM

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




alloak41 - 1/21/2017 at 04:04 PM

quote:
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.


Swifty - 1/21/2017 at 04:39 PM

quote:
quote:
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?

But voters did not know how extensive those holdings are because Trump did not release his tax returns. Trump concealed his holdings. He asked the voters to trust him. Now if conflicts emerge and these are reported in the press, voters might reach a different conclusion about his business dealings. This would put pressure on congress to act.

If Trump creates jobs in a way that the country as a whole flourishes and people are happy with their new prospects, then there would be less pressure to investigate any conflicts. If people are unhappy with his performance then Trump will have big trouble.

Complicating matters for him is that all of the measures on his priority list will have an adverse impact on the poor unemployed people who voted for him. He has no real economic plan.


Bhawk - 1/21/2017 at 04:45 PM

The Emoluments Clause violation is a legitimate Constitutional concern.

Anyone who spent months or even years frothing at the mouth about Benghazi or emails, yet blows this off, is simply a smug partisan hypocrite who isn't as better than others as they think they are.


nebish - 1/21/2017 at 04:46 PM

quote:
quote:
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.


Well, that is true, but if there is a violation of law that turns into something different. If we are talking about just some kind of custom or ethical tradition it is one thing, if there are legal issues that goes beyond voters overlooking or not giving weight to it in their vote.

I mean look, there are things that I want to happen in this administration that I think can only happen in a Trump administration and as I've talked for years that is on trade. If he is impeached that opportunity goes out the window, so I don't want that. But we can't have constitutional violations either.

I have just a cursory knowledge of these things, right wrong or otherwise potential conflicts of interest were not something I factored when voting. I suppose one could think that stuff may work it's self out, but if it hasn't then people are going to continue to bring it up and it may have some legitimacy to it.

Just this morning trying to get up to speed I've learned that criminal conflict of interest statute prohibits every other person in executive branch, except the President and Vice President, from participating in any matter that had a direct and predictable outcome on their investments or personal well being. But President and VP are exempt from this statute. However they risk serious appearances of impropriety. Previous Presidents have done everything they could to eliminate any appearance of conflict.

Emoluments clause comes in with foreign governments or institutions/companies controlled by foreign governments (like if the Bank of China lends to a Trump business for instance) that is a violation. I'm not a lawyer, one side would say it is not or why it is not and the other side would argue otherwise. The end result is if it is a violation then it is an impeachable issue. It’s best to divest these interests so there are no questions. Nobody technically knows at this point if there is a violation, but speculation is if there hasn’t been already that potential exists. Even if you give Trump the benefit of the doubt and say it happened without his knowledge it is still a violation I suspect, again you shouldn't take any of this from me there are much more knowledgeable people out there.

So it is best to get as far away from a potential conflict as possible so it isn’t a constant black cloud or liability to his term. I didn't know how a blind trust would work with the vast and diverse holdings of somebody like Trump. The physical businesses or properties wouldn’t go into a blind trust, all the assets would have to be sold (rolled into one, offered as a public offering), all holdings would need converted to cash and the money goes into a blind trust. So no doubt Trump didn't want to do that.

And to my limited knowledge, it isn't against the law for him to continue ownership of these companies and businesses. It leads to some problems, but not legal problems with him being President - except for that issue of foreign government influence and dollars and with Trump's global holdings that potential does exist. Nobody should want that exposure, certainly not Trump or anyone on his team. But he has left himself open to it.

One big problem maintaining these private business interests, outside of the potential Emoluments violation, is the President could be a litigation magnet with private lawsuits, legitimate or frivolous. The President can be sued in his personal capacity and would have to go through the process of discovery, deposition related to those lawsuits. Not something we want our President to be facing much of. It's a distraction at best.

And some say politics are boring!


MartinD28 - 1/21/2017 at 04:47 PM

quote:
quote:
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.


Some maybe but most probably not. Truthfully, alloak - How many voters really follow substance & details enough to know the extent of Trump's conflicts of issue? You might be referring to the same voters that think ACA and Obamacare are different.

As pointed out, if the guy won't release his tax returns, imagine what's in there to add to the extent of conflict. Just the other day he lied, yet again (for the umpteenth time) and said that the American public doesn't care about his tax returns. He knows there are things in there not beneficial for release. Google it up for yourself.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/jan/11/donald-trump /trump-wrong-reporters-are-only-ones-who-care-about/

alloak, Do you care about what's in his tax returns and where there is conflict, or are you just more thrilled that Obama's 2 terms are over, and Trump will Make America Great Again...whatever that means?


Bhawk - 1/21/2017 at 04:48 PM

quote:
So it is best to get as far away from a potential conflict as possible so it isn’t a constant black cloud or liability to his term. I didn't know how a blind trust would work with the vast and diverse holdings of somebody like Trump. The physical businesses or properties wouldn’t go into a blind trust, all the assets would have to be sold (rolled into one, offered as a public offering), all holdings would need converted to cash and the money goes into a blind trust. So no doubt Trump didn't want to do that.



Then he shouldn't have run for President. Pretty simple.


nebish - 1/21/2017 at 04:51 PM

I should thank Chain for providing some substantive info and direction on the issue. I know more now than I did an hour ago and that is a good thing.


Bhawk - 1/21/2017 at 04:58 PM

quote:
I should thank Chain for providing some substantive info and direction on the issue. I know more now than I did an hour ago and that is a good thing.


Good to see Chain around these parts again!


Bhawk - 1/21/2017 at 04:58 PM

quote:
I should thank Chain for providing some substantive info and direction on the issue. I know more now than I did an hour ago and that is a good thing.


Good to see Chain around these parts again!


alloak41 - 1/21/2017 at 05:14 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
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.


Some maybe but most probably not. Truthfully, alloak - How many voters really follow substance & details enough to know the extent of Trump's conflicts of issue? You might be referring to the same voters that think ACA and Obamacare are different.

As pointed out, if the guy won't release his tax returns, imagine what's in there to add to the extent of conflict. Just the other day he lied, yet again (for the umpteenth time) and said that the American public doesn't care about his tax returns. He knows there are things in there not beneficial for release. Google it up for yourself.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/jan/11/donald-trump /trump-wrong-reporters-are-only-ones-who-care-about/

alloak, Do you care about what's in his tax returns and where there is conflict, or are you just more thrilled that Obama's 2 terms are over, and Trump will Make America Great Again...whatever that means?


Of course I'm thrilled that Obama's is done. I could say I'm sad to see him go but you wouldn't believe that anyway.

No. I don't care about his tax returns. Just as I don't care about Clinton, Kerry, Romney, McCain, Bush, or Gore's tax return. I guess I care more job performance and results.


Bhawk - 1/21/2017 at 05:16 PM

quote:
I guess I care more job performance and results.


At the sake of legality and ethics? The same level of legality and ethics that the rightists have been going on about for two years towards their enemies?

Bold statement to make on Day 2, I'll give you that.


Chain - 1/21/2017 at 05:33 PM

quote:
The Emoluments Clause violation is a legitimate Constitutional concern.

Anyone who spent months or even years frothing at the mouth about Benghazi or emails, yet blows this off, is simply a smug partisan hypocrite who isn't as better than others as they think they are.


Exactly, Hawk....Richard Painter mentioned this very issue on "Fresh Air" with Terry Gross yesterday. He mentioned how embarrassed he is as a long time partisan Republican that his party made such an issue about Benghazi but yet is ignoring blatant violations by Trump on an issue that is tantamount to the very foundation of checks and balances within our government.

He also pointed to the fact that the Republicans in congress are already making efforts to thwart efforts by those very federal employees (not elected politicians) and agencies charged with investigating and overseeing ethics violations who are bringing some of these obvious violations forward.

I would suggest listening to the entire "Fresh Air" edition from yesterday as well as a recent "On Point" with Tom Ashbrook in which both of these attorney's also were guests. Also, both co-authored a recent NY Times article (or maybe it was Washington Post?) about this issue. Here's a link to yesterday's Fresh Air:

http://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/2017/01/19/510596329/fresh-air-for-ja nuary-19-2017

And the "On Point" episode:

http://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2016/11/28/conflict-interest-donald-trump

Thanks for the kind wishes, gang.....



[Edited on 1/21/2017 by Chain]


alloak41 - 1/21/2017 at 05:43 PM

quote:
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?








Time will tell....


Bhawk - 1/21/2017 at 05:46 PM

quote:
quote:
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.


alloak41 - 1/21/2017 at 05:51 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
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.


Bhawk - 1/21/2017 at 06:24 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
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?


goldtop - 1/21/2017 at 07:38 PM

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



MartinD28 - 1/21/2017 at 08:43 PM

quote:

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.


goldtop - 1/22/2017 at 04:12 PM

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




Redfish7 - 1/22/2017 at 05:06 PM

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?


BoytonBrother - 1/22/2017 at 05:22 PM

quote:
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?


BoytonBrother - 1/22/2017 at 05:22 PM

quote:
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]


porkchopbob - 1/22/2017 at 05:28 PM

quote:
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....


Bhawk - 1/22/2017 at 05:36 PM

quote:
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.

quote:
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.

quote:
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.

quote:
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.


Redfish7 - 1/22/2017 at 05:55 PM

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.


BoytonBrother - 1/22/2017 at 06:17 PM

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

[Edited on 1/22/2017 by BoytonBrother]


Redfish7 - 1/22/2017 at 06:29 PM

quote:
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.


Bhawk - 1/22/2017 at 06:30 PM

quote:
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.

quote:
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.


Bhawk - 1/22/2017 at 06:31 PM

quote:
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...


Redfish7 - 1/22/2017 at 06:39 PM

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.


goldtop - 1/22/2017 at 06:50 PM

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]


Bhawk - 1/22/2017 at 06:53 PM

quote:
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.


BoytonBrother - 1/22/2017 at 07:03 PM

quote:
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.


Redfish7 - 1/22/2017 at 07:07 PM

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 - 1/22/2017 at 07:15 PM

quote:
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


Bhawk - 1/22/2017 at 07:15 PM

quote:
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.


Bhawk - 1/22/2017 at 07:18 PM

quote:
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.


Bhawk - 1/22/2017 at 07:21 PM

quote:
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!"


porkchopbob - 1/22/2017 at 07:24 PM

quote:
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.


Redfish7 - 1/22/2017 at 07:28 PM

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.


Redfish7 - 1/22/2017 at 07:45 PM

quote:
quote:
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.


Redfish7 - 1/22/2017 at 07:54 PM

quote:
quote:
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 - 1/22/2017 at 07:58 PM

quote:
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.

quote:
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.


porkchopbob - 1/22/2017 at 08:04 PM

quote:
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.


It's called context, they reappropriated his own words. Often times, quite sharply and wittily. They are responding to what they found insulting. How do you protest words and actions you find horrible by extracting them from your own protest? And how vulgar is "nasty" - what are you a Puritan? They peacefully protested? That is about as classy as you can get. You want them to burn Trump in effigy as many did Obama in 2008? You may not agree with what they protested, but you can't argue with how they protested.


Bhawk - 1/22/2017 at 08:06 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
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.


One thing is for sure, you are quite sensitive.


Redfish7 - 1/22/2017 at 08:22 PM

I get that this is how you "feel". But I'm not interested in how you feel about something. I'm only interested in how things really are.

And it's not that I just "CONSIDER" a difference in political ideology to be a problem that creates some sort of threat to me. It's that this is reality. And the "threat" isn't necessarily a loss of rights. It could be a decrease in disposable income or the loss of a good health care policy, which I have already provided as evidence of ways in which the political ideology of the Obama administration directly impacted me.

Political ideology can also have a positive impact. I'm not saying it is all bad. I favor those aspects of a political ideology that are positive, while opposing those that are negative.

But to say that political ideology has no impact on my life or yours...well, you can "feel" that way all you want to. But the reality is quite different.

So...those women protesting yesterday...their rights aren't really in jeopardy, they are just unjustifiably paranoid, and they are only protesting because they are butt-hurt over some comments Trump made? Another interesting theory...


Redfish7 - 1/22/2017 at 08:28 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
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.


One thing is for sure, you are quite sensitive.


Yes, I know...a quite sensitive, dishonest, troll. I've learned so much about myself from you.


BoytonBrother - 1/22/2017 at 08:48 PM

quote:
You are kidding, right? With the Supreme Court up for grabs you don't think Roe vs. Wade is going to come under fire?


I don't. It might be challenged, but I believe a woman will always be able to have an abortion should she choose that route. I don't see how Trump could prevent that. If he can, please do tell. I'm always eager to learn.


Bhawk - 1/22/2017 at 08:51 PM

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


quote:
So...those women protesting yesterday...their rights aren't really in jeopardy, they are just unjustifiably paranoid, and they are only protesting because they are butt-hurt over some comments Trump made?


You find these things "disgusting," but anyone else taking issue to them is "butt-hurt?"


BoytonBrother - 1/22/2017 at 08:54 PM

quote:
And it's not that I just "CONSIDER" a difference in political ideology to be a problem that creates some sort of threat to me. It's that this is reality. And the "threat" isn't necessarily a loss of rights. It could be a decrease in disposable income or the loss of a good health care policy, which I have already provided as evidence of ways in which the political ideology of the Obama administration directly impacted me.


Wah wah, the government is to blame for your income now? Whatever happened to working harder for the income you want?


quote:
But to say that political ideology has no impact on my life or yours...well, you can "feel" that way all you want to. But the reality is quite different.


If you say so.


quote:
So...those women protesting yesterday...their rights aren't really in jeopardy, they are just unjustifiably paranoid, and they are only protesting because they are butt-hurt over some comments Trump made? Another interesting theory...


your words and interpretation. you can cut and past mine from above for my words and interpretation.


jkeller - 1/22/2017 at 09:02 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
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.


One thing is for sure, you are quite sensitive.


Yes, I know...a quite sensitive, dishonest, troll. I've learned so much about myself from you.


You concluded that.


Bhawk - 1/22/2017 at 09:11 PM

Consider this. This is today. This morning:

quote:
4:47 am - Watched protests yesterday but was under the impression that we just had an election! Why didn't these people vote? Celebs hurt cause badly.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/823150055418920960?ref_src=twsrc %5Etfw



Then, about an hour and a half later:

quote:
6:23am - Peaceful protests are a hallmark of our democracy. Even if I don't always agree, I recognize the rights of people to express their views.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/823174199036542980?ref_src=twsrc %5Etfw



All of the ridiculous and inane nitpicking done over Presidents over the last several years and all of the sudden you even breathe the slightest implication of negativity on the things like this our PRESIDENT says and you're just a butt-hurt snowflake?

Get the ---- outta here.


Redfish7 - 1/22/2017 at 10:13 PM

quote:
Wah wah, the government is to blame for your income now? Whatever happened to working harder for the income you want?


Oh, OK...so now I have to go find a higher paying job or work more hours just to maintain the same level of income. Great! Well, at least you are finally acknowledging that political ideologies negatively impact me and my family. We're making some progress now.

You are so lost here. What don't you get? Someone's or some party's political ideology lead to the implementation of Obamacare. I now pay a higher premium, have a higher deductible, etc. which means less net income in my pocket every month. That is a negative impact to me that is a result of a political ideology. Your suggestion...work harder...so now we have another negative impact to me and my family.

Before Obamacare: Good health insurance policy, lower premiums, lower deductibles.

After Obamacare: Higher premiums, higher deductibles - both of which result in less money in my pocket. And according to you I must now work harder to maintain the same level of income.

So...a worse insurance policy, less money in my pocket, more work resulting in less free time to spend with my family and doing the things that I enjoy, etc. So tell me again how political ideologies have no impact on my life? And tell me again why I should not be opposed to something that negatively impacts me and my family?

And keep in mind that Obamacare is just one small example of how politics intersects with and impacts our lives.


jkeller - 1/22/2017 at 10:24 PM

quote:
quote:
Wah wah, the government is to blame for your income now? Whatever happened to working harder for the income you want?


Oh, OK...so now I have to go find a higher paying job or work more hours just to maintain the same level of income. Great! Well, at least you are finally acknowledging that political ideologies negatively impact me and my family. We're making some progress now.

You are so lost here. What don't you get? Someone's or some party's political ideology lead to the implementation of Obamacare. I now pay a higher premium, have a higher deductible, etc. which means less net income in my pocket every month. That is a negative impact to me that is a result of a political ideology. Your suggestion...work harder...so now we have another negative impact to me and my family.

Before Obamacare: Good health insurance policy, lower premiums, lower deductibles.

After Obamacare: Higher premiums, higher deductibles - both of which result in less money in my pocket. And according to you I must now work harder to maintain the same level of income.

So...a worse insurance policy, less money in my pocket, more work resulting in less free time to spend with my family and doing the things that I enjoy, etc. So tell me again how political ideologies have no impact on my life? And tell me again why I should not be opposed to something that negatively impacts me and my family?

And keep in mind that Obamacare is just one small example of how politics intersects with and impacts our lives.




What you and so many others failed to understand is that the ACA was intended so that everyone would be able to get insurance, but the premiums are set by the insurance companies. Just about every insurance companies made record profits after the ACA was passed.


Bhawk - 1/22/2017 at 10:44 PM

quote:
Someone's or some party's political ideology lead to the implementation of Obamacare.


Not entirely. Obamacare was a reaction to a legitimate societal need.

Medicare and Medicaid were heading down one of two paths: Complete insolvency, or, rescue from that insolvency via a massive tax crush that would start hitting as early as 2030, now not that far away.

As Medicare and Medicaid evolved over time, both parties ignored the Baby Boomer reality...eventually there was going to be waaaaay more claims paid out than there were workers paying in, simply by math.

The three main pillars of Obamacare:

1. Ban insurance companies from the pre-existing condition exemption from coverage - This is a win for the people that now would have insurance that did not have access before.
2. Mandate those without insurance to participate, or, pay a penalty. This is a win for the insurance companies who had to take on all those new customers with expensive conditions by balancing it with making those younger and healthier pay in, as that group tends to not use insurance as much. It also was originally concepted on a very basic conservative complaint - no free rides, everyone has to pay something.
3. More Americans have health insurance - This is a win for the government.

Three main groups, everyone gets something. This is the basic theory as originally presented by The Heritage Foundation, one of Washington's oldest and most respected conservative think tanks, and was also the basic framework for Bob Dole's heathcare plan on his 1996 Presidential campaign platform.

Not exactly so easily discernable by political ideology, now is it?

As to the premiums, the ACA left giant loopholes...there were no premium price controls at the Federal level, that was left to the states. Now there's 50 different states with 50 different insurance commissions, so while the Federal law enacted things, the states were left to run things, or opt in to the Medicaid provision to help offset the new administrative burden.

It should be noted that no matter one's level of regard for insurance companies, their motives and their profitability, it goes without saying that any premium increase can be made by any insurance company and they can blame Obamacare, the position of the Sun or the presence of demons as a reason to make that increase.

Premiums, like most other things, increase over time as adjusted with inflation. Let's say there's a full repeal and dismantling of the ACA. When premiums go up again, then who to blame?

After that, there's still the matter of millions of people now without insurance, which may or may not include the 76 million Baby Boomers getting older by the minute and a healthcare system that would be further behind the 8-ball than ever.

Then what do we do?


nebish - 1/22/2017 at 11:39 PM

These threads all go so many different directions of off topic.

quote:
What you and so many others failed to understand is that the ACA was intended so that everyone would be able to get insurance, but the premiums are set by the insurance companies. Just about every insurance companies made record profits after the ACA was passed.


So that is why United, Humana and Aetna are withdrawing from some state exchanges...too much profit?

I mean yeah, I get it...huge windfall for them, the government mandates that everyone must buy their product and have health insurance and if you can't afford to buy it the government subsidizes it. Something obviously went wrong or else these companies wouldn't be withdrawing.


Redfish7 - 1/23/2017 at 12:09 AM

quote:
Not entirely. Obamacare was a reaction to a legitimate societal need.


Even the idea that the government (or the taxpayers) is responsible for addressing that societal need is a political ideology, and one that not everyone shares. I stopped reading after this...so can't comment on your other points.


jkeller - 1/23/2017 at 12:14 AM

quote:
quote:
Not entirely. Obamacare was a reaction to a legitimate societal need.


Even the idea that the government (or the taxpayers) is responsible for addressing that societal need is a political ideology, and one that not everyone shares. I stopped reading after this...so can't comment on your other points.


So, building roads, schools, having police departments, fire departments, a standing military force to protect us are a political ideology? And that is bad?

Since you refused to read the rest of his post, we can add lazy and narrow minded to your list of perceived flaws.


Redfish7 - 1/23/2017 at 12:31 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Not entirely. Obamacare was a reaction to a legitimate societal need.


Even the idea that the government (or the taxpayers) is responsible for addressing that societal need is a political ideology, and one that not everyone shares. I stopped reading after this...so can't comment on your other points.


So, building roads, schools, having police departments, fire departments, a standing military force to protect us are a political ideology? And that is bad?

Since you refused to read the rest of his post, we can add lazy and narrow minded to your list of perceived flaws.


How one thinks we should go about doing those things, providing those services, and how we should pay for them is largely determined by one's political ideology. And I never said all government is bad, or that all political ideologies have negative impacts. I said that they can also have positive impacts. But if you had read my posts you would already know this. So I'm not the only lazy one.

And the primary point being debated was whether or not political ideology affects/impacts our lives. BoyntonBrother says "no". I say "yes". I used Obamacare as evidence that it does. Whether you are pro-OC or anti-OC is irrelevant (at least to the point being debated). The only question is...did Obamacare impact peoples' lives? I am living proof that it did. That's why I didn't read any further...I'm not interested in discussing the pros/cons of Obamacare.




alloak41 - 1/23/2017 at 01:04 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Wah wah, the government is to blame for your income now? Whatever happened to working harder for the income you want?


Oh, OK...so now I have to go find a higher paying job or work more hours just to maintain the same level of income. Great! Well, at least you are finally acknowledging that political ideologies negatively impact me and my family. We're making some progress now.

You are so lost here. What don't you get? Someone's or some party's political ideology lead to the implementation of Obamacare. I now pay a higher premium, have a higher deductible, etc. which means less net income in my pocket every month. That is a negative impact to me that is a result of a political ideology. Your suggestion...work harder...so now we have another negative impact to me and my family.

Before Obamacare: Good health insurance policy, lower premiums, lower deductibles.

After Obamacare: Higher premiums, higher deductibles - both of which result in less money in my pocket. And according to you I must now work harder to maintain the same level of income.

So...a worse insurance policy, less money in my pocket, more work resulting in less free time to spend with my family and doing the things that I enjoy, etc. So tell me again how political ideologies have no impact on my life? And tell me again why I should not be opposed to something that negatively impacts me and my family?

And keep in mind that Obamacare is just one small example of how politics intersects with and impacts our lives.




What you and so many others failed to understand is that the ACA was intended so that everyone would be able to get insurance, but the premiums are set by the insurance companies.


Set by the insurance companies after the government forced them into what to include in their policies, who and what to cover.

Not that that would effect prices.


Redfish7 - 1/23/2017 at 01:18 AM

quote:
quote:
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.


It's called context, they reappropriated his own words. Often times, quite sharply and wittily. They are responding to what they found insulting. How do you protest words and actions you find horrible by extracting them from your own protest? And how vulgar is "nasty" - what are you a Puritan? They peacefully protested? That is about as classy as you can get. You want them to burn Trump in effigy as many did Obama in 2008? You may not agree with what they protested, but you can't argue with how they protested.


I don't have a problem with them protesting...it’s their right…but apparently some of the stuff they were doing was too lewd and vulgar to even show on the news. And you know there were kids and teenagers at the march. I thought back to the commercial that Hillary had during the campaign...the one that showed the kids watching all of Trump's antics. But I guess it was OK for these same kids and young people to see the vulgar things that were displayed at the march...and I'm sure these kids totally understood the context (sarcasm). And I guess we just have different perspectives on what classy is. And, yes...I get what they were doing, and the context and all...but to protest vulgarity with more vulgarity is hypocritical in my book. Not to mention that women who are pro-life were not allowed to partner with the march. So much for women being united, and all that diversity and inclusiveness BS...

It would have been nice if Trump had in some way acknowledged the folks at the march...let them know that he hears them, ease some of their concerns, etc. And going forward it would be great if he would set up some town halls or other types of forums with some representatives of those groups and have some open dialog with them. I know...that's crazy talk...and I won't hold my breath, but I think that would be a great move on his part if he really wants to start healing some of the division in this country.

[Edited on 1/23/2017 by Redfish7]


Bhawk - 1/23/2017 at 01:21 AM

quote:

So that is why United, Humana and Aetna are withdrawing from some state exchanges...too much profit?



Why aren't they withdrawing from them all?


Bhawk - 1/23/2017 at 01:29 AM

quote:
quote:
Not entirely. Obamacare was a reaction to a legitimate societal need.


Even the idea that the government (or the taxpayers) is responsible for addressing that societal need is a political ideology, and one that not everyone shares. I stopped reading after this...so can't comment on your other points.


If no change had been made, by 2040 Medicare and Medicaid spending would require 40% (yes, 40%) of GDP.

The tax rate would have to go to 50% for everyone to cover that.

That has nothing to do with political ideology, that's fiscal reality.

You might go ahead and say that Medicare and Medicaid are bad programs too. That doesn't change the fact that millions of people had Medicare deductions taken out of the paychecks for most or all of their working lives and still may face having no assistance at all when the time comes.

There's still the matter of millions of people not having insurance, which may or may not include the 76 million Baby Boomers getting older by the minute and a healthcare system that would be further behind the 8-ball than ever.

Then what do we do?


Bhawk - 1/23/2017 at 01:31 AM

quote:
Whether you are pro-OC or anti-OC is irrelevant (at least to the point being debated). The only question is...did Obamacare impact peoples' lives? I am living proof that it did. That's why I didn't read any further...I'm not interested in discussing the pros/cons of Obamacare.


So, get rid of it. Then what?


Redfish7 - 1/23/2017 at 01:47 AM

Bhawk - just to be clear...the point being discussed/debated was whether or not political ideology impacts our lives, either for good or bad. Are you actually siding with BoyntonBrother in trying to claim that it does not impact our lives?

I don't care to debate the pros/cons of OC, or how we fix it, or what we do after Trump dismantles it, etc. The only reason that it came up was as an example of how political ideology impacts our lives.

The belief that the right to health care is a basic human right, or that money should be taken out of Joe's pocket to pay for Bill's health insurance, or that the government should be involved in regulating/mandating health care in any way whatsoever, etc....those basic presuppositions are part of a political ideology whether you care to admit it or not. Is there a fiscal aspect also. Sure, OK...but that doesn't negate the political ideology behind it.



[Edited on 1/23/2017 by Redfish7]


BoytonBrother - 1/23/2017 at 01:53 AM

quote:
How one thinks we should go about doing those things, providing those services, and how we should pay for them is largely determined by one's political ideology.


I'm pretty sure both Democrats and Republicans agreed that taxes would pay for those things.

quote:
And the primary point being debated was whether or not political ideology affects/impacts our lives. BoyntonBrother says "no". I say "yes". I used Obamacare as evidence that it does.


I was referring to how it evidently affects you emotionally based on your previous posts.


BoytonBrother - 1/23/2017 at 02:01 AM

quote:
But I guess it was OK for these same kids and young people to see the vulgar things that were displayed at the march...


Only you have said that. And what was so vulgar? Any links?

quote:
Not to mention that women who are pro-life were not allowed to partner with the march. So much for women being united, and all that diversity and inclusiveness BS...


What do you mean? My pro-life co-worker went to the D.C. one and had a great time. Where do you get your info?


Redfish7 - 1/23/2017 at 02:02 AM

quote:
quote:
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.


Haha...I missed this earlier. So...what kind of time frame are we looking at here?...just so I will know when my "benefit of the doubt" trial period runs out? And what metric are we using...calendar days or number of posts?

So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.


alloak41 - 1/23/2017 at 02:24 AM

quote:
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.


Haha...I missed this earlier. So...what kind of time frame are we looking at here?...just so I will know when my "benefit of the doubt" trial period runs out? And what metric are we using...calendar days or number of posts?

So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.



Just wait, it gets a whole lot better.


Bhawk - 1/23/2017 at 02:26 AM

quote:
Bhawk - just to be clear...the point being discussed/debated was whether or not political ideology impacts our lives, either for good or bad. Are you actually siding with BoyntonBrother in trying to claim that it does not impact our lives?

I don't care to debate the pros/cons of OC, or how we fix it, or what we do after Trump dismantles it, etc. The only reason that it came up was as an example of how political ideology impacts our lives.

The belief that the right to health care is a basic human right, or that money should be taken out of Joe's pocket to pay for Bill's health insurance, or that the government should be involved in regulating/mandating health care in any way whatsoever, etc....those basic presuppositions are part of a political ideology whether you care to admit it or not. Is there a fiscal aspect also. Sure, OK...but that doesn't negate the political ideology behind it.



The original tenets of what became the Affordable Care Act was concepted by a conservative think tank and was on the platform of a Republican presidential candidate. So, the question is, whose ideology drove what?

If you are going to claim effects of political ideology, where does it apply in matters of consensus? In this case, ideology defined the opposition to an act of government because a tenet of that ideology dictates that the opponent, the enemy, is not allowed a "victory," regardless of if it a positive or negative for the citizenry.

The Republicans could have sold this exact same plan if they had framed it using the "everyone must pay something, no freeloaders" approach. Now, that's an example of using ideology.

It also looks like you tend to start with the extremes of an ideology. Why?


Bhawk - 1/23/2017 at 02:27 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
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.


Haha...I missed this earlier. So...what kind of time frame are we looking at here?...just so I will know when my "benefit of the doubt" trial period runs out? And what metric are we using...calendar days or number of posts?

So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.




I thought BB was getting too close to insulting you and said so. How you interpret that is up to you.


Bhawk - 1/23/2017 at 02:28 AM

quote:
quote:
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.


Haha...I missed this earlier. So...what kind of time frame are we looking at here?...just so I will know when my "benefit of the doubt" trial period runs out? And what metric are we using...calendar days or number of posts?

So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.



Just wait, it gets a whole lot better.


Contempt is equally returned when given.


alloak41 - 1/23/2017 at 02:32 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
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.


Haha...I missed this earlier. So...what kind of time frame are we looking at here?...just so I will know when my "benefit of the doubt" trial period runs out? And what metric are we using...calendar days or number of posts?

So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.



Just wait, it gets a whole lot better.


Contempt is equally returned when given.


Equally? Contempt is "returned" whether it's given or not.


Redfish7 - 1/23/2017 at 02:33 AM

quote:
quote:
But I guess it was OK for these same kids and young people to see the vulgar things that were displayed at the march...


Only you have said that. And what was so vulgar? Any links?

quote:
Not to mention that women who are pro-life were not allowed to partner with the march. So much for women being united, and all that diversity and inclusiveness BS...


What do you mean? My pro-life co-worker went to the D.C. one and had a great time. Where do you get your info?


It was reported on the news yesterday...lots of vulgar speech, lewd content and pictures on signs (some of it of a sexual nature), women dressed like vaginas, signs with "F**k Trump", people spitting on people, Madonna talking about blowing up the white house, etc...not a great environment for children or young people.

The exclusion of the pro-life group was also reported on the news. They interviewed someone from the pro-life group. Later I saw another interview with someone from one of the pro-choice groups, and the reporter was somewhat calling her out for it...you know, asking her why the pro-life women were excluded if it was supposed to be about all women, solidarity, etc.

Sorry...I don't recall specific names, or have links, etc...and I was switching around between CNN, Fox and others...so I don't even recall which news show/channel it was on. If you're really interested in the details, then just google it.

And I didn't mean that no pro-life women attended the march. Anyone who wanted to attend could go. Heck, there were even some Trump supporters there. Imagine that...women who voted for Trump.

But apparently there was a large, well organized and coordinated march that groups had to apply for if they wanted to partner with it. This pro-life group was initially accepted and had planned to be a part of that specific march. But then when the organizers of the march found out that they were a pro-life group, they changed their mind and told them they weren't welcome. Gotta love that inclusiveness.


nebish - 1/23/2017 at 02:36 AM

quote:
quote:
These threads all go so many different directions of off topic


What the heck does this have to do with the topic? If you want to talk about people posting off-topic, start another thread!


An observation that in a thread about impeaching Trump the discussion moved to ACA. Sorry such a comment has appeared to offend you so much.


Bhawk - 1/23/2017 at 02:42 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
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.


Haha...I missed this earlier. So...what kind of time frame are we looking at here?...just so I will know when my "benefit of the doubt" trial period runs out? And what metric are we using...calendar days or number of posts?

So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.



Just wait, it gets a whole lot better.


Contempt is equally returned when given.


Equally? Contempt is "returned" whether it's given or not.


Snowflake need a safe space?

Oh, that's right. You don't hate liberals and Democrats, don't wish to eradicate entire belief systems. Musta forgot. Uh-huh.

Lines are drawn. Everyone involved drew them. Here we are.


Redfish7 - 1/23/2017 at 02:48 AM


I'm pretty sure both Democrats and Republicans agreed that taxes would pay for those things.


And I suppose the belief/presupposition that involuntary taxation should be used to pay for those things is not a political ideology? Anarcho-capitalists, voluntaryists, some schools of libertarianism, and many others would heartily disagree.

So even your most basic assumption about how society should operate is based on a political ideology.


alloak41 - 1/23/2017 at 02:54 AM

quote:
So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.

Just wait, it gets a whole lot better.


Contempt is equally returned when given.


Equally? Contempt is "returned" whether it's given or not.


Lines are drawn. Everyone involved drew them. Here we are.


That's right, and as of five minutes ago I decided to cross the line and post as a Liberal.

How's that sound, moron?


Bhawk - 1/23/2017 at 03:02 AM

quote:

I'm pretty sure both Democrats and Republicans agreed that taxes would pay for those things.


And I suppose the belief/presupposition that involuntary taxation should be used to pay for those things is not a political ideology? Anarcho-capitalists, voluntaryists, some schools of libertarianism, and many others would heartily disagree.

So even your most basic assumption about how society should operate is based on a political ideology.




quote:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States


Which ideology is that, label-wise, do you think? What should we call it?


Redfish7 - 1/23/2017 at 03:11 AM

quote:
quote:
Bhawk - just to be clear...the point being discussed/debated was whether or not political ideology impacts our lives, either for good or bad. Are you actually siding with BoyntonBrother in trying to claim that it does not impact our lives?

I don't care to debate the pros/cons of OC, or how we fix it, or what we do after Trump dismantles it, etc. The only reason that it came up was as an example of how political ideology impacts our lives.

The belief that the right to health care is a basic human right, or that money should be taken out of Joe's pocket to pay for Bill's health insurance, or that the government should be involved in regulating/mandating health care in any way whatsoever, etc....those basic presuppositions are part of a political ideology whether you care to admit it or not. Is there a fiscal aspect also. Sure, OK...but that doesn't negate the political ideology behind it.



The original tenets of what became the Affordable Care Act was concepted by a conservative think tank and was on the platform of a Republican presidential candidate. So, the question is, whose ideology drove what?

If you are going to claim effects of political ideology, where does it apply in matters of consensus? In this case, ideology defined the opposition to an act of government because a tenet of that ideology dictates that the opponent, the enemy, is not allowed a "victory," regardless of if it a positive or negative for the citizenry.

The Republicans could have sold this exact same plan if they had framed it using the "everyone must pay something, no freeloaders" approach. Now, that's an example of using ideology.

It also looks like you tend to start with the extremes of an ideology. Why?


Yep, if I recall correctly…I believe Mitt Romney came up with the model/prototype for what later became the ACA. Obama stole it from Mitt, and we have Republicans and Democrats both to blame for it.

Again…the debate was simply over whether or not political ideology impacts our lives. It wasn’t about whose political ideology impacts our lives. Both liberal/conservative ideology have impacts…some negative and some positive. In fact, I even used US foreign policy/the Bush Doctrine as another example, and showed how that particular ideology resulted in the unnecessary deaths/displacement of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

By the way, I know you will find this hard to believe (due to the conclusions that you have drawn about me), but if I had been active on this forum during the Bush regime, I would have been accused of being a liberal…trust me on that…I was just as critical of Bush, probably more so, as I am of Obama. Bush was a real tool also.

What do you mean that I start with the extremes of an ideology?


Bhawk - 1/23/2017 at 03:17 AM

quote:
quote:
So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.

Just wait, it gets a whole lot better.


Contempt is equally returned when given.


Equally? Contempt is "returned" whether it's given or not.


Lines are drawn. Everyone involved drew them. Here we are.


That's right, and as of five minutes ago I decided to cross the line and post as a Liberal.

How's that sound, moron?


Yes, only liberals insult people. Yawn. The alloak manifesto of conservative perfection. Well established.


Redfish7 - 1/23/2017 at 03:19 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
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.


Haha...I missed this earlier. So...what kind of time frame are we looking at here?...just so I will know when my "benefit of the doubt" trial period runs out? And what metric are we using...calendar days or number of posts?

So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.




I thought BB was getting too close to insulting you and said so. How you interpret that is up to you.


I was actually trying to mess with you...joke around a little...hence the smiley/wink face. I know we've taken some jabs at each other, but it's all good.


Redfish7 - 1/23/2017 at 03:23 AM

quote:
quote:

I'm pretty sure both Democrats and Republicans agreed that taxes would pay for those things.


And I suppose the belief/presupposition that involuntary taxation should be used to pay for those things is not a political ideology? Anarcho-capitalists, voluntaryists, some schools of libertarianism, and many others would heartily disagree.

So even your most basic assumption about how society should operate is based on a political ideology.




quote:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States


Which ideology is that, label-wise, do you think? What should we call it?


I have no idea. Republicanism, maybe? What difference does it matter what the label is?


BoytonBrother - 1/23/2017 at 01:56 PM

quote:
It was reported on the news yesterday...lots of vulgar speech, lewd content and pictures on signs (some of it of a sexual nature), women dressed like vaginas, signs with "F**k Trump", people spitting on people, Madonna talking about blowing up the white house, etc...not a great environment for children or young people.


"Reported on the news", I'll assume was some hack with an agenda, not an actual reporter, unless you have something. If those actions are so vulgar, why elect Trump as President who behaved the same way?


porkchopbob - 1/23/2017 at 02:06 PM

quote:
It was reported on the news yesterday...lots of vulgar speech, lewd content and pictures on signs (some of it of a sexual nature), women dressed like vaginas, signs with "F**k Trump", people spitting on people, Madonna talking about blowing up the white house, etc...not a great environment for children or young people.


I have friends who marched in NYC, DC, LA, Chicago, and they all said it was peaceful. Many brought their kids, and it was a completely positive experience of activism. No one spitting or talking about attacking anything, it was a show of unity of a lot of people who aren't offended by women's body parts against a President they strongly disagree with.


goldtop - 1/23/2017 at 03:39 PM

Day 4....Suit filed against Trump for ethics violations....that didn't take long

Redfish after your "are they butt hurt" comment I clearly understand how the disgusting things Trump says didn't bother you...and how you could possibly vote for him

That's the exact kind of talk that is disgusting....get it???

That protest was world wide not just here at home....Open your eyes

As far as the ACA....before the ACA my wife couldn't get insurance because she is type II diabetic....See before the only people who could get insurance had to have nothing wrong with them...

I guess that doesn't both you because you had to pay less....pretty phucking selfish...but that is the Republican way...if it doesn't directly effect me its not an issue


Redfish7 - 1/25/2017 at 01:28 AM

quote:
quote:
It was reported on the news yesterday...lots of vulgar speech, lewd content and pictures on signs (some of it of a sexual nature), women dressed like vaginas, signs with "F**k Trump", people spitting on people, Madonna talking about blowing up the white house, etc...not a great environment for children or young people.


"Reported on the news", I'll assume was some hack with an agenda, not an actual reporter, unless you have something. If those actions are so vulgar, why elect Trump as President who behaved the same way?


No, it was actual reporters on the major networks…and not just one reporter, or one news show. Did these reporters have an agenda? Well, of course…don’t all reporters and news outlets have an agenda?

And your last sentence is exactly the point I was making…just using the reverse logic. If Trump behaved like that…and that’s supposedly why they are so offended…then it’s hypocritical for them to behave the same way.


Redfish7 - 1/25/2017 at 01:31 AM

quote:
quote:
It was reported on the news yesterday...lots of vulgar speech, lewd content and pictures on signs (some of it of a sexual nature), women dressed like vaginas, signs with "F**k Trump", people spitting on people, Madonna talking about blowing up the white house, etc...not a great environment for children or young people.


I have friends who marched in NYC, DC, LA, Chicago, and they all said it was peaceful. Many brought their kids, and it was a completely positive experience of activism. No one spitting or talking about attacking anything, it was a show of unity of a lot of people who aren't offended by women's body parts against a President they strongly disagree with.


It’s great that your friends had a positive experience, but the fact that your friends didn’t happen to see any of the stuff being reported on the news is hardly evidence that it didn’t happen. I’m sure not everyone at the inauguration witnessed a limo and trash cans being burned either? Does that mean it didn’t happen?

And no comments on the Ashley Judd meltdown?…Trump is Hitler, his cabinet is a bunch of Nazis, he has wet dreams about his daughter, blood on the sheets, the prison system is a form of slavery, etc.…what a raving lunatic (or poet in this case)…makes Bocephus look like a saint. And Madonna’s fantasies about blowing up the white house? Yep…that sure is some classy celebrity gals they got to be the face of the march. And they think Trump is vulgar and full of hate?


Redfish7 - 1/25/2017 at 01:38 AM

quote:
Day 4....Suit filed against Trump for ethics violations....that didn't take long

Redfish after your "are they butt hurt" comment I clearly understand how the disgusting things Trump says didn't bother you...and how you could possibly vote for him

That's the exact kind of talk that is disgusting....get it???

That protest was world wide not just here at home....Open your eyes

As far as the ACA....before the ACA my wife couldn't get insurance because she is type II diabetic....See before the only people who could get insurance had to have nothing wrong with them...

I guess that doesn't both you because you had to pay less....pretty phucking selfish...but that is the Republican way...if it doesn't directly effect me its not an issue


Didn’t vote for Trump. Not a Republican. Don’t consider myself a selfish person. My sister is an unemployed widow raising a daughter, and she could not even afford the ACA premiums…I thought it was supposed to be “affordable” for folks just like my sister...but then again, I also thought I could keep my policy if I liked my policy. And I never said that it didn’t help anyone. I was just sharing my personal experience with it. I guess it’s helped some folks, and hurt lots of others...and in some cases it's not even helped the people that you would think that it should help (like my sister).


goldtop - 2/10/2017 at 11:13 PM

Please sign this petition to impeach Trump

https://impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org/thank-you/?key=42056317

The wheels are turning


nebish - 2/13/2017 at 01:22 AM

I like the Dead Kennedys. I like views that are not the same as my own. It's all about presentation and the delivery of the argument for me. That is why I listen to different points of view on talk radio and that is why I enjoy engaging in these forums and why I like politically charged music that is artfully crafted.

I don't know who would be calling for "extermination" of Trump opponents. Again another pretty radical view you've posted. I'd like to think it is done with sarcasm, but maybe you really feel that way.

Surely there are people on the right who despise the left and those on the left who despise the right, but anyone from any side who might justify death of their political opponents, to the extent people like that exist we must be talking about a sliver of a percentage of people.

You and I may not agree on a host of issues, but rest assured I would have you in my home or buy you a drink and allow you to express yourself as know you would of me. I just try to draw a very visible and distinct line between the very small group of people you speak of and other people, like myself and I suspect others here who voted for the President and support some of his agenda items, but do not wish his opponents any harm. I hope you do not wish me harm in return for feeling different than you on foreign policy, immigration, taxes, etc.

[Edited on 2/13/2017 by nebish]


nebish - 2/13/2017 at 05:13 AM

quote:
What's with this "extreme view" thing you keep on about?


I think that wanting Mexico to become a state, to open the border, to reach a settlement in back pay and benefits for illegal workers...now Trump supporters would applaud open warfare, even extermination, of their opponents.

Sounds extreme to me.

I guess you not wanting to sign a petition to impeach the President for fear of putting your name out there is kind of like people not wanting a national gun registry with their name and location of listed guns for fear of the government coming to get them. In that, you have something in common, fear of the government, fear on one had that government would someday confiscate firearms and on the other hand fear the government might exterminate dissenters. I don't know, sounds extreme. But different perspectives lead to different feelings.


goldtop - 2/13/2017 at 06:03 AM

quote:
Goldtop - quite honestly I think that could be signing my own death warrant. Anyone who signs that will call the Nazgul upon themselves. It is entirely possible that they are gathering up voting records, ostensibly for popular vote recount, to compile a database of undesirables.

Hemp's Bannon thread pretty much nails it.

As Jello Biafra said so long ago: It is "Bedtime for Democracy".


I signed it and I don't care that they know...In fact I want Trump to fully understand that I think he is disgusting .....I'd have no problem telling Mr Trump exactly how I feel about him to his face...


LeglizHemp - 2/13/2017 at 02:09 PM

I think we are getting very close to starting Impeachment hearings. Trump better slow down and figure out how the office of the Presidency works or he will be out the door by the end of the year.


Bhawk - 2/13/2017 at 03:23 PM

quote:
I think we are getting very close to starting Impeachment hearings. Trump better slow down and figure out how the office of the Presidency works or he will be out the door by the end of the year.


On what charge? By the current GOP? Impeachment charges come from the House.


LeglizHemp - 2/13/2017 at 03:30 PM

i just said "very close". they are walking right up to the line with their rhetoric but so far not with their actions. if they start ignoring court orders that would be one way. emoluments clause might be another. if proof of colusion with the russians is found, there is another. we'll just have to wait and see bhawk.


Bhawk - 2/13/2017 at 03:31 PM

quote:
In that, you have something in common, fear of the government, fear on one had that government would someday confiscate firearms and on the other hand fear the government might exterminate dissenters. I don't know, sounds extreme. But different perspectives lead to different feelings.



The government is made up of people who occupy constant transitive jobs. If human history is a guide, there's a strong chance that someone would come along that oversteps the powers they have been given. Just because someone exhibiting those traits happens to be a guy on your team and therefore they get a longer benefit of the doubt, then that's the ultimate example of party before country, something that has always been around but seems to be getting worse.

I continue to find Trump's consistent attacks on the independent judiciary absolutely terrifying. The President personally attacking Federal judges by name IS EXTREME.


LeglizHemp - 2/13/2017 at 03:41 PM

and yes the house is stacked with republicans and impeachment won't come today. but i don't believe he has as much support in the GOP as some think and it is slowly eroding. i believe alot of his support before the election had to do with hating clinton and party loyalty and tea party loyalty. i don't believe trump is a republican and that his support will fall away if he keeps throwing the constitution into the blender. like i said, we'll see.


Brendan - 2/13/2017 at 03:42 PM

Is this rhetoric not extreme?

http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/-what-stephen-miller-said-should-wor ry-everyone-875968067895


Bhawk - 2/13/2017 at 03:43 PM

quote:
and yes the house is stacked with republicans and impeachment won't come today. but i don't believe he has as much support in the GOP as some think and it is slowly eroding. i believe alot of his support before the election had to do with hating clinton and party loyalty and tea party loyalty. i don't believe trump is a republican and that his support will fall away if he keeps throwing the constitution into the blender. like i said, we'll see.


I largely agree...just cynical.


Bhawk - 2/13/2017 at 03:44 PM

These weekend trips to Mar-A-Lago, profiteering? Who is joining? Who has access? All the employees there...do they all have a security clearance?


Bhawk - 2/13/2017 at 03:46 PM

quote:
Is this rhetoric not extreme?

http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/-what-stephen-miller-said-should-wor ry-everyone-875968067895


That's not what he meant. He was talking about the funny ha-ha kind of quelling dissent.


BoytonBrother - 2/13/2017 at 03:49 PM

Trump and is his supporters are the most insecure people in the history of our country.


LeglizHemp - 2/13/2017 at 03:49 PM

quote:
These weekend trips to Mar-A-Lago, profiteering? Who is joining? Who has access? All the employees there...do they all have a security clearance?


supposedly he was having national security discussions with Abe at the dinner table with guests present. if classified intelligence was discussed openly.............

(CNN)The iceberg wedge salads, dripping with blue cheese dressing, had just been served on the terrace of Mar-a-Lago Saturday when the call to President Donald Trump came in: North Korea had launched an intermediate-range ballistic missile, its first challenge to international rules since Trump was sworn in three weeks ago.

The launch, which wasn't expected, presented Trump with one of the first breaking national security incidents of his presidency. It also noisily disrupted what was meant to be an easygoing weekend of high-level male bonding with the more sobering aspects of global diplomacy.

Sitting alongside Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, with whom he'd spent most of the day golfing, Trump took the call on a mobile phone at his table, which was set squarely in the middle of the private club's dining area.

As Mar-a-Lago's wealthy members looked on from their tables, and with a keyboard player crooning in the background, Trump and Abe's evening meal quickly morphed into a strategy session, the decision-making on full view to fellow diners, who described it in detail to CNN.

On Saturday evening, as the two men walked through Mar-a-Lago's ornate wrought-iron doors on their way to dinner, neither responded to questions about the launch from reporters.
Swanning through the club's living room and main dining area alongside Abe, Trump was -- as is now typical -- swarmed with paying members, who now view dinner at the club as an opportunity for a few seconds of face time with the new President.

But as he sat down for the planned working dinner with Abe, whose country is well within range of North Korea's missiles, it was clear his counterpart felt it necessary to respond to the test. The launch occurred just before 8 a.m. on Sunday morning in Japan.

Trump's National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and chief strategist Steve Bannon left their seats to huddle closer to Trump as documents were produced and phone calls were placed to officials in Washington and Tokyo.

The patio was lit only with candles and moonlight, so aides used the camera lights on their phones to help the stone-faced Trump and Abe read through the documents.

Even as a flurry of advisers and translators descended upon the table carrying papers and phones for their bosses to consult, dinner itself proceeded apace. Waiters cleared the wedge salads and brought along the main course as Trump and Abe continued consulting with aides.

Eventually Trump and Abe, along with their collection of aides, stood and moved from the dining terrace and toward a marble-trimmed ballroom, whose gilded columns were concealed by more sober-looking black drapes.

[Edited on 2/13/2017 by LeglizHemp]


goldtop - 4/20/2019 at 11:20 PM

Just thought I'd revisit this thread....OK...can we impeach him now


MartinD28 - 4/20/2019 at 11:50 PM

quote:
Just thought I'd revisit this thread....OK...can we impeach him now


Regardless of the intent by Trump as detailed in Mueller's Report, the base and GOP enablers in Congress will fall in line and be good little soldiers and parrot Trump's lines referencing the democrat prosecutors bias on the Mueller Team, etc.

My goodness - look how many of Trump's inner circle worked with the Russians and lied about it. What has the presidency come to? And the people's Congress willing to turn their head along with a lackey Attorney General whose words have been disputed by Mueller's Report.

Unless enough of the GOP in Congress step up and show they have values & guts, impeachment is an exercise in futility.


goldtop - 4/21/2019 at 12:41 AM

quote:
quote:
Just thought I'd revisit this thread....OK...can we impeach him now


Regardless of the intent by Trump as detailed in Mueller's Report, the base and GOP enablers in Congress will fall in line and be good little soldiers and parrot Trump's lines referencing the democrat prosecutors bias on the Mueller Team, etc.

My goodness - look how many of Trump's inner circle worked with the Russians and lied about it. What has the presidency come to? And the people's Congress willing to turn their head along with a lackey Attorney General whose words have been disputed by Mueller's Report.

Unless enough of the GOP in Congress step up and show they have values & guts, impeachment is an exercise in futility.


So true...everyday since he's been in office I will never understand why anyone would protect that vile disgusting person...I'd would have throw his azz under the bus so long ago it would have made his head swim....and how I would love to be his truth teller everyday...I'd love to let him know the truth and watch him explode....and I'd laugh in his face as he did...everyday


alloak41 - 4/25/2019 at 03:15 PM

quote:
Trump and is his supporters are the most insecure people in the history of our country.


God, I know! I'd feel a lot more secure if the government could just fork over my guaranteed Universal Income already. I have no confidence in myself or my abilities, and shouldn't have to compete in the workplace anymore.
And I need the government to pay my debts for me while they're at it.


BoytonBrother - 4/25/2019 at 04:23 PM

quote:
I'd feel a lot more secure if the government could just fork over my guaranteed Universal Income already. I have no confidence in myself or my abilities, and shouldn't have to compete in the workplace anymore.
And I need the government to pay my debts for me while they're at it.


Here you are feeling the need to announce to us all that you earned your own income, have confidence in your own abilities, compete in the workplace, and pay your debts. Instead of thinking rationally about what is being proposed, you took the opportunity to pat yourself on the back for what you have done. Why? Because you earned those things on your own, it angers you that others are getting help with it? That's not someone who is at peace with their situation.


BIGV - 4/25/2019 at 07:50 PM

quote:
quote:
Trump and is his supporters are the most insecure people in the history of our country.


God, I know! I'd feel a lot more secure if the government could just fork over my guaranteed Universal Income already. I have no confidence in myself or my abilities, and shouldn't have to compete in the workplace anymore.
And I need the government to pay my debts for me while they're at it.


I agree with you wholeheartedly, just make life free for everyone, similar to the Democrats proposal of free College. Don’t want to work? The Democrats will make it their priority to come to the rescue, because well , white privelage....


gina - 4/25/2019 at 09:08 PM

Lindsey Graham said the Democrats will try to impeach him, he also said Pelosi was NOT in charge of them, but he said any impeachment proceedings would have "a hard time" getting through (pr passed by the Senate), so if one house passes them and the other doesn't, it probably goes nowhere.


BoytonBrother - 4/25/2019 at 09:39 PM

quote:
Don’t want to work? The Democrats will make it their priority to come to the rescue, because well , white privelage....


Somebody is envious of receiving help.




[Edited on 4/25/2019 by BoytonBrother]


piacere - 4/25/2019 at 11:33 PM

quote:
quote:
Don’t want to work? The Democrats will make it their priority to come to the rescue, because well , white privelage....


Somebody is envious of receiving help.






[Edited on 4/25/2019 by BoytonBrother]


You're kidding, right?

[Edited on 4/25/2019 by piacere]


BoytonBrother - 4/26/2019 at 12:05 AM

quote:
You're kidding, right?


About that particular poster? No, not at all.


alloak41 - 4/26/2019 at 02:13 AM

The only thing i feel the slightest bit apprehensive about now day to day is the difficulty in hiring. I need good workers badly. The supply of jobs svailable is outstripping the supply of labor and good csndidates.

So much for the economy crashing if Trump gets elected.


Sang - 4/26/2019 at 02:32 AM

With the debt rising at record rates, who knows?

I was at a financial planner meeting tonight. The Cleveland fed has the chance of a recession at over 30%..... whenever it goes that high, the recession typically is -5 to 8 months from then ...... it's coming.....


nebish - 4/26/2019 at 02:43 AM

quote:
With the debt rising at record rates, who knows?

I was at a financial planner meeting tonight. The Cleveland fed has the chance of a recession at over 30%..... whenever it goes that high, the recession typically is -5 to 8 months from then ...... it's coming.....


I'm waiting for it too Sang...just because it is overdue if nothing else. But periods of expansion don't just die of old age. So what if, let me know if anyone mentioned this at your meeting, what if countries around the globe can pick up their own sluggish economies with fiscal stimulus plans? If global economies grow, won't the US be a beneficiary of that which could in turn prolong our own expansion?


BIGV - 4/26/2019 at 03:14 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Don’t want to work? The Democrats will make it their priority to come to the rescue, because well , white privelage....


Somebody is envious of receiving help.


You're kidding, right?


Just consider the source


Sang - 4/26/2019 at 03:37 AM

quote:
quote:
With the debt rising at record rates, who knows?

I was at a financial planner meeting tonight. The Cleveland fed has the chance of a recession at over 30%..... whenever it goes that high, the recession typically is -5 to 8 months from then ...... it's coming.....


I'm waiting for it too Sang...just because it is overdue if nothing else. But periods of expansion don't just die of old age. So what if, let me know if anyone mentioned this at your meeting, what if countries around the globe can pick up their own sluggish economies with fiscal stimulus plans? If global economies grow, won't the US be a beneficiary of that which could in turn prolong our own expansion?



That was not mentioned. Germany and Japan are still in the negative on 10-year bonds - but international and emerging markets are still cheap compared to the US, and are expected to have higher earnings than the US this year - the US blew everyone away last year in earnings because of the tax cuts - 24% - but this year they expect 3%, with international and emerging around 6%.


BIGV - 4/26/2019 at 04:02 AM


BrerRabbit - 4/26/2019 at 04:31 AM

Damn, no evidence. Someone should have kept his blue dress after his private meeting with Vladmir.


BoytonBrother - 4/26/2019 at 10:41 AM

Not a fan of the impeachment route. I'd rather see him get voted out. Being a one-term President would say everything there is to say.



[Edited on 4/26/2019 by BoytonBrother]


BoytonBrother - 4/26/2019 at 10:45 AM

quote:
The only thing i feel the slightest bit apprehensive about now day to day is the difficulty in hiring. I need good workers badly. The supply of jobs svailable is outstripping the supply of labor and good candidates


It’s hard to find good American workers? Shocking! What’s the solution?


tbomike - 4/26/2019 at 06:58 PM

Gee that noted leftist from Fox Judge Nap thinks there is something there.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/judge-andrew-napolitano-did-president-trump -obstruct-justice


BrerRabbit - 4/26/2019 at 07:45 PM

Interesting article, but Napolitano is a hardcore Libertarian so whatever.


Bhawk - 4/26/2019 at 07:50 PM

quote:



Is the distraught girl supposed to represent Robert Mueller?


BrerRabbit - 4/26/2019 at 07:54 PM

I don't know, but the shrink could be Putin. Hell the meme itself could be generated by the ongoing Russian cyber psy-op.


goldtop - 4/26/2019 at 10:19 PM

quote:
I don't know, but the shrink could be Putin. Hell the meme itself could be generated by the ongoing Russian cyber psy-op.


I guess they also didn't read about the destruction of evidence that took place and what do supporters think of 12 points of obstruction of justice and the biggest question will always be if there was nothing going on why did so many people lie??

Seems Judge Napalitano thinks there's plenty along with one of his original member of his transition team and again why would anyone protect that vile disgusting azz

Check out his comments
https://video.foxnews.com/v/6029505643001/#sp=show-clips



[Edited on 4/26/2019 by goldtop]


OriginalGoober - 4/26/2019 at 10:58 PM

A hammer, a cell phone, bleach bit and the POTUS on speed dial is why you dont get charged.


BrerRabbit - 4/27/2019 at 12:06 AM

A hammer and a sickle is why you don't get charged.


gina - 4/30/2019 at 09:47 PM


https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/441301-biden-if-trump-blocks-in vestigations-congress-has-no-choice-but-to



goldtop - 4/30/2019 at 11:49 PM

Mueller has spoken

Mueller has written a letter objecting to Barr’s summary of his report because it “did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of the investigation.”


MartinD28 - 5/1/2019 at 01:21 AM

quote:
Mueller has spoken

Mueller has written a letter objecting to Barr’s summary of his report because it “did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of the investigation.”




Another lackey with loyalty to Russian Don is exposed for deception & lies. Anybody surprised? Good thing Trump drained the swamp in DC.


Chain - 5/1/2019 at 09:11 PM

As someone mentioned in another thread, Barr evidently argued that Iran/Contra was not a crime either. It seems to me he's been a lackey Republican operative his entire career in the beltway so it's not surprising he's providing cover for the latest Republican crook to occupy the White House.

It makes me wonder if he and opportunists like him care at all about the republic, the laws of the land, or in the constitution. It seems to be party first for not just Barr, but many of the slime balls who live in the swamp we call our capital.


nebish - 5/7/2019 at 04:40 AM

quote:
As someone mentioned in another thread, Barr evidently argued that Iran/Contra was not a crime either. It seems to me he's been a lackey Republican operative his entire career in the beltway so it's not surprising he's providing cover for the latest Republican crook to occupy the White House.

It makes me wonder if he and opportunists like him care at all about the republic, the laws of the land, or in the constitution. It seems to be party first for not just Barr, but many of the slime balls who live in the swamp we call our capital.


You are right. Nobody should be surprised that one party or the other or any of their representatives have their own motives and agendas.

How many representatives actually care about the republic above their own agendas? There in lies the problem.


goldtop - 5/21/2019 at 10:13 PM

One step closer today....tick tock....was bound to happen since he went down the elevator....he's a scum bag people an embarrassment to our country


BrerRabbit - 5/21/2019 at 10:28 PM

wha happen?


goldtop - 5/21/2019 at 10:44 PM

quote:
wha happen?


People not complying with congressional subpoenas while Trump continues to obstruct justice by instructing them to not show up


BrerRabbit - 5/21/2019 at 10:48 PM

Yeah saw some of that . They keep revving the engine without a load on it, gonna rattle to pieces.


BIGV - 5/21/2019 at 11:27 PM

quote:
I guess they also didn't read about the destruction of evidence that took place


E-Mails?


crazyjoe - 5/22/2019 at 04:37 AM

Look, I am not smart enough to know if Trumpty Dumpty will or should be impeached, I can tell You Trumpty and vittually every person in his entire circle and administration have exactly the same lilly white and very Nazi look about them, I suppose that is a good part of his appeal to his supporters? You all knows that these **** lickin low lifes make me want to puke, no need to rehash it, my mom is a 74 year very devout Catholic, I was raised as such, but went Methodist 7 yrs ago to support my grandson and son in law, my mom may come up for Sainthood, she is my Spiritual advisor, I asked her if it was OK for me to Pray for Trumpty to have a huge massive fatal or debilitating heart attack, she shut me down and said no good on that. So it's God's Will that I will ask for..............Peace.........joe


BrerRabbit - 5/22/2019 at 04:56 AM

quote:
. . .exactly the same lilly white and very Nazi look about them . . .


It isn't just that, not only outward appearance, but you are on to something there. Its a darkness inside. One of these links around here oh yeah the Jared one, sh!t man that guys face scares the crap out of me. I cant believe nobody else can see it, or maybe they can and quick click or scroll away. He just looks flat out evil, sorry I got no other word for it. Yeah and a lot of the administration has that ugly old mean kremlin look.


nebish - 5/22/2019 at 01:01 PM

The Democrats aren't doing anything different than if the Republicans were in charge and the opposition party was in the white house embroiled in scandal and controversy. Democrats in Congress have every right for their investigative and oversight duties and I think the Trump administration is wrong to resist. I do think in some cases the administration has a right to executive privilege, I'm more along the lines of they should not be resisting. And on the other hand, I think the AG has a right and responsibility to investigate the origins of the FBI's focus on Trump and the campaign. The things being discussed are pretty out of the norm, but how the people in charge are acting seems pretty normal, I mean for politics and Washington and all.

Like crazyjoe, I really am not smart enough either to know if Trump should be impeached. I do not know if he obstructed justice, it does appear like he tried and is even doing so right now, but it is a legal determination that I do not have the education, experience or knowledge of all the variables and evidence, both incriminating and exonerating. That is what trials and legal proceedings are for. So if the people in charge want to go down that road, let them. And let those accused and charged defend themselves.


goldtop - 5/22/2019 at 09:30 PM

Tick Tock....


Jerry - 5/22/2019 at 09:41 PM

If there is evidence shown on the report for future action (possibly the redaction that says Grand Jury), that part does not need to be shown to anyone.

Be funny if there was something about investigations on the committee members under the black ink.


BrerRabbit - 5/23/2019 at 12:59 AM

Impeachments pretty dumb idea. It will fail, they got nothing.


gina - 5/24/2019 at 11:07 PM

Impeachment not happening. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said they are not looking at that as an option.

The only obstruction that has occurred is he is obstructing the new world order, but that is not an impeachable offense. A psychic has said he will be re-elected in 2020, but will not serve his full term, he will be out of office in 2022, and he did not know how or why at this point.


BrerRabbit - 5/25/2019 at 10:17 PM

quote:
The only obstruction that has occurred is he is obstructing the new world order . . .


Name one ittybitty thing he has done to obstruct the New World Order. Looks like business as usual to me. You really think a pissant govt bureaucrat at the level of president has any sway over the New World Order? There are "powers and principalities" far above him, and far more powerful. That's like saying the toilet scrubber at the Pentagon could influence global military command.


goldtop - 5/29/2019 at 03:09 PM

Mueller is speaking and he's made it clear that he is not exonerating the prez

Tick Tock.....

He's made it clear that the DOJ policy got in the way of making an indictment and that the Constitution has the correct procedure to deal with crimes the prez commits

Tick Tock...


goldtop - 6/11/2019 at 04:40 PM

Seems the DOJ is giving up more of the underlying documents...tick tock


BrerRabbit - 6/11/2019 at 06:19 PM

Great clock! Kind of a Zen experience watching that.


goldtop - 7/27/2019 at 04:19 PM

Tick Tock


goldtop - 8/9/2019 at 02:09 PM

Jerry Nadler announced that the US is in formal impeachment proceedings against tRump and a decision on bringing charges will come by the end of the year...


Skydog32103 - 8/9/2019 at 03:23 PM

quote:
Jerry Nadler announced that the US is in formal impeachment proceedings against tRump and a decision on bringing charges will come by the end of the year...


Won’t this be appealed and overturned by the Senate, like the Clinton impeachment?


Bhawk - 8/9/2019 at 04:21 PM

quote:
quote:
Jerry Nadler announced that the US is in formal impeachment proceedings against tRump and a decision on bringing charges will come by the end of the year...


Won’t this be appealed and overturned by the Senate, like the Clinton impeachment?


Need 67 votes in the Senate to convict. One vote short of a 2/3 majority and the accused is acquitted of all charges.

67 votes in the current Senate (53 Republicans, 45 Democrats, 2 Independents)...yeah, no. It'd have be something so egregious and open and shut regardless of political party...yeah, no.


Skydog32103 - 9/21/2019 at 03:52 AM

quote:
It'd have be something so egregious and open and shut regardless of political party...yeah, no.


Per Fox News:

quote:
The Wall Street Journal reported Friday that, in a July phone call, Trump repeatedly asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to work with Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani on a probe into Hunter Biden. The call came a month before Trump put a hold on $250 million in military aid to Ukraine -- a hold that was eventually released after objections from the Senate.



Chain - 9/22/2019 at 01:02 PM

quote:
quote:
It'd have be something so egregious and open and shut regardless of political party...yeah, no.


Per Fox News:

quote:
The Wall Street Journal reported Friday that, in a July phone call, Trump repeatedly asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to work with Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani on a probe into Hunter Biden. The call came a month before Trump put a hold on $250 million in military aid to Ukraine -- a hold that was eventually released after objections from the Senate.





I'm a bit baffled by the apparent fear the Trumpster has of Joe Biden. It seems to me the entire appeal of Trump in 2016 was that he wasn't a career insider politician from Washington. That is to say the exact opposite of Joe Biden.

So how hard is it for Trump to capitalize on that theme now and moving forward given Biden proves daily what a long time Washington insider he really is? Instead Trump appears to be engaging in, ironically, the very type of dirt digging politicians always seem to utilize against their potential political rivals.

But then again, Trump certainly has engaged in such "hit job" tactics before....For instance in the case of Obama's birth certificate and the Central Park Five murder several years back...


Bhawk - 9/22/2019 at 05:44 PM

quote:
quote:
It'd have be something so egregious and open and shut regardless of political party...yeah, no.


Per Fox News:

quote:
The Wall Street Journal reported Friday that, in a July phone call, Trump repeatedly asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to work with Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani on a probe into Hunter Biden. The call came a month before Trump put a hold on $250 million in military aid to Ukraine -- a hold that was eventually released after objections from the Senate.





This isn’t nearly egregious enough. Need more cut and dried. This one has details too complicated for the uncaring public and campaign shenanigans with foreign governments is accepted process now.


goldtop - 9/24/2019 at 03:06 AM



Tick Tock Donny


Stephen - 9/24/2019 at 03:42 AM

The election is only 14 mos away, I say let the people impeach Trump at the voting polls next Nov, if the majority feels that way
it would take the politicians longer than that just to organize impeachment efforts - the campaign mudslinging will include most of that

[Edited on 9/24/2019 by Stephen]


Skydog32103 - 9/24/2019 at 03:19 PM

Why bother with impeachment if the Senate won’t convict?


BIGV - 9/24/2019 at 03:47 PM

quote:
Why bother with impeachment if the Senate won’t convict?


I find it absolutely hilarious that the Democrats main focus is on impeachment and not concentrating on one Candidate who can win in November 2020.

Maybe Beto can knock on every door in his home sate and attempt to take guns away from Law abiding citizens.

Or Andrew Yang can get started writing checks for $1,000.

Joe Biden could could start reminding himself to go to his Memory Class.

So much work ahead and so little time.


MartinD28 - 9/24/2019 at 05:43 PM

Soliciting interference from foreign governments in our elections is a good thing and representative of what our founding fathers belived in. They would back Trump to the end just like those in Congress and on this site who see no problem in this and divert. There are far bigger problems than Putin's previous actions and Trump's threatening to withold foreign aid until dirt is dug up on a political opponent. All in a day's work in the new accepted norm of corruption.

[Edited on 9/24/2019 by MartinD28]


Skydog32103 - 9/24/2019 at 06:32 PM

quote:
I find it absolutely hilarious that the Democrats main focus is on impeachment and not concentrating on one Candidate who can win in November 2020.

Maybe Beto can knock on every door in his home sate and attempt to take guns away from Law abiding citizens.

Or Andrew Yang can get started writing checks for $1,000.

Joe Biden could could start reminding himself to go to his Memory Class.


Maybe you will one day find something new to post about instead of bigotry towards a entire party because they have different opinions than you do.


Stephen - 9/24/2019 at 06:35 PM

Then if it’s that bad, the people will speak next November at the voting booths

Still don’t see the sense in having impeachment proceedings during the presidential election - he might be voted out anyway rendering the whole thing moot
I say forget impeachment for now, pending outcome of election - then, if he Is re-elected, it will prove what BigV said, that they should’ve focused on a viable candidate instead of impeachment, & that the majority was never behind the effort

[Edited on 9/24/2019 by Stephen]


BIGV - 9/24/2019 at 07:12 PM

quote:
quote:
I find it absolutely hilarious that the Democrats main focus is on impeachment and not concentrating on one Candidate who can win in November 2020.

Maybe Beto can knock on every door in his home sate and attempt to take guns away from Law abiding citizens.

Or Andrew Yang can get started writing checks for $1,000.

Joe Biden could could start reminding himself to go to his Memory Class.


Maybe you will one day find something new to post about instead of bigotry towards a entire party because they have different opinions than you do.


What's good for the Goose....

Maybe someday you in turn will not be bothered by the things I post that are directed towards the leadership of Political Party and not at individuals on this board.


Bhawk - 9/24/2019 at 08:52 PM

If he's impeached and then no conviction, God help us all.


Bhawk - 9/24/2019 at 08:58 PM

quote:
Soliciting interference from foreign governments in our elections is a good thing and representative of what our founding fathers belived in. They would back Trump to the end just like those in Congress and on this site who see no problem in this and divert. There are far bigger problems than Putin's previous actions and Trump's threatening to withold foreign aid until dirt is dug up on a political opponent. All in a day's work in the new accepted norm of corruption.


This. Trump could go over to Walter Reed right now and take a dump on a vet in a hospital bed and wipe with the flag and the Right wouldn't care.


goldtop - 9/24/2019 at 09:08 PM



We see Donny just got the ball pulled out from under him...Miss Nancy will doing the kicking

BIGV...let me give you some perspective on how they would remove your weapon. First there would be a buy back program and if you don't sell your weapon back they will simply issue an arrest warrant for you. They won't storm your house. They'll wait for you to run a red light, speed or have some other incident where the police will come in contact with you. They will see there's an arrest warrant for you and then they will arrest you. So while you're sitting in jail they will go to your house and remove the weapon. I guess you didn't think that through, did ya...like most other stuff you comment about...



Let the games begin


Skydog32103 - 9/24/2019 at 09:34 PM

quote:
Maybe someday you in turn will not be bothered by the things I post that are directed towards the leadership of Political Party and not at individuals on this board.


You direct your comments towards liberals time and time again, which includes individuals on this board. How does that make you better than Hillary’s deplorable comment? That type of ignorance does indeed bother me, especially on this particular website. If it’s the leaders that are your target, then you should say so. Words matter.



[Edited on 9/24/2019 by Skydog32103]


Skydog32103 - 9/24/2019 at 09:39 PM

quote:
If he's impeached and then no conviction, God help us all.


You mean, “when” he’s impeached and then no conviction.....and yes, god help us all for sure. If we think it’s bad now, wait until he’s acquitted. I’ve always believed he will serve 8 years. We should let it happen. The Republican Party will be a joke to everyone, practically making themselves extinct. After he’s gone, the U.S. will be Democrat for the next several decades, if not more.


tcatanesi - 9/24/2019 at 09:40 PM

quote:
I find it absolutely hilarious that the Democrats main focus is on impeachment and not concentrating on one Candidate who can win in November 2020.

Maybe Beto can knock on every door in his home sate and attempt to take guns away from Law abiding citizens.

Or Andrew Yang can get started writing checks for $1,000.

Joe Biden could could start reminding himself to go to his Memory Class.

So much work ahead and so little time.


Angry white male, much?


2112 - 9/24/2019 at 10:08 PM

quote:
quote:
If he's impeached and then no conviction, God help us all.


You mean, “when” he’s impeached and then no conviction.....and yes, god help us all for sure. If we think it’s bad now, wait until he’s acquitted. I’ve always believed he will serve 8 years. We should let it happen. The Republican Party will be a joke to everyone, practically making themselves extinct. After he’s gone, the U.S. will be Democrat for the next several decades, if not more.


I agree that the House will impeach and there will be no conviction. So, why bother? Well, Trump has obviously been doing what he wants not caring about any laws he happens to break in the process, and the Democrats haven't had the balls to do anything about it. So, we all know that the Senate is not going to remove him, so the Democrats better have a good case for impeachment that will win over independents in a handful of states. If there is overwhelming evidence of wrongdoing and a senator in a purple state lets him get away with it, then it may flip the Senate. On the other hand, if the case for wrongdoing is weak, then the opposite may happen. Keep in mind, almost 40% of the country will love Trump no matter what and will find any excuse to support him regardless of what he does. Most Democrats will think it is about time that Trump gets called out for his criminal ways. The only opinions that matter are the swing voters in purple states. We already know the impeachment is not going to result in Trump's removal from office...at least not directly. But this whole process is a high stakes game of poker with the prize being the outcome of the next election. It seems of late the Republicans play the game of politics better than the Democrats, and I think Pelosi know this. If she is finally ready to move forward with an impeachment inquiry, then she must think there is a very damning case against Trump that will play well with the American swing voters.


MartinD28 - 9/24/2019 at 10:26 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
If he's impeached and then no conviction, God help us all.


You mean, “when” he’s impeached and then no conviction.....and yes, god help us all for sure. If we think it’s bad now, wait until he’s acquitted. I’ve always believed he will serve 8 years. We should let it happen. The Republican Party will be a joke to everyone, practically making themselves extinct. After he’s gone, the U.S. will be Democrat for the next several decades, if not more.


I agree that the House will impeach and there will be no conviction. So, why bother? Well, Trump has obviously been doing what he wants not caring about any laws he happens to break in the process, and the Democrats haven't had the balls to do anything about it. So, we all know that the Senate is not going to remove him, so the Democrats better have a good case for impeachment that will win over independents in a handful of states. If there is overwhelming evidence of wrongdoing and a senator in a purple state lets him get away with it, then it may flip the Senate. On the other hand, if the case for wrongdoing is weak, then the opposite may happen. Keep in mind, almost 40% of the country will love Trump no matter what and will find any excuse to support him regardless of what he does. Most Democrats will think it is about time that Trump gets called out for his criminal ways. The only opinions that matter are the swing voters in purple states. We already know the impeachment is not going to result in Trump's removal from office...at least not directly. But this whole process is a high stakes game of poker with the prize being the outcome of the next election. It seems of late the Republicans play the game of politics better than the Democrats, and I think Pelosi know this. If she is finally ready to move forward with an impeachment inquiry, then she must think there is a very damning case against Trump that will play well with the American swing voters.


I'd be shocked if Trump is convicted...facts be damned. Keep in mind that the GOP will lay down in the road for Trump. For example - former "Never Trumper" Lindsey Graham now turned to lead Trump lead ball licker are along for the Trump ride regardless of what he does or says. Nothing imaginable is not acceptable in the new world of the GOP. Corruption and emoluments violations are alive and well.

On the other hand, Congress has a job to do, and regardless of outcome owes it to the American people to do their job.


dutchoneill - 9/24/2019 at 11:04 PM

This is gonna be fun to watch. I wonder if Trump was even the target of the 'whistleblower'

Demi probably want Biden gone for good.

As far as the transcript, why release now?

First domino to fall will be Biden then the FISA abuse indictments come out.

October surprise this year!


OriginalGoober - 9/25/2019 at 12:05 AM

Guys, I had to pull the reins back on your Russia zeal, looks like you are all hoping that this will replace all that emotional energy when it all amounted to fake news, false reporting, complicit democrats, and a willing media.


BrerRabbit - 9/25/2019 at 01:16 AM


Bhawk - 9/25/2019 at 02:31 AM

From what’s out there so far, this isn’t enough. It’s too complicated and obtuse. The Kyiv Times in Ukraine has some great writing on the whole thing from that part of the world. Lots of details and foreign names. Waaaay too many parts to hold the American attention span.

Donald Trump is still a horrible human being, though.


BIGV - 9/25/2019 at 02:39 AM

quote:
quote:
I find it absolutely hilarious that the Democrats main focus is on impeachment and not concentrating on one Candidate who can win in November 2020.

Maybe Beto can knock on every door in his home sate and attempt to take guns away from Law abiding citizens.

Or Andrew Yang can get started writing checks for $1,000.

Joe Biden could could start reminding himself to go to his Memory Class.

So much work ahead and so little time.


Angry white male, much?


Anger? Typical. Disagree and here comes the label.


BIGV - 9/25/2019 at 02:46 AM

quote:
BIGV...let me give you some perspective on how they would remove your weapon. First there would be a buy back program and if you don't sell your weapon back they will simply issue an arrest warrant for you.


Since you brought up the phrase "Not thinking it through"...lol..ALL of your mentioned "cures" apply to registered weapons, probably referring to "Legal" purchases

How does this affect the criminal element? You know!...The peeps who don't follow the LAW? As in Criminals. So with this "Genius plan" ...lol... How do we get the weapons out of the hands of the bad guys?

quote:
I guess you didn't think that through, did ya....


Bhawk - 9/25/2019 at 02:59 AM

Although, Trump’s attorney isn’t helping...

Rudy Giuliani, a half hour ago: "I never talked to a Ukrainian official until the State Department called me and asked me to do it"

Good grief.


Stephen - 9/25/2019 at 03:31 AM

quote:

Donald Trump is still a horrible human being, though.


Many friendly reasonable people feel that way
Makes one wonder how he got elected in the 1st place

Again, if he’s that much of a lowlife he’ll be voted out in a landslide next fall

2112 posted that “we all know impeachment won’t result in Trump’s removal from office”
That’s what I thought it was - when you were impeached, you were removed from office
This stuff isn’t my bag, & I’m sure it shows

Now it’s time to go get imPeached - ABB STYLE- on the stereo


Skydog32103 - 9/25/2019 at 03:32 PM

quote:
How do we get the weapons out of the hands of the bad guys?


The current system allows for all disturbed liberal entitled millenials, who have never had a job, who blame mommy, daddy, and Trump for all of their problems, as well as any other crazy disturbed individual, to buy multiple AR-15s and unlimited ammunition....simply because they don't have a criminal record. You mock a solution to this problem because it won't solve the black market sub-issue....maybe you have no room to be laughing at anyone.


BIGV - 9/25/2019 at 03:54 PM

quote:
quote:
How do we get the weapons out of the hands of the bad guys?


The current system allows for all disturbed liberal entitled millenials, who have never had a job, who blame mommy, daddy, and Trump for all of their problems, as well as any other crazy disturbed individual, to buy multiple AR-15s and unlimited ammunition....simply because they don't have a criminal record. You mock a solution to this problem because it won't solve the black market sub-issue....maybe you have no room to be laughing at anyone.


This has been my point all along; sane, Law abiding individuals are not the ones committing these heinous acts. It is a difficult issue with no easy solution; taking guns away from people who do not abuse the Law is not the way to go. Come up with a means to keep these weapons out of the hands of the mentally disturbed and we'll be in agreement.


dutchoneill - 9/25/2019 at 05:23 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
How do we get the weapons out of the hands of the bad guys?


The current system allows for all disturbed liberal entitled millenials, who have never had a job, who blame mommy, daddy, and Trump for all of their problems, as well as any other crazy disturbed individual, to buy multiple AR-15s and unlimited ammunition....simply because they don't have a criminal record. You mock a solution to this problem because it won't solve the black market sub-issue....maybe you have no room to be laughing at anyone.


This has been my point all along; sane, Law abiding individuals are not the ones committing these heinous acts. It is a difficult issue with no easy solution; taking guns away from people who do not abuse the Law is not the way to go. Come up with a means to keep these weapons out of the hands of the mentally disturbed and we'll be in agreement.



I don't see any legislation being drafted that the WH might accept especially with phase two of the Coup underway. Americans wanted common sense legislation, its dead now. Along with any help on prescription drug prices. Such is the state of politics in our country now.


Skydog32103 - 9/25/2019 at 05:31 PM

quote:
This has been my point all along; sane, Law abiding individuals are not the ones committing these heinous acts. It is a difficult issue with no easy solution; taking guns away from people who do not abuse the Law is not the way to go. Come up with a means to keep these weapons out of the hands of the mentally disturbed and we'll be in agreement.


Your previous points above were that it won't address the black market sub-issue. As for keeping military weapons out of the hands of the mentally disturbed, why WOULDN'T a ban on such weapons be a means to this? The mentally disturbed buy AR-15s legally all the time, as it is now. This is crazy.

If you are arguing that law-abiding civilians should be able to buy military weapons, then we can stop now, because I'll never agree to that. Military weapons should only be available to the military...period.


Stephen - 9/25/2019 at 06:18 PM

No gun control legislation could ever be fully effective, much less common sense IMO - we’ve seen that through all the mass murders, from Columbine to Las Vegas & beyond - calls rise anew for gun control measures to be passed after each crime, w/the same result - nothing can be done


BrerRabbit - 9/25/2019 at 06:25 PM

quote:
. . . especially with phase two of the Coup underway . . .


Hahaha! "The Coup". Whatever it takes to make your day a bit more dramatic and exciting I guess. 007 theme here

[Edited on 9/25/2019 by BrerRabbit]


LUKE - 9/25/2019 at 08:59 PM

Whoop's wrong website.I was trying to order TRUMP 2020 bumper sticker's.


BrerRabbit - 9/25/2019 at 10:34 PM


MartinD28 - 9/25/2019 at 11:55 PM

quote:



Notice the positioning - Putin is always on top of Trump.


gina - 9/26/2019 at 12:26 AM

The phone call.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/09/25/trump-releases-tran script-call-ukraine-president/2438300001/

So what is wrong with this?


MartinD28 - 9/26/2019 at 12:30 AM

quote:
The phone call.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/09/25/trump-releases-tran script-call-ukraine-president/2438300001/

So what is wrong with this?


Nothing at all. Kind of like calling a friend and asking to go to a concert. Very casual conversation?

Really Gina, if intent stared you in the eyes, would you know it?


BrerRabbit - 9/26/2019 at 12:44 AM

quote:
So what is wrong with this?


What is wrong is buddying up with foreign powers and confiding about ripping on fellow Americans. We can fight amongst ourselves all we want but we show a united front to the world. This is treason. Show us one other president of any political stripe who has ever undermined the US like this, casting aspersions on their countrymen in foreign negotiations. This guy is bad news, wake tf up folks, let's pick another Republican asap.



[Edited on 9/26/2019 by BrerRabbit]


Chain - 9/26/2019 at 09:52 PM

quote:
quote:
So what is wrong with this?


What is wrong is buddying up with foreign powers and confiding about ripping on fellow Americans. We can fight amongst ourselves all we want but we show a united front to the world. This is treason. Show us one other president of any political stripe who has ever undermined the US like this, casting aspersions on their countrymen in foreign negotiations. This guy is bad news, wake tf up folks, let's pick another Republican asap.



Indeed....This particular telephone call shake down may be only the tip of the iceberg if the whistle blower is correct in his/her assertion that other telephone calls with other foreign heads of state have also been removed from official White House storage and squirreled away from the official logs.

I wouldn't put it past Trump to shake down any foreign leader for any favor whatsoever. The con man/crook has proven time and time again he's using his position as President to enrich himself so any favor toward that end and not even necessarily about attempting to smear a potential rival is also highly possible.






MartinD28 - 9/26/2019 at 10:49 PM

So sad to post this, but over at State Run TV the right wing fellas are having cat fights over impeachment. Can't they just all get along and find common ground...like talking about relevant Hillary or reprising Obama's birth certificate.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/shep-judge-nap-tucker-fox-202522475.html


goldtop - 9/26/2019 at 11:32 PM

Honestly who did not see this coming...??? He's an azzhat and a bunch of azzhats voted him in without once noticing he's was an azzhat??? sad commentary on our country and those who would vote for an azzhat. Like there wasn't anyone better on the right??? please...this a GTFU moment and start acting like adults during elections

Phuck did he need a dressed up monkey and wagon to let you know he's a azzhat???

Was it the childish names...the mocking of the disabled...The P***Y grabbing...he has so many redeeming qualities that we should love to represent us on the World stage??? right??? phucking boobs...

Who really didn't see this coming???


PhotoRon286 - 9/27/2019 at 12:45 AM

quote:
Honestly who did not see this coming...??? He's an azzhat and a bunch of azzhats voted him in without once noticing he's was an azzhat??? sad commentary on our country and those who would vote for an azzhat. Like there wasn't anyone better on the right??? please...this a GTFU moment and start acting like adults during elections

Phuck did he need a dressed up monkey and wagon to let you know he's a azzhat???

Was it the childish names...the mocking of the disabled...The P***Y grabbing...he has so many redeeming qualities that we should love to represent us on the World stage??? right??? phucking boobs...

Who really didn't see this coming???




BigV will have an issue with your post.


goldtop - 9/27/2019 at 01:49 AM

quote:
quote:
Honestly who did not see this coming...??? He's an azzhat and a bunch of azzhats voted him in without once noticing he's was an azzhat??? sad commentary on our country and those who would vote for an azzhat. Like there wasn't anyone better on the right??? please...this a GTFU moment and start acting like adults during elections

Phuck did he need a dressed up monkey and wagon to let you know he's a azzhat???

Was it the childish names...the mocking of the disabled...The P***Y grabbing...he has so many redeeming qualities that we should love to represent us on the World stage??? right??? phucking boobs...

Who really didn't see this coming???




BigV will have an issue with your post.


Like I give rats azz what Mr B3 licks BIGV thinks about anything...I don't care what peoples fake azz justifications are....The tinfoil hat troubadours


2112 - 9/27/2019 at 02:14 AM

quote:
quote:
Honestly who did not see this coming...??? He's an azzhat and a bunch of azzhats voted him in without once noticing he's was an azzhat??? sad commentary on our country and those who would vote for an azzhat. Like there wasn't anyone better on the right??? please...this a GTFU moment and start acting like adults during elections

Phuck did he need a dressed up monkey and wagon to let you know he's a azzhat???

Was it the childish names...the mocking of the disabled...The P***Y grabbing...he has so many redeeming qualities that we should love to represent us on the World stage??? right??? phucking boobs...

Who really didn't see this coming???




BigV will have an issue with your post.


Not so sure. Didn't BigV say he didn't vote for Trump? So this wouldn't apply to him. He seems to love the guy, but didn't vote for him.

But Goober on the other hand. I think he is all in when it comes to Trump worship.


BIGV - 9/27/2019 at 02:27 AM

quote:
Not so sure. Didn't BigV say he didn't vote for Trump? So this wouldn't apply to him. He seems to love the guy, but didn't vote for him.


That would be correct, I simply can not recall how many times I have stated this. Seems my "Failure" to condemn him and his actions translates into unabashed support....Truth be told (for the umpteenth time) I am just happy as Hell Hillary lost.

This whole thread sends me to bed every night hoping he keeps the Democrats out of the WH a second time. The Dems lost and still can not face that fact.


pops42 - 9/27/2019 at 03:53 AM

quote:
quote:
Not so sure. Didn't BigV say he didn't vote for Trump? So this wouldn't apply to him. He seems to love the guy, but didn't vote for him.


That would be correct, I simply can not recall how many times I have stated this. Seems my "Failure" to condemn him and his actions translates into unabashed support....Truth be told (for the umpteenth time) I am just happy as Hell Hillary lost.

This whole thread sends me to bed every night hoping he keeps the Democrats out of the WH a second time. The Dems lost and still can not face that fact.


So you support a lying, criminal, scumbag, whiner?.


BIGV - 9/27/2019 at 04:26 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Not so sure. Didn't BigV say he didn't vote for Trump? So this wouldn't apply to him. He seems to love the guy, but didn't vote for him.


That would be correct, I simply can not recall how many times I have stated this. Seems my "Failure" to condemn him and his actions translates into unabashed support....Truth be told (for the umpteenth time) I am just happy as Hell Hillary lost.

This whole thread sends me to bed every night hoping he keeps the Democrats out of the WH a second time. The Dems lost and still can not face that fact.


So you support a lying, criminal, scumbag, whiner?.


If it keeps the Democrats out of the White House?

YES


pops42 - 9/27/2019 at 06:12 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Not so sure. Didn't BigV say he didn't vote for Trump? So this wouldn't apply to him. He seems to love the guy, but didn't vote for him.


That would be correct, I simply can not recall how many times I have stated this. Seems my "Failure" to condemn him and his actions translates into unabashed support....Truth be told (for the umpteenth time) I am just happy as Hell Hillary lost.

This whole thread sends me to bed every night hoping he keeps the Democrats out of the WH a second time. The Dems lost and still can not face that fact.


So you support a lying, criminal, scumbag, whiner?.


If it keeps the Democrats out of the White House?

YES
trump will be the very thing that puts Democrats back in power. How do you like them apples, big vee?

[Edited on 9/27/2019 by pops42]


Stephen - 9/27/2019 at 01:08 PM

Am not so sure about that pops42, going back to Dutch’s (Ronald Reagan’s) time, every incumbent except for Geo HW Bush, Reagan’s VP, has been re-elected, usually thru one ‘scandal’ or another

If he was all those things - lying criminal scumbag whiner - he wouldn’t be sitting in office - it’s all nothing new, every president has political enemies who want to undermine him

[Edited on 9/27/2019 by Stephen]


Bhawk - 9/27/2019 at 01:38 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Not so sure. Didn't BigV say he didn't vote for Trump? So this wouldn't apply to him. He seems to love the guy, but didn't vote for him.


That would be correct, I simply can not recall how many times I have stated this. Seems my "Failure" to condemn him and his actions translates into unabashed support....Truth be told (for the umpteenth time) I am just happy as Hell Hillary lost.

This whole thread sends me to bed every night hoping he keeps the Democrats out of the WH a second time. The Dems lost and still can not face that fact.


So you support a lying, criminal, scumbag, whiner?.


If it keeps the Democrats out of the White House?

YES


This is a good thing to keep in mind the next time you float some smug line about personal responsibility and accountability.

You'd rather have a criminal President?

So noted!


Bhawk - 9/27/2019 at 01:43 PM

quote:
The Dems lost and still can not face that fact.


Hillary lost. She'll never be President, so...

Wait. You don't care what anyone-other-than-a-Democrat does.

How do you square your obsession with the word ILLEGAL in one context, and then absolutely not care if the President of the United States is a criminal?


Skydog32103 - 9/27/2019 at 01:47 PM

quote:
If it keeps the Democrats out of the White House?

YES


I admire your honesty, but it is not normal to be this fearful of a political party. I think you just need someone to blame for whatever is eating at you.


BIGV - 9/27/2019 at 02:52 PM

quote:
I admire your honesty


Thanks

quote:
but it is not normal to be this fearful of a political party. I think you just need someone to blame for whatever is eating at you.


It is not normal to be so concerned about what others think on a musical website


BIGV - 9/27/2019 at 02:56 PM

quote:
You'd rather have a criminal President?


Accusations vs. Convictions. This is nothing more than the Democrats spending all of their resources looking for something, anything in an attempt to explain how and why they lost.

Nothing more.


2112 - 9/27/2019 at 04:09 PM

quote:
quote:
You'd rather have a criminal President?


Accusations vs. Convictions. This is nothing more than the Democrats spending all of their resources looking for something, anything in an attempt to explain how and why they lost.

Nothing more.


Yet it wasn't the Democrats using their power to solicit help from the leader of a foreign country to help win an election. Hmmm


MartinD28 - 9/27/2019 at 04:28 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
You'd rather have a criminal President?


Accusations vs. Convictions. This is nothing more than the Democrats spending all of their resources looking for something, anything in an attempt to explain how and why they lost.

Nothing more.


Yet it wasn't the Democrats using their power to solicit help from the leader of a foreign country to help win an election. Hmmm


What does that matter? 13,000 lies later all is good. An uptick in hate crimes - coincidental with Trump in office - all good. BFF with dictators and murderers and turning our country's back on our allies - all good. Trade wars, tariffs, record deficits - all good in the ways of long term GOP fiscal conservatism. Blatant racism - not a problem. Using the government to pad one's own pocket - all in a day's work. Currying favor in elections and dirt from foreign countries on the competition - very acceptable. Record turnover in key cabinet level positions and in generals surrounding the savant in the White House.

But the most important thing of all - thank goodness the dreaded Hillary is not president. If that was accomplished, absolutely nothing else matters.

2112 - expand your mindset.


Skydog32103 - 9/27/2019 at 04:28 PM

quote:
It is not normal to be so concerned about what others think on a musical website


quote:
This is nothing more than the Democrats spending all of their resources looking for something, anything in an attempt to explain how and why they lost.


Do you even know why you are so fearful and affected by Democrats? It’s not that I’m concerned about you personally. I’m concerned with people like you collectively, because for the first time in U.S. history, the people chose to lower their standards for the office of the presidency by filling the position with a mentally unfit criminal demogogue, all because you want to take the easy road of scapegoating your personal demons. Had you all used common sense, pride, and integrity in your strategies, I wouldn’t be saying this. I couldn’t say any of these things had you all chose someone with the required qualities that any leader must possess for such a role.


pops42 - 9/28/2019 at 12:12 AM

quote:
Am not so sure about that pops42, going back to Dutch’s (Ronald Reagan’s) time, every incumbent except for Geo HW Bush, Reagan’s VP, has been re-elected, usually thru one ‘scandal’ or another

If he was all those things - lying criminal scumbag whiner - he wouldn’t be sitting in office - it’s all nothing new, every president has political enemies who want to undermine him

[Edited on 9/27/2019 by Stephen]
He won't be sitting there long. I predict he will resign, and cite health problems, rather than face a crushing and humiliating defeat. You cant compare what happened in the past, to what is happening now. It is unprecedented.

[Edited on 9/28/2019 by pops42]


goldtop - 9/28/2019 at 12:51 AM

quote:
quote:
Am not so sure about that pops42, going back to Dutch’s (Ronald Reagan’s) time, every incumbent except for Geo HW Bush, Reagan’s VP, has been re-elected, usually thru one ‘scandal’ or another

If he was all those things - lying criminal scumbag whiner - he wouldn’t be sitting in office - it’s all nothing new, every president has political enemies who want to undermine him

[Edited on 9/27/2019 by Stephen]
He won't be sitting there long. I predict he will resign, and cite health problems, rather than face a crushing and humiliating defeat. You cant compare what happened in the past, to what is happening now. It is unprecedented.

[Edited on 9/28/2019 by pops42]


Those damn bone spurs


PhotoRon286 - 9/28/2019 at 01:50 AM

quote:
quote:
You'd rather have a criminal President?


Accusations vs. Convictions. This is nothing more than the Democrats spending all of their resources looking for something, anything in an attempt to explain how and why they lost.

Nothing more.


This post isn't holding up too well now.

We'll look back at it in a month.


goldtop - 9/28/2019 at 02:23 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
You'd rather have a criminal President?


Accusations vs. Convictions. This is nothing more than the Democrats spending all of their resources looking for something, anything in an attempt to explain how and why they lost.

Nothing more.


This post isn't holding up too well now.

We'll look back at it in a month.



It's all a left wing media george soro's funded coup ....the media gets up everyday just to lie to us...I was watching the morning news and they said it was gonna rain so I know they're lying so I put on my shorts and I knew it was a god damn conspiracy when I started to get wet...I was looking for the hose that was spraying the water but the cloud were in the way and the water kept getting in my eye...The traffic guy told me there was a traffic jam on my direct route to work...so I took it...I guess they hired a bunch of people to fill the lanes...

I turned on BBC because I was told they told the truth....I had to keep checking the station because it sounded like the people on MSNBC and my morning local news cast...especially when it come to tRump

It's all one big conspiracy...they all lie

Phucking boobs....yeah and we flew planes into our own building and had them wired with bombs so we can be in an endless war....ya know, ya gotta crack a few eggs....

This is the kind of madness that people think and they want people to actually justify that stupidity

[Edited on 9/28/2019 by goldtop]


Stephen - 9/28/2019 at 02:25 AM

quote:
quote:
Am not so sure about that pops42, going back to Dutch’s (Ronald Reagan’s) time, every incumbent except for Geo HW Bush, Reagan’s VP, has been re-elected, usually thru one ‘scandal’ or another

If he was all those things - lying criminal scumbag whiner - he wouldn’t be sitting in office - it’s all nothing new, every president has political enemies who want to undermine him

[Edited on 9/27/2019 by Stephen]
He won't be sitting there long. I predict he will resign, and cite health problems, rather than face a crushing and humiliating defeat. You cant compare what happened in the past, to what is happening now. It is unprecedented.

[Edited on 9/28/2019 by pops42]


I disagree, under similar intense political pressure Nixon resigned in 1974 rather than face what then looked like certain impeachment/ouster - we can always be informed/learn from past history/mistakes etc

What’s your favorite cut off that Gregg Plays Jimmy Smith Favorites recording

[Edited on 9/28/2019 by Stephen]


BIGV - 9/28/2019 at 03:40 AM

quote:
Do you even know why you are so fearful and affected by Democrats? It’s not that I’m concerned about you personally. I’m concerned with people like you collectively, because for the first time in U.S. history, the people chose to lower their standards for the office of the presidency by filling the position with a mentally unfit criminal demogogue, all because you want to take the easy road of scapegoating your personal demons. Had you all used common sense, pride, and integrity in your strategies, I wouldn’t be saying this. I couldn’t say any of these things had you all chose someone with the required qualities that any leader must possess for such a role.


Too funny, disagree with you and get lectured. See, it can't be something as simple as daring to see things differently.....


BIGV - 9/28/2019 at 03:44 AM

quote:
But the most important thing of all - thank goodness the dreaded Hillary is not president


Exactly my thought


Skydog32103 - 9/28/2019 at 12:11 PM

quote:
Too funny, disagree with you and get lectured. See, it can't be something as simple as daring to see things differently.....


It’s just criticism, relax a little. Between your reaction to criticism and your boogie monster Democrats, you are one fragile little boy. Just remember, whenever you feel the need to scapegoat, I’ll be here to help you remember that your diaper is full and needs to be changed.


Skydog32103 - 9/28/2019 at 01:19 PM

If the Democrats in Washington think that a House impeachment will hurt Trump's chances at re-election, they are sorely mistaken. That being said, it's good to be on record that someone tried to reject what's going on.

I realize there are segments of America that have valid reasons to vote for Trump - those who have seen their communities be reduced to abandoned wastelands, factory workers who can't find work, opiod addicted families, people with limited resources and abilities. If these people feel a need to blow up the system, then I completely understand. But any American who grew up in a stable home and received a decent education should have much higher standards, not only for the office of the presidency, but for themselves as well.

I feel bad that some people think they deserve to follow someone like Trump, and that they don't see they can have much better. Some people go their whole lives believing that there is someone to blame for their unhappiness, that there is some fantasy standard that all people must be, and those who don't meet that standard are the bad guys. It sounds terrible.


BIGV - 9/28/2019 at 01:22 PM

quote:
quote:
Too funny, disagree with you and get lectured. See, it can't be something as simple as daring to see things differently.....


It’s just criticism, relax a little. Between your reaction to criticism and your boogie monster Democrats, you are one fragile little boy. Just remember, whenever you feel the need to scapegoat, I’ll be here to help you remember that your diaper is full and needs to be changed.


Nice well thought out retort and all because I disagree with the you.

Tell me again who the child is here.


Stephen - 9/28/2019 at 05:02 PM

Congrats Skydog32103, you’re a Peach Pro
- no need for the personal insults tho, none have been directed your way


piacere - 9/28/2019 at 05:27 PM

quote:
If the Democrats in Washington think that a House impeachment will hurt Trump's chances at re-election, they are sorely mistaken. That being said, it's good to be on record that someone tried to reject what's going on.

I realize there are segments of America that have valid reasons to vote for Trump - those who have seen their communities be reduced to abandoned wastelands, factory workers who can't find work, opiod addicted families, people with limited resources and abilities. If these people feel a need to blow up the system, then I completely understand. But any American who grew up in a stable home and received a decent education should have much higher standards, not only for the office of the presidency, but for themselves as well.

I feel bad that some people think they deserve to follow someone like Trump, and that they don't see they can have much better. Some people go their whole lives believing that there is someone to blame for their unhappiness, that there is some fantasy standard that all people must be, and those who don't meet that standard are the bad guys. It sounds terrible.


Who the f*ck are you? Shut up.


PhotoRon286 - 9/28/2019 at 09:32 PM

quote:
quote:
Too funny, disagree with you and get lectured. See, it can't be something as simple as daring to see things differently.....


It’s just criticism, relax a little. Between your reaction to criticism and your boogie monster Democrats, you are one fragile little boy. Just remember, whenever you feel the need to scapegoat, I’ll be here to help you remember that your diaper is full and needs to be changed.


^^^^

This.


Skydog32103 - 9/28/2019 at 09:42 PM

quote:
Congrats Skydog32103, you’re a Peach Pro
- no need for the personal insults tho, none have been directed your way


He routinely insults anyone liberal, but you are right - I should take the high road. My apologies.


Skydog32103 - 9/28/2019 at 09:45 PM

quote:
Who the f*ck are you? Shut up.


With a reaction like this, you clearly saw truth in my post.



[Edited on 9/28/2019 by Skydog32103]


LUKE - 9/29/2019 at 02:23 AM

DAMMIT!!!! Every time i go to pay for my 250 2020 Trump bumper sticker's,this site pop's up.Guess i gotta call Nadler to get to the bottom of what's goin on.


BrerRabbit - 9/29/2019 at 03:49 AM

Here ya go! Plaster 250 of these all over your rig!


BIGV - 9/29/2019 at 04:03 AM

quote:
I should take the high road.


I understand, it's new and scary; there's a first time for every behavior.


2112 - 9/29/2019 at 04:19 AM

quote:
Here ya go! Plaster 250 of these all over your rig!




Do you have them translated into Ukrainian?


alanwoods - 9/29/2019 at 12:49 PM

quote:


I realize there are segments of America that have valid reasons to vote for Trump - those who have seen their communities be reduced to abandoned wastelands, factory workers who can't find work, opiod addicted families, people with limited resources and abilities. If these people feel a need to blow up the system, then I completely understand. But any American who grew up in a stable home and received a decent education should have much higher standards, not only for the office of the presidency, but for themselves as well.



I suppose you feel that sweeping changes in the conditions you reference were made during the previous administration? Especially for those factory workers...???

You're delusional.

I'll wait for the sanctimonious, insulting reply.


Stephen - 9/29/2019 at 01:17 PM

He’s already acknowledged & apologized for all this, no sense in dragging it out all over again
I say let the thread rest until after impeachment, if it gets that far - the thread was started Jan 2017, it can stand to vanish off the pages again for awhile - best wishes, happy Sunday to all

[Edited on 9/29/2019 by Stephen]


Skydog32103 - 9/29/2019 at 01:49 PM

quote:
I understand, it's new and scary; there's a first time for every behavior.


It’s the comeback kid everyone! Lol.


Skydog32103 - 9/29/2019 at 05:06 PM

quote:
Comedy has traditionally picked on people in power, people who abuse their power. Women and gays and immigrants, to my way of thinking, are underdogs. I think his core audience is young white males who are threatened by these groups. I think a lot of these guys aren’t sure of their manhood, I think that’s often a problem when you’re going through adolescence... and the women who assert themselves and that are competent are a threat to these men, and so are immigrants in terms of jobs. I think that’s what is at the core of that experience that takes place in those arenas. A sharing of anger and rage at these targets.


quote:
Who the f*ck are you?


That quote is from George Carlin, 1990. It's Trump in a nutshell. Wake up and demand better for yourself...you deserve it.





[Edited on 9/29/2019 by Skydog32103]


Skydog32103 - 9/29/2019 at 05:16 PM

quote:
I suppose you feel that sweeping changes in the conditions you reference were made during the previous administration? Especially for those factory workers...???

You're delusional.

I'll wait for the sanctimonious, insulting reply.


You can wait, but you're not going to get one. I've never seen you come on here and scapegoat a bunch of decent people. The truth is that no administration in our history has helped these groups that I described, and it sounds like you and I both know that Trump isn't going to help the situation either. The most likely scenario is that these groups are neglected because of the sad reality of an evolving technological workplace and a survival of the fittest world. No government will lift them - people have to lift themselves and evolve with the times, or get left behind. I find it sad that Trump preyed on these folks. If he does one thing in his 8 years, I hope he helps these people. I'll congratulate him if he does.



[Edited on 9/29/2019 by Skydog32103]


alanwoods - 9/30/2019 at 12:22 PM

quote:
quote:
I suppose you feel that sweeping changes in the conditions you reference were made during the previous administration? Especially for those factory workers...???

You're delusional.

I'll wait for the sanctimonious, insulting reply.


You can wait, but you're not going to get one. I've never seen you come on here and scapegoat a bunch of decent people. The truth is that no administration in our history has helped these groups that I described, and it sounds like you and I both know that Trump isn't going to help the situation either. The most likely scenario is that these groups are neglected because of the sad reality of an evolving technological workplace and a survival of the fittest world. No government will lift them - people have to lift themselves and evolve with the times, or get left behind. I find it sad that Trump preyed on these folks. If he does one thing in his 8 years, I hope he helps these people. I'll congratulate him if he does.



[Edited on 9/29/2019 by Skydog32103]


My apologies. I guess you are specific in who you respond to in a harsh manner.

I have my own opinions about manufacturing and who failed who. I do think that although technology is largely responsible for the erosion of factory jobs, the biggest reason that there are so many unskilled and skilled workers sitting idle is that the jobs went elsewhere. Take for instance, the textile industry. And why aren't those millions of cell phones being assembled in the USA? I have my own opinions and theories regarding that, too.

No, I don't think Trump is going to help those people, but the parties, organizations, and individuals that they routinely look to have failed them miserably.


Skydog32103 - 9/30/2019 at 02:33 PM

quote:
My apologies. I guess you are specific in who you respond to in a harsh manner.


No apology needed, but thanks. I make my own reputation here. And yes, you are correct in your assessment.

quote:
I have my own opinions about manufacturing and who failed who. I do think that although technology is largely responsible for the erosion of factory jobs, the biggest reason that there are so many unskilled and skilled workers sitting idle is that the jobs went elsewhere. Take for instance, the textile industry. And why aren't those millions of cell phones being assembled in the USA? I have my own opinions and theories regarding that, too.

No, I don't think Trump is going to help those people, but the parties, organizations, and individuals that they routinely look to have failed them miserably.


Agree 100% with all of this. Thriving factory towns used to provide middle class laborers with nice homes, cars, disposable income, and a strong quality of life with pride. Then just as you said, they all closed up and went elsewhere by the 70s or so. I guess the question remains is...why can’t the U.S. produce affordable domestic labor? We know it isn’t a party issue, although I’m sure it does factor into it somewhat.

What’s your theory?

For me, a big part of it is that Americans tend to have higher demands for their pay and working environment. These demands are justified in my opinion, but they become costly, so owners look elsewhere. On one hand, these workers deserve the better pay and conditions, but on the other, an owner should be able to maximize profits for himself too. As long as we have developing countries offering cheap production and labor, what can be done to prevent owners from going there?

Does the U.S. even have a workforce that is available and ready at a comparable pay-scale and environment as the developing countries? I know we have the workers, but will they accept that type of pay and quality of life?






[Edited on 9/30/2019 by Skydog32103]


goldtop - 9/30/2019 at 02:59 PM

I'll ask again without the diatribe

Did anyone not see this coming?


BrerRabbit - 9/30/2019 at 04:11 PM

quote:
Does the U.S. even have a workforce that is available and ready at a comparable pay-scale and environment as the developing countries?


Not since the Emancipation Proclamation.


Chain - 9/30/2019 at 09:17 PM

quote:
quote:
My apologies. I guess you are specific in who you respond to in a harsh manner.


No apology needed, but thanks. I make my own reputation here. And yes, you are correct in your assessment.

quote:
I have my own opinions about manufacturing and who failed who. I do think that although technology is largely responsible for the erosion of factory jobs, the biggest reason that there are so many unskilled and skilled workers sitting idle is that the jobs went elsewhere. Take for instance, the textile industry. And why aren't those millions of cell phones being assembled in the USA? I have my own opinions and theories regarding that, too.

No, I don't think Trump is going to help those people, but the parties, organizations, and individuals that they routinely look to have failed them miserably.


Agree 100% with all of this. Thriving factory towns used to provide middle class laborers with nice homes, cars, disposable income, and a strong quality of life with pride. Then just as you said, they all closed up and went elsewhere by the 70s or so. I guess the question remains is...why can’t the U.S. produce affordable domestic labor? We know it isn’t a party issue, although I’m sure it does factor into it somewhat.

What’s your theory?

For me, a big part of it is that Americans tend to have higher demands for their pay and working environment. These demands are justified in my opinion, but they become costly, so owners look elsewhere. On one hand, these workers deserve the better pay and conditions, but on the other, an owner should be able to maximize profits for himself too. As long as we have developing countries offering cheap production and labor, what can be done to prevent owners from going there?

Does the U.S. even have a workforce that is available and ready at a comparable pay-scale and environment as the developing countries? I know we have the workers, but will they accept that type of pay and quality of life?






[Edited on 9/30/2019 by Skydog32103]


Some economists and historians have theorized that eventually Capitalism will destroy itself as it searches across the world for cheap, low cost labor and cheap manufacturing inputs. As it races and races around the globe over the course of years, eventually such low cost inputs will no longer exist and thus no one will have the purchasing power to actually buy the goods that keep the entire system running.

It's sort of akin to "racing to the bottom" as the never ending effort to maximize profits causes the entire system to eventually implode. These same economists, historians, social scientist, etc. suggest this is why the world maybe will eventually have to move toward perhaps a basic standard income.

Others suggest we should simply pay people a living wage and thus maintain their purchasing power to continue the cycle. Paying that living wage may consist of pay from your employer along with a basic gov't subsidy. Or some combination of the two along with a shorter work week to create more actual jobs, ect. etc.....

Smart companies understand the race to the bottom and now see the long game and are finding ways to address income inequality, living wages, etc.....



[Edited on 9/30/2019 by Chain]


BIGV - 10/1/2019 at 12:14 AM

quote:
Some economists and historians have theorized that eventually Capitalism will destroy itself as it searches across the world for cheap, low cost labor and cheap manufacturing inputs.


Maybe so, but I will still choose it 100% of the time over any form of Government that declares Socialism as the answer.


Skydog32103 - 10/1/2019 at 12:38 AM

So much for the intelligent dialogue that was developing.



PhotoRon286 - 10/1/2019 at 01:02 AM

quote:
So much for the intelligent dialogue that was developing.





I agree.

Socialism is nothing more than the government doing it's best for the PEOPLE, not the corporations.

I look forward to those evil "socialist" snowplows clearing my road this coming winter.


goldtop - 10/1/2019 at 02:34 AM

quote:
quote:
So much for the intelligent dialogue that was developing.





I agree.

Socialism is nothing more than the government doing it's best for the PEOPLE, not the corporations.

I look forward to those evil "socialist" snowplows clearing my road this coming winter.


Or the police, fire department, Army, USMC, Navy, Air Force, National Guard, Coast Guard, county sheriff, state police, FBI, CIA, social security, medicare, the library, stop lights, infrastructure public school k-12

For most it's a word that they over use to show that they're just selfish

All the European countries that they think are socialist are democracies where the people have agreed they'd rather pay taxes to cover basic human services. schools through college(because they care if their children are educated) Medical care(Because they believe healthcare is a right) Paternity services(because having the mother with child at the beginning is important)

Their governments don't control the markets for products...that is communism

So we instead pay an insurance company who then makes the decision if you get the medical care you require...and people think that's better??? and we put our kids in massive debt so they can get a quality education...madness, stupidity and the height of selfishness

[Edited on 10/1/2019 by goldtop]


Stephen - 10/1/2019 at 03:03 AM

Maybe applying some of the Economic tenets of socialism to the free-enterprise approach we have here, would benefit the e pluribus unum system, & would in retrospect be something our founding fathers would have been OK with

Didn’t Ronald Reagan try something new & different like that with “supply side economics” when he was elected - but am veering off topic

[Edited on 10/1/2019 by Stephen]


Skydog32103 - 10/1/2019 at 02:45 PM

quote:
Maybe applying some of the Economic tenets of socialism to the free-enterprise approach we have here, would benefit the e pluribus unum system, & would in retrospect be something our founding fathers would have been OK with

Didn’t Ronald Reagan try something new & different like that with “supply side economics” when he was elected - but am veering off topic


All logic and evidence shows that countries can benefit from some level of socialism in certain areas, like the public services mentioned above, Medicaid, etc. All of us here benefit from socialism from our government, but there seems to be a fanatical paranoia about the word.


MartinD28 - 10/1/2019 at 03:04 PM

quote:
quote:
Maybe applying some of the Economic tenets of socialism to the free-enterprise approach we have here, would benefit the e pluribus unum system, & would in retrospect be something our founding fathers would have been OK with

Didn’t Ronald Reagan try something new & different like that with “supply side economics” when he was elected - but am veering off topic


All logic and evidence shows that countries can benefit from some level of socialism in certain areas, like the public services mentioned above, Medicaid, etc. All of us here benefit from socialism from our government, but there seems to be a fanatical paranoia about the word.


X2

There is a misunderstanding of what socialism is and that there are aspects of it already in play as you have correctly identified and back referenced.

It's individuals that are uninformed or deceptive and ether take the bait or on the other hand use the term "socialism" as some sort of fear factor. Yet they are the same ones that benefit from what socialism provides.


BIGV - 10/1/2019 at 03:13 PM

quote:
All logic and evidence shows that countries can benefit from some level of socialism in certain areas, like the public services mentioned above, Medicaid, etc. All of us here benefit from socialism from our government, but there seems to be a fanatical paranoia about the word.


X2

There is a misunderstanding of what socialism is and that there are aspects of it already in play as you have correctly identified and back referenced.

It's individuals that are uninformed or deceptive and ether take the bait or on the other hand use the term "socialism" as some sort of fear factor. Yet they are the same ones that benefit from what socialism provides.


"some level of socialism"...."It's individuals that are uninformed "...."There is a misunderstanding of what socialism is"....


Too funny. Yeah, it's easy to cherry pick and say all of this, especially when the left loves to highlight countries in northern Europe that have populations the size of Nebraska. But name ONE country where a TOTALLY Socialist economy and Government is thriving. What's even funnier is the left's propensity to single out those who disagree and label them as "Not understanding"....


Skydog32103 - 10/1/2019 at 03:26 PM

quote:
But name ONE country where a TOTALLY Socialist economy and Government is thriving.


Why? What would be the point?


BIGV - 10/1/2019 at 03:45 PM

quote:
quote:
But name ONE country where a TOTALLY Socialist economy and Government is thriving.


Why? What would be the point?


You would think it would be so easy, just pointing out ONE example where the left's beloved Socialist ideals are thriving. Just one, and please make it a Country with a population larger than the state of Kansas...

If you won't, I am guessing it is because you can not.


Skydog32103 - 10/1/2019 at 04:01 PM

quote:
But name ONE country where a TOTALLY Socialist economy and Government is thriving.


quote:
You would think it would be so easy, just pointing out ONE example where the left's beloved Socialist ideals are thriving. Just one, and please make it a Country with a population larger than the state of Kansas...

If you won't, I am guessing it is because you can not.


So your “opinion” is that the left wants a TOTALLY socialist country? Or are you just being dramatic and emotional?


Bhawk - 10/1/2019 at 05:06 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
But name ONE country where a TOTALLY Socialist economy and Government is thriving.


Why? What would be the point?


You would think it would be so easy, just pointing out ONE example where the left's beloved Socialist ideals are thriving. Just one, and please make it a Country with a population larger than the state of Kansas...

If you won't, I am guessing it is because you can not.


As completely disingenuous as this inquiry is, the easiest answer to "thriving Socialism" is China. Their GDP matches ours, their Gini coefficient matches ours and your beloved President At-Least-He's-Not-Hillary just praised and congratulated them this morning.

Does that count?

Save the keystrokes on "so the left wants to be more like China" response, too. You aren't that lazy.


BrerRabbit - 10/1/2019 at 07:08 PM

China is not a "totally socialist" country. It is capitalist as hell. Countries have varying degrees of capitalism and socialism and all the other isms, but there is no such thing as any country being "totally" anything. Never has been either, the USSR was corrupt as hell and crony capitalism was normal there. The USA is not "totally" free market capitalist either.


goldtop - 10/1/2019 at 10:15 PM

quote:
China is not a "totally socialist" country. It is capitalist as hell. Countries have varying degrees of capitalism and socialism and all the other isms, but there is no such thing as any country being "totally" anything. Never has been either, the USSR was corrupt as hell and crony capitalism was normal there. The USA is not "totally" free market capitalist either.


So true and the only "major" difference between those countries and the US is healthcare and education.

Those are the 2 major things on my list that I'd like to see changed.


Chain - 10/1/2019 at 11:05 PM

quote:
quote:
Some economists and historians have theorized that eventually Capitalism will destroy itself as it searches across the world for cheap, low cost labor and cheap manufacturing inputs.


Maybe so, but I will still choose it 100% of the time over any form of Government that declares Socialism as the answer.


If only it was as simple as you, one individual among millions, making such a decision. If only here in America we practiced a pure form of capitalism (We don't) or a pure form of socialism (we don't).

Instead, as I assume you well know, both are interwoven and it's really just a question of how much of each at any given time in the history of our economy. In other words it's not black or white, but gray....

For example, it seems to me that we need a dash or two more of socialism in present day America given the unequal distribution of wealth in this nation and the rise of a relatively few corporations that more and more control more and more of the American economy....Corporations owned and controlled by relatively few people. In the years and decades ahead, perhaps less socialism and more capitalism.

[Edited on 10/1/2019 by Chain]


MartinD28 - 10/1/2019 at 11:56 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Some economists and historians have theorized that eventually Capitalism will destroy itself as it searches across the world for cheap, low cost labor and cheap manufacturing inputs.


Maybe so, but I will still choose it 100% of the time over any form of Government that declares Socialism as the answer.


If only it was as simple as you, one individual among millions, making such a decision. If only here in America we practiced a pure form of capitalism (We don't) or a pure form of socialism (we don't).

Instead, as I assume you well know, both are interwoven and it's really just a question of how much of each at any given time in the history of our economy. In other words it's not black or white, but gray....

For example, it seems to me that we need a dash or two more of socialism in present day America given the unequal distribution of wealth in this nation and the rise of a relatively few corporations that more and more control more and more of the American economy....Corporations owned and controlled by relatively few people. In the years and decades ahead, perhaps less socialism and more capitalism.

[Edited on 10/1/2019 by Chain]


But remember that corporations are people

And never forget Citizens United.


BIGV - 10/2/2019 at 12:42 AM

quote:
As completely disingenuous as this inquiry is, the easiest answer to "thriving Socialism" is China.


Turn on your TV and watch how just how staunchly the people of Hong Kong are trying to resist....


BIGV - 10/2/2019 at 12:47 AM

quote:
quote:
But name ONE country where a TOTALLY Socialist economy and Government is thriving.


quote:
You would think it would be so easy, just pointing out ONE example where the left's beloved Socialist ideals are thriving. Just one, and please make it a Country with a population larger than the state of Kansas...

If you won't, I am guessing it is because you can not.


So your “opinion” is that the left wants a TOTALLY socialist country? Or are you just being dramatic and emotional?


Well let's see, Health insurance for all "Who is going to Pay"? 15$ an hour. Free College, "Who is going to pay"? Andrew Yang and his $1000 a month for everyone "Who is going to pay"?

Shall I go on?

"Or are you just being dramatic and emotional?"..LOL...You just can't help it, I have once again disagreed and this is how you handle it. Too funny.


OriginalGoober - 10/2/2019 at 01:07 AM


I came hear looking for any Biden articles? Has anyone come across any MSM articles about the Biden -Ukraine quid pro quo?


Skydog32103 - 10/2/2019 at 02:35 AM

quote:
Well let's see, Health insurance for all "Who is going to Pay"? 15$ an hour. Free College, "Who is going to pay"? Andrew Yang and his $1000 a month for everyone "Who is going to pay"?

Shall I go on?


If you want to state a case for “TOTALLY” socialist, then yes, you’re going to need to go on much much more than three examples.


quote:
"Or are you just being dramatic and emotional?"..LOL...You just can't help it, I have once again disagreed and this is how you handle it. Too funny.


Well, to suggest the left wants a "TOTALLY" socialist U.S., then are you not being dramatic? You gave three examples....wouldn't you say you are being dramatic about it?



[Edited on 10/2/2019 by Skydog32103]


BIGV - 10/2/2019 at 02:42 AM

quote:
quote:
Well let's see, Health insurance for all "Who is going to Pay"? 15$ an hour. Free College, "Who is going to pay"? Andrew Yang and his $1000 a month for everyone "Who is going to pay"?

Shall I go on?


If you want to state a case for “TOTALLY” socialist, then yes, you’re going to need to go on much much more than three examples.


quote:
"Or are you just being dramatic and emotional?"..LOL...You just can't help it, I have once again disagreed and this is how you handle it. Too funny.


Well, to suggest the left wants a "TOTALLY" socialist U.S., then are you not being dramatic? You gave three examples....wouldn't you say you are being dramatic about it?


No, but knock yourself out bro'. I don't care.

Enjoy the evening


Skydog32103 - 10/2/2019 at 02:43 AM

quote:
I came hear looking for any Biden articles? Has anyone come across any MSM articles about the Biden -Ukraine quid pro quo?


"hear", lol.


goldtop - 10/2/2019 at 03:49 AM



I guess we don't have any money for basic human services like a quality education and healthcare


MartinD28 - 10/2/2019 at 12:03 PM

quote:


I guess we don't have any money for basic human services like a quality education and healthcare


I'm curious how much Congress will appropriate for Trump's desire for alligators & snakes would cost to augment the border wall. If they shoot that down, maybe we can just get Mexico to pay for the alligators and snakes. If not, how about an executive order? Looking forward to hear Trump work that into his immigrant rant at the next rally. Maybe he can hold snakes like those pastors that preach & heal with snakes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/us/politics/trump-border-wars.html


cyclone88 - 10/2/2019 at 12:37 PM

I don't understand how anyone can support Trump. Period. Without reference to party or replacement or political capital, how can any American much less a legislator believe that a man who, aside from being corrupt & lawless, thinks building moats filled w/alligators and snakes at the border, shooting unarmed immigrants in the legs to slow them down if killing them outright is illegal, and makes an offer of cash to a foreign leader in exchange for political dirt on a rival should be president?

Were such a man presented w/o party affiliation to voters he would seem surreal and rejected for mental health reasons. For three years, reasonable members of Congress have supported him and those who objected to him, didn't run for re-election. Presumably competent heads of key agencies and the military have been fired or quit because of this man's volatility. Worse, POTUS isn't the job Trump wants. He wants to be a king, emperor, or dictator like his idols Putin, MBS, and Xi. He had his own fiefdom at the Trump Organization and somehow, through the magic of being of TV celebrity, he landed in the Oval Office.

Impeachment isn't the best choice; invoking the 25th Amendment makes the most sense. The man simply isn't fit for office.


Bhawk - 10/2/2019 at 12:48 PM

quote:
quote:
As completely disingenuous as this inquiry is, the easiest answer to "thriving Socialism" is China.


Turn on your TV and watch how just how staunchly the people of Hong Kong are trying to resist....


Your President is praising them, though. He ain't on the left, but since he's not Hillary, you don't have an issue with it.

Says way more about you than anyone else here.


Bhawk - 10/2/2019 at 12:49 PM

quote:
I don't understand how anyone can support Trump. Period. Without reference to party or replacement or political capital, how can any American much less a legislator believe that a man who, aside from being corrupt & lawless, thinks building moats filled w/alligators and snakes at the border, shooting unarmed immigrants in the legs to slow them down if killing them outright is illegal, and makes an offer of cash to a foreign leader in exchange for political dirt on a rival should be president?

Were such a man presented w/o party affiliation to voters he would seem surreal and rejected for mental health reasons. For three years, reasonable members of Congress have supported him and those who objected to him, didn't run for re-election. Presumably competent heads of key agencies and the military have been fired or quit because of this man's volatility. Worse, POTUS isn't the job Trump wants. He wants to be a king, emperor, or dictator like his idols Putin, MBS, and Xi. He had his own fiefdom at the Trump Organization and somehow, through the magic of being of TV celebrity, he landed in the Oval Office.

Impeachment isn't the best choice; invoking the 25th Amendment makes the most sense. The man simply isn't fit for office.




Because no matter what he does, they will always hate liberals more.

It's just that simple.


Skydog32103 - 10/2/2019 at 01:33 PM

quote:
Because no matter what he does, they will always hate liberals more.

It's just that simple.


This is 100% the root of everything going on here. But as easy as it is to criticize this mentality, people were preyed upon by a massive Russian troll operation that fed them fanatical lies about liberals as far back as the Obama administration, compounded by a disturbed demogogue candidate pouring gas on the fire. They exploited these folks through the wonders of modern technology like predators. They are victims of fraud by the ulimate fraudsters.

I've been most let down by our Republicans in Washington that go along with it for career reasons, even though they are fully aware of how insane all of this is. They are the ones who are supposed to help and know better.

The storm will pass in 2024. I expect the Republicans in Washington will feign ignorance, and there will be an eery calm. People will be so sick and tired of fighting.

Trump is a strong fighter, who also shows glaring examples of low self-esteem, insecurity, rage, and sadness...basically someone who has never felt peace. Because he feels this way, because he's threatened by cool cats like Obama, he fights, and he fights hard. Many Americans feel threatened by change, so they have the same urge to fight those who embrace change...liberals and Democrats. If this is how they are living, and if they relate to Donald Trump and wish to follow him, then part of this equation is that maybe Democrats need to address these fears in a serious manner when explaining their policies.





[Edited on 10/2/2019 by Skydog32103]


BIGV - 10/2/2019 at 02:10 PM

quote:
I don't understand how anyone can support Trump. Period.


And the other half of the Country does not understand how anyone can Vote in line with Democratic ideals and values. Period.

Impasse.


Skydog32103 - 10/2/2019 at 02:24 PM

quote:
I don't understand how anyone can support Trump. Period.


quote:
And the other half of the Country does not understand how anyone can Vote in line with Democratic ideals and values. Period.


He spoke for himself by using the word "I". Why would you say, "and the other half of the country" in response?


Stephen - 10/2/2019 at 02:31 PM

quote:
quote:


The storm will pass in 2024. I expect the Republicans in Washington will feign ignorance, and there will be an eery calm. People will be so sick and tired of fighting.

Trump is a strong fighter, who also shows glaring examples of low self-esteem, insecurity, rage, and sadness...basically someone who has never felt peace. Because he feels this way, because he's threatened by cool cats like Obama, he fights, and he fights hard. Many Americans feel threatened by change, so they have the same urge to fight those who embrace change...liberals and Democrats. If this is how they are living, and if they relate to Donald Trump and wish to follow him, then part of this equation is that maybe Democrats need to address these fears in a serious manner when explaining their policies.
[Edited on 10/2/2019 by Skydog32103]


IMO his re-election is not a foregone conclusion, his many enemies will be working OT to that effect - all good, but the eerie calm you foresee leading up to election day, I personally don’t see happening -

but you could be right, voters might be sick & tired of all the bull **** by next Nov, possibly enhancing re-election chances

The comment about his personal demons - low self esteem, insecurity, rage, sadness - is a little too over the top for me - I don’t see Donald trump as the evil whack job he’s far-&-wide portrayed to be - it’s a fickle public I guess - George W Bush was equally reviled, but was still re-elected

[Edited on 10/2/2019 by Stephen]


BIGV - 10/2/2019 at 02:40 PM

quote:
quote:
I don't understand how anyone can support Trump. Period.


quote:
And the other half of the Country does not understand how anyone can Vote in line with Democratic ideals and values. Period.


He spoke for himself by using the word "I". Why would you say, "and the other half of the country" in response?


Does not the phrase "anyone" infer the 50% who did?


goldtop - 10/2/2019 at 03:20 PM

What exactly are Democratic values and polices?? Fox talking points or reality

I don't know one person that wants open borders, or a weak military, or any of the wack-a-do crap I ear spewed

Every person has their own set of values. I didn't want HC either but when they boiled all of it down to the 2 that counted in the election the path for me was clear because I already knew DT was a buffoon. So the choice for me was a Buffoon for someone that I could deal with for 4 years and then hope to vote out.

There were many that ran under the GOP umbrella that if any sane republican would have followed their values I would have voted for that person this time around. Rubio, Kasich, Even Romney I could have dealt with my difference in policy to not have HC but again the Republican base fell of the meds and went with a buffoon

Now they want to justify the Buffoon because when you vote for a buffoon you must be one first


Skydog32103 - 10/2/2019 at 03:36 PM

quote:
Does not the phrase "anyone" infer the 50% who did?


I'm referring to the subject of the sentences, not the object. He said, "I don't understand...", and you responded in comparison with, "the other half of the country doesn't understand..." Why would you claim to know what half the country does or doesn't understand? And why would you take "I don't understand" as "half the country"? I think you meant to say that YOU don't understand how someone can vote for Democratic ideals and values.


Skydog32103 - 10/2/2019 at 03:55 PM

quote:
but the eerie calm you foresee leading up to election day, I personally don’t see happening -
but you could be right, voters might be sick & tired of all the bull **** by next Nov, possibly enhancing re-election chances


I meant that the eery calm would come in 2024, after his 8 years are up. I do believe he will win again in 2020. By the 8th year, everyone will be completely drained and desperate for serenity.

quote:
The comment about his personal demons - low self esteem, insecurity, rage, sadness - is a little too over the top for me - I don’t see Donald trump as the evil whack job he’s far-&-wide portrayed to be - it’s a fickle public I guess - George W Bush was equally reviled, but was still re-elected


I'm not referring to any of his proposed policies, but how can you listen to his unscripted speeches and daily Tweets and think otherwise? It's a non-stop steady stream of rage and sadness in his demeanor. It's not healthy or normal to blame and attack people everyday.


BIGV - 10/2/2019 at 03:57 PM

quote:
quote:
Does not the phrase "anyone" infer the 50% who did?


I'm referring to the subject of the sentences, not the object. He said, "I don't understand...", and you responded in comparison with, "the other half of the country doesn't understand..." Why would you claim to know what half the country does or doesn't understand? And why would you take "I don't understand" as "half the country"? I think you meant to say that YOU don't understand how someone can vote for Democratic ideals and values.


Take it anyway you choose professor


Skydog32103 - 10/2/2019 at 04:02 PM

quote:
And the other half of the Country does not understand how anyone can Vote in line with Democratic ideals and values. Period.


You don't get to speak for half the country. Period. You speak for yourself. Most people CAN understand differing ideals and values.


cyclone88 - 10/2/2019 at 04:25 PM

quote:
Because no matter what he does, they will always hate liberals more.


True, but my question was REMOVING PARTY AFFILIATION or ALTERNATIVE or SUCCESSOR - just looking at the man himself.

[Edited on 10/2/2019 by cyclone88]


BIGV - 10/2/2019 at 04:48 PM

quote:
quote:
And the other half of the Country does not understand how anyone can Vote in line with Democratic ideals and values. Period.


You don't get to speak for half the country. Period. You speak for yourself. Most people CAN understand differing ideals and values.


Don't think, even for a moment you will ever be in a position to tell me what to do.


BrerRabbit - 10/2/2019 at 04:56 PM


You sound like an old married couple


Skydog32103 - 10/2/2019 at 05:42 PM

quote:
Don't think, even for a moment you will ever be in a position to tell me what to do.


Where did I tell you what to do? Do you speak for half the country or do we all speak for ourselves? You are one defensive dude. I'll move on.


Skydog32103 - 10/2/2019 at 05:46 PM

quote:
And the other half of the Country does not understand how anyone can Vote in line with Democratic ideals and values. Period.


Putting our differences aside for a moment, I have a very sincere and genuine question for you....have Democratic policies ever hurt you in your personal life, or caused some sort of damage? If it has, I'd like to learn about it. Maybe I'm not realizing something.


cyclone88 - 10/2/2019 at 05:52 PM

quote:
You are one defensive dude. I'll move on.


Before you move on, could you maybe get us back on track to my question of looking at Trump objectively w/o party affiliation or scared Congressman or labels - just Don Doe who spouts off about moats w/gators & shooting migrants in the legs to slow them down & openly asks a foreign leader for dirt on his political rival - am I the only one who thinks he is unfit to be president? Thanks.


BIGV - 10/2/2019 at 06:51 PM

quote:
have Democratic policies ever hurt you in your personal life, or caused some sort of damage?


Damage?..No. But having been and continuing to be a working man, I deeply resent the answer for everything to be the Democratic principle of raising Taxes to support those who can not or more importantly to "those who will not work"......Also, the Democratic conclusion that ALL Illegal immigrants are just looking for a "better life" and that WE should shoulder that cost.

It is my money, if I decide to donate it, that is my choice. Do not reach into MY wallet under the pretense that there are people out there who need help. There are soooo many other "sticky" Democratic points; for the purpose of this question, I am vehemently opposed to the diffusion of wealth.

Work harder.
Finish School.
Create your own opportunities.

Imho, any argument against the three points I've listed above strengthens my feelings against The Democratic Party, so please do not counter with such Liberal catch phrases as "White Privilege" or "Not everyone has the same contingencies"....I am without any elaboration,... not buying. There are simply way too many success stories pertaining to people who make the choice to overcome.

A question for you-----"Why are you not a Libertarian or a Republican"?
( I do not care )

Do you understand now?

Add, I am not in the least puzzled by your party affiliation, nor do I have any interest in swaying your opinion about such, which seems to be in complete contrast to your attempts at "communication"....It would appear you've no patience for an opinion that differs from yours.....Your argument as presented is that I am criticizing a "Group" of people and your measured response is to chastise me for having done so.

Interesting math.


Skydog32103 - 10/2/2019 at 07:04 PM

quote:
Before you move on, could you maybe get us back on track to my question of looking at Trump objectively w/o party affiliation or scared Congressman or labels - just Don Doe who spouts off about moats w/gators & shooting migrants in the legs to slow them down & openly asks a foreign leader for dirt on his political rival - am I the only one who thinks he is unfit to be president? Thanks.


Not sure if you meant that for me or not, but I am certainly in your corner. But I think his supporters agree with you, but they just don't care because he's fighting their fight, which is more important than whether he meets the qualifications. You have to understand that this is the fight of their lifetime.


Skydog32103 - 10/2/2019 at 08:18 PM

quote:
Damage?..No. But having been and continuing to be a working man, I deeply resent the answer for everything to be the Democratic principle of raising Taxes to support those who can not or more importantly to "those who will not work"......Also, the Democratic conclusion that ALL Illegal immigrants are just looking for a "better life" and that WE should shoulder that cost.

It is my money, if I decide to donate it, that is my choice. Do not reach into MY wallet under the pretense that there are people out there who need help. There are soooo many other "sticky" Democratic points; for the purpose of this question, I am vehemently opposed to the diffusion of wealth.

Work harder.
Finish School.
Create your own opportunities.


So then it sounds like your concerns are largely financial, and that's certainly understandable.


cyclone88 - 10/2/2019 at 09:00 PM

quote:
Not sure if you meant that for me or not, but I am certainly in your corner.

Yes, skydog, it was meant for you. I'm trying to put his party, his supporters, everything aside & just say doesn't this guy w/these illegal & mindblowing words & actions seem ---- well, not mentally fit for the presidency?

Glad to know there are 2 of us who think so.

Were he anywhere other than the Oval Office spouting about gators in moats & shooting people in the leg so they can't run fast I think someone would be dialing 911 fairly quickly.


BrerRabbit - 10/2/2019 at 09:20 PM

quote:
. . .doesn't this guy w/these illegal & mindblowing words & actions seem ---- well, not mentally fit for the presidency?


I wouldn't trust him to babysit my kid for an hour, let alone watch over the country. Trump would clearly fail the DOD psychological testing and background integrity checks required of anyone working with or around our nuclear arsenal, down to the janitors and cafeteria workers - and this clown can hit the button.

He is crazy, and everyone who follows him is crazy. Kookoo for koko puffs.


BIGV - 10/2/2019 at 09:24 PM

quote:
quote:
. . .doesn't this guy w/these illegal & mindblowing words & actions seem ---- well, not mentally fit for the presidency?


I wouldn't trust him to babysit my kid for an hour, let alone watch over the country. Trump would clearly fail the DOD psychological testing and background integrity checks required of anyone working with or around our nuclear arsenal, down to the janitors and cafeteria workers - and this clown can hit the button.

He is crazy, and everyone who follows him is crazy. Kookoo for koko puffs.


Interesting, my unsolicited advice is "Don't Vote for him".


BrerRabbit - 10/2/2019 at 09:31 PM

quote:
Interesting, my unsolicited advice is "Don't Vote for him".


I think I had that figured out by now, but thanks for the wisdom.



Chain - 10/2/2019 at 11:30 PM

Crazy is an understatement....He's also growing ever more desperate as can be seen by the lashing out with what seems to me to be just stupid excuses and deflection attempts by blaming everyone but himself for the mess he's created for himself. Case in point was the craziness from today in the oval office.

What is as equally bizarre as the President's behavior is the lengths the people around him will go to protect him. What is it about this guy that makes people believe the oh so obvious con he's playing? If it smells and tastes like dog sh*t, it probably is. Why can't his supporters smell it too?


cyclone88 - 10/2/2019 at 11:33 PM

quote:
I wouldn't trust him to babysit my kid for an hour, let alone watch over the country.

Great so I'm not alone in thinking the man - regardless of party affiliation - is not fit for office.

Although I've thought the 25th amendment should've been invoked the day after his inauguration, there is a new possibility w/the Ukraine quid pro quo - he may have torpedoed his eligibility to be a candidate in 2020 by tampering w/that election.




Chain - 10/2/2019 at 11:49 PM

quote:
quote:
I wouldn't trust him to babysit my kid for an hour, let alone watch over the country.

Great so I'm not alone in thinking the man - regardless of party affiliation - is not fit for office.

Although I've thought the 25th amendment should've been invoked the day after his inauguration, there is a new possibility w/the Ukraine quid pro quo - he may have torpedoed his eligibility to be a candidate in 2020 by tampering w/that election.






I wonder if there are some Republicans within the party hierarchy that have reached the limit with this crook and are thinking they could just vote to impeach this nut job and take their chances with Mike Pence for the rest of this term. For the sake of the future of the Republican party mind you and not necessarily for the country.

But then again, if the most recent reporting is true, Pence may well be up to his neck in this Ukraine thing too....


BIGV - 10/2/2019 at 11:51 PM

quote:
I wonder if there are some Republicans within the party hierarchy that have reached the limit with this crook and are thinking they could just vote to impeach this nut job and take their chances with Mike Pence for the rest of this term.


You do understand what Impeachment is.......?


goldtop - 10/2/2019 at 11:56 PM

quote:
Crazy is an understatement....He's also growing ever more desperate as can be seen by the lashing out with what seems to me to be just stupid excuses and deflection attempts by blaming everyone but himself for the mess he's created for himself. Case in point was the craziness from today in the oval office.

What is as equally bizarre as the President's behavior is the lengths the people around him will go to protect him. What is it about this guy that makes people believe the oh so obvious con he's playing? If it smells and tastes like dog sh*t, it probably is. Why can't his supporters smell it too?


No doubt why they hooked their horse to that wagon and didn't cut the reins long ago is again beyond me...He's useless, doesn't care about anything but himself and controlling the news cycle

quote:
quote:
I wouldn't trust him to babysit my kid for an hour, let alone watch over the country.

Great so I'm not alone in thinking the man - regardless of party affiliation - is not fit for office.

Although I've thought the 25th amendment should've been invoked the day after his inauguration, there is a new possibility w/the Ukraine quid pro quo - he may have torpedoed his eligibility to be a candidate in 2020 by tampering w/that election.



There's many who agree with you...There's at least one we know who claims to have not voted for him but seems unfazed by the total corruption on top of the obvious personality issues and working against our allies

It makes me wonder whose families fought in WWII and are just OK with crapping on our allies while kissing up to Putin, Kim and Saudi Arabia and looking for ways to corrupt our next election...oh yeah he has the nuke codes too


MartinD28 - 10/3/2019 at 12:15 AM

quote:
Crazy is an understatement....He's also growing ever more desperate as can be seen by the lashing out with what seems to me to be just stupid excuses and deflection attempts by blaming everyone but himself for the mess he's created for himself. Case in point was the craziness from today in the oval office.

What is as equally bizarre as the President's behavior is the lengths the people around him will go to protect him. What is it about this guy that makes people believe the oh so obvious con he's playing? If it smells and tastes like dog sh*t, it probably is. Why can't his supporters smell it too?


I watched him today on TV. He is one angry and desperate snake. He senses the alligators closing in on him. He was amped up with rage today. He went after Biden, Dems, the media, and whistleblower today. Wouldn't answer a reporter's question, lied, made up stories, and was 1000 miles from what we would expect of a statesman.

The upside to his out of control behavior is that SNL got some good stuff for Saturday night's episode.


MartinD28 - 10/3/2019 at 12:25 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I wouldn't trust him to babysit my kid for an hour, let alone watch over the country.

Great so I'm not alone in thinking the man - regardless of party affiliation - is not fit for office.

Although I've thought the 25th amendment should've been invoked the day after his inauguration, there is a new possibility w/the Ukraine quid pro quo - he may have torpedoed his eligibility to be a candidate in 2020 by tampering w/that election.






I wonder if there are some Republicans within the party hierarchy that have reached the limit with this crook and are thinking they could just vote to impeach this nut job and take their chances with Mike Pence for the rest of this term. For the sake of the future of the Republican party mind you and not necessarily for the country.




Doubtful, Chain.

Trump has neutered most of the GOP Senators. They're along for the good ride of complicity.

Just take a look at the way Trump treated Ted Cruz, Cruz's wife, and father during the primaries - horrible and despicable. Now Ted says to Ukraine Don, "Sir, can I have another"?


Chain - 10/3/2019 at 01:44 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I wouldn't trust him to babysit my kid for an hour, let alone watch over the country.

Great so I'm not alone in thinking the man - regardless of party affiliation - is not fit for office.

Although I've thought the 25th amendment should've been invoked the day after his inauguration, there is a new possibility w/the Ukraine quid pro quo - he may have torpedoed his eligibility to be a candidate in 2020 by tampering w/that election.






I wonder if there are some Republicans within the party hierarchy that have reached the limit with this crook and are thinking they could just vote to impeach this nut job and take their chances with Mike Pence for the rest of this term. For the sake of the future of the Republican party mind you and not necessarily for the country.




Doubtful, Chain.

Trump has neutered most of the GOP Senators. They're along for the good ride of complicity.

Just take a look at the way Trump treated Ted Cruz, Cruz's wife, and father during the primaries - horrible and despicable. Now Ted says to Ukraine Don, "Sir, can I have another"?


Ha, ha.....Right out of the scene from "Animal House". It says a great deal about the BS politicians in both parties will endure to keep their relatively cozy jobs in Washington.


Bhawk - 10/3/2019 at 03:18 PM

quote:
quote:
Because no matter what he does, they will always hate liberals more.

It's just that simple.


This is 100% the root of everything going on here. But as easy as it is to criticize this mentality, people were preyed upon by a massive Russian troll operation that fed them fanatical lies about liberals as far back as the Obama administration, compounded by a disturbed demogogue candidate pouring gas on the fire. They exploited these folks through the wonders of modern technology like predators. They are victims of fraud by the ulimate fraudsters.


It all goes back waaaaay longer than that. Where we are now has just been the natural progression of things.


BIGV - 10/3/2019 at 04:43 PM

quote:
So much for the intelligent dialogue that was developing.


Interesting statement in that this is a belief that infects both major parties. Roughly translated ....

..."It's easy to talk Politics when everyone involved sees things the way we do"


BIGV - 10/3/2019 at 04:48 PM

quote:
Because no matter what he does, they will always hate liberals more.

It's just that simple.


No, it is not. For everyone that despises Liberals and the Policies they stand behind, there is someone who has no tolerance for The right wing and the Conservative narrative.

Politics and the power yielded is very much like a pendulum, back and forth we go and each time one party moves ahead in the WH, Congress or Senate, all of the "Headway" made by your party becomes secondary. It is that balance that allows us to continue to move forward.....


Bhawk - 10/3/2019 at 05:55 PM

quote:
quote:
Because no matter what he does, they will always hate liberals more.

It's just that simple.


No, it is not. For everyone that despises Liberals and the Policies they stand behind, there is someone who has no tolerance for The right wing and the Conservative narrative.

Politics and the power yielded is very much like a pendulum, back and forth we go and each time one party moves ahead in the WH, Congress or Senate, all of the "Headway" made by your party becomes secondary. It is that balance that allows us to continue to move forward.....


Yes, it is that simple.

Both sides are not exactly the same. There are not two equally valid sides to every issue.

Tolerance and agreement are not the same thing, either.

There's a lot of things we don't move forward on. Ever.


BIGV - 10/3/2019 at 05:57 PM

quote:
There's a lot of things we don't move forward on. Ever.


For example?


BrerRabbit - 10/3/2019 at 06:31 PM

quote:
I am vehemently opposed to the diffusion of wealth.


Then stop paying Fed tax and stay the hell off our public lands, until you "voluntarily donate" a user fee to the rest of us who share ownership. Did you know that before public land was nationalized, ONE ranching family OWNED all the present National Forest land from Flagstaff to Cottonwood? Until they were bought out by the US govt and all those billions of $ of real estate wealth you enjoy every day was distributed equally among all of us? I met a couple of them, who still run cattle on the rim - they still think it belongs to them, the way they talk. According to them we are all trespassers. Same deal with vast stretches of public lands across the Western Interior. Nationalized. That is textbook hardline socialism. A rockbottom bargain for the taxpayer, privlege of land use, a priceless resource for a pittance.


Skydog32103 - 10/3/2019 at 06:33 PM

If there's people on this site who welcome a foreign country's investigation into an opponent, I can understand that urge among the commom folk like all of us - we're not supposed to be perfect. But the point is that common folk like us, and like Trump, can't and shouldn't be President of the United States of America if we cannot fight off that important urge, or see the extremely dangerous risks of it. We all know this ability should be a mandatory requirement for any leader of any country.


BIGV - 10/3/2019 at 06:44 PM

quote:
quote:
I am vehemently opposed to the diffusion of wealth.


Then stop paying Fed tax and stay the hell off our public lands, until you "voluntarily donate" a user fee to the rest of us who share ownership. Did you know that before public land was nationalized, ONE ranching family OWNED all the present National Forest land from Flagstaff to Cottonwood? Until they were bought out by the US govt and all those billions of $ of real estate wealth you enjoy every day was distributed equally among all of us? I met a couple of them, who still run cattle on the rim - they still think it belongs to them, the way they talk. According to them we are all trespassers. Same deal with vast stretches of public lands across the Western Interior. Nationalized. That is textbook hardline socialism. A rockbottom bargain for the taxpayer, privlege of land use, a priceless resource for a pittance.


Y a w n.......


BrerRabbit - 10/3/2019 at 06:56 PM

quote:
Y a w n.......



Sounds like someone's ready for a nice cozy nap.


BIGV - 10/3/2019 at 07:04 PM

quote:
quote:
Y a w n.......



Sounds like someone's ready for a nice cozy nap.


Exactly.


BrerRabbit - 10/3/2019 at 08:28 PM

quote:
quote:

Y a w n.......

Sounds like someone's ready for a nice cozy nap.

Exactly



Gotta agree, the self-evident makes for hohum boring discussion points. Enjoy your beauty sleep.


Stephen - 10/3/2019 at 08:29 PM

I second that motion for this thread too - let it rest


BIGV - 10/3/2019 at 09:31 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:

Y a w n.......

Sounds like someone's ready for a nice cozy nap.

Exactly



Gotta agree, the self-evident makes for hohum boring discussion points. Enjoy your beauty sleep.


Not exactly "sleeping"...or "napping", more of a respite from those who choose to preach the Gospel as they see it and then are bothered when people have the audacity to disagree.


BrerRabbit - 10/3/2019 at 09:55 PM

quote:
Not exactly "sleeping"...or "napping", more of a respite from those who choose to preach the Gospel as they see it and then are bothered when people have the audacity to disagree.


Posting "Yawn" does not exactly strike me as daring and audacious disagreement. It isn't disagreement at all, it is saying that the post you are replying to is boring.

Saying "enjoy your nap" in response to "yawn" does not show a high degree of being bothered. It more shows a concession to your point of boredom.

Spare us your self-righteous kick, your "Lone Defender of Freedom" act, it is contrived, stale, and transparent. We are all middle of the road middle class working squares, man, more similar than different.


Skydog32103 - 10/3/2019 at 11:12 PM

quote:
and then are bothered when people have the audacity to disagree.


when "people"? He was talking to you directly.


Skydog32103 - 10/3/2019 at 11:24 PM

quote:
I find it absolutely hilarious that the Democrats main focus is on impeachment and not concentrating on one Candidate who can win in November 2020.

Maybe Beto can knock on every door in his home sate and attempt to take guns away from Law abiding citizens.

Or Andrew Yang can get started writing checks for $1,000.

Joe Biden could could start reminding himself to go to his Memory Class.

So much work ahead and so little time.


quote:
Damage?..No. But having been and continuing to be a working man, I deeply resent the answer for everything to be the Democratic principle of raising Taxes to support those who can not or more importantly to "those who will not work"......Also, the Democratic conclusion that ALL Illegal immigrants are just looking for a "better life" and that WE should shoulder that cost.

It is my money, if I decide to donate it, that is my choice. Do not reach into MY wallet under the pretense that there are people out there who need help.

...Your argument as presented is that I am criticizing a "Group" of people and your measured response is to chastise me for having done so.


quote:
and then are bothered when people have the audacity to disagree.


So if we "disagree" with your chastizing of Democrats, then you are the real victim here being chastized......unreal.



[Edited on 10/3/2019 by Skydog32103]


BrerRabbit - 10/3/2019 at 11:47 PM

You don't seem to get it. The way Whipping Post works is we say whatever comes to mind, then when others don't like what we said we get to go "Alamo", and be the last proud beleaguered defender of civilization surrounded by bloodthirsty Philistines. Think the last scene of a bunch of Charlton Heston movies, that's the general idea.


OriginalGoober - 10/4/2019 at 12:13 AM

So the whistle-blowerrr met privately with Adam Schifffft and we are told that this was nothing to see here... Where have I heard this before? Oh, could be when Loretta lynch met with Bill Clinton (sic) on the tarmac and discussed grandkids and family. Nothing to do about illegal servers and DNC fave.



MartinD28 - 10/4/2019 at 12:30 AM

quote:
So the whistle-blowerrr met privately with Adam Schifffft and we are told that this was nothing to see here... Where have I heard this before? Oh, could be when Loretta lynch met with Bill Clinton (sic) on the tarmac and discussed grandkids and family. Nothing to do about illegal servers and DNC fave.





Big picture, Goob?

So you think that Trump is just an innocent guy in his day to day transactions with everything from honesty to emoluments to supporting despots over our security agencies to having foreign governments interfere in our elections to being just one big victim in all things he's trying to do as the ultimate & self described stable genius that he is?


2112 - 10/4/2019 at 01:14 AM

quote:
So the whistle-blowerrr met privately with Adam Schifffft and we are told that this was nothing to see here... Where have I heard this before? Oh, could be when Loretta lynch met with Bill Clinton (sic) on the tarmac and discussed grandkids and family. Nothing to do about illegal servers and DNC fave.



We've also seen Trump meet with Putin privately with nobody else in the room. Maybe your right that only sleazy things can happen at these private meetings.


Stephen - 10/4/2019 at 04:10 AM

The Dem Nat’l Convention is next July in Milwaukee
IF the Dems have successfully impeached-&-ousted Trump by then, it will be a festive occasion
IF, however, impeachment proceedings are still going on w/all the castigation/invective etc - it’ll be a 180 the other way - a disaster
They have 8 months to get it done - but it still won’t guarantee anything -

that’s where I think they’re mistaken IMO - believing their guy will get elected b/c voters think that anyone is better than Donald Trump, hence that amped up effort to get him out of there Now & not leave anything to chance in the general election


2112 - 10/4/2019 at 05:49 AM

quote:
The Dem Nat’l Convention is next July in Milwaukee
IF the Dems have successfully impeached-&-ousted Trump by then, it will be a festive occasion
IF, however, impeachment proceedings are still going on w/all the castigation/invective etc - it’ll be a 180 the other way - a disaster
They have 8 months to get it done - but it still won’t guarantee anything -

that’s where I think they’re mistaken IMO - believing their guy will get elected b/c voters think that anyone is better than Donald Trump, hence that amped up effort to get him out of there Now & not leave anything to chance in the general election


The Democrats already know the senate won't remove him. I think they just want to send a message that Trump can't keep breaking the law at will and not getting called out on it. If he gets impeached at least his presidency will go into the history books with an embarrassing mark on it.


cyclone88 - 10/4/2019 at 12:12 PM

quote:
that’s where I think they’re mistaken IMO - believing their guy will get elected b/c voters think that anyone is better than Donald Trump, hence that amped up effort to get him out of there Now & not leave anything to chance in the general election

Impeachment is on the front burner now because he's done such egregious things to TAMPER W/THE 2020 ELECTION - calling on a quid pro quo w/Ukraine's leader and now, publicly & loudly asking Xi & China to do the same. This isn't about pay offs or corruption or Mueller that the Democrats didn't move forward on. It's about a fundamental tenet of US democracy - elections.

Democrats DON'T think that virtually any nominee will beat Trump & they've made a mistake in not identifying & getting behind a single winning candidate. There are political scientists & legal experts who think Republicans are making a mistake in not having a candidate other than Trump at the ready because by blatantly tampering with the upcoming election, he's made himself (& Pence) ineligible to run.


MartinD28 - 10/4/2019 at 01:29 PM

quote:
quote:
that’s where I think they’re mistaken IMO - believing their guy will get elected b/c voters think that anyone is better than Donald Trump, hence that amped up effort to get him out of there Now & not leave anything to chance in the general election

This isn't about pay offs or corruption or Mueller that the Democrats didn't move forward on. It's about a fundamental tenet of US democracy - elections.




I truly don't believe that Republicans care anymore about "fundamental tenet of US democracy - elections."

I don't say this as sarcasm or comedy. I think that the GOP at the highest levels (Barr, Pompeo, Congress) as well as the GOP electorate have turned their heads to just about all things Trump including his blatant abuse of power and dismanteling of the greatest tentet we have as a country as you have described. What have we, as country come to? The framers would turnover in their graves.


cyclone88 - 10/4/2019 at 02:38 PM

quote:
I truly don't believe that Republicans care anymore about "fundamental tenet of US democracy - elections."

I agree and has been said ad nauseum on this site, Trump's acolytes will do anything to hold onto their seats or whatever else they fear by crossing him.

However, election tampering IS a crime and the man has now publicly asked 2 foreign governments to tamper w/his perceived rival in order to affect the 2020 outcome. No transcription errors. No fabrication. No misrepresentation. He did it in front of the press & TV cameras.

Election tampering doesn't need the DOJ to prosecute or Congress to impeach. Any AG in any state can file charges.


Stephen - 10/4/2019 at 02:52 PM

quote:
quote:


Democrats DON'T think that virtually any nominee will beat Trump & they've made a mistake in not identifying & getting behind a single winning candidate. There are political scientists & legal experts who think Republicans are making a mistake in not having a candidate other than Trump at the ready because by blatantly tampering with the upcoming election, he's made himself (& Pence) ineligible to run.


I need to be more knowledgeable about the whole process
At what point would the Trump-Pence ticket be declared ineligible - as a result of impeachment - or by a motion on the floor of the GOP convention - or at some other point in time

Dfrnt subject, Maybe, lacking a single candidate to identify & get behind, the Democrats should endorse a Biden-Bernie Sanders ticket

Bernie is 78 & had a health scare recently - IMO he wouldn’t be able to withstand the rigors of being president, but IMO would be an effective VP - Joe (76) is no youngster either but such a ticket, as of right now, might be the Dems’ best bet toward their ultimate stated goal - not so much Winning the White House, but removing Trump From it

Plus, in tandem w/Bernie, Biden could shoulder the load & provide effective experienced popular leadership - in the same fashion as previous elders like Ike & Ronald Reagan did - just sayin

[Edited on 10/4/2019 by Stephen]


goldtop - 10/4/2019 at 02:52 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
that’s where I think they’re mistaken IMO - believing their guy will get elected b/c voters think that anyone is better than Donald Trump, hence that amped up effort to get him out of there Now & not leave anything to chance in the general election

This isn't about pay offs or corruption or Mueller that the Democrats didn't move forward on. It's about a fundamental tenet of US democracy - elections.




I truly don't believe that Republicans care anymore about "fundamental tenet of US democracy - elections."

I don't say this as sarcasm or comedy. I think that the GOP at the highest levels (Barr, Pompeo, Congress) as well as the GOP electorate have turned their heads to just about all things Trump including his blatant abuse of power and dismanteling of the greatest tentet we have as a country as you have described. What have we, as country come to? The framers would turnover in their graves.


They see the tides changing with immigration no longer coming from western European countries. They see what they call the "browning" of America happening in front of their face and they don't like that those people will most likely vote democratic. So cheating to save the white world from reality and the destruction of our democracy is their chosen direction. It's not just the politicians it's those who voted in those politicians and still stand by their vote that don't care about what US values are. What's written on the statue of liberty. What my father and many of your families fought and died for in WWII. They don't care and I never in my life ever really followed politics that closely until this last election. I never feared for our government or democracy under any other president.

Knowing that DT for the last 40 years has been nothing but a buffoon and then to watch all of the other crap he pulled during his campaign and got elected is when my attention turned. I'd actually like to go back to the other way of living but this is way too important. Those who seem unfazed by all of it and still back him don't care about our democracy. Actions always speak louder than words, and lame justifications are just that. Empty word backed by actions that say I'm all in for this


BIGV - 10/4/2019 at 02:59 PM

quote:
They see the tides changing with immigration no longer coming from western European countries. They see what they call the "browning" of America happening in front of their face and they don't like that those people will most likely vote democratic.


Interesting in that a lot of these immigrants come from countries where the Government takes care of them in the form of social programs and which Party will continue to do this?


goldtop - 10/4/2019 at 03:13 PM

quote:
quote:
They see the tides changing with immigration no longer coming from western European countries. They see what they call the "browning" of America happening in front of their face and they don't like that those people will most likely vote democratic.


Interesting in that a lot of these immigrants come from countries where the Government takes care of them in the form of social programs and which Party will continue to do this?


Thanks for making my point with a lame justification for being all in on whats happening. We aren't those countries and weren't Italy when my family came here. They come to seek the American way of life like my family did. Only in your fearful head are they here to change that. So we get a lame justification for allow Trump to destroy our country


BIGV - 10/4/2019 at 04:06 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
They see the tides changing with immigration no longer coming from western European countries. They see what they call the "browning" of America happening in front of their face and they don't like that those people will most likely vote democratic.


Interesting in that a lot of these immigrants come from countries where the Government takes care of them in the form of social programs and which Party will continue to do this?


Thanks for making my point with a lame justification for being all in on whats happening. We aren't those countries and weren't Italy when my family came here. They come to seek the American way of life like my family did. Only in your fearful head are they here to change that. So we get a lame justification for allow Trump to destroy our country


If you are insinuating that "Color" is the core of immigration concerns, well, you are dead wrong. First and foremost I wish them to follow the LAW when entering this country as my Fiancee and myself are doing. Secondly I wish for all hard working citizens of this country to keep their hard earned money and spen it the way they see fit and not because there are people here who are expecting "help" all while entering Illegally.


Skydog32103 - 10/4/2019 at 04:21 PM

quote:
They see the tides changing with immigration no longer coming from western European countries. They see what they call the "browning" of America happening in front of their face and they don't like that those people will most likely vote democratic. So cheating to save the white world from reality and the destruction of our democracy is their chosen direction.


Color is probably part of the story, but I think it’s also about their perceived threat of immigrants in general, in terms of jobs, especially for the working class folks. This fear is certainly understandable - their livelihood is at stake.


BrerRabbit - 10/4/2019 at 05:10 PM

quote:
First and foremost I wish them to follow the LAW when entering this country as my Fiancee and myself are doing.


"Casado hoy, divorcio mañana!" Married today, divorce tomorrow Oldest immigration trick in the book. Perfectly legal of course. Not only does she get to be a citizen, she'll get half of all your property.

Run away, brother! Warning Will Robinson! Danger! Danger!



[Edited on 10/4/2019 by BrerRabbit]


MartinD28 - 10/4/2019 at 05:11 PM

quote:
quote:
They see the tides changing with immigration no longer coming from western European countries. They see what they call the "browning" of America happening in front of their face and they don't like that those people will most likely vote democratic. So cheating to save the white world from reality and the destruction of our democracy is their chosen direction.


Color is probably part of the story, but I think it’s also about their perceived threat of immigrants in general, in terms of jobs, especially for the working class folks. This fear is certainly understandable - their livelihood is at stake.


Yet in some cases the immigrants are taking the jobs that many Americans choose not to take. It's easier to accept gov't assistance, wear a MAGA hat, and bitch about immigration.


goldtop - 10/4/2019 at 05:38 PM

quote:
quote:
They see the tides changing with immigration no longer coming from western European countries. They see what they call the "browning" of America happening in front of their face and they don't like that those people will most likely vote democratic. So cheating to save the white world from reality and the destruction of our democracy is their chosen direction.


Color is probably part of the story, but I think it’s also about their perceived threat of immigrants in general, in terms of jobs, especially for the working class folks. This fear is certainly understandable - their livelihood is at stake.


Most of the jobs immigrants take are jobs we generally reject, field work, janitorial, restaurant cleaning jobs. Some start their own businesses. Both my grandfathers owned their own business. One was a commercial fisherman(A green card holder) and the other was a fruit merchant. I'm not sure of his status because he died when my dad was 11 in 1933. None of my grandparents spoke English, maybe just a few words. Like most immigrants they lived within their community and tried to service both their community but also try to assimilate and offer their services to all Americans.

There is so much muck that isn't true that are just talking points

quote:
quote:
First and foremost I wish them to follow the LAW when entering this country as my Fiancee and myself are doing.


"Casado hoy, divorcio mañana!" Married today, divorce tomorrow Oldest immigration trick in the book. Perfectly legal of course. Not only does she get to be a citizen, she'll get half of all your property.

Run away, brother! Warning Will Robinson! Danger! Danger!



[Edited on 10/4/2019 by BrerRabbit]


Probably will happen to DT after he's arrested and jailed. Hopefully for BIGV that doesn't happen I wish nothing bad on anyone here...

quote:
quote:
quote:
They see the tides changing with immigration no longer coming from western European countries. They see what they call the "browning" of America happening in front of their face and they don't like that those people will most likely vote democratic. So cheating to save the white world from reality and the destruction of our democracy is their chosen direction.


Color is probably part of the story, but I think it’s also about their perceived threat of immigrants in general, in terms of jobs, especially for the working class folks. This fear is certainly understandable - their livelihood is at stake.


Yet in some cases the immigrants are taking the jobs that many Americans choose not to take. It's easier to accept gov't assistance, wear a MAGA hat, and bitch about immigration.


In most cases. The MAGA's refuse to re-educate themselves to the current needs and want to hold on to old jobs that are going away. Instead of embracing green tech and creating new jobs they resist. Not all green tech will pan out but the cream always rises to the top and then there will be a huge number of jobs along with all the support jobs that get created.

If we could also pass a comprehensiveness infrastructure bill there would be a huge boom in the economy

If your job is a buggy whip maker ya might want to look into a job education program


Skydog32103 - 10/4/2019 at 08:56 PM

quote:
Most of the jobs immigrants take are jobs we generally reject, field work, janitorial, restaurant cleaning jobs.


But we can't ignore perhaps one of the biggest and most important industries - construction and labor, a.k.a. the working man, which are jobs Americans do want and need. Immigrants are heavily involved in the construction and labor industry, which also happens to be the traditional career for the blue collar American. I'm only exploring this side of the argument to play devil's advocate. I'm suggesting anyone in Washington, whether Republican or Democrat, to craft a campaign to address these fears among the American working class, so that they don't feel a need to follow a snake like Trump, who has only preyed on them for his own ego.


goldtop - 10/4/2019 at 10:00 PM

quote:
quote:
Most of the jobs immigrants take are jobs we generally reject, field work, janitorial, restaurant cleaning jobs.


But we can't ignore perhaps one of the biggest and most important industries - construction and labor, a.k.a. the working man, which are jobs Americans do want and need. Immigrants are heavily involved in the construction and labor industry, which also happens to be the traditional career for the blue collar American. I'm only exploring this side of the argument to play devil's advocate. I'm suggesting anyone in Washington, whether Republican or Democrat, to craft a campaign to address these fears among the American working class, so that they don't feel a need to follow a snake like Trump, who has only preyed on them for his own ego.


I guess we can make the same argument for IT, doctors and a lot of other jobs here in the US. I live in an extremely diverse area, The Silicon Valley. I teach a piano class at the local adult ed center and I'm the only white person in the room most semesters. Most of my students are from India and Asian countries as are my private students and the people I do Piano tuning work for. The only time I generally interact with other white people is at family events and home, and my wife is an immigrant from Portugal. Her family came here in 1959 and she is a naturalized citizen. She was a green card holder from the age of 4 until 12. Her family had a sponsor when they came.


PhotoRon286 - 10/5/2019 at 11:27 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
They see the tides changing with immigration no longer coming from western European countries. They see what they call the "browning" of America happening in front of their face and they don't like that those people will most likely vote democratic. So cheating to save the white world from reality and the destruction of our democracy is their chosen direction.


Color is probably part of the story, but I think it’s also about their perceived threat of immigrants in general, in terms of jobs, especially for the working class folks. This fear is certainly understandable - their livelihood is at stake.


Most of the jobs immigrants take are jobs we generally reject, field work, janitorial, restaurant cleaning jobs. Some start their own businesses. Both my grandfathers owned their own business. One was a commercial fisherman(A green card holder) and the other was a fruit merchant. I'm not sure of his status because he died when my dad was 11 in 1933. None of my grandparents spoke English, maybe just a few words. Like most immigrants they lived within their community and tried to service both their community but also try to assimilate and offer their services to all Americans.

There is so much muck that isn't true that are just talking points

quote:
quote:
First and foremost I wish them to follow the LAW when entering this country as my Fiancee and myself are doing.


"Casado hoy, divorcio mañana!" Married today, divorce tomorrow Oldest immigration trick in the book. Perfectly legal of course. Not only does she get to be a citizen, she'll get half of all your property.

Run away, brother! Warning Will Robinson! Danger! Danger!



[Edited on 10/4/2019 by BrerRabbit]


Probably will happen to DT after he's arrested and jailed. Hopefully for BIGV that doesn't happen I wish nothing bad on anyone here...

quote:
quote:
quote:
They see the tides changing with immigration no longer coming from western European countries. They see what they call the "browning" of America happening in front of their face and they don't like that those people will most likely vote democratic. So cheating to save the white world from reality and the destruction of our democracy is their chosen direction.


Color is probably part of the story, but I think it’s also about their perceived threat of immigrants in general, in terms of jobs, especially for the working class folks. This fear is certainly understandable - their livelihood is at stake.


Yet in some cases the immigrants are taking the jobs that many Americans choose not to take. It's easier to accept gov't assistance, wear a MAGA hat, and bitch about immigration.


In most cases. The MAGA's refuse to re-educate themselves to the current needs and want to hold on to old jobs that are going away. Instead of embracing green tech and creating new jobs they resist. Not all green tech will pan out but the cream always rises to the top and then there will be a huge number of jobs along with all the support jobs that get created.

If we could also pass a comprehensiveness infrastructure bill there would be a huge boom in the economy

If your job is a buggy whip maker ya might want to look into a job education program


EGG ZAKK LEE!

If those poor, unemployed coal miners want a safer, more meaningful job, they should learn to install solar panels.


OriginalGoober - 10/9/2019 at 01:00 AM


Good strategy for the President to ignore Pelosi and Schiff and their fishing expedition. See you in court, where evidence matters, not just Russia collusion part 2.


pops42 - 10/9/2019 at 01:40 AM

quote:

Good strategy for the President to ignore Pelosi and Schiff and their fishing expedition. See you in court, where evidence matters, not just Russia collusion part 2.
One day you will learn to tell the difference between alternative facts, and actual facts, but I'm not holding me breath.


Stephen - 10/9/2019 at 03:23 AM

Suppose they impeached Trump AFTER (hypothetically) He Was Re Elected
Wouldn’t re election, by Constitutional bylaws/provisos/language etc - take precedence over impeachment, thus rendering null & void the whole proce$$$$$$$$

Altho RM Nixon was re elected by a huge plurality, only to soon be shown the Watergate door - Trump’s detractors will always be around

still seems as tho the most surefire way to remove Pres. Trump from office is not the impeach-&-ouster route - but at the polls next Nov - vox populi baby

Dems should learn from their mistake in that 1972 election - without a strong candidate, shaky & uncertain VP candidates,......

Overall, no telling how long impeachment will take

[Edited on 10/9/2019 by Stephen]


2112 - 10/9/2019 at 05:39 AM

quote:

Good strategy for the President to ignore Pelosi and Schiff and their fishing expedition.


It is a brilliant strategy to ignore everything. Too bad Clinton didn't think about it with all the fishing explorations the Republicans went on. For now on, we can expect all presidents to feel that they are above the law and ignore all subpoenas and call everything executive privilege. I have to give Trump credit, he has mastered the art of the con.


Skydog32103 - 10/9/2019 at 01:08 PM

quote:
Good strategy for the President to ignore Pelosi and Schiff and their fishing expedition. See you in court, where evidence matters, not just Russia collusion part 2.


Yes, that’s always been the idea the whole time. Impeachment, then trial, Senate decides. Sounds like you are with the Democrats on this one - they want the trial and evidence badly just like you.


Skydog32103 - 10/9/2019 at 01:17 PM

I hate to say it, but if the Democrats didn’t expect and have a plan in place for his defiance, then they don’t really deserve to win. It was obvious to me he’d refuse everything and make them go in there with law enforcement to physically remove him. If they aren’t prepared to do this then they messed up.



[Edited on 10/9/2019 by Skydog32103]


cyclone88 - 10/9/2019 at 02:35 PM

quote:
Suppose they impeached Trump AFTER (hypothetically) He Was Re Elected
[Edited on 10/9/2019 by Stephen]

There are legal & political scholars who consider Trump ineligible to be on the 2020 ballot since he attempted & continues to attempt to TAMPER WITH THAT ELECTION. He doesn't have to be impeached to be kept off the ballot - he asked for China's assistance in investigating his perceived political rival on TV & his personal lawyer talks openly about the requests to China and the Ukraine. Parties in each states decide who is allowed on their ballots.

Although GOP Congressmen may not be willing to cross him, the state party chairs may. I don't think it will happen in all 50 states, but it's an interesting idea.


Bhawk - 10/9/2019 at 03:07 PM

quote:
I hate to say it, but if the Democrats didn’t expect and have a plan in place for his defiance, then they don’t really deserve to win. It was obvious to me he’d refuse everything and make them go in there with law enforcement to physically remove him. If they aren’t prepared to do this then they messed up.


All he’s doing now is watching Fox News and rage tweeting. There’s no hurry.


Stephen - 10/9/2019 at 03:55 PM

quote:
quote:
Suppose they impeached Trump AFTER (hypothetically) He Was Re Elected
[Edited on 10/9/2019 by Stephen]

There are legal & political scholars who consider Trump ineligible to be on the 2020 ballot since he attempted & continues to attempt to TAMPER WITH THAT ELECTION. He doesn't have to be impeached to be kept off the ballot - he asked for China's assistance in investigating his perceived political rival on TV & his personal lawyer talks openly about the requests to China and the Ukraine. Parties in each states decide who is allowed on their ballots.

Although GOP Congressmen may not be willing to cross him, the state party chairs may. I don't think it will happen in all 50 states, but it's an interesting idea.



Yes it is - ineligibility sounds like as plausible a process as impeachment
In that scenario, a vacated GOP ticket would have them scrambling for a replacement ticket - this would enhance chances of the Democratic nominee being elected, it’d seem

Any-way, a lot coming down the political pike in the coming year - surprising Trump’s lawyers aren’t advising him of the hole he’s digging for himself


BrerRabbit - 10/9/2019 at 04:24 PM

quote:
. . .he asked for China's assistance in investigating his perceived political rival on TV & his personal lawyer talks openly about the requests to China and the Ukraine.


Treason. He is a ruckin fussian. Anyone ok with this open betrayal is an asset of hostile foreign powers.


cyclone88 - 10/9/2019 at 04:41 PM

quote:
- surprising Trump’s lawyers aren’t advising him of the hole he’s digging for himself

Remember, Guiliani aka SNL's Kate McKinnon is his lawyer - crazier than Trump.


BrerRabbit - 10/9/2019 at 05:38 PM

quote:
. . .If it smells and tastes like dog sh*t, it probably is. Why can't his supporters smell it too?


Because they think they are being spoon fed fudge swirl ice cream that's why!







OriginalGoober - 10/9/2019 at 11:40 PM

This thread is a living document of the lefts obsession over impeachment. No one here needs to see any evidence apparently to reach this conclusion. You cant change 2016. Hillary may try again though.


OriginalGoober - 10/9/2019 at 11:59 PM


New Quinnipiac poll:


After another week with impeachment in the news, registered voters nationwide are still divided on impeaching and removing President Trump from office, with 45 percent saying he should be impeached and removed and 49 percent opposing the idea, according to a Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pea-ack) University national poll released today.


https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3643


Sang - 10/10/2019 at 12:53 AM

quote:
This thread is a living document of the lefts obsession over impeachment. No one here needs to see any evidence apparently to reach this conclusion. You cant change 2016. Hillary may try again though.




There is plenty of evidence, you just refuse to see it. Trump went on TV and doubled down, saying China should also look for info on Biden along with the Ukraine. Maybe you should look up what is impeachable.....like asking a foreign country for information on an opponent to influence a US election, for starters...


Skydog32103 - 10/10/2019 at 01:51 AM

quote:
This thread is a living document of the lefts obsession over impeachment.


You are feeling the pressure and blowing off steam.


BIGV - 10/10/2019 at 04:21 AM

quote:
Hillary may try again though.


May?


MartinD28 - 10/10/2019 at 12:59 PM

quote:

New Quinnipiac poll:


After another week with impeachment in the news, registered voters nationwide are still divided on impeaching and removing President Trump from office, with 45 percent saying he should be impeached and removed and 49 percent opposing the idea, according to a Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pea-ack) University national poll released today.


https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3643


State Run TV's poll shows more in favor of impeachment - quite a statement coming from a FOX poll.

"Fox News Poll: Record support for Trump impeachment"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-record-support-for-trump-imp eachment


Bhawk - 10/10/2019 at 01:50 PM

Rage tweeting continues. Such a good thing for America that he watches so much TV with his phone in hand. So inspirational.


MartinD28 - 10/10/2019 at 02:27 PM

quote:
Rage tweeting continues. Such a good thing for America that he watches so much TV with his phone in hand. So inspirational.


Such a waste of time - his obsession with TV and tweeting when real work of the country needs to be done as opposed to protecting himself and attacking others which are his greatest attributes.

All of this from the self described stable genius.

Below is a recent post. Note the "that I, in my great and unmatched wisdom"

"As I have stated strongly before, and just to reiterate, if Turkey does anything that I, in my great and unmatched wisdom, consider to be off limits, I will totally destroy and obliterate the Economy of Turkey (I’ve done before!). They must, with Europe and others, watch over..."


goldtop - 10/10/2019 at 02:32 PM

anyone at anytime who thought DT was qualified had/has and will always have their head shoved firmly up their azz...and they simply need to own that fact...EOS for me and everything else is just a lame justification for being an ignorant azzhole

How anyone can justify any of this is beyond rational


BIGV - 10/10/2019 at 03:14 PM

quote:
when real work of the country needs to be done


My taxes are low, Gas is affordable as is food, we're not at war......


cyclone88 - 10/10/2019 at 04:57 PM

quote:
"As I have stated strongly before, and just to reiterate, if Turkey does anything that I, in my great and unmatched wisdom, consider to be off limits, I will totally destroy and obliterate the Economy of Turkey (I’ve done before!). They must, with Europe and others, watch over..."

His great and unmatched wisdom - that leads him to protect his investment of Trump Towers Istanbul. I have to say my first thought when I read that line was of the great & powerful Wizard of Oz.

He must get no sleep based on the time stamps of his tweets.


cyclone88 - 10/10/2019 at 05:04 PM

quote:
There is plenty of evidence, you just refuse to see it. Trump went on TV and doubled down, saying China should also look for info on Biden along with the Ukraine. Maybe you should look up what is impeachable.....like asking a foreign country for information on an opponent to influence a US election, for starters...

So, some of Guiliani's Ukraine "influencers" have been arrested while another is at large. The indictment provides ample evidence of funneling money to Congressman-1 and other campaigns through shell companies and just plain lying.


BIGV - 10/10/2019 at 07:12 PM

quote:
Maybe you will one day find something new to post about instead of bigotry towards a entire party because they have different opinions than you do.


I doubt it. And a point of clarification, I would say this is exactly why we vote.."because they have different opinions than you do"...Is this not why people choose one party over another?...

Why are you NOT a Republican?

If I find fault in almost every issue Democrats stand behind, how does this even remotely affect you?

"Bigotry"?...lol, very similar to another poster here who embraced the jargon "Concentration Camps" for the affair at the border....


Bhawk - 10/10/2019 at 07:14 PM

The decisions being made regarding the Kurds may end up being a much bigger problem for Trump.


BIGV - 10/10/2019 at 07:15 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
How do we get the weapons out of the hands of the bad guys?


The current system allows for all disturbed liberal entitled millenials, who have never had a job, who blame mommy, daddy, and Trump for all of their problems, as well as any other crazy disturbed individual, to buy multiple AR-15s and unlimited ammunition....simply because they don't have a criminal record. You mock a solution to this problem because it won't solve the black market sub-issue....maybe you have no room to be laughing at anyone.


This has been my point all along; sane, Law abiding individuals are not the ones committing these heinous acts. It is a difficult issue with no easy solution; taking guns away from people who do not abuse the Law is not the way to go. Come up with a means to keep these weapons out of the hands of the mentally disturbed and we'll be in agreement.



I don't see any legislation being drafted that the WH might accept especially with phase two of the Coup underway. Americans wanted common sense legislation, its dead now. Along with any help on prescription drug prices. Such is the state of politics in our country now.


quote:
"Americans wanted common sense legislation, its dead now."


Disagree, people who hate guns want this. Americans believe in the Constitution.


Bhawk - 10/10/2019 at 07:18 PM

The House has passed over 400 bills since the midterms that McConnell hasn't brought to the floor of the Senate. No one's interested in "getting anything done," regardless of issue.


Bhawk - 10/10/2019 at 07:19 PM

quote:
anyone at anytime who thought DT was qualified had/has and will always have their head shoved firmly up their azz...and they simply need to own that fact...EOS for me and everything else is just a lame justification for being an ignorant azzhole

How anyone can justify any of this is beyond rational


Easy. Hillary isn't President and no matter what Trump does, legal or illegal, they'll always hate liberals more. There you go.


BIGV - 10/10/2019 at 07:33 PM

quote:
quote:
I don't understand how anyone can support Trump. Period.


quote:
And the other half of the Country does not understand how anyone can Vote in line with Democratic ideals and values. Period.


He spoke for himself by using the word "I". Why would you say, "and the other half of the country" in response?


Simply responding to the poster who used "I" when referencing "Anyone" which in this case is roughly "half the Country"....


MartinD28 - 10/10/2019 at 09:01 PM

quote:
The decisions being made regarding the Kurds may end up being a much bigger problem for Trump.


Doubtful. The GOP Senators may speak out initially against Trump for doing another favor for Putin, but in the end good little boys will fall in line, or they will feel the wrath of the tweet.


tcatanesi - 10/10/2019 at 09:21 PM

Gets more entertaining by the minute.

"Rick Perry subpoenaed."

"GOP congressman 'heartbroken' over President's Syria moves and says he no longer supports Trump."

"Giuliani had lunch with 2 indicted associates at Trump hotel just before their arrest."

The noose is tightening...


2112 - 10/10/2019 at 09:54 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
How do we get the weapons out of the hands of the bad guys?


The current system allows for all disturbed liberal entitled millenials, who have never had a job, who blame mommy, daddy, and Trump for all of their problems, as well as any other crazy disturbed individual, to buy multiple AR-15s and unlimited ammunition....simply because they don't have a criminal record. You mock a solution to this problem because it won't solve the black market sub-issue....maybe you have no room to be laughing at anyone.


This has been my point all along; sane, Law abiding individuals are not the ones committing these heinous acts. It is a difficult issue with no easy solution; taking guns away from people who do not abuse the Law is not the way to go. Come up with a means to keep these weapons out of the hands of the mentally disturbed and we'll be in agreement.



I don't see any legislation being drafted that the WH might accept especially with phase two of the Coup underway. Americans wanted common sense legislation, its dead now. Along with any help on prescription drug prices. Such is the state of politics in our country now.


quote:
"Americans wanted common sense legislation, its dead now."


Disagree, people who hate guns want this. Americans believe in the Constitution.


For those Americans who believe in the Constitution, does that include the system of checks and balances outlined in the constitution, or only the Second Amendment part?


goldtop - 10/10/2019 at 10:35 PM

quote:
quote:
anyone at anytime who thought DT was qualified had/has and will always have their head shoved firmly up their azz...and they simply need to own that fact...EOS for me and everything else is just a lame justification for being an ignorant azzhole

How anyone can justify any of this is beyond rational


Easy. Hillary isn't President and no matter what Trump does, legal or illegal, they'll always hate liberals more. There you go.


LOL...Yes I know but there were people on the right that were qualified and they were all tossed aside for the American buffoon. A man who's been a buffoon for decades and they disregarded those who would serve with dignity for a buffoon a conman, a carnival barker, a criminal.

Yeah for me there's no justification for that vote or the continued support


Skydog32103 - 10/11/2019 at 02:26 AM

Do Trump supporters really want the next Democrat president to do whatever they want and refuse Republican demands? Have they thought this through, or is the high just too good to give up?


Skydog32103 - 10/11/2019 at 02:35 AM

quote:
I doubt it. And a point of clarification, I would say this is exactly why we vote.."because they have different opinions than you do"...Is this not why people choose one party over another?...

Why are you NOT a Republican?

If I find fault in almost every issue Democrats stand behind, how does this even remotely affect you?


Who cares.

quote:
"Bigotry"?...lol, very similar to another poster here who embraced the jargon "Concentration Camps" for the affair at the border....


Do you realize you are proudly proclaiming to be "very similar" to a liberal who compared the affair at the border to concentration camps?


JimSheridan - 10/11/2019 at 03:02 AM



quote:
"Americans wanted common sense legislation, its dead now."


Disagree, people who hate guns want this. Americans believe in the Constitution.

_________________________________________________________

Americans who believe in the Constitution believe in its Emoluments Clause, which Trump has violated.

The Constitution also forbids presidents from making deals with foreign powers for personal gain, which the attempt to gain dirt on Biden clearly is.

THIS WEEK: Attorney Barr met with Rupert Murdoch in secret....Trump betrayed the Kurds to the Turks, with whom he has personal business deals (TRUMP'S WORDS)....Giuliani's henchmen (Trump donors) just got arrested....military leaders are speaking out against Trump....

Once the floodgates really open, it will not surprise anyone who can read that the offenses committed by Trump will stack from here to the moon. His refusal to show his tax returns is an obvious aberration. Anyone who has lived in the Tri-State area has known that his business abuses are plentiful, and the pattern did not step with his presidency. If you're looking for a champion of the Constitution, Trump ain't it.

________________________________________________________________________--

President Trump said that he has a “conflict of interest” in Turkey because of a development there in a 2015 interview.

The interview was resurfaced by Mother Jones after Trump faced criticism for congratulating Turkey’s president Tayyip Erdogan on winning a referendum that increases his power.

“I have a little conflict of interest ’cause I have a major, major building in Istanbul,” Trump said on Breitbart News Daily. “It’s a tremendously successful job. It’s called Trump Towers—two towers, instead of one, not the usual one, it’s two.”

The host of the news show was Breitbart executive Steve Bannon, who then served as an advisor to Trump in the White House.


BrerRabbit - 10/11/2019 at 03:43 AM

quote:
. . .another poster here who embraced the jargon "Concentration Camps" for the affair at the border....


No, I didn't "compare" them or say they were "similar", I referred to them as actual concentration camps, and posted clear references from the Holocaust Memorial Museum that showed that your "affair at the border" fits their criteria for the term "concentration camp." The Holocaust Memorial Museum includes the Japanese Internment camps as concentration camps as well. By the way, our Indian reservation system was an inspiration for Hitler's corralling entire populations. The concentration camp concept is an American invention.

Just posting my own take, not attacking yours, just daring to disagree, even though it seems to bother folks. You are more comfortable with your warmfuzzy "affair at the border" making the crisis sound like a Harlequin Romance, thats cool, whatever it takes for you to process.


[Edited on 10/11/2019 by BrerRabbit]


BIGV - 10/11/2019 at 03:32 PM

quote:
quote:
. . .another poster here who embraced the jargon "Concentration Camps" for the affair at the border....


No, I didn't "compare" them or say they were "similar",


I used the phrase "embrace" ....

quote:
You are more comfortable with your warmfuzzy "affair at the border" making the crisis sound like a Harlequin Romance, thats cool, whatever it takes for you to process.


I believe it to be more "humane" than this reference of yours to the thought of how we are handling "The affair at the border"...

quote:
Just wait, mark my words, this is heading towards concentration camps. Germans who were saying that death camps existed or might exist during WW2 were probably greeted with similar shock.


BrerRabbit - 10/11/2019 at 04:34 PM

quote:
Just wait, mark my words, this is heading towards concentration camps. Germans who were saying that death camps existed or might exist during WW2 were probably greeted with similar shock.


My statement and I stand by it. Thanks for digging that up and running it again. I realize that you find euphemisms for "the affair at the border" more palatable.


goldtop - 10/11/2019 at 06:16 PM

quote:
quote:
Just wait, mark my words, this is heading towards concentration camps. Germans who were saying that death camps existed or might exist during WW2 were probably greeted with similar shock.


My statement and I stand by it. Thanks for digging that up and running it again. I realize that you find euphemisms for "the affair at the border" more palatable.




Have they given you a better label. What do you call places that you cage children, separate them from their family. Tell them to drink toilet water. Deny medicine and basic needs like soap, toothbrushes, tooth paste and clean water. I think concentration camps is an appropriate label when the demographic is concentrated on a certain group of people. Internment camp fits the description pretty well. I think Fox said their summer camps...How many children have died?? 8, 10..??? do we even really know. This isn't about right or left this is basic humanity and respect for people who already lived under harsh conditions and want better and people can justify this?? I hope he ends up at the Hague for world human rights crimes


BrerRabbit - 10/11/2019 at 08:07 PM

Yeah for sure, me I just call a spade a spade. Saves a lot of beating around the bush. No point trying to make things sound better than they are.

[Edited on 10/12/2019 by BrerRabbit]


BIGV - 10/12/2019 at 02:55 AM

quote:
What do you call places that you cage children, separate them from their family.


If you break the law in this country and are arrested, are you separated from your children?...Answer? "Don't break the Law" and a resounding NO, they are NOT all "asylum seekers" not when you ignore a legal point of entry and cross ILLEGALLY.

quote:
Tell them to drink toilet water. Deny medicine and basic needs like soap, toothbrushes, tooth paste and clean water.


Laughable. This is straight out of Congresswoman AOC/BOR's playbook, proved False by Agents on the scene at the time of her ridiculous assertion.


BIGV - 10/12/2019 at 02:56 AM

quote:
quote:
Just wait, mark my words, this is heading towards concentration camps. Germans who were saying that death camps existed or might exist during WW2 were probably greeted with similar shock.


My statement and I stand by it. Thanks for digging that up and running it again. I realize that you find euphemisms for "the affair at the border" more palatable


I do and I repeat, you ought to be ashamed, making any type of comparison to Germany during WWII...


BrerRabbit - 10/12/2019 at 05:37 AM

quote:
I do and I repeat, you ought to be ashamed, making any type of comparison to Germany during WWII...


Yawn . . .


Chain - 10/12/2019 at 12:31 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Just wait, mark my words, this is heading towards concentration camps. Germans who were saying that death camps existed or might exist during WW2 were probably greeted with similar shock.


My statement and I stand by it. Thanks for digging that up and running it again. I realize that you find euphemisms for "the affair at the border" more palatable


I do and I repeat, you ought to be ashamed, making any type of comparison to Germany during WWII...


Speaking of Germany and WWII, is anyone besides Donald Trump still pissed the Kurds didn't participate with the rest of the Allies in the Normandy invasion?

All these years later I never even knew they were asked to assist in the liberation of Europe from the grasps of the Nazi's. Thanks for the history lesson, Donnie! And to think most American's think he's a moron...Maybe he truly is a stable genius as only a genius could pull this one completely out if his @ss when at a loss for words or rationale or understanding of basic history...


Bhawk - 10/12/2019 at 01:43 PM

quote:
quote:
The decisions being made regarding the Kurds may end up being a much bigger problem for Trump.


Doubtful. The GOP Senators may speak out initially against Trump for doing another favor for Putin, but in the end good little boys will fall in line, or they will feel the wrath of the tweet.


Turkey almost hit US troops with artillery yesterday. This situation is very, very real.

Conservatives rightly criticized Obama on Syria. Now, of course, they’re non-principled hypocritical cowards because they are afraid of a blowhard and his phone, but such is life.


MartinD28 - 10/12/2019 at 01:46 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
The decisions being made regarding the Kurds may end up being a much bigger problem for Trump.


Doubtful. The GOP Senators may speak out initially against Trump for doing another favor for Putin, but in the end good little boys will fall in line, or they will feel the wrath of the tweet.


Turkey almost hit US troops with artillery yesterday. This situation is very, very real.

Conservatives rightly criticized Obama on Syria. Now, of course, they’re non-principled hypocritical cowards because they are afraid of a blowhard and his phone, but such is life.


Trump is "thinking" about economic sanctions for Turkey. I guess he'll show them how serious he is. In the meantime, with the recent invasion how many more will die due to Trump's moronic decision?


Bhawk - 10/12/2019 at 01:55 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
The decisions being made regarding the Kurds may end up being a much bigger problem for Trump.


Doubtful. The GOP Senators may speak out initially against Trump for doing another favor for Putin, but in the end good little boys will fall in line, or they will feel the wrath of the tweet.


Turkey almost hit US troops with artillery yesterday. This situation is very, very real.

Conservatives rightly criticized Obama on Syria. Now, of course, they’re non-principled hypocritical cowards because they are afraid of a blowhard and his phone, but such is life.


Trump is "thinking" about economic sanctions for Turkey. I guess he'll show them how serious he is. In the meantime, with the recent invasion how many more will die due to Trump's moronic decision?


The guy admires authoritarians and wants to be in their circle. Imagine what the neocon wing of the GOP would be doing if any Democrat President had literally abandoned an ally on the battlefield...they’d be screaming for...impeachment.


Bhawk - 10/12/2019 at 02:43 PM

2,000 US troops headed to Saudi Arabia to protect the royal family there, but Trump wants to stop the “endless wars.” Then he goes to the mic and says that it’s ok, the Saudis are gonna pay us for it.

Conservatives never say a word, though, because if you make an observation beyond what color tie Trump is wearing, you’re just mad Hillary lost.

Such cowardice easily embraced, morals and ethics easily abandoned by those who believe they are better people than those they so hate.


Chain - 10/12/2019 at 04:46 PM

quote:
2,000 US troops headed to Saudi Arabia to protect the royal family there, but Trump wants to stop the “endless wars.” Then he goes to the mic and says that it’s ok, the Saudis are gonna pay us for it.

Conservatives never say a word, though, because if you make an observation beyond what color tie Trump is wearing, you’re just mad Hillary lost.

Such cowardice easily embraced, morals and ethics easily abandoned by those who believe they are better people than those they so hate.


Good point on the Saudi business, Bhawk.....Notice how quickly Trump's antics shifted that story out of the news cycle. The media should redirect back to this shift in troop strength whenever Trump starts babbling about "The US should never have entered the Middle East."


BrerRabbit - 10/12/2019 at 05:17 PM

quote:
. . . it’s ok, the Saudis are gonna pay us for it.


So the US military is now mercenary?


Chain - 10/12/2019 at 09:48 PM

quote:
quote:
. . . it’s ok, the Saudis are gonna pay us for it.


So the US military is now mercenary?


I wonder what sort of fee a Trillion dollar a year military demands these days? I'm guessing the deed to a 10 acre parcel in downtown Ryadh in the name of Trump, Inc.. Or maybe the deed and guaranteed permitting and the dirt cheap labor the Saudi Royal Family usually imports from around the Middle East to do the actual building of things like large gaudy hotels.....That's my guess.


gina - 10/13/2019 at 08:38 PM

The mainstream news is not reporting the entire truth. Not their fault, they don't know.

In Jis al Shogur, in West Idlib, 200 drones were dispatched to the tv Headquarters of the Turkistani party in al Janoudieh in Jis-al-Shogur to reinforce positions under their control in NW Hama, NE Lattakia. The Turkistani party sent Chinese militants to Sahl-al-Ghab in NW Hama and Kabani in NE Lattakia to stop Syrian advances there. 13,000 foreign fighters are in Sahl-al-Ghab and Jisr-al-Shogur and Lattakia to guard areas by the Turkistani party. (which is based in Ankara).

The problem is the Syrian Army (those so called freedom fighters we were supporting, remember them?) found US and NATO based weapons and missiles in South Idlib in an underground military network in Al-Latameneh, a main base for deploying 5,000 foreign (Isil) fighters. The Syrian Army also found a workshop to manufacture drones and found drones equipped with bombs t oattack the Syrian Army Military Units.

So what is really going on over there?

Al Akhbar reported (10-6-19) that the US wants chaos in Iraq, 3 months ago Washington organized protest rallies in Iraq under the cover of popular demands of the people not being met (poverty and unemployment were the stated protest reasons). Then the US wanted to lead this disenfranchised group to a popular Military Commander to lead the people to a 'salvation' government so the US can strenghthen it's hegemony over Iraq.

Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul Mahdi, implemented a counter plan controlling the security and military blocks controlling the field situation in 18 provinces to calm people down and meet their needs and demands encouraging fearful protesters to work within the framework of current law.

Qais Khazali, Leader Asaib Ahl-al-Haq Resistance Movemenbt said mroe than a month ago on 8/26 some political factions in Iraq joined a joint endeavor with foreign powers aimed at igniting demonstrations. The problem is Trump's Deal of the Century making the current administration abide by their demands. Demonstrations were scheduled to happen in October and have. Al Akhbar says Saudi Arabia handed the plan to Trump to stir unrest in Tehran, Baghdad and Beirut. The tactic is to stimulate the public opinion thru the media to instigate street protests to weaken the government. There is no political leadership in Iraq. Sr. Iraqi cleric Sayed Moqtadr al Sadr and Ammar al Hakim have sought to take the lead and were pushed back by protesters.

Sr. Iraqi Popular Forces Commander Hashd al Shaabi warned the US against military wargames at the border of Syria because it will create a safe passageway for Isil' sinfiltration into Iraq. Hadi al Khorasani revealed they want Isil to infiltrate into the desert of Al-Anbar which is free from security forces. Then when they get ready they can approach Baghdad from the desert for a coup. The Iraqi Governor knows what is going on and stepped down. Olay Fallah al Jazairi stepped down. Coverage was on Al-Sumaria TV. He knows the protests are far beyond the will of the people.

If anyone believes that Mubarak was ousted because 2 million Egyptians just came together on Facebook and decided to to to Tahrir Square, they really do not understand what is going on here, globally.


P.S. All the clandestine stuff, I doubt Trump is aware of it. The rogue military/intelligence folks do their thing and just tell them what they want to. And they are keeping him busy with the impeachment crappola.

[Edited on 10/13/2019 by gina]


BrerRabbit - 10/13/2019 at 08:49 PM

If anyone needs a good My Pillow workout it's you.


Chain - 10/13/2019 at 08:54 PM

Not a surprisingly, a number of ISIS prisoners escaped today. How long before they reach Europe?


BrerRabbit - 10/13/2019 at 09:20 PM

Here ya go Gina you can borrow mine - works wonders for stress anxiety paranoid schizophrenia


MartinD28 - 10/13/2019 at 10:10 PM

quote:
Not a surprisingly, a number of ISIS prisoners escaped today. How long before they reach Europe?


Remember when Ukraine Don said ISIS was defeated. Yet former Never Trumper turned Trump Ball Massager, Lindsey Graham states the following:

Graham Says Trump’s ‘Biggest Lie’ Is of Islamic State’s Defeat

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-07/trump-says-of-syria-it-s -time-u-s-gets-out-of-endless-wars


dutchoneill - 10/13/2019 at 11:28 PM

Impeachment?

Its a campaign strategy, nothing more.

And with the first IG/Fisa report dropping this Friday that will have a lot of folks running for cover.


Skydog32103 - 10/14/2019 at 03:27 PM

quote:
by those who believe they are better people than those they so hate.


For some of his supporters, yes, I'd agree. But for many others, it's driven by a deep-seeded fear of progression.

quote:
...Such cowardice easily embraced, morals and ethics easily abandoned

2,000 US troops headed to Saudi Arabia to protect the royal family there, but Trump wants to stop the “endless wars.” Then he goes to the mic and says that it’s ok, the Saudis are gonna pay us for it.

Conservatives never say a word, though, because if you make an observation beyond what color tie Trump is wearing, you’re just mad Hillary lost.


These sad results show us just how palpable those fears really are.


BIGV - 10/14/2019 at 11:20 PM

quote:
But for many others, it's driven by a deep-seeded fear of progression.


Haha, I love this "theory"..."progress" means the call for impeachment is the answer for everything



quote:
Conservatives never say a word, though, because if you make an observation beyond what color tie Trump is wearing, you’re just mad Hillary lost.


"you’re just mad Hillary lost"

Are you not?


Skydog32103 - 10/15/2019 at 02:33 AM

quote:
Haha, I love this "theory"..."progress" means the call for impeachment is the answer for everything


Laughing in response to a serious post, and if you are criticized for it, let me guess.....you are the victim?


Stephen - 10/15/2019 at 04:26 AM

If no one has stepped forward by early next year, Hillary’s supporters will encourage her to run
However she’s 72 years old, an age too advanced to even campaign vigorously for, much less handle the workload of the presidency
Presidents Reagan & Trump began their 1st terms at 70 yrs old - that IMO should be a cutoff point of sorts IMO, or even 65
LBJ was 61 when he left office, but could easily have passed for 75-80

But yes the impeachment machinery continues to warm up/fine tune in preparation for whenever a panel convenes & the first subpoenas go out etc - OMGosh it’ll be so toxic next year - an impeachment inquiry during a presidential election - we’ll all be victims

[Edited on 10/15/2019 by Stephen]


BIGV - 10/15/2019 at 04:45 AM

quote:
quote:
Haha, I love this "theory"..."progress" means the call for impeachment is the answer for everything


Laughing in response to a serious post, and if you are criticized for it, let me guess.....you are the victim?




Haha...Boy.... I'll give you this, you and I sure have a different view on what it means to be a "victim"..


Skydog32103 - 10/15/2019 at 11:17 AM

quote:
Haha...Boy.... I'll give you this, you and I sure have a different view on what it means to be a "victim"..


Probably, and I'm fine with that.


goldtop - 10/15/2019 at 07:07 PM

I'll ask again. Did anyone really not see this coming?

John Bolton called Rudy a "hand grenade" He also said he wanted nothing to do with the "drug deal. His synopsis of the entire corrupt situation going on with Ukraine. The ambassadors are confirming the whistle blowers account. People are coming forward.

Did anyone not see this all coming? That DT was self impeachable from moment 1.


goldtop - 10/17/2019 at 03:23 AM

Can you imagine the American buffoon actually released this photo of him being owned by Nancy Pelosi



Now off to bed with you and no cake tonight little boy


BrerRabbit - 10/17/2019 at 03:27 AM

quote:
Did anyone really not see this coming?


. . . And that, children, is how they came to be known as "Notsees".


goldtop - 10/17/2019 at 03:28 AM

quote:
Can you imagine the American buffoon actually released this photo of him being owned by Nancy Pelosi



Now off to bed with you and no cake tonight little boy




All roads lead to Putin


goldtop - 10/17/2019 at 03:30 AM

quote:
quote:
Did anyone really not see this coming?


. . . And that, children, is how they came to be known as "Notsees".


Sad isn't it...how so many people can be this gullible


BrerRabbit - 10/17/2019 at 03:31 AM

It is way worse than gullible - it is willful ignorance.


goldtop - 10/17/2019 at 03:39 AM

quote:
It is way worse than gullible - it is willful ignorance.


yes...so true


Skydog32103 - 10/17/2019 at 02:13 PM

quote:
It is way worse than gullible - it is willful ignorance.


I consider many of them to be victims of fraud. And while I do agree it's best to learn how to spot and avoid scams, I don't think it's their fault one bit if these people trusted that he'd respect the office of the Presidency to fulfill his promises to them. Instead he's intentionally creating enemies for his own personal need for attention, making it impossible to get anything done. I'd be really pissed if I were them.

For his supporters who see the risk and issues, but rally behind him anyways, I imagine they are punching back, because they felt under attack during the Obama administration. Ironically, their biggest complaint about Obama was that he was too extreme to be productive in Washington.....so what was their response? "Lets elect an extreme candidate".


BrerRabbit - 10/17/2019 at 02:48 PM

trump has no forehead


cyclone88 - 10/17/2019 at 02:53 PM

quote:
I consider many of them to be victims of fraud. And while I do agree it's best to learn how to spot and avoid scams, I don't think it's their fault one bit if these people trusted that he'd respect the office of the Presidency to fulfill his promises to them. Instead he's intentionally creating enemies for his own personal need for attention, making it impossible to get anything done. I'd be really pissed if I were them.

They're not victims in any sense of the word. Trump showed himself to be EXACTLY who he is before & during the campaign - lying, racist, corrupt, grandiose, narcissist, insulting, greedy, & self-dealing to name a few. Build a wall at Mexico's expense to keep out criminals & rapists we know all Mexicans to be out. That's a campaign promise? From the man who has supporters & close friends who actually ARE criminals, rapists & child traffickers? His own former business associates said the man knew zip about government & couldn't respect boundaries he didn't know existed. Remember his behavior during debates - disrespectful, interrupting, insulting, ranting, & spewing hatred for his opponents? EXACTLY how he behaves in office. He just changed the names - Speaker Pelosi instead of Jeb Bush.

A reasonable person WOULD expect even the most ignorant (and I mean that in the sense of not knowing) Trump voter to be pissed that ANYONE in that office would behave so disrespectfully, wantonly & dangerously.

His active disciples are always going to support him.


BIGV - 10/17/2019 at 03:30 PM

quote:
His active disciples are always going to support him.


Which totals 1.9% "Victims of fraud" less than those who supported other corrupt candidate.


BrerRabbit - 10/17/2019 at 04:07 PM

It is clear by now that Trump is a lemon. Bummer. Should have looked under the hood before driving it off the lot.

You elected an actual raging moron to wreck America.

Buggered by a conman.

Don't blame me I didn't vote for this sh!t.


BrerRabbit - 10/19/2019 at 02:18 AM


Bhawk - 10/19/2019 at 04:35 PM

quote:
It is clear by now that Trump is a lemon. Bummer. Should have looked under the hood before driving it off the lot.

You elected an actual raging moron to wreck America.

Buggered by a conman.

Don't blame me I didn't vote for this sh!t.


Yeah, but...everyone knew who this guy was. Been a pop culture icon since the 80s. The (failed) business dealings, the long history of never paying his bills, the reality TV, all the women, hell, killing off the USFL was a dumbass move when you look back. He’s the same person he’s always been.

People hated Hillary and hate liberals more than anything Trump is or represents. That’s it.

America isn’t wrecked. Truth is wrecked. Right and wrong is wrecked. Nothing matters anymore. Anything can be spun. Anything can be justified. We are a solid 10 years into The Post-Truth Era.

Every single time anyone says “they just can’t handle the fact that Hillary lost” or “they are just trying to reverse the results of the 2016 election,” what is actually being said is...

“Donald Trump can do nothing wrong and is not accountable for anything, no matter what he says or does, and I’ll never stop supporting him. I don’t care, because it doesn’t matter. There’s nothing he can do that is worse than a liberal being President.”

Personally, politics aside, I think he’s an absolutely horrid human being who isn’t interested in being a Republican or a Conservative, it’s just a means for him to serve what he thinks is best for him.

“Well, you know, Bhawk, if you bash him or his base too much, that’s how you get more Trump.”

I don’t care. I’m not voting for him, and if he wins again, so be it. Doesn’t mean I or anyone else has to support it.


PhotoRon286 - 10/19/2019 at 05:20 PM

quote:



Perfect.


BrerRabbit - 10/19/2019 at 05:37 PM

Satisfying image isn't it


goldtop - 10/19/2019 at 09:07 PM

quote:
quote:
It is clear by now that Trump is a lemon. Bummer. Should have looked under the hood before driving it off the lot.

You elected an actual raging moron to wreck America.

Buggered by a conman.

Don't blame me I didn't vote for this sh!t.


Yeah, but...everyone knew who this guy was. Been a pop culture icon since the 80s. The (failed) business dealings, the long history of never paying his bills, the reality TV, all the women, hell, killing off the USFL was a dumbass move when you look back. He’s the same person he’s always been.

People hated Hillary and hate liberals more than anything Trump is or represents. That’s it.

America isn’t wrecked. Truth is wrecked. Right and wrong is wrecked. Nothing matters anymore. Anything can be spun. Anything can be justified. We are a solid 10 years into The Post-Truth Era.

Every single time anyone says “they just can’t handle the fact that Hillary lost” or “they are just trying to reverse the results of the 2016 election,” what is actually being said is...

“Donald Trump can do nothing wrong and is not accountable for anything, no matter what he says or does, and I’ll never stop supporting him. I don’t care, because it doesn’t matter. There’s nothing he can do that is worse than a liberal being President.”

Personally, politics aside, I think he’s an absolutely horrid human being who isn’t interested in being a Republican or a Conservative, it’s just a means for him to serve what he thinks is best for him.

“Well, you know, Bhawk, if you bash him or his base too much, that’s how you get more Trump.”

I don’t care. I’m not voting for him, and if he wins again, so be it. Doesn’t mean I or anyone else has to support it.




There were qualified people on the right that were just completely disregarded some now coming out and saying impeachment is required. Yesterday John Kasich came out in full support of removing him from office. If the party of values would have put John Kasich up as the nominee I would have voted for him over HC.

But again justifications for lies, corruption, and human rights crimes are what they are trying to make the norm. Won't work with me. They didn't grow up with parents where a lie is just that and there is no justification for it. Or his vile behavior none of it is about policy because he has none. When you sell snake oil you get snake oil


MartinD28 - 10/19/2019 at 11:08 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
It is clear by now that Trump is a lemon. Bummer. Should have looked under the hood before driving it off the lot.

You elected an actual raging moron to wreck America.

Buggered by a conman.

Don't blame me I didn't vote for this sh!t.


Yeah, but...everyone knew who this guy was. Been a pop culture icon since the 80s. The (failed) business dealings, the long history of never paying his bills, the reality TV, all the women, hell, killing off the USFL was a dumbass move when you look back. He’s the same person he’s always been.

People hated Hillary and hate liberals more than anything Trump is or represents. That’s it.

America isn’t wrecked. Truth is wrecked. Right and wrong is wrecked. Nothing matters anymore. Anything can be spun. Anything can be justified. We are a solid 10 years into The Post-Truth Era.

Every single time anyone says “they just can’t handle the fact that Hillary lost” or “they are just trying to reverse the results of the 2016 election,” what is actually being said is...

“Donald Trump can do nothing wrong and is not accountable for anything, no matter what he says or does, and I’ll never stop supporting him. I don’t care, because it doesn’t matter. There’s nothing he can do that is worse than a liberal being President.”

Personally, politics aside, I think he’s an absolutely horrid human being who isn’t interested in being a Republican or a Conservative, it’s just a means for him to serve what he thinks is best for him.

“Well, you know, Bhawk, if you bash him or his base too much, that’s how you get more Trump.”

I don’t care. I’m not voting for him, and if he wins again, so be it. Doesn’t mean I or anyone else has to support it.




There were qualified people on the right that were just completely disregarded some now coming out and saying impeachment is required. Yesterday John Kasich came out in full support of removing him from office. If the party of values would have put John Kasich up as the nominee I would have voted for him over HC.

But again justifications for lies, corruption, and human rights crimes are what they are trying to make the norm. Won't work with me. They didn't grow up with parents where a lie is just that and there is no justification for it. Or his vile behavior none of it is about policy because he has none. When you sell snake oil you get snake oil



Haven't seen a tweet yet, but awaiting the "Great One" to tweet that Kasich is weak and overrated or the worst governor in the country.


Skydog32103 - 10/20/2019 at 04:35 AM

quote:
Every single time anyone says “they just can’t handle the fact that Hillary lost” or “they are just trying to reverse the results of the 2016 election,” what is actually being said is...

“Donald Trump can do nothing wrong and is not accountable for anything, no matter what he says or does, and I’ll never stop supporting him. I don’t care, because it doesn’t matter. There’s nothing he can do that is worse than a liberal being President.”


At the end of the day, we should feel fortunate that we're not in their position. Imagine the hell that is your life, if you are that afraid and affected by a different political affiliation. We're sophisticated enough to understand how to navigate life, but they are not.


goldtop - 10/20/2019 at 04:30 PM

I love this picture of Nancy Pelosi sending DT to bed without his cake

Notice the men sitting next to DT looking down in embarrassment as DT cries like the tiny little boychild he is


Chain - 10/20/2019 at 05:46 PM

quote:
I love this picture of Nancy Pelosi sending DT to bed without his cake

Notice the men sitting next to DT looking down in embarrassment as DT cries like the tiny little boychild he is




Yep....It's written all over their and Little Donnie Caligula's face. I wasn't in favor of Nancy Pelosi earning the House Leadership position when the Dem's won back the House nearly two years ago but I will admit she's owned Trump since.

For all his bluster and tough talk about what a stable genius he is, when it comes to Nancy Pelosi he's outmaneuvered and outclassed every time she's in the room with him. She's not intimidated by him as her intellect and understanding of both the government and how Washington works and even how to use the media to her ends trumps Trump's obvious ignorance, stupidity, and uneasiness when she faces off with him.

He's so dependent on his con game that when anyone checks him on it and makes clear they know he's full of sh*t and it won't work that he's sort of left flailing in the wind. Whenever in a room with someone of superior intellect who lets him know he's a dumbf@ck he becomes a paper tiger.

I think part of her craftiness is knowing his die hard supporters will believe and support anything the American Caligula will say and do no matter what she or others do. So instead she plays to the Dems. and more importantly the Independents who will ultimately decide Trump's fate.

[Edited on 10/20/2019 by Chain]


BrerRabbit - 10/20/2019 at 08:42 PM

quote:
Whenever in a room with someone of superior intellect . . .


Meaning any room with another person in it, or even the monkey house at the zoo. The only room he could be in and be intellectually superior to others would be a chicken coop.


goldtop - 10/20/2019 at 10:14 PM

quote:
quote:
I love this picture of Nancy Pelosi sending DT to bed without his cake

Notice the men sitting next to DT looking down in embarrassment as DT cries like the tiny little boychild he is




Yep....It's written all over their and Little Donnie Caligula's face. I wasn't in favor of Nancy Pelosi earning the House Leadership position when the Dem's won back the House nearly two years ago but I will admit she's owned Trump since.

For all his bluster and tough talk about what a stable genius he is, when it comes to Nancy Pelosi he's outmaneuvered and outclassed every time she's in the room with him. She's not intimidated by him as her intellect and understanding of both the government and how Washington works and even how to use the media to her ends trumps Trump's obvious ignorance, stupidity, and uneasiness when she faces off with him.

He's so dependent on his con game that when anyone checks him on it and makes clear they know he's full of sh*t and it won't work that he's sort of left flailing in the wind. Whenever in a room with someone of superior intellect who lets him know he's a dumbf@ck he becomes a paper tiger.

I think part of her craftiness is knowing his die hard supporters will believe and support anything the American Caligula will say and do no matter what she or others do. So instead she plays to the Dems. and more importantly the Independents who will ultimately decide Trump's fate.

[Edited on 10/20/2019 by Chain]


The best part is knowing what she told him at that moment with all those men shamed by the truth. "All paths with you lead to Putin"

Look at them, not one of them saying a word to her looking down in shame and embarrassment of the traitor prez and childish meltdown. I wonder what would happen if we threw water on him ...so what do you think they believe...

Yeah...all paths do lead to Putin...that's what they know


dutchoneill - 10/20/2019 at 10:40 PM

Enjoy the distractions, while the real work continues to be done. That sham of a walkout was just that a sham. Why did the other Dems stay. More FaceTime for the Speaker and the Minority Senator. Gotta keep up appearances.

The IG report has been delayed but it will drop. Then the crying and gnashing of teeth will start.
Asagnge is due out in February assuming he doesn't commit suicide. I suspect he has some stories to tell.
With BCs failing health and Hillarys attack of Tulsi, its just a matter of time til the truths about that Crime Family starts to surface. Remember when the Vatican financial office was raided recently?

Scot away, but pay attention, pain will be dished out eventually.


Chain - 10/20/2019 at 11:47 PM

quote:
Enjoy the distractions, while the real work continues to be done. That sham of a walkout was just that a sham. Why did the other Dems stay. More FaceTime for the Speaker and the Minority Senator. Gotta keep up appearances.

The IG report has been delayed but it will drop. Then the crying and gnashing of teeth will start.
Asagnge is due out in February assuming he doesn't commit suicide. I suspect he has some stories to tell.
With BCs failing health and Hillarys attack of Tulsi, its just a matter of time til the truths about that Crime Family starts to surface. Remember when the Vatican financial office was raided recently?

Scot away, but pay attention, pain will be dished out eventually.


Oh my, so cryptic...Just in time for Halloween...


BrerRabbit - 10/20/2019 at 11:49 PM

Whatever makes your day more exciting. The sad, stale, and boring truth is there is no drama here other than the country regurgitating a halfwit president.


PhotoRon286 - 10/21/2019 at 02:48 AM

quote:
Enjoy the distractions, while the real work continues to be done. That sham of a walkout was just that a sham. Why did the other Dems stay. More FaceTime for the Speaker and the Minority Senator. Gotta keep up appearances.

The IG report has been delayed but it will drop. Then the crying and gnashing of teeth will start.
Asagnge is due out in February assuming he doesn't commit suicide. I suspect he has some stories to tell.
With BCs failing health and Hillarys attack of Tulsi, its just a matter of time til the truths about that Crime Family starts to surface. Remember when the Vatican financial office was raided recently?

Scot away, but pay attention, pain will be dished out eventually.


This post will not hold up well in time.

It will be interesting to see wott Ed will say about it then.


BIGV - 10/21/2019 at 03:05 PM

quote:
Sad isn't it...how so many people can be this gullible


LOL, What is "sad" is this is all the left has and continues to focus on. In the meantime, the debates forge on providing entertainment in a fashion not intended, pure, comedy gold.

quote:
Yesterday John Kasich came out in full support of removing him from office


Just curious...."How will this happen"?


Skydog32103 - 10/21/2019 at 07:42 PM

quote:
LOL, What is "sad" is this is all the left has and continues to focus on.


I propose a new rule in the forum: If you have the urge to type “LOL” in response to someone’s serious post, then you cannot run to Rowland when name-called.


BrerRabbit - 10/21/2019 at 08:55 PM

quote:
. . .in the meantime, the debates forge on providing entertainment in a fashion not intended, pure, comedy gold.


Silly debates indeed - however silly, debates are a lost art, a dying tradition of failing democracy.

At least the left is still capable of engaging itself in debate, while the right is unable to question or challenge anything within its own kamp. Conservatives no longer allow any debate amongst themselves, if they dare to raise any question they are branded traitor.

So let's make fun of those silly liberal debates, to avoid facing the awful truth that we have become fascist.



[Edited on 10/22/2019 by BrerRabbit]


dutchoneill - 10/25/2019 at 07:11 PM

How many Defense Attorneys are there in D.C.?


OriginalGoober - 10/25/2019 at 07:59 PM

quote:
quote:


quote:
Yesterday John Kasich came out in full support of removing him from office





"Small bites" , John, "Small bites.."


goldtop - 10/28/2019 at 03:10 AM

Anyone watching the WS game right now? Seems the entire stadium, after booing him, broke into a chant of "Lock him up". Impeach trump signs being hung from the stands and people behind home plate putting up vets for impeachment signs.

I thought I'd be happy but it actually makes me sad to think that the president of the US can't go to the American past time and be hailed. Can't throw out the first pitch because he's hated and would be booed just like he was when introduced

I can't wait for the spin from the WH tomorrow


pops42 - 10/28/2019 at 03:14 AM


BrerRabbit - 10/28/2019 at 03:59 AM

Historic backlash. It is sad for sure. I feel for the guy as a person, but he brought this on himself.


Skydog32103 - 10/28/2019 at 11:36 AM

If Trump was a half decent person, and treated people with respect, ya know, the bare minimum...then he could have avoided impeachment, gathered more moderate allies in Washington, and become one of the most powerful presidents this country has ever had...maybe THE most powerful in U.S. history. But no, because of his severe personality defects, and piece of garbage personality, Trump supporters granted themselves nothing but gridlock. They spent 8 years during Obama complaining that he was too extreme to get anything done, and they respond by electing someone even more extreme, plus mental illness on top of it. Great selection guys. Way to show them libs. You really showed us who's boss.


MartinD28 - 10/28/2019 at 11:37 AM

quote:
Anyone watching the WS game right now? Seems the entire stadium, after booing him, broke into a chant of "Lock him up". Impeach trump signs being hung from the stands and people behind home plate putting up vets for impeachment signs.

I thought I'd be happy but it actually makes me sad to think that the president of the US can't go to the American past time and be hailed. Can't throw out the first pitch because he's hated and would be booed just like he was when introduced

I can't wait for the spin from the WH tomorrow



Well...he earned this honestly. It's one of the few times one can use the word "honest" in the same sentence with "Trump".


BrerRabbit - 10/28/2019 at 12:51 PM

Sorry but getting booed at a baseball game means America is unhappy with you. Damn he must have felt awful. This is hard to watch going down.


Skydog32103 - 10/28/2019 at 01:41 PM

He wanted the boos so he can play victim and say he’s treated so unfairly. He went to the game just to collect ammunition to use against his detractors....”look how rude people are to me!”

This guy has desperately needed praise his whole life. Voters know he’s only about himself, they know he’s not going to change the country, and they know he shouldn’t be President. They know exactly what he’s about, but it doesn’t matter because he embraces and nurtures their flaws, instead of condemning them. The poor Trump supporter is just so sick and tired of being condemned by society. That’s why he is their savior.


Stephen - 10/28/2019 at 01:58 PM

So the same people who know he shouldn’t be president, also consider him their savor because he embraces & nurtures their flaws
Whatever........
W/disrespect toward none

[Edited on 10/28/2019 by Stephen]


Skydog32103 - 10/28/2019 at 02:28 PM

quote:
So the same people who know he shouldn’t be president, also consider him their savor because he embraces & nurtures their flaws
Whatever........


Yes, exactly. Everyone knows he isn’t qualified, but he “made it ok” to bash and attack people you don’t like. Feels good, don’t it?


BrerRabbit - 10/28/2019 at 03:49 PM


Over it.


gina - 10/29/2019 at 08:31 PM

There is a vote Thursday to make an official inquiry. Nancy likes to stick the pitchfork in awhile before they officially do him.


OriginalGoober - 10/31/2019 at 02:32 AM


What happens when whistle-blower is finally revealed and its determined this person is a stoolie for Schiff?


BrerRabbit - 10/31/2019 at 03:02 AM

What if its revealed that Trump is a stoolie for Putin?

We already know he is a stool for pootin

[Edited on 10/31/2019 by BrerRabbit]


Skydog32103 - 10/31/2019 at 03:25 AM

quote:
What happens when whistle-blower is finally revealed and its determined this person is a stoolie for Schiff?


What an incredible power you have. What’s the secret to knowing the motives of someone you have not identified?


OriginalGoober - 10/31/2019 at 11:31 PM

We'll see who is right. It's pretty obvious concealment must be maintained (the MSM has their marching orders). If this whistle-blower is legit and not a Schiff stoolie I will burn my maga hat.






Skydog32103 - 11/1/2019 at 12:22 AM

How will you know for sure in order to form an accurate judgment?


Chain - 11/1/2019 at 11:18 AM

quote:

What happens when whistle-blower is finally revealed and its determined this person is a stoolie for Schiff?


The whistle-blower has already served his/her purpose in that they prompted the beginning of the investigation and now inquiry. Should this person actually testify it's just more evidence of what has already been corroborated by other people within the White House itself.

You can try and spin the "stoolie for Schiff" Republican/bot line all you wish but the cat is out of the bag and the public knows Trump is guilty of everything he's claiming now he didn't do. The evidence is being corroborated practically daily by people who Trump and his minions placed in positions to witness his illegal acts.

Of course the running scared Republicans in the House and the Senate are too scared for their own jobs and so will not turn on Caligula but this now official inquiry will expose Trump and perhaps sway even more voters to not support him in 2020.


goldtop - 11/1/2019 at 01:59 PM



Personally I don't care if Mark Twain actually said this or not....But!! it speaks volumes about a tRump supporter/voter


Chain - 11/1/2019 at 02:50 PM

Twain is right....But the Independents still on the fence about Trump might be swayed by the mounting evidence shown in the public inquiry enough to show up to the polls in droves and vote against him.

It's all about turnout and so if the Dems turn out like they did in 2018 and enough Independents do too and vote against him, Trump is most likely toast. Even if the impeachment brings out the conservative vote, their numbers are not enough to sway the election back in Trump's favor....


kevdab - 11/1/2019 at 04:01 PM

As much as I would like to see Bone Spurs impeached, it's not going to happen. The Republican Senate won't cross party lines. The voters will have to decide next November. The problem is that the Democrats have nobody that will beat him. Biden isn't so clean in the Ukraine crap, and the country won't go socialist yet.


MartinD28 - 11/1/2019 at 05:37 PM

quote:
quote:

What happens when whistle-blower is finally revealed and its determined this person is a stoolie for Schiff?


The whistle-blower has already served his/her purpose in that they prompted the beginning of the investigation and now inquiry. Should this person actually testify it's just more evidence of what has already been corroborated by other people within the White House itself.

You can try and spin the "stoolie for Schiff" Republican/bot line all you wish but the cat is out of the bag and the public knows Trump is guilty of everything he's claiming now he didn't do. The evidence is being corroborated practically daily by people who Trump and his minions placed in positions to witness his illegal acts.

Of course the running scared Republicans in the House and the Senate are too scared for their own jobs and so will not turn on Caligula but this now official inquiry will expose Trump and perhaps sway even more voters to not support him in 2020.


What goob doesn't seem to get is that what the whistleblower provided has been more than validated and much more has been presented by others to show intent and the workings of a criminal enterprise run by Trump, Barr, Pompeo, and outsider Rudy G.


MartinD28 - 11/1/2019 at 05:45 PM

quote:
As much as I would like to see Bone Spurs impeached, it's not going to happen. The Republican Senate won't cross party lines. The voters will have to decide next November. The problem is that the Democrats have nobody that will beat him. Biden isn't so clean in the Ukraine crap, and the country won't go socialist yet.



I agree that the GOP Senate probably will toss all the facts & evidence aside and give Trump a pass. They all have their tongues up his rear in fear. They have no dignity & sold their souls. The John McCain types no longer are part of the GOP. Look at former Never Trumper, Lindsey Graham. He now totes Trump's golf clubs around and cleans his balls.

On the other hand, in the 2020 election I believe there is so much "wake up and smell the coffee" effect that the American people will reject Trump just like they did in the 2018 midterms. He was a proxy for the GOP House, he said he was on the ballot, and look at the the results. He is disliked and ditrusted by the public. There will be no GOP Senate to intervene in the elections.


gina - 11/1/2019 at 09:22 PM

quote:

What happens when whistle-blower is finally revealed and its determined this person is a stoolie for Schiff?


How do you know it isn't Schifty Goob? The whistleblower supposedly went to Schiff, maybe that is a cover story and the leak is Schiff himself.


Skydog32103 - 11/4/2019 at 06:18 PM

quote:
If this whistle-blower is legit and not a Schiff stoolie I will burn my maga hat.


You kept your red hat for:

1. “Russia if you’re listening, I hope you find those emails, our media will reward you.”
2. Helsinki
3. The Ukraine call transcript

There’s nothing left to salvage.


Jerry - 11/5/2019 at 12:33 AM

quote:
quote:

What happens when whistle-blower is finally revealed and its determined this person is a stoolie for Schiff?


The whistle-blower has already served his/her purpose in that they prompted the beginning of the investigation and now inquiry. Should this person actually testify it's just more evidence of what has already been corroborated by other people within the White House itself.



He will have to be called to testify. The Sixth Amendment calls for the accused to be able to face his accusers.
Quote: to be confronted with the witnesses against him.
Since he/she has "born witness against him" they have to be called to testify. If not, then a Federal Judge could call the whole proceeding moot and void.


Skydog32103 - 11/5/2019 at 03:04 AM

Why would any regular Joe civilian convince themselves they know the "truth" about the whistleblower's character and integrity? How much of an arrogant narcissist do you have to be to believe you have any insight whatsoever.


2112 - 11/5/2019 at 06:40 AM

quote:
Why would any regular Joe civilian convince themselves they know the "truth" about the whistleblower's character and integrity? How much of an arrogant narcissist do you have to be to believe you have any insight whatsoever.


Because if Trump and Fox News tells them something, then they believe it to be true without question. Anybody who says anything bad about Trump is fake news. You've had 3 years to figure this out. You should know this by now. It's the way cults work.


2112 - 11/5/2019 at 06:44 AM

quote:
quote:
If this whistle-blower is legit and not a Schiff stoolie I will burn my maga hat.


You kept your red hat for:

1. “Russia if you’re listening, I hope you find those emails, our media will reward you.”
2. Helsinki
3. The Ukraine call transcript

There’s nothing left to salvage.



I actually appreciate Trump supporters wearing their red hats. I consider it an early warning system.


BIGV - 11/5/2019 at 10:52 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
If this whistle-blower is legit and not a Schiff stoolie I will burn my maga hat.


You kept your red hat for:

1. “Russia if you’re listening, I hope you find those emails, our media will reward you.”
2. Helsinki
3. The Ukraine call transcript

There’s nothing left to salvage.



I actually appreciate Trump supporters wearing their red hats. I consider it an early warning system.


Yep, if only all 62,979,636 people could do it without fear of being physically assaulted.

If only the left were a little more tolerant!...lol


goldtop - 11/5/2019 at 02:42 PM

The red hat is the hat of hate and there is no debate!!!


2112 - 11/5/2019 at 03:24 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
If this whistle-blower is legit and not a Schiff stoolie I will burn my maga hat.


You kept your red hat for:

1. “Russia if you’re listening, I hope you find those emails, our media will reward you.”
2. Helsinki
3. The Ukraine call transcript

There’s nothing left to salvage.



I actually appreciate Trump supporters wearing their red hats. I consider it an early warning system.


Yep, if only all 62,979,636 people could do it without fear of being physically assaulted.

If only the left were a little more tolerant!...lol




Aw yes, playing the victim. Poor oppressed snowflakes.


BIGV - 11/5/2019 at 03:42 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
If this whistle-blower is legit and not a Schiff stoolie I will burn my maga hat.


You kept your red hat for:

1. “Russia if you’re listening, I hope you find those emails, our media will reward you.”
2. Helsinki
3. The Ukraine call transcript

There’s nothing left to salvage.



I actually appreciate Trump supporters wearing their red hats. I consider it an early warning system.


Yep, if only all 62,979,636 people could do it without fear of being physically assaulted.

If only the left were a little more tolerant!...lol




Aw yes, playing the victim. Poor oppressed snowflakes.


Too funny.

Question: "If a person is walking down the street wearing a MAGA hat and another attempts to rip it off their head, which is the 'intolerant snowflake' "?


goldtop - 11/5/2019 at 03:52 PM

Yes please be more tolerant of my Neo-Nazi tendencies. The fact I have no empathy, humanity, ethic, morals. I'm perfectly fine with caged children. Presidents that conspire with foreign governments to harm our elections. Yes you need to be more tolerant of my intolerance, of my hate and foul mouthed racists rants. Of the fact that I'm a raging a$$hole


BIGV - 11/5/2019 at 03:54 PM

quote:
Yes please be more tolerant of my Neo-Nazi tendencies. The fact I have no empathy, humanity, ethic, morals. I'm perfectly fine with caged children. Presidents that conspire with foreign governments to harm our elections. Yes you need to be more tolerant of my intolerance, of my hate and foul mouthed racists rants. Of the fact that I'm a raging a$$hole


I'm not sure you thoroughly understand the meaning of the word "Tolerance".


pops42 - 11/5/2019 at 04:53 PM

quote:
quote:
Yes please be more tolerant of my Neo-Nazi tendencies. The fact I have no empathy, humanity, ethic, morals. I'm perfectly fine with caged children. Presidents that conspire with foreign governments to harm our elections. Yes you need to be more tolerant of my intolerance, of my hate and foul mouthed racists rants. Of the fact that I'm a raging a$$hole


I'm not sure you thoroughly understand the meaning of the word "Tolerance".
Should we be tolerant of a president that puts the interests of Putin's Russia ahead of the interests of the United States?, Big Vee?.


BIGV - 11/5/2019 at 05:37 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Yes please be more tolerant of my Neo-Nazi tendencies. The fact I have no empathy, humanity, ethic, morals. I'm perfectly fine with caged children. Presidents that conspire with foreign governments to harm our elections. Yes you need to be more tolerant of my intolerance, of my hate and foul mouthed racists rants. Of the fact that I'm a raging a$$hole


I'm not sure you thoroughly understand the meaning of the word "Tolerance".
Should we be tolerant of a president that puts the interests of Putin's Russia ahead of the interests of the United States?, Big Vee?.


If you preach tolerance?...Yes


pops42 - 11/5/2019 at 06:25 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Yes please be more tolerant of my Neo-Nazi tendencies. The fact I have no empathy, humanity, ethic, morals. I'm perfectly fine with caged children. Presidents that conspire with foreign governments to harm our elections. Yes you need to be more tolerant of my intolerance, of my hate and foul mouthed racists rants. Of the fact that I'm a raging a$$hole


I'm not sure you thoroughly understand the meaning of the word "Tolerance".
Should we be tolerant of a president that puts the interests of Putin's Russia ahead of the interests of the United States?, Big Vee?.


If you preach tolerance?...Yes
Sounds like YOU preach TREASON, not "tolerance " Big Vee.


Skydog32103 - 11/5/2019 at 07:01 PM

quote:
Sounds like YOU preach TREASON, not "tolerance " Big Vee.


Reminds me of that pic of the two men wearing shirts that say “I’d rather be Russian than Democrat.” I can’t imagine condoning treason because you don’t like other Americans.


MartinD28 - 11/5/2019 at 07:17 PM

quote:
quote:
Sounds like YOU preach TREASON, not "tolerance " Big Vee.


Reminds me of that pic of the two men wearing shirts that say “I’d rather be Russian than Democrat.” I can’t imagine condoning treason because you don’t like other Americans.


Further - just look at the proliferation of hate crimes since Trump took office. He has given plenty of cover for hate crimes. Remember Charlottesvile and Trump's "good people on both sides". He's a natural for polarization and hate.


goldtop - 11/5/2019 at 08:51 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Yes please be more tolerant of my Neo-Nazi tendencies. The fact I have no empathy, humanity, ethic, morals. I'm perfectly fine with caged children. Presidents that conspire with foreign governments to harm our elections. Yes you need to be more tolerant of my intolerance, of my hate and foul mouthed racists rants. Of the fact that I'm a raging a$$hole


I'm not sure you thoroughly understand the meaning of the word "Tolerance".
Should we be tolerant of a president that puts the interests of Putin's Russia ahead of the interests of the United States?, Big Vee?.


If you preach tolerance?...Yes





BIGV - 11/5/2019 at 09:59 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Sounds like YOU preach TREASON, not "tolerance " Big Vee.


Reminds me of that pic of the two men wearing shirts that say “I’d rather be Russian than Democrat.” I can’t imagine condoning treason because you don’t like other Americans.


Further - just look at the proliferation of hate crimes since Trump took office. He has given plenty of cover for hate crimes. Remember Charlottesvile and Trump's "good people on both sides". He's a natural for polarization and hate.


And you hate him for it.


pops42 - 11/6/2019 at 12:58 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Yes please be more tolerant of my Neo-Nazi tendencies. The fact I have no empathy, humanity, ethic, morals. I'm perfectly fine with caged children. Presidents that conspire with foreign governments to harm our elections. Yes you need to be more tolerant of my intolerance, of my hate and foul mouthed racists rants. Of the fact that I'm a raging a$$hole


I'm not sure you thoroughly understand the meaning of the word "Tolerance".
Should we be tolerant of a president that puts the interests of Putin's Russia ahead of the interests of the United States?, Big Vee?.


If you preach tolerance?...Yes





Green shirt guy!


OriginalGoober - 11/7/2019 at 02:06 AM

Don jr. revealed the Schiff Stoollie is Eric Ciaramella.


goldtop - 11/7/2019 at 04:04 AM

I guess you feel proud exposing this man's name without any real evidence. What happens if this man is attacked and its not him? Did you take even one second t think about that?

I guess not because being a trump supporter requires no thought of one's action just justification for protecting your master. No matter if it's a fact or not or if this man's life and his family are now in danger. Again he may not be the person and even if he is it puts him and his family at risk.

But it isn't you that stepped up and need for your name to be held quiet, nope its you and all the supports who always step down


pops42 - 11/7/2019 at 12:04 PM

quote:
Don jr. revealed the Schiff Stoollie is Eric Ciaramella.
don jr. Is a certified imbecile. He belongs behind bars.


Skydog32103 - 11/7/2019 at 01:53 PM

Trump proudly presents himself as boisterous, ill-tempered, arrogant, divisive, and self-destructive to the point where he's knocking himself out of the game. He's the Antonio Brown of Washington.


StratDal - 11/7/2019 at 02:29 PM

quote:


Personally I don't care if Mark Twain actually said this or not....But!! it speaks volumes about a tRump supporter/voter


lol!!! Great meme or whatever they're called these days.


BrerRabbit - 11/7/2019 at 03:46 PM

Hahaha, so true.

I don't know if that is a Mark Twain quote, my bet is it is not - but I am certain of one thing: he would have spelled persuade correctly.

Companion quotes, off the cuff:

"Only an idiot would attempt to persuade an idiot with evidence."

Then, "Only an idiot would say that an idiot would have evidence with which to persuade an idiot."


goldtop - 11/7/2019 at 04:58 PM

quote:
Hahaha, so true.

I don't know if that is a Mark Twain quote, my bet is it is not - but I am certain of one thing: he would have spelled persuade correctly.

Companion quotes, off the cuff:

"Only an idiot would attempt to persuade an idiot with evidence."

Then, "Only an idiot would say that an idiot would have evidence with which to persuade an idiot."




I think the misspell was part of the joke...As though some back woods hick would pronounce the word "Pursuade"


BIGV - 11/8/2019 at 02:50 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Further - just look at the proliferation of hate crimes since Trump took office. He has given plenty of cover for hate crimes. Remember Charlottesvile and Trump's "good people on both sides". He's a natural for polarization and hate.

And you hate him for it.



Yep.


Yep. The hate for the President certainly "Out-Hates" all other hate.

Think about that.


goldtop - 11/8/2019 at 04:14 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Further - just look at the proliferation of hate crimes since Trump took office. He has given plenty of cover for hate crimes. Remember Charlottesvile and Trump's "good people on both sides". He's a natural for polarization and hate.

And you hate him for it.



Yep.


Yep. The hate for the President certainly "Out-Hates" all other hate.

Think about that.



2112 - 11/8/2019 at 05:43 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Further - just look at the proliferation of hate crimes since Trump took office. He has given plenty of cover for hate crimes. Remember Charlottesvile and Trump's "good people on both sides". He's a natural for polarization and hate.

And you hate him for it.



Yep.


Yep. The hate for the President certainly "Out-Hates" all other hate.

Think about that.


Not sure about that. I know a lot of us would like to see him locked in a cage, but most of us don't think we should send his family back to a war torn country.

So, not sure if Trump haters out hate even Trump himself.


Skydog32103 - 11/8/2019 at 09:20 AM

Green shirt guy is PERFECT for this thread.


goldtop - 11/8/2019 at 02:34 PM

quote:
Green shirt guy is PERFECT for this thread.


Green shirt guy is perfect for anything "Mr B3 Licks" BIGV has to say about anything. Absurd would be a gentle response to his comments but green shirt guy hit the note perfectly for his "difference of opinion"


Skydog32103 - 11/8/2019 at 02:36 PM

quote:
"a senior official in the Trump administration" describes President Trump as volatile, incompetent and unfit to be commander in chief, according to excerpts published Thursday by The Washington Post.


The newspaper says the book tells of racist and misogynist behind-the-scenes statements by Mr. Trump and says he "stumbles, slurs, gets confused, is easily irritated, and has trouble synthesizing information."

The Post says the book "paints a chilling portrait of the president as cruel, inept and a danger to the nation he was elected to lead."


Probably not a good idea to make such a person President of the United States. Does the right really want to be associated with this guy for decades to come? I wish they would know that they deserve a lot better than this clown.


goldtop - 11/13/2019 at 02:03 PM

Well here we are at the hearings...I'll ask again did anyone not see this coming? That he'd make it through without scandals and corruption or without being tried for impeachment?



[Edited on 11/13/2019 by goldtop]


Jerry - 11/13/2019 at 03:59 PM

quote:
Well here we are at the hearings...I'll ask again did anyone not see this coming? That he'd make it through without scandals and corruption or without being tried for impeachment?
[Edited on 11/13/2019 by goldtop]


How could we not know that at some point an impeachment effort would be put forth since Dems have been calling for it even before he was inaugurated.


pops42 - 11/13/2019 at 04:30 PM

Yeah, it's a phony witch hunt


Skydog32103 - 11/13/2019 at 04:39 PM

They were doing their job, after hearing “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you find those emails, you’ll be rewarded”. Once he enlisted Russia for help to win, why wouldn’t they mention it? It would be irresponsible to not mention it.


MartinD28 - 11/13/2019 at 04:41 PM

quote:
quote:
Well here we are at the hearings...I'll ask again did anyone not see this coming? That he'd make it through without scandals and corruption or without being tried for impeachment?
[Edited on 11/13/2019 by goldtop]


How could we not know that at some point an impeachment effort would be put forth since Dems have been calling for it even before he was inaugurated.


So, do believe Trump's actions in the Ukraine as presented by the below warrant an impeachment? Certainly most have us have heard or read their statements which are quite compelling.

House Intelligence Committee are Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the former National Security Council director for European affairs; Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union; and Kurt Volker, the former special envoy to Ukraine.

Two State Department officials — Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent and acting ambassador to Ukraine William B. Taylor Jr. — on Wednesday will be the first witnesses to testify publicly.


BIGV - 11/13/2019 at 06:11 PM

quote:
Probably not a good idea to make such a person President of the United States.


Too funny. The same people coming forth and clearly stating that "Impeachment is part of the Constitutional process" are the same one screaming bloody murder about the Electoral College....

Hahaha


Skydog32103 - 11/13/2019 at 06:57 PM

quote:
Hahaha


You hate being working class, but it ain’t my fault or the “Dems”.


BIGV - 11/13/2019 at 07:00 PM

quote:
You hate being working class


Interesting and perhaps you can detail the experiences as you recall them and the many times we've met and discussed my profession and how I feel about it.


Skydog32103 - 11/13/2019 at 07:09 PM

quote:
Interesting and perhaps you can detail the experiences as you recall them and the many times we've met and discussed my profession and how I feel about it.


It was the very first thing you typed when I asked you why you hate Democrats....”because I’m working class and I don’t want people reaching into my pockets....”. Calling Dr. Freud. You make your own bed bro.


BIGV - 11/13/2019 at 07:18 PM

quote:
quote:
Interesting and perhaps you can detail the experiences as you recall them and the many times we've met and discussed my profession and how I feel about it.


It was the very first thing you typed when I asked you why you hate Democrats....”because I’m working class and I don’t want people reaching into my pockets....”. Calling Dr. Freud. You make your own bed bro.


I challenge you to post that phrase.


BrerRabbit - 11/13/2019 at 09:19 PM

quote:
. . . having been and continuing to be a working man, I deeply resent the answer for everything to be the Democratic principle of raising Taxes to support those who can not or more importantly to "those who will not work"......Also, the Democratic conclusion that ALL Illegal immigrants are just looking for a "better life" and that WE should shoulder that cost.

It is my money, if I decide to donate it, that is my choice. Do not reach into MY wallet under the pretense that there are people out there who need help.


Close enough to chalk it up to a paraphrase.


goldtop - 11/13/2019 at 09:54 PM

Actually the people coming forward today were 2 career diplomats appointed by tRump himself. One was a Vietnam war vet 5th in his class at West Point and had served under both Dem and Rep administrations. The other a 25 year public servant working for 3 Rep and 2 Dem administrations in the state department and reported directly to Mike Pompeo

Plus the additional call revealed between tRump and the EU ambassador where after the call was finished the EU ambassador(Who bought the job with a $1million donation) said all that tRump cared about was the investigations he wanted and not the aid

"Hand picked witnesses" they were called...Yeah hand picked by tRump


cyclone88 - 11/13/2019 at 09:58 PM

quote:
Too funny. The same people coming forth and clearly stating that "Impeachment is part of the Constitutional process" are the same one screaming bloody murder about the Electoral College.... Hahaha

Impeachment IS a process rooted in the constitution. Fact.

People citing facts have the ability to be objective. They also have opinions on unrelated topics.

Count me as one who can recognize the fact that impeachment is a constitutional matter and on other topics, I don't give a fig about the electoral college, the weather in Las Vegas, or Rod Stewart's model trains.


pops42 - 11/13/2019 at 10:01 PM

What is funny to me: those who believe what "trump says", when everything he says is **** . Holding back military aid, and soliciting the help of a foreign country to investigate a political rival is against the law, big vee, Jerry, gloober.


KCJimmy - 11/13/2019 at 10:54 PM

Which law is that btw? I thought they got their aid? Don't think they investigated to get it did they?


BIGV - 11/13/2019 at 11:17 PM

quote:
quote:
. . . having been and continuing to be a working man, I deeply resent the answer for everything to be the Democratic principle of raising Taxes to support those who can not or more importantly to "those who will not work"......Also, the Democratic conclusion that ALL Illegal immigrants are just looking for a "better life" and that WE should shoulder that cost.

It is my money, if I decide to donate it, that is my choice. Do not reach into MY wallet under the pretense that there are people out there who need help.


Close enough to chalk it up to a paraphrase.


"Close enough"...Fair enough...I don't care for the word "Class" in any form; therein lay my "objection"...


MartinD28 - 11/13/2019 at 11:24 PM

quote:
quote:
. . . having been and continuing to be a working man, I deeply resent the answer for everything to be the Democratic principle of raising Taxes to support those who can not or more importantly to "those who will not work"......Also, the Democratic conclusion that ALL Illegal immigrants are just looking for a "better life" and that WE should shoulder that cost.

It is my money, if I decide to donate it, that is my choice. Do not reach into MY wallet under the pretense that there are people out there who need help.


Close enough to chalk it up to a paraphrase.


I think Brer just achieved a checkmate.


MartinD28 - 11/13/2019 at 11:27 PM

quote:
Actually the people coming forward today were 2 career diplomats appointed by tRump himself. One was a Vietnam war vet 5th in his class at West Point and had served under both Dem and Rep administrations. The other a 25 year public servant working for 3 Rep and 2 Dem administrations in the state department and reported directly to Mike Pompeo



But Trump would have served if it wasn't for his bone spurs. And besides, he didn't need to serve because he's told us he knows more than the Generals.


BrerRabbit - 11/14/2019 at 05:28 AM


BrerRabbit - 11/14/2019 at 05:54 AM

quote:
. . . he knows more than the Generals


The only general he is going to know about is general population.


goldtop - 11/15/2019 at 04:07 PM

Just tweeted by Bret Bair on Fox

"That was a turning point in this hearing so far. She was already a sympathetic witness & the President’s tweet ripping her allowed Schiff to point it out real time characterizing it as witness tampering or intimidation -adding an article of impeachment real-time. twitter.com/johnrobertsfox…"

tRump just committed witness intimidation in real time...even FOX news says so


tcatanesi - 11/15/2019 at 04:39 PM

He said he's too busy being President to watch the hearings.

Trump lied AGAIN to us.

SAD!


tcatanesi - 11/15/2019 at 05:06 PM

tRUMP associate Roger Stone found guilty.

Ruh roh.


Skydog32103 - 11/15/2019 at 05:08 PM

Wow, not a good day for America.


BrerRabbit - 11/15/2019 at 05:20 PM

Making America Great Again, getting rid of the skumbags.


KCJimmy - 11/15/2019 at 05:32 PM

quote:
tRUMP associate Roger Stone found guilty.

Ruh roh.
He is bad guy. Done a lot of bad things. Seems they caught up with him.


tcatanesi - 11/15/2019 at 05:56 PM

Roger Stone is going to like prison.

He and his wife used to place "racy" ads in publications.

You can't make this stuff up.


goldtop - 11/15/2019 at 08:02 PM

quote:
Making America Great Again, getting rid of the skumbags.



goldtop - 11/15/2019 at 11:58 PM

The latest statement from a state diplomat that heard the call between Sondland and tRump

"Holmes testified that he asked Sondland why Trump did not "give a s--t about Ukraine."

Holmes said Sondland responded Trump only cares about "big stuff." When Holmes said that the Ukraine war was big, Sondland "big stuff" that benefits the President, like the Biden investigation

All in one day...witness intimidation and first hand witnesses testimony to tRump back door dealings


pops42 - 11/16/2019 at 11:14 PM

quote:
Roger Stone is going to like prison.

He and his wife used to place "racy" ads in publications.

You can't make this stuff up.
he has a tattoo of Nixon on his back.


Chain - 11/17/2019 at 12:23 AM

I suppose it's a good thing Roger likes c*ck as he's going to get a lot of it...Until Caligula pardons him.


Skydog32103 - 11/18/2019 at 03:37 PM

How do our fellow Trump supporters feel about the socialism going on right now - your hard-earned tax dollars being used to pay for yet another farmer bailout? I’m all for it! Kudos to Trump for this socialist policy. Let’s keep it going for more improvements. He loves to follow in Obama’s footsteps, doesn’t he?


goldtop - 11/19/2019 at 03:01 PM

Lt Co Vindman's today at the end of his opening statement

"Dad, my sitting here today, in the US Capitol talking to our elected officials is proof that you made the right decision forty years ago to leave the Soviet Union ... Do not worry, I will be fine for telling the truth."


Skydog32103 - 11/19/2019 at 05:07 PM

Question - if Trump and Rudy thought the Bidens were guilty of a crime, then why didn’t they ask THE UNITED STATES to investigate them?


goldtop - 11/19/2019 at 05:30 PM

The US Army is relocating Lt Col Vindman and his family to a secure facility due to the threats from Trump and his supporters. This man is a Purple heart recipient and the GOP have tried to say he has duel loyalties.

When you can't defend the crime attack the witness. Today is a great day for the truth and for the conspiracy idiots to find a new roll of tinfoil for their next hat trick

[Edited on 11/19/2019 by goldtop]


MartinD28 - 11/19/2019 at 06:09 PM

quote:
The US Army is relocating Lt Col Vindman and his family to a secure facility due to the threats from Trump and his supporters. This man is a Purple heart recipient and the GOP have tried to say he has duel loyalties.

When you can't defend the crime attack the witness. Today is a great day for the truth and for the conspiracy idiots to find a new roll of tinfoil for their next hat trick

[Edited on 11/19/2019 by goldtop]


Ron Johnson, U.S Senator from Wisconsin is amongst Trump's attack dogs going after Lt Col Vindman. Vindman is a true American hero who has to be drug through the mud by draft dodgers and Trump sycophants / conspiracy theory nuts. This is so shameful to witness this happen to a Purple Heart Recipient. Below from the "esteemed" senator:

“A significant number of bureaucrats and staff members within the executive branch have never accepted President Trump as legitimate and recent his unorthodox style and intrusion on to his turf. They react by leak together press and participating in the ongoing effort sabotage his policies and if possible remove him from office. It is entirely possible that Vindman fits this profile .”


2112 - 11/19/2019 at 06:35 PM

Wow, Nunes is worthless. No questions. He definately doesn't want any answers.


goldtop - 11/19/2019 at 08:39 PM

quote:
Wow, Nunes is worthless. No questions. He definately doesn't want any answers.


He's rambin' on right now. It's amazing how low they will go to save tRump like there isn't someone better qualified among the GOP. Someone with some dignity, morals, ethic, humanity, intelligence. Nope scrap the whale shi$ off the bottom of the ocean paint it orange put some blond hair on it make it speak like the idiot at the end of the bar that screams at the TV. Yeah...they like the way he talks....


KCJimmy - 11/19/2019 at 08:45 PM

You all seem to forget who works for who here. Vindman is no hero. He is insubordinate at best. He should be relieved of his duties, yes fired. So he doesn't agree with Trumps Policies. Quiting is the only honorable thing he could have done. Instead he will assist the dims with their effort to remove a President because he thinks the President's actions were inappropriate? INAPPROPRIATE the new high crime or misdemeanor?

No time to list all of Obama's inappropriate moves, let alone Clintons. What is bad is these witnesses WILL NOT acknowledge that Trump has done more for Ukraine in 3 yrs than Obama did in 8. They just want him out of office and they know they don't have the votes to do it properly, VIA ELECTION.

"I'm afraid if we don't impeach this president that he will get re-elected" Rep AL Green (D)

[Edited on 11/19/2019 by KCJimmy]


adhill58 - 11/19/2019 at 09:10 PM

quote:
You all seem to forget who works for who here. Vindman is no hero. He is insubordinate at best. He should be relieved of his duties, yes fired. So he doesn't agree with Trumps Policies. Quiting is the only honorable thing he could have done. Instead he will assist the dims with their effort to remove a President because he thinks the President's actions were inappropriate? INAPPROPRIATE the new high crime or misdemeanor?

No time to list all of Obama's inappropriate moves, let alone Clintons. What is bad is these witnesses WILL NOT acknowledge that Trump has done more for Ukraine in 3 yrs than Obama did in 8. They just want him out of office and they know they don't have the votes to do it properly, VIA ELECTION.

"I'm afraid if we don't impeach this president that we will get re-elected" Rep AL Green (D)



What you are saying is that you would be completely satisfied with a Democrat doing what Trump is accused of and has basically admitted. Right?

Here is the thing - the Republicans in the Senate would rather take a dump in their own lunchbuckets than vote to convict Trump when this goes over to them. As a result, Trump isn't going anywhere before the election. This episode is rightfully being investigated right now, as I am sure you would want to happen if a Democrat was attempting to do the same thing. The Senate will save Trump. You'll get to vote for him again if you believe he is so great.

Vindman reported something that he believes to be illegal to the appropriate lawyer in the White House. He IS doing his job. He works for the United States, not the Trump Campaign.

Amazing that Trump supporters can bash people who have actually served the country and sacrificed while cheering for a grifter who has only ever had self-serving interests. Pretty sick!


Skydog32103 - 11/19/2019 at 09:30 PM

quote:
You all seem to forget who works for who here. Vindman is no hero. He is insubordinate at best. He should be relieved of his duties, yes fired. So he doesn't agree with Trumps Policies. Quiting is the only honorable thing he could have done. Instead he will assist the dims with their effort to remove a President because he thinks the President's actions were inappropriate? INAPPROPRIATE the new high crime or misdemeanor?

No time to list all of Obama's inappropriate moves, let alone Clintons. What is bad is these witnesses WILL NOT acknowledge that Trump has done more for Ukraine in 3 yrs than Obama did in 8. They just want him out of office and they know they don't have the votes to do it properly, VIA ELECTION.

"I'm afraid if we don't impeach this president that we will get re-elected" Rep AL Green (D)


And Clinton got impeached for it....probably not the best comparison to make. Then the Senate overturned it, which is exactly what's going to happen here. You don't know these peole, why are you letting it get to you?





[Edited on 11/19/2019 by Skydog32103]


KCJimmy - 11/19/2019 at 09:34 PM

quote:
What you are saying is that you would be completely satisfied with a Democrat doing what Trump is accused of and has basically admitted. Right?
Correct. You don't impeach over policy differences. We had 2 1/2 years of Mueller investigating 2016 election interference, to no avail. But how dare Trump ask Ukraine to look into the EXACT same subject from a different angle.

Here is the thing - there are Democrats in the House that would rather take a dump in their own lunch buckets than vote to impeach Trump right before an election. So I KNOW Trump isn't going anywhere. It is questionable as to whether this thing even gets to the Senate. And if it does, 3 of the top candidates on the Dem side will have to take time off to participate. They are GAURANTEEING Trumps victory in 2020. I say they know they can't beat him anyway so WTH?

The truth will come out eventually and no doubt there will be some other urgent reason to get rid of Trump by any means other than an election.

"I'm afraid if we don't impeach this president that he will get re-elected" Rep AL Green (D)


Skydog32103 - 11/19/2019 at 09:43 PM

quote:
But how dare Trump ask Ukraine to look into


Why not have his own country, the United States of America, to investigate an American, to protect an American election? You all seem to be a bunch of traitors, having foreign governments do you dirty work on other Americans - that's all it is. Hate to break it to you. When you calm down, I'd love for you to explain what set you off. He's a Purple Heart who you've never heard of before, yet he is so under your skin that you've formed character judgments about him. Strange.


BrerRabbit - 11/19/2019 at 10:41 PM

quote:
They are GAURANTEEING Trumps victory in 2020.


That explains why the Redhats are so overjoyed right now.


2112 - 11/19/2019 at 11:28 PM

quote:
You all seem to forget who works for who here. Vindman is no hero. He is insubordinate at best. He should be relieved of his duties, yes fired. So he doesn't agree with Trumps Policies. Quiting is the only honorable thing he could have done. Instead he will assist the dims with their effort to remove a President because he thinks the President's actions were inappropriate? INAPPROPRIATE the new high crime or misdemeanor?



You seem to forget that Vindman and all other US government employees loyalty should be to defend the US, not necessarily the president. I seem to remember when one of the generals criticized Obama we heard the Republicans cheer. Well, I never got the impression during the testimony that Vindman was out to get President Trump. He wrote the talking points for the president so the president could do a good job. He seemed to me to be a loyal American patriot, doing his job the best he could, and I never got the impression that he lied or tried to mislead.


OriginalGoober - 11/20/2019 at 01:22 AM

quote:
quote:
They are GAURANTEEING Trumps victory in 2020.


That explains why the Redhats are so overjoyed right now.


As soon as I see evidence of a crime I will let you know


2112 - 11/20/2019 at 01:47 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
They are GAURANTEEING Trumps victory in 2020.


That explains why the Redhats are so overjoyed right now.


As soon as I see evidence of a crime I will let you know


You are so deep in the cult that there is NOTHING that Trump could do that you would consider a crime.


MartinD28 - 11/20/2019 at 01:58 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
They are GAURANTEEING Trumps victory in 2020.


That explains why the Redhats are so overjoyed right now.


As soon as I see evidence of a crime I will let you know


So you are in the "investigation" business now?

You may want to read the below, as it might expand your horizons:

"You don't have to break a law to be impeached. Trump's defenders need a better argument.
The Founders made clear that an impeachable or convictable offense need not be a crime. Hamilton said it applied to 'the misconduct of public men.' "

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/10/28/abuse-of-power-enough-to- impeach-no-crimes-necessary-column/2479066001/


BrerRabbit - 11/20/2019 at 02:28 AM

quote:
You are so deep in the cult that there is NOTHING that Trump could do that you would consider a crime.


Just wait til Trump leaves office, for whatever reason - even if he rules until 2024 - there will be Redhats cracking all over the place as it becomes clear that democracy survived and the Thousand Year Trump Dynasty won't happen after all.


cyclone88 - 11/20/2019 at 03:45 AM

quote:
Just wait til Trump leaves office, for whatever reason - even if he rules until 2024 - there will be Redhats cracking all over the place as it becomes clear that democracy survived and the Thousand Year Trump Dynasty won't happen after all.

There's always Barron.


pops42 - 11/20/2019 at 04:03 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
They are GAURANTEEING Trumps victory in 2020.


That explains why the Redhats are so overjoyed right now.


As soon as I see evidence of a crime I will let you know
As soon as I see evidence of: Truth, competence, integrity, decency, I'll let you know.


BrerRabbit - 11/20/2019 at 05:03 AM

quote:
There's always Barron.



Skydog32103 - 11/20/2019 at 11:43 AM

Bueller? Anyone on why he didn't ask his own country to conduct an investigation into the Bidens?


Skydog32103 - 11/20/2019 at 02:23 PM

It’s amazing when you think about it, that Trump could’ve had everything. He could have been the most powerful president we’ve ever seen. But he did the one thing you can never get away with in this country. He challenged the United States to a fight. Any time in our history, we have destroyed those who have challenged us. For him to come in the office, and undermine every branch of our government and its workers, while recruiting help from foreign governments and praising dictators, crossed a line. And he’s going to pay severely for this by the controls we have in place to defeat tyranny or any other domestic terrorism. I think NY will put him behind bars in a orange jumpsuit whenever he leaves office.

He will probably win again, but he attracted too much heat to be able to do anything. Might as well pick someone new - his brand is stained badly. It’s history....on the wrong side.





[Edited on 11/20/2019 by Skydog32103]


adhill58 - 11/20/2019 at 02:38 PM

quote:
quote:
What you are saying is that you would be completely satisfied with a Democrat doing what Trump is accused of and has basically admitted. Right?
Correct. You don't impeach over policy differences. We had 2 1/2 years of Mueller investigating 2016 election interference, to no avail. But how dare Trump ask Ukraine to look into the EXACT same subject from a different angle.

Here is the thing - there are Democrats in the House that would rather take a dump in their own lunch buckets than vote to impeach Trump right before an election. So I KNOW Trump isn't going anywhere. It is questionable as to whether this thing even gets to the Senate. And if it does, 3 of the top candidates on the Dem side will have to take time off to participate. They are GAURANTEEING Trumps victory in 2020. I say they know they can't beat him anyway so WTH?

The truth will come out eventually and no doubt there will be some other urgent reason to get rid of Trump by any means other than an election.

"I'm afraid if we don't impeach this president that he will get re-elected" Rep AL Green (D)



There are all kinds of policy differences. So far, this is the only one known to involve a bribery scheme. To act like the inquiry is about a policy difference is a real stretch. Why are there not 300 impeachment inquiries? There are at least that many policy differences.

The interference wasn't just investigated by Mueller. All 17 of the US intelligence agencies have agreed that it was Russia. Dan Coates, Trump's own Director of National Intelligence has stated many times that it was Russia. The Ukraine "angle' is a conspiracy theory. I don't care if someone in Ukraine looks into it, but that should not be what our aid money to them is conditioned on.

Why would you want to get an 18th opinion from a foreign country? Do you not trust the guy that Trump hired to be the DNI originally? I am no fan of Dan Coates, but I think I would rather trust him over someone in Ukraine. Also, why are you okay with the president chasing conspiracy theories rather than "saving clean beautiful coal" or some other crazy promise to the voters?


goldtop - 11/20/2019 at 02:56 PM

Sondland is throwing everyone under the bus this morning...admitted there was extortion to get aid




pops42 - 11/20/2019 at 03:15 PM

quote:
You all seem to forget who works for who here. Vindman is no hero. He is insubordinate at best. He should be relieved of his duties, yes fired. So he doesn't agree with Trumps Policies. Quiting is the only honorable thing he could have done. Instead he will assist the dims with their effort to remove a President because he thinks the President's actions were inappropriate? INAPPROPRIATE the new high crime or misdemeanor?

No time to list all of Obama's inappropriate moves, let alone Clintons. What is bad is these witnesses WILL NOT acknowledge that Trump has done more for Ukraine in 3 yrs than Obama did in 8. They just want him out of office and they know they don't have the votes to do it properly, VIA ELECTION.

"I'm afraid if we don't impeach this president that he will get re-elected" Rep AL Green (D)

[Edited on 11/19/2019 by KCJimmy]
Col.Vindman is a decorated Iraq war vet, a honorable and respectable American, the exact polar opposite of trump. So in your mind he should have just kept quiet and said nothing of the crimes he witnessed trump commit?. You and trump are both bottom feeders, traitorous weasels.


goldtop - 11/20/2019 at 03:36 PM

“Everyone was in the loop.”— Gordon Sondland


goldtop - 11/20/2019 at 04:29 PM

Sondland just got to a core issue - Trump didn’t want the Biden investigation, just the *announcement* of the investigation: “(Pres. Zelensky) had to announce the investigations. He didn’t actually have to do them.”

Yep he just wanted gas to drive his engine during the campaign and use the media against Biden

Pops42 anyone who support DT is scum....the justifications for why I couldn't care less about. The fact that they like any of it speaks volumes to the lack of values, morals and ethics any of them have.

Remember they like the way he "Talks"....like a 3 year old having a tantrum


2112 - 11/20/2019 at 04:41 PM

Very damaging testimony to Trump. This guy was obviously friends to Trump, and reminded me of Trump in many ways. The fact that they were primarily concerned with an announcement of an investigation, without actually having to do one, blows a hole in the argument that this was about corruption and not about getting dirt on a political rival.


MartinD28 - 11/20/2019 at 05:28 PM

quote:
Sondland is throwing everyone under the bus this morning...admitted there was extortion to get aid




Sondland has a wise lawyer who must have told him now is the time to fess up. They saw what lying to Congress does - look at what happended to Roger Stone. Sondland decided he didn't want to share soap with Roger so he spoke the truth...finally.

I can only imagine Trump attacking him like the other attacks he does on a daily basis. Then it will be that Trump barely knows him. In the meantime, Rudy and Pompeo are fine guys.


cyclone88 - 11/20/2019 at 05:39 PM

quote:
It’s amazing when you think about it, that Trump could’ve had everything. He could have been the most powerful president we’ve ever seen. [Edited on 11/20/2019 by Skydog32103]

No, his personality won't allow him to see opportunity and play a long game w/his ego in check. I still contend that Trump was as surprised as anyone (well, Melania was more surprised) that he won & he was completely unprepared to assume office. I actually thought he would resign in frustration after 2 weeks once he learned there were constraints on his power unlike his kingdom at Trump Tower. He simply cannot control himself nor take the advice of others who have actual expertise. He persists in his "stable genius" delusion & his only defense to criticism/accusations translates as paranoia.


tcatanesi - 11/20/2019 at 06:00 PM

Nunes is tRump's lap dog.

Nunes is almost as bad as tRump.

SAD!


cyclone88 - 11/20/2019 at 08:54 PM

quote:
Sondland has a wise lawyer who must have told him now is the time to fess up. They saw what lying to Congress does - look at what happended to Roger Stone. Sondland decided he didn't want to share soap with Roger so he spoke the truth...finally.

Sondland seems to be a smart guy on his own. He's a SUCCESSFUL hotel owner (as opposed to Trump), money manager, and active Republic (w/a short foray for the Dems) and he's not blinded by Trump as so many of the others are. He could've easily decided that his 1/2 truths and amendments in previous testimony wasn't going to cut it & now is the time to not only fess up but note that his testimony, including today's, was hindered by a lack of documents he repeatedly requested but didn't receive from DJT. He, indeed, threw all of them, including Trump & Pence, under the bus. His contempt for Rudy Who? was palpable even in his written remarks.

Prior to getting into the swamp of the Trump administration - even as an off-site ambassador - he appeared respectable. Successful hotel portfolio, philanthropist, married to the same woman for decades w/2 kids, & solid State of Washington citizen. He's got more $ than Trump, a far better reputation, & isn't a career politician. He's exactly the kind of guy who can say "No, I'm not going to be ruined or jailed" for Trump because of his wealth & position. He's not like a lot of the others who need Trump for his "base" or political blessing. He can come out of this tainted but not ruined. His lawyers wrote an excellent opening statement that reminded everyone of his Holocaust roots straight thru to his "shock" at having a shyster like Rudy Who? meddling in foreign relations.


BrerRabbit - 11/20/2019 at 09:12 PM

quote:
. . .he did the one thing you can never get away with in this country. He challenged the United States to a fight.


And he tried to divide us. Won't happen.


adhill58 - 11/20/2019 at 09:29 PM

quote:


Pops42 anyone who support DT is scum....the justifications for why I couldn't care less about. The fact that they like any of it speaks volumes to the lack of values, morals and ethics any of them have.

Remember they like the way he "Talks"....like a 3 year old having a tantrum


I have to agree. If you think this guy is even remotely acceptable to be president, you have a real problem... no matter how bad you hate Hillary Clinton. He was not qualified and refuses to attempt to learn what it takes to do the job. He literally has a compulsion to lie and cheat.


MartinD28 - 11/20/2019 at 09:46 PM

quote:
quote:
Sondland is throwing everyone under the bus this morning...admitted there was extortion to get aid




Sondland has a wise lawyer who must have told him now is the time to fess up. They saw what lying to Congress does - look at what happended to Roger Stone. Sondland decided he didn't want to share soap with Roger so he spoke the truth...finally.

I can only imagine Trump attacking him like the other attacks he does on a daily basis. Then it will be that Trump barely knows him. In the meantime, Rudy and Pompeo are fine guys.


Right on target and expected as with anyone in the Trump orbit who speaks truth against Trump. Of course Trump doesn't know him well. If Sondland would have backed Trump today, Trump would have claimed how close they were and that Sondland was an honorable man... just like Rudy, Lev Parnas, and Igor Fruman.

"President Donald Trump said Gordon Sondland “is not a man I know well,” as his ambassador to the European Union delivered bombshell testimony to the House impeachment panel Wednesday."

https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trump-i-dont-know-ambassador-gordon-so ndland-but-his-impeachment-testimony-proves-my-innocence


cyclone88 - 11/20/2019 at 11:15 PM

quote:
Right on target and expected as with anyone in the Trump orbit who speaks truth against Trump. Of course Trump doesn't know him well.

He's pathetically predictable. It's not even a strategy; it's a reflex. In September, Trump said Sondland was "a really good man and great American." Today, it's "I barely know the guy."


BrerRabbit - 11/21/2019 at 12:53 AM

quote:
. . . in the Trump orbit . . .


Around Uranus?


adhill58 - 11/21/2019 at 02:06 PM

quote:
quote:
. . . in the Trump orbit . . .


Around Uranus?



Thanks for the moment of levity. Uranus jokes never fail!


Has anybody on here used "Im-Peach Fesitival" yet? Too easy?


PhotoRon286 - 11/21/2019 at 11:01 PM

Dr. Hill kicked gop ass today.


MartinD28 - 11/21/2019 at 11:28 PM

quote:
Dr. Hill kicked gop ass today.

Yet GOP Congressmen still out there advancing conspiracy theories after all that came out today & this week.


pops42 - 11/21/2019 at 11:34 PM

quote:
quote:
Dr. Hill kicked gop ass today.

Yet GOP Congressmen still out there advancing conspiracy theories after all that came out today & this week.
And goober will be parroting them soon.


goldtop - 11/22/2019 at 01:54 AM

quote:
quote:
Dr. Hill kicked gop ass today.

Yet GOP Congressmen still out there advancing conspiracy theories after all that came out today & this week.


Like little boys and girls who's parents never told the the story of the boy that cried wolf....

Where do they get this stuff and more why do they believe such nonsense what is the end game

Freekin chicken little the sky is falling....sad sacks

for who...Probably the most useless, worthless, piece of human excrement ever born in this country

[Edited on 11/22/2019 by goldtop]


BrerRabbit - 11/22/2019 at 01:57 AM

quote:
Uranus jokes never fail!


Did I say Uranus? I meant to say Urfanus.


Bill_Graham - 11/22/2019 at 07:22 PM

Interesting that John Bolton starting tweeting again and seemed to imply his account had been locked by the White House.

We have now liberated the Twitter account, previously suppressed unfairly in the aftermath of my resignation as National Security Advisor. More to come.....

Based on some of the testimony of others who had contact with him he was a vocal critic of Giuliani and the whole Ukraine dumpster fire but has refused to testify voluntarily. Why do I get the feeling he would welcome a subpoena so he could claim he had to testify?

Now that is a man who knows where the skeletons are buried.


dutchoneill - 11/22/2019 at 08:32 PM

quote:
quote:
Enjoy the distractions, while the real work continues to be done. That sham of a walkout was just that a sham. Why did the other Dems stay. More FaceTime for the Speaker and the Minority Senator. Gotta keep up appearances.

The IG report has been delayed but it will drop. Then the crying and gnashing of teeth will start.
Asagnge is due out in February assuming he doesn't commit suicide. I suspect he has some stories to tell.
With BCs failing health and Hillarys attack of Tulsi, its just a matter of time til the truths about that Crime Family starts to surface. Remember when the Vatican financial office was raided recently?



Scot away, but pay attention, pain will be dished out eventually.


This post will not hold up well in time.

It will be interesting to see wott Ed will say about it then.




If it does Ron will you acknowledge it?

December 9th starts the fun.


BrerRabbit - 11/22/2019 at 09:33 PM

quote:
Remember when the Vatican financial office was raided recently?


Sorry I'm not up to speed on news about the Vatican. Care to highlight a couple of points?


PhotoRon286 - 11/23/2019 at 08:07 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Enjoy the distractions, while the real work continues to be done. That sham of a walkout was just that a sham. Why did the other Dems stay. More FaceTime for the Speaker and the Minority Senator. Gotta keep up appearances.

The IG report has been delayed but it will drop. Then the crying and gnashing of teeth will start.
Asagnge is due out in February assuming he doesn't commit suicide. I suspect he has some stories to tell.
With BCs failing health and Hillarys attack of Tulsi, its just a matter of time til the truths about that Crime Family starts to surface. Remember when the Vatican financial office was raided recently?



Scot away, but pay attention, pain will be dished out eventually.


This post will not hold up well in time.

It will be interesting to see wott Ed will say about it then.




If it does Ron will you acknowledge it?

December 9th starts the fun.


What has been put out so far, some minor problems on paperwork for one renewal on Carter Page but the whole investigation was legit, no deep state FBI hates trump crap.

Possible criminal charges against the lawyer who changed some documents which had no bearing on the overall probe.

And we've learned devin nunes himself went to Ukraine looking for dirt.

Doesn't look very good for him or the trump crime syndicate.


goldtop - 11/23/2019 at 10:15 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Enjoy the distractions, while the real work continues to be done. That sham of a walkout was just that a sham. Why did the other Dems stay. More FaceTime for the Speaker and the Minority Senator. Gotta keep up appearances.

The IG report has been delayed but it will drop. Then the crying and gnashing of teeth will start.
Asagnge is due out in February assuming he doesn't commit suicide. I suspect he has some stories to tell.
With BCs failing health and Hillarys attack of Tulsi, its just a matter of time til the truths about that Crime Family starts to surface. Remember when the Vatican financial office was raided recently?

Scot away, but pay attention, pain will be dished out eventually.


This post will not hold up well in time.

It will be interesting to see wott Ed will say about it then.




If it does Ron will you acknowledge it?

December 9th starts the fun.


What has been put out so far, some minor problems on paperwork for one renewal on Carter Page but the whole investigation was legit, no deep state FBI hates trump crap.

Possible criminal charges against the lawyer who changed some documents which had no bearing on the overall probe.

And we've learned devin nunes himself went to Ukraine looking for dirt.

Doesn't look very good for him or the trump crime syndicate.


When tRump gets his chance in front of the Senate he'll probably bring Alice in wonderland, Chicken little and the little boy who cried wolf to testify that they all ran down the rabbit hole because the sky is falling and he just saw a wolf in sheep's clothing and it happens to be Devin Nunez


[Edited on 11/23/2019 by goldtop]


Chain - 11/24/2019 at 04:25 PM

So is it safe to assume that Nunez is bucking for a gig in the Trump administration? Especially since the constituents from his district may not exactly be impressed with all the water caring he's done for Caligula and oust him in 2020?

I do wonder how any of Nunez's constituents can't see that his blind loyalty to Trump usurps any service or loyalty to them. He's sold his soul...


MartinD28 - 11/24/2019 at 09:02 PM

quote:
So is it safe to assume that Nunez is bucking for a gig in the Trump administration? Especially since the constituents from his district may not exactly be impressed with all the water caring he's done for Caligula and oust him in 2020?

I do wonder how any of Nunez's constituents can't see that his blind loyalty to Trump usurps any service or loyalty to them. He's sold his soul...


He's in a solid red district that loves Russia, Trump, and Nunes.


2112 - 11/25/2019 at 02:07 AM

quote:
quote:
So is it safe to assume that Nunez is bucking for a gig in the Trump administration? Especially since the constituents from his district may not exactly be impressed with all the water caring he's done for Caligula and oust him in 2020?

I do wonder how any of Nunez's constituents can't see that his blind loyalty to Trump usurps any service or loyalty to them. He's sold his soul...


He's in a solid red district that loves Russia, Trump, and Nunes.


And meth. His district is the meth capital of California. They love their meth, tractors, and Trump.


BrerRabbit - 11/25/2019 at 02:12 AM


PhotoRon286 - 11/29/2019 at 02:49 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Enjoy the distractions, while the real work continues to be done. That sham of a walkout was just that a sham. Why did the other Dems stay. More FaceTime for the Speaker and the Minority Senator. Gotta keep up appearances.

The IG report has been delayed but it will drop. Then the crying and gnashing of teeth will start.
Asagnge is due out in February assuming he doesn't commit suicide. I suspect he has some stories to tell.
With BCs failing health and Hillarys attack of Tulsi, its just a matter of time til the truths about that Crime Family starts to surface. Remember when the Vatican financial office was raided recently?



Scot away, but pay attention, pain will be dished out eventually.


This post will not hold up well in time.

It will be interesting to see wott Ed will say about it then.




If it does Ron will you acknowledge it?

December 9th starts the fun.


https://news.yahoo.com/huge-blow-trump-doj-watchdog-202544788.html?soc_src= strm&soc_trk=fb

Oh, snap.

And for the "Clinton body bags" conspiracies clowns, add this to epstein's mysterious death.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/former-deutsche-bank-executive-who-ove rsaw-trumps-loans-dies-by-suicide/

Funny, don't putin's enemies also have a high rate of suicide???

Asking for a comrade.

Coincidence that he handles trump's loans, I'm sure.

[Edited on 11/29/2019 by PhotoRon286]


goldtop - 12/2/2019 at 01:25 AM

Just a Sunday night thought from FOX News

NEW: Fox's Andrew Napolitano says there's enough evidence to impeach Trump for bribery, election law violations, obstruction of justice and witness tampering.

"The evidence of his impeachable behavior at this point, in my view, is overwhelming."

He'll probably get fired tomorrow for telling the truth to the new Jones Town Crowd


2112 - 12/2/2019 at 01:40 AM

quote:
Just a Sunday night thought from FOX News

NEW: Fox's Andrew Napolitano says there's enough evidence to impeach Trump for bribery, election law violations, obstruction of justice and witness tampering.

"The evidence of his impeachable behavior at this point, in my view, is overwhelming."

He'll probably get fired tomorrow for telling the truth to the new Jones Town Crowd


I remember the good old days when the Fox News crowd used to love Napolitano, and they used to post his opinions right here on this board to make a point all the time. Now, since he refuses to wear a red hat, they hate him and say his opinions are meaningless. Really fun to watch from the sidelines.


goldtop - 12/5/2019 at 02:20 PM

PELOSI: “I am asking our chairmen to proceed with articles of impeachment”


OriginalGoober - 12/6/2019 at 02:33 AM

I have to agree with Lindsey on this:

Salem witches got better deals than this': Graham

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/salem-witches-got-better-deals-than -this-graham-rages-at-pelosis-impeachment-announcement


goldtop - 12/6/2019 at 03:30 AM

quote:
I have to agree with Lindsey on this:

Salem witches got better deals than this': Graham

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/salem-witches-got-better-deals-than -this-graham-rages-at-pelosis-impeachment-announcement




Another green shirt guy moment from the GOP



Or as Bugs would say "What a maroon"


Bhawk - 12/6/2019 at 04:13 AM

quote:
I have to agree with Lindsey on this:

Salem witches got better deals than this': Graham

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/salem-witches-got-better-deals-than -this-graham-rages-at-pelosis-impeachment-announcement




The Salem “witches” were all executed.


2112 - 12/6/2019 at 05:48 AM

quote:
I have to agree with Lindsey on this:

Salem witches got better deals than this': Graham

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/salem-witches-got-better-deals-than -this-graham-rages-at-pelosis-impeachment-announcement




Well, they should have. Unlike Trump, they did nothing wrong.

And as Bhawk pointed out, the Salam witches were executed. Whether he deserves it or not, that will never happen to Trump. The worse that can happen is that he goes down in the history books as the worst president ever, which is likely anyway.


OriginalGoober - 12/7/2019 at 12:51 AM


A liberal darling, legal scholar Johnathan Turley does not see what Adam and Chuck and Nancy see:

Turley: Democrats offering passion over proof in Trump impeachment

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/473171-turley-democrats-offering-pass ion-over-proof-in-trump-impeachment


PhotoRon286 - 12/8/2019 at 05:01 PM

quote:

A liberal darling, legal scholar Johnathan Turley does not see what Adam and Chuck and Nancy see:

Turley: Democrats offering passion over proof in Trump impeachment

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/473171-turley-democrats-offering-pass ion-over-proof-in-trump-impeachment


Funny thing, when he was testifying about impeaching Bill Clinton he said exactly the opposite.

He was also factually wrong on some of his claims so.......

keep grasping for straws, goober.


PhotoRon286 - 12/8/2019 at 05:03 PM

quote:
Trump will be impeached for multiple ethics violations, and several of his staff will be facing prison sentences for various crimes.


From 1/20/17


Sang - 12/9/2019 at 03:22 PM

It's December 9, has the fun begun yet?


BIGV - 12/9/2019 at 03:27 PM

"This has nothing to do with the upcoming Election and everything to do with our Constitution" -Nancy Pelosi

Right!...And "Free Speech" is OK as long as it is not "Hate speech"

And guns are OK as long as they not.....

And the Electoral College only works when the Democrats win....


Sang - 12/9/2019 at 03:32 PM

...and freedom of religion only applies to Christians.....

...and All men are created equal doesn't apply to any minority....

So what's your point?


BIGV - 12/9/2019 at 03:43 PM

quote:
...and freedom of religion only applies to Christians.....

...and All men are created equal doesn't apply to any minority....

So what's your point?


Nancy Pelosi and the drudge that spews from her surgically altered face.

We all know this is about slowing down President Trump's return to the White House.

When there is no viable Candidate the bag of last resorts is endless


Skydog32103 - 12/9/2019 at 03:56 PM

quote:
the drudge that spews from her surgically altered face.


What a gentleman.


Sang - 12/9/2019 at 04:14 PM

You mean like holding up a supreme court nominee for a year because there is an election ....

Or not bringing any of the 389 bills passed by the house for a vote in the senate?


Skydog32103 - 12/9/2019 at 04:20 PM

quote:
We all know this is about slowing down President Trump's return to the White House.


This is what you believe, not what “we all know”.

quote:
When there is no viable Candidate the bag of last resorts is endless


“I don’t think any of the candidates are viable.”, you meant.


MartinD28 - 12/9/2019 at 04:48 PM

quote:
You mean like holding up a supreme court nominee for a year because there is an election ....

Or not bringing any of the 389 bills passed by the house for a vote in the senate?




Laws & The Constitution take a backseat to Trump's reelection. That darn Constitution seems to just get in the way especially when the opposing party has "no real viable candidate".

[Edited on 12/9/2019 by MartinD28]


pops42 - 12/9/2019 at 06:00 PM

quote:
"This has nothing to do with the upcoming Election and everything to do with our Constitution" -Nancy Pelosi

Right!...And "Free Speech" is OK as long as it is not "Hate speech"

And guns are OK as long as they not.....

And the Electoral College only works when the Democrats win....


Name ONE time the electoral college swayed a presidential election in favor of a democratic candidate?.


Skydog32103 - 12/9/2019 at 06:07 PM

quote:
And "Free Speech" is OK as long as it is not "Hate speech"


Nobody is going to arrest you for it, don’t worry.



[Edited on 12/9/2019 by Skydog32103]


BrerRabbit - 12/9/2019 at 08:15 PM

quote:
. . . the opposing party has "no real viable candidate".


There are some stellar people runnng. Gabbard / Yang would be my choice for a great ticket. Biden / Harris would work, tho Biden will be a hold-my-nose vote just to get that thing out of the White House.


Chain - 12/9/2019 at 10:09 PM

quote:
quote:
. . . the opposing party has "no real viable candidate".


There are some stellar people runnng. Gabbard / Yang would be my choice for a great ticket. Biden / Harris would work, tho Biden will be a hold-my-nose vote just to get that thing out of the White House.


Buttigeg is not a bad choice either....Possibly the moderate the Dems. need to get the White House back. Even as the VP choice....


BIGV - 12/9/2019 at 10:25 PM

quote:
Yang


As soon as I get my first $1,000...I'm buying guns!


PhotoRon286 - 12/9/2019 at 10:27 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Enjoy the distractions, while the real work continues to be done. That sham of a walkout was just that a sham. Why did the other Dems stay. More FaceTime for the Speaker and the Minority Senator. Gotta keep up appearances.

The IG report has been delayed but it will drop. Then the crying and gnashing of teeth will start.
Asagnge is due out in February assuming he doesn't commit suicide. I suspect he has some stories to tell.
With BCs failing health and Hillarys attack of Tulsi, its just a matter of time til the truths about that Crime Family starts to surface. Remember when the Vatican financial office was raided recently?



Scot away, but pay attention, pain will be dished out eventually.


This post will not hold up well in time.

It will be interesting to see wott Ed will say about it then.




If it does Ron will you acknowledge it?

December 9th starts the fun.


What has been put out so far, some minor problems on paperwork for one renewal on Carter Page but the whole investigation was legit, no deep state FBI hates trump crap.

Possible criminal charges against the lawyer who changed some documents which had no bearing on the overall probe.

And we've learned devin nunes himself went to Ukraine looking for dirt.

Doesn't look very good for him or the trump crime syndicate.


Well well well

The report is out and confirms no political bias to launch the investigation.

Will you acknowledge it???


BrerRabbit - 12/10/2019 at 01:19 AM

quote:
quote:
Yang


As soon as I get my first $1,000...I'm buying guns!



Gabbard too: Universal basic income is a good idea to help provide that security so people can make choices that they want to see. - Tulsi Gabbard

Guns are always a fun choice! Or guitars. However it sounds like you don't need the assistance. I am sure there will be an opt-out, leave it for folks who can use it.
1k$ won't buy much other than basic survival. I imagine a lot of folks will get off the street - be able to find a cheap room and get a shower, change of clothes, a decent night's sleep - and be better able to present themselves to employers.

Richard Nixon was the first to seriously consider universal basic income. Keeps folks in the game, like pass Go get $200.


BrerRabbit - 12/10/2019 at 02:00 AM

quote:
Remember when the Vatican financial office was raided recently?


Am still waiting to hear details on this. Sounds very illuminatious. I get a spooky frisson from all that deep dark vatican stuff, catacombs and all that. Big Dario Argento film buff here.

Reminds me of a dumb joke I made up:

What was the Shroud of Turin?

The Da Vinci Kodak




goldtop - 12/10/2019 at 02:18 PM

2 Articles of impeachment introduced today...We're making America great again. There will be an asterisk next to that man's name forever.


[Edited on 12/10/2019 by goldtop]


BIGV - 12/10/2019 at 03:21 PM

quote:
1k$ won't buy much other than basic survival.


It sure will buy Cigarettes, Alacohol & Drugs


BrerRabbit - 12/10/2019 at 04:11 PM

quote:
It sure will buy Cigarettes, Alacohol & Drugs


Conundrum: The benefit of the doubt vs the doubt of the benefit.


BIGV - 12/10/2019 at 04:39 PM

quote:
quote:
It sure will buy Cigarettes, Alcohol & Drugs


Conundrum: The benefit of the doubt vs the doubt of the benefit.


Interesting logic (or the lack of it) please elaborate on how well the current Welfare state is working in that the "need" to throw more money into this well is going to make things better.

Let's TAX at higher rate so that a few more can "benefit"....

No thanks

Andrew Yang...How anyone can take this idea seriously is beyond belief....


BrerRabbit - 12/10/2019 at 04:56 PM

quote:
How anyone can take this idea seriously is beyond belief.


Tulsi Gabbard takes it seriously. She is also a strict environmentalst.

Thanks for the heads up on Gabbard - when you postd that you liked her I went to her website, looks great. If she ends up running I will vote for Gabbard.









Skydog32103 - 12/10/2019 at 05:21 PM

quote:
please elaborate on how well the current Welfare state is working in that the "need" to throw more money into this well is going to make things better.

Let's TAX at higher rate so that a few more can "benefit"....


People would have to qualify for Yang’s program, by losing a job through automation - the idea being that this type of job loss is tougher to overcome since their trade doesn’t exist anymore. For those still working in labor jobs, seems beneficial to invest in such protection. Also, for working class folks who are W2 employees, there wouldn’t be any additional taxes being taken out. Your paycheck would be the same.


cyclone88 - 12/10/2019 at 05:24 PM

quote:
2 Articles of impeachment introduced today...We're making America great again. There will be an asterisk next to that man's name forever.


That man thinks the asterisk means he's extra special.

The articles are narrowly drawn w/ample evidence that make them indefensible. Of course, the GOP Senators will do the equivalent of jury nullification & ignore the facts. Kind of like the OJ Simpson trial.


Bhawk - 12/10/2019 at 05:26 PM

quote:
quote:
How anyone can take this idea seriously is beyond belief.


Tulsi Gabbard takes it seriously. She is also a strict environmentalst.

Thanks for the heads up on Gabbard - when you postd that you liked her I went to her website, looks great. If she ends up running I will vote for Gabbard.



Unelectable as a Democrat (which she is not, no matter what she says), will have to make inroads as an independent.


BIGV - 12/10/2019 at 05:31 PM

quote:
quote:
How anyone can take this idea seriously is beyond belief.


Tulsi Gabbard takes it seriously. She is also a strict environmentalst.

Thanks for the heads up on Gabbard - when you postd that you liked her I went to her website, looks great. If she ends up running I will vote for Gabbard.


My pleasure. She hits me as being articulate and savvy, but has lost me with this....


BIGV - 12/10/2019 at 05:32 PM

quote:
quote:
please elaborate on how well the current Welfare state is working in that the "need" to throw more money into this well is going to make things better.

Let's TAX at higher rate so that a few more can "benefit"....


People would have to qualify for Yang’s program, by losing a job through automation - the idea being that this type of job loss is tougher to overcome since their trade doesn’t exist anymore. For those still working in labor jobs, seems beneficial to invest in such protection. Also, for working class folks who are W2 employees, there wouldn’t be any additional taxes being taken out. Your paycheck would be the same.


Where does the $$ to pay these people come from?


BrerRabbit - 12/10/2019 at 05:45 PM

quote:
My pleasure. She hits me as being articulate and savvy, but has lost me with this....


So guess you are back to frustration with all possible options in 2020. Libertarians look piss poor now that GJ is gone.

Or just vote for Trump, out of spite.

[Edited on 12/10/2019 by BrerRabbit]


Skydog32103 - 12/10/2019 at 05:54 PM

quote:
Where does the $$ to pay these people come from?


Same as unemployment.


BIGV - 12/10/2019 at 05:58 PM

quote:
quote:
Where does the $$ to pay these people come from?


Same as unemployment.


Just say it..."TAX Dollars"?


Skydog32103 - 12/10/2019 at 06:05 PM

quote:
Just say it..."TAX Dollars"?


Just like your border wall that you support. If you are opposed to new programs because it will require tax dollars, then how will we ever implement new programs?


gina - 12/10/2019 at 06:50 PM

quote:
quote:
Yang


As soon as I get my first $1,000...I'm buying guns!


I'm getting that Costco freeze dried food good for 25 years and hiding it someplace for when the country is in shambles, civil war erupts and we all have to get off the grid.


gina - 12/10/2019 at 06:57 PM

quote:
It's December 9, has the fun begun yet?


Very soon.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-ignored-and-injured-the-natio nal-interest-democrats-charge-in-impeachment-articles/ar-BBY1N3F

WASHINGTON — House Democratic leaders on Tuesday formally called for President Trump’s removal from office, asserting that he “ignored and injured the interests of the Nation” in two articles of impeachment that charged him with abusing his power and obstructing Congress.


https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/10/us/politics/articles-impeach ment-document-pdf.html

Donald J. Trump has abused the powers of the Presidency, in that:

Using the powers of his high office, President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election. He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations that would benefit his reelection, harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and influence the 2020 United States Presidential election to his advantage. President Trump also sought to pressure the Government of Ukraine to take these steps by condi-tioning official United States Government acts of significant value to Ukraine on its public announcement of the investigations. President Trump engaged in this scheme or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of personal political benefit. In so doing, President Trump used the powers of the Presidency in a manner that compromised the national security of the United States and undermined the integrity of the United States democratic process. He thus ignored and injured the interests of the Nation.

President Trump engaged in this scheme or course of conduct through the following means:

(1) President Trump — acting both directly and through his agents within and outside the United States Government — corruptly solicited the Government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations into —

(A) a political opponent, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.; and

(B) a discredited theory promoted by Russia alleging that Ukraine — rather than Russia — interfered in the 2016 United States Presidential election.

(2) With the same corrupt motives, President Trump — acting both directly and through his agentswithin and outside the United States Government — conditioned two official acts on the public announcements that he had requested —

(A) the release of $391 million of United States taxpayer funds that Congress had appropriated on a bipartisan basis for the purpose of providing vital military and security assistance to Ukraine to oppose Russian aggression and which President Trump had ordered suspended; and

(B) a head of state meeting at the White House, which the President of Ukraine sought to demonstrate continued United States support for the Government of Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression.

(3) Faced with the public revelation of his actions, President Trump ultimately released the military and security assistance to the Government of Ukraine, but has persisted in openly and corruptly urging and soliciting Ukraine to undertake investigations for his personal political benefit.

These actions were consistent with President Trump’s previous invitations of foreign interference in United States elections.

In all of this, President Trump abused the powers of the Presidency by ignoring and injuring national security and other vital national interests to obtain an improper personal political benefit. He has also betrayed the Nation by abusing his high office to enlist a foreign power in corrupting democratic elections.

Wherefore President Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law. President Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.

ARTICLE II: OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS

The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment” and that the President “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”. In his conduct of the office of President of the United States — and in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed —

Donald J. Trump has directed the unprecedented, categorical, and indiscriminate defiance of subpoenas issued by the House of Representatives pursuant to its “sole Power of Impeachment”. President Trump has abused the powers of the Presidency in a manner offensive to, and subversive of, the Constitution, in that:

The House of Representatives has engaged in an impeachment inquiry focused on President Trump’s corrupt solicitation of the Government of Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 United States Presidential election. As part of this impeachment inquiry, the Committees undertaking the investigation served subpoenas seeking documents and testimony deemed vital to the inquiry from various Executive Branch agencies and offices, and current and former officials.

In response, without lawful cause or excuse, President Trump directed Executive Branch agencies, offices, and officials not to comply with those subpoenas. President Trump thus interposed the powers of the Presidency against the lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives, and assumed to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the “sole Power of Impeachment” vested by the Constitution in the House of Representatives.

President Trump abused the powers of his high office through the following means:

(1) Directing the White House to defy a lawful subpoena by withholding the production of documents sought therein by the Committees.

(2) Directing other Executive Branch agencies and offices to defy lawful subpoenas and withhold the production of documents and records from the Committees — in response to which the Department of State, Office of Management and Budget, Department of Energy, and Department of Defense refused to produce a single document or record.

(3) Directing current and former Executive Branch officials not to cooperate with the Committees — in response to which nine Administration officials defied subpoenas for testimony, namely John Michael “Mick” Mulvaney, Robert B. Blair, John A. Eisenberg, Michael Ellis, Preston Wells Griffith, Russell T. Vought, Michael Duffey, Brian McCormack, and T. Ulrich Brechbuhl.

These actions were consistent with President Trump’s previous efforts to undermine United States Government investigations into foreign interference in United States elections.

Through these actions, President Trump sought to arrogate to himself the right to determine the propriety, scope, and nature of an impeachment inquiry into his own conduct, as well as the unilateral prerogative to deny any and all information to the House of Representatives in the exercise of its “sole Power of Impeachment”. In the history of the Republic, no President has ever ordered the complete defiance of an impeachment inquiry or sought to obstruct and impede so comprehensively the ability of the House of Representatives to investigate “high Crimes and Misdemeanors”. This abuse of office served to cover up the President’s own repeated misconduct and to seize and control the power of impeachment — and thus to nullify a vital constitutional safeguard vested solely in the House of Representatives.

In all of this, President Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore, President Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law. President Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.


REMARKS:



You will notice in the side bar notes the impeachment committees sought advice from Mr. Mueller.

"The Democrats decided against charging Mr. Trump with obstruction of justice stemming from the Russia investigation, keeping the articles tied strictly to the Ukraine matter to avoid complicating the debate. Although the special counsel Robert S. Mueller III outlined 10 actions that he considered possible acts of obstruction, he did not say one way or the other whether he would have filed charges if Mr. Trump were not the president, leaving it to lawmakers to decide."

Mueller outllines 10 actions he "considered possible acts of obstruction".

And Bolton added his opinions also.
"The article, interestingly, does not name John R. Bolton, the president’s former national security adviser who, according to testimony of other witnesses, objected to the pressure campaign on Ukraine. Mr. Bolton has defied a request to give his own testimony, citing the White House position and pending the results of an unresolved court case for another witness."

"The Democrats are adopting an argument advanced in both the Nixon and Clinton cases, that defying a congressional impeachment inquiry is itself an impeachable offense. Republicans argue that Mr. Trump is entitled to assert privileges to preserve the confidentiality of presidential decision-making and it would be up to the courts to judge whether they are valid — but the Democrats do not want to wait for a long drawn-out legal fight."

Nixon ordered Watergate didn't he? And Bill, well he was seduced by a determined, smitten intern. Trump did NONE of those things.


This is the most horrible thing they are doing.



[Edited on 12/10/2019 by gina]


gina - 12/10/2019 at 07:20 PM

The Mueller Obstruction of Justice points

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/us/politics/trump-obstruction-of-justice .html

April 18, 2019
By Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman

Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, examined an array of actions President Trump took in office that could have constituted obstruction of justice. Ultimately, Mr. Mueller declined to make a decision about whether Mr. Trump broke the law and Attorney General William P. Barr stepped in to clear the president of wrongdoing. Regardless of whether Mr. Trump should have been prosecuted, the episodes show a president seeking to use his power to insulate himself from a sprawling investigation that examined ties between his campaign and Russia. Yet his aides often refused to heed his commands, protecting Mr. Trump from causing significant damage to the investigation.

2016 CAMPAIGN

Misleading statements about his ties to Russia
Mr. Mueller examined episodes dating back to Mr. Trump’s candidacy and showed how he misled the public on the campaign trail. During the election, Mr. Trump cast doubt about whether Russia was behind the release of emails hacked from Democrats. But according to the report, his campaign was seeking more information about how the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks planned to release more batches of emails.

At the time, Mr. Trump insisted he had no ties to Russia. But the report said that was false because “as late as June 2016 the Trump Organization had been pursing a licensing deal for a skyscraper to be built in Russia called Trump Tower Moscow.”

FEB. 14, 2017

Asking Comey to end an investigation
Less than a month after taking office, Mr. Trump cornered the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, in a one-on-one encounter in the Oval Office. He asked Mr. Comey to end an investigation into his first national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn. Mr. Trump called Mr. Flynn a good guy who had been through a lot, according to a memo Mr. Comey wrote at the time documenting the encounter. Mr. Comey demurred, and Mr. Flynn later pleaded guilty to lying to investigators and agreed to cooperate with Mr. Mueller.

MARCH 2017

Attempts to stop Sessions from recusing himself from the Russia investigation
The report shows Mr. Trump’s obsession with having someone loyal to him overseeing the Russia investigation. After Mr. Trump learned that Attorney General Jeff Sessions was considering recusing himself from the investigation because of his role in Mr. Trump’s campaign, the president sought to prevent it from happening.

“The president told White House counsel Donald McGahn to stop Sessions from recusing,” the report said. “And after Sessions announced his recusal on March 2, the president expressed anger at the decision and told advisers that he should have an attorney general who would protect him.”

MARCH 2017

Trying to get Sessions to resume control of the inquiry
Despite Mr. Sessions’s recusal, Mr. Trump continued to lean on him. The weekend after Mr. Sessions recused himself, Mr. Trump cornered him in a meeting at Mar-a-Lago, the president’s club in Palm Beach, Fla., asking him to “unrecuse” himself from the investigation.

In the weeks and months that followed, Mr. Trump sought to pressure Mr. Sessions to reassert control over the investigation. Despite the pressure, Mr. Sessions never went along with Mr. Trump’s wishes. Mr. Sessions fell out of favor with the president, who then began an effort to get Mr. Sessions to resign.

MARCH 2017

Reacting to the disclosure that his campaign was under investigation
The report shows how Mr. Trump tried to use all the instruments at his disposal to protect himself. After Mr. Comey testified before Congress in March 2017 that the F.B.I. was investigating links between Mr. Trump’s campaign and Russia, the president pushed his top intelligence officials — including the C.I.A. director, Mike Pompeo — to put out the word to knock down the notion that his campaign coordinated with the Russians.

Around that time, Mr. Trump also reached out to Mr. Comey, despite guidance from Mr. McGahn that the president should avoid talking directly to Justice Department officials. “The president asked Comey to ‘lift the cloud’ of the Russia investigation” by saying publicly that he was not under investigation, the report said. Mr. Comey refused.


MAY 9, 2017

Firing Comey
Mr. Trump struggled to get Mr. Comey to say publicly that he was not under investigation. Those frustrations finally came to a head in May 2017 when the president decided Mr. Comey needed to be fired.

The president first said he fired Mr. Comey because of how he handled the investigation into Ms. Clinton’s emails, but he soon strayed from that explanation. Within days, Mr. Trump appeared to say in an NBC News interview that Russia was on his mind when he dismissed Mr. Comey; at another point, he told senior Russian officials in the Oval Office that, by firing Mr. Comey, he had relieved great pressure on himself.

The report said that even though the White House relied on so-called independent recommendations for the dismissal from Mr. Sessions and deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, Mr. Trump had decided to fire Mr. Comey regardless of what they said. “The day after firing Comey, the president told Russian officials that he had ‘faced great pressure because of Russia,’ which had been ‘taken off’ by Comey’s firing,” the report said.

JUNE 17, 2017

Reacting to the Mueller appointment and trying to fire him
After learning in May 2017 that Mr. Mueller had been appointed, Mr. Trump told advisers that it was “the end of my presidency” and demanded Mr. Sessions resign. Mr. Sessions submitted a resignation letter to Mr. Trump, who began carrying it around and asked advisers what he should do with it.

In the weeks after Mr. Mueller began his work, Mr. Trump tried to force Mr. McGahn to have the Justice Department fire Mr. Mueller, citing what the president perceived as conflicts of interest. Mr. McGahn thought the president’s assertions carried little weight and refused to follow his instructions, he has told investigators.

On Saturday, June 17, 2017, Mr. McGahn said, the president called him at home and insisted he have Mr. Mueller fired. Fed up with the repeated directive, Mr. McGahn drove to the White House, packed up his office and told senior White House officials that he planned to quit. They advised Mr. McGahn to ignore Mr. Trump, and the lawyer remained in his post another year.

Mr. McGahn told investigators he would rather resign than “trigger what he regarded as a potential Saturday Night Massacre.”


JULY 8, 2017

Misleading statement about meeting with Russians
Flying aboard Air Force One with aides as he returned to Washington from a Group of 20 summit meeting in Europe, Mr. Trump thrust himself into the crafting of a response to a New York Times article about a campaign meeting arranged by his son Donald Trump Jr. with a Russian lawyer promising damaging information on Hillary Clinton.

Over his son’s wishes, Mr. Trump wanted the statement to give as little information as possible; his lawyers told Mr. Mueller’s team that the president “personally dictated” the response. The initial statement said only that the meeting had been “primarily” about adoptions, without acknowledging the part about Mrs. Clinton.


JULY 2017

Trying to oust Sessions
Mr. Trump made two attempts to have Corey Lewandowski, his former campaign manager, influence the behavior of Mr. Sessions, according to the report. In a meeting at the White House on June 19, 2017, the president “dictated a message” for Mr. Lewandowski to deliver to Mr. Sessions, the report said.

“The message said that Sessions should publicly announce that, notwithstanding his recusal from the Russia investigation, the investigation was ‘very unfair’ to the president, the president had done nothing wrong,” the report said, adding that Mr. Sessions was to announce he would let the special counsel investigation on election interference continue.

A month later, in another meeting on July 19, 2017, Mr. Trump asked Mr. Lewandowski about the status of the message, and Mr. Lewandowski said it would be delivered soon. Hours later, Mr. Trump criticized Mr. Sessions in an interview with The Times. Mr. Lewandowski was “uncomfortable” delivering the message, the report said, and he asked a White House official, Rick Dearborn, who had worked previously with Mr. Sessions, to do it. Mr. Dearborn chose not to.


JAN. 26, 2018

Talking to witnesses about testimony
Mr. Trump asked aides to disavow a Times article reporting that investigators had learned of the president’s attempt to fire the special counsel and threatened to fire Mr. McGahn if he refused to rebut the news publicly. The president insisted he had never given the firing directive, and when Mr. McGahn disagreed, Mr. Trump said he did not remember it that way.


APRIL 2018

Interacting with his personal lawyer
The special counsel included Mr. Trump’s various interactions with his former personal lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, as part of his obstruction review. That included praise for Mr. Cohen early on, as well as Mr. Cohen’s false testimony to Congress about the length of time that a possible Trump Tower project in Moscow was being worked on during the 2016 campaign.

Mr. Cohen, according to the special counsel, said he was told by a personal lawyer for the president to “stay on message.” The president’s aides had said the project discussions ended before the Iowa caucuses in January 2016. They also noted that Mr. Trump publicly called Mr. Cohen a “rat” after he cooperated with prosecutors.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/us/politics/the-mueller-report-excerpts. html

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/18/us/politics/mueller-report-d ocument.html?action=click&module=Mueller%20Recirc&pgtype=Article

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/21/us/mueller-trump-charges.htm l?action=click&module=Mueller%20Recirc&pgtype=Article


REMARKS: The Justice Department clearly aligned themselves with the impeachment flock. Firing them made no difference, the continued on and they clearly want him removed from office.


gina - 12/10/2019 at 07:29 PM

What happens next:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-2-articles-of-impeachment-again st-president-trump-explained-%E2%80%94-and-what-happens-next/ar-BBY1SBZ


WASHINGTON — The House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump.

The articles — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — are charges of wrongdoing that lay out specific assertions of how the president violated the U.S. Constitution and the oath of his office.

Each of the articles will be voted on separately by the Judiciary Committee later this week, possibly Thursday. Those the panel approves will go to the full House for a vote, probably with a simple majority in the Democratic-controlled body on each article.

Those that pass will be sent on to the Senate, which must hold a trial. If two-thirds of the Senate, or 67 senators, vote to convict, Trump would be removed from office and Vice President Mike Pence would become commander in chief.

The articles are drawn from the work of the House Intelligence Committee, which released a 300-page report on the investigation last week.


The 300 page report

https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20191203_-_full_report___hpsci _impeachment_inquiry_-_20191203.pdf


REMARKS: He cannot ignore this anymore.

[Edited on 12/10/2019 by gina]


BIGV - 12/10/2019 at 07:35 PM

quote:
If you are opposed to new programs because it will require tax dollars, then how will we ever implement new programs?


I am opposed to any "New programs" that implement the doling out of money when those same funds can directed towards putting people to work.


cyclone88 - 12/10/2019 at 07:44 PM

quote:
This is the most horrible thing they are doing.


Oh FFS, The Articles of Impeachment stand alone w/o annotations. There are only 2 narrowly drawn offenses based on investigative testimony under oath.

This is the appropriate next step in the constitutional process: the HR drafts Articles of Impeachment.

The next step is a trial in the Senate overseen by the CJ of SCOTUS.

None of this is new, shocking, or even interesting except there were only 2 counts instead of a possible 9. This thread started in January, 2017. We've had 2 years, 11 months to understand how impeachment works. It's not hard. It's just like an episode of Law & Order. The DA gets an indictment, the defendant is tried, the jury votes. Can we move along now?




BrerRabbit - 12/10/2019 at 07:48 PM

quote:
Can we move along now?


You ever tried to move a box of rocks?


Skydog32103 - 12/10/2019 at 08:11 PM

quote:
I am opposed to any "New programs" that implement the doling out of money when those same funds can directed towards putting people to work.


How so? If it puts working class folks who lost their jobs from automation back to work, let’s hear it.


cyclone88 - 12/10/2019 at 08:35 PM

quote:
quote:
Can we move along now?


You ever tried to move a box of rocks?


3 years is enough time to buy a sled, slide it in there, and push it down a hill into a deep, deep lake.


PhotoRon286 - 12/10/2019 at 10:13 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Enjoy the distractions, while the real work continues to be done. That sham of a walkout was just that a sham. Why did the other Dems stay. More FaceTime for the Speaker and the Minority Senator. Gotta keep up appearances.

The IG report has been delayed but it will drop. Then the crying and gnashing of teeth will start.
Asagnge is due out in February assuming he doesn't commit suicide. I suspect he has some stories to tell.
With BCs failing health and Hillarys attack of Tulsi, its just a matter of time til the truths about that Crime Family starts to surface. Remember when the Vatican financial office was raided recently?



Scot away, but pay attention, pain will be dished out eventually.


This post will not hold up well in time.

It will be interesting to see wott Ed will say about it then.




If it does Ron will you acknowledge it?

December 9th starts the fun.


What has been put out so far, some minor problems on paperwork for one renewal on Carter Page but the whole investigation was legit, no deep state FBI hates trump crap.

Possible criminal charges against the lawyer who changed some documents which had no bearing on the overall probe.

And we've learned devin nunes himself went to Ukraine looking for dirt.

Doesn't look very good for him or the trump crime syndicate.


Well well well

The report is out and confirms no political bias to launch the investigation.

Will you acknowledge it???




Crickets



Not surprised.


OriginalGoober - 12/11/2019 at 12:12 AM

Ladies and Gentlemen, this concludes Act I of Insane in the Ukraine. Please take a short break and take advantage of our snacks and wide selection of liquors in the lobby.

Act II, The Articles will begin shortly.


pops42 - 12/11/2019 at 02:01 AM

quote:
Ladies and Gentlemen, this concludes Act I of Insane in the Ukraine. Please take a short break and take advantage of our snacks and wide selection of liquors in the lobby.

Act II, The Articles will begin shortly.
OK, MR. "I believe in make believe".


cyclone88 - 12/11/2019 at 12:23 PM

quote:
Ladies and Gentlemen, this concludes Act I of Insane in the Ukraine. Please take a short break and take advantage of our snacks and wide selection of liquors in the lobby.

Act II, The Articles will begin shortly.


It's not a very good play, but it's all we've got. Act III will be The Trial w/what IRL would be called a rigged jury but in impeachment it's called a Senate GOP majority who will not vote the defendant out of office.

The wide of selection of liquors is a good idea.


BIGV - 12/12/2019 at 08:26 PM

https://youtu.be/DrpXyXKZUR4

Hypocrites all....

Joe Biden doing Obama's "work".....lol


2112 - 12/12/2019 at 10:29 PM

quote:
https://youtu.be/DrpXyXKZUR4

Hypocrites all....

Joe Biden doing Obama's "work".....lol


Well, soon it won't matter. Once the senate fails to convict and remove Trump, then it will set a precedent that government officials can use their influence and withhold money from foreign governments for their own personal reasons anytime in the future. Oh, and administration officials will be allowed to ignore subpoenas from congress in the future. I'll bet Hillary Clinton is pissed off now knowing she didn't have to show up to give testimony to congress now. It's all a new ball game folks. Checks and balances are a thing of the past. Just play victim and say the other party hates you and you can do whatever you want.


goldtop - 12/12/2019 at 11:37 PM

quote:
quote:
https://youtu.be/DrpXyXKZUR4

Hypocrites all....

Joe Biden doing Obama's "work".....lol


Well, soon it won't matter. Once the senate fails to convict and remove Trump, then it will set a precedent that government officials can use their influence and withhold money from foreign governments for their own personal reasons anytime in the future. Oh, and administration officials will be allowed to ignore subpoenas from congress in the future. I'll bet Hillary Clinton is pissed off now knowing she didn't have to show up to give testimony to congress now. It's all a new ball game folks. Checks and balances are a thing of the past. Just play victim and say the other party hates you and you can do whatever you want.


Seems people don't want to see the entire picture of how it all played out starting in May when the ambassador was relived of her duties to get her out of the way.

The funds had been appropriated and the corruption narratives had been met and signed off. Ukraine asked many time between the time of the release and the time it actually happened. When? After the whistle blower came forward.

Trumps' phone call about no quid pro quo and I want nothing and the release of the funds came after he was aware of the whistle blower. Before that he made it clear though Sondland and others that if Zelinsky didn't announce an investigation into Biden there would be no aid or visit to the WH.

The investigation didn't even have to happen just an announcement. There also the insecure phone call to Sondland where another official heard Trump ask about investigations. To be told "Yes he loves your ass and will do anything for you" Never in any phone call did Trump talk about corruption. He was not looking into any other people or businesses just his political rival. I would find it quite strange that you would ask a country that you're worried is corrupt to do an investigation on corruption...but of course he's a stable genius

And all the supporter "like the way he talks"

As with all extortion's of course the one being extorted is going to play the game to save his country

How long will it take I asked on Jan 20th 2017...Here we are could be tomorrow or early next week and we'll have that answer

Individual #1 will be indicted one day and that day can't come too soon


OriginalGoober - 12/13/2019 at 01:24 PM

Having a non partisan process should of been the top priority. Democrat plauy shennanagine and think the public will go along for the ride. Big mistake.


cyclone88 - 12/13/2019 at 01:49 PM

quote:
Having a non partisan process should of been the top priority. Democrat plauy shennanagine and think the public will go along for the ride. Big mistake.

Yes, it would be more authentic & respected if we didn't know the outcome. Trump will not be removed from office during the GOP-controlled Senate (partisan) trial. The GOP Senators/jurors have announced how they will vote - along party lines in support of DJT - rather than reviewing indisputable evidence objectively. The public has no choice but to watch from the spectator seats.


adhill58 - 12/13/2019 at 01:59 PM

quote:
Having a non partisan process should of been the top priority. Democrat plauy shennanagine and think the public will go along for the ride. Big mistake.


If one party is not willing to perform any oversight of the executive branch, which is part of their job as members of congress, how is the other party supposed to go about things in a non-partisan manner?

The Republicans are supposed to care about the Constitution, but they have now diminished the threat of impeachment in the future to only be a real option when the party opposite the president controls both houses of congress.

McConnell says the Senate Republicans and the White House are already coordinating on the impeachment trial. Is that non-partisan enough for you, Goober?


Skydog32103 - 12/13/2019 at 03:45 PM

quote:
Hypocrites all....


And you are the biggest one of all, bashing values that differ from yours whenever you feel like it..


Skydog32103 - 12/13/2019 at 03:47 PM

There are many examples of people on the far right who are threatening violence if Trump is impeached. Make no mistake, these people are no different than Al Queda or ISIS, and should be treated the same way.


BIGV - 12/13/2019 at 04:32 PM

quote:
quote:
Hypocrites all....


And you are the biggest one of all, bashing values that differ from yours whenever you feel like it..


As so it goes. I am critical of an entity an you come along and make it personal.

Guess you didn't notice the word "all"?

LOL




BIGV - 12/13/2019 at 04:39 PM

quote:
quote:
I am opposed to any "New programs" that implement the doling out of money when those same funds can directed towards putting people to work.


How so? If it puts working class folks who lost their jobs from automation back to work, let’s hear it.


Looks like you just can't make the distinction between "Doling out" & "putting people to work (giving them a job)...

Oh well...

Example....If I see someone outside a Grocery store with a sign that says "Hungry" I will purchase a banana, some nuts and an apple and hand it to them on my way out of the grocer, You are hungry, I will get you something to eat, hunger is terrible. What I will not do is give that person money...


BIGV - 12/13/2019 at 04:44 PM

quote:
The Republicans are supposed to care about the Constitution


Haha!...So are the Democrats. Like the 2nd amendment, "Hate speech" LOL & The Electoral College. Carved in stone they are serviceable everyday, not meant to be applicable only when it suits your argument.

I repeat, hypocrites all.


goldtop - 12/13/2019 at 05:00 PM

Jan 20 2017 - Dec 13 2019 1059 days

Today an asterisk will be placed next to tRumps name to live in infamy. The apprentice president still has supporters because they "Like the way he talks"

He wants to fight corruption but just paid $2,000,000 in fines for stealing from a charity for vets...But they "Like the way he talks"

He ran a bait and switch tRump U and had to pay $25,000,000 but he's anti-corruption for Ukraine and his supporters "Like the way he talks"

His "Fixer" sits in jail for paying off a porn star for tRump aka Individual1 an unindicted co-conspirator but they "Like the way he talks"


pops42 - 12/13/2019 at 06:53 PM

quote:
quote:
The Republicans are supposed to care about the Constitution


Haha!...So are the Democrats. Like the 2nd amendment, "Hate speech" LOL & The Electoral College. Carved in stone they are serviceable everyday, not meant to be applicable only when it suits your argument.

I repeat, hypocrites all.
Bullsh!t. Tell me how Democrats are "anti 2nd amendment"?. The electorial college was put in place to help slave states hold on to power, and in the last 20 years, helped 2 Republican presidents win elections when they lost the popular vote. One of them had help from a Russian disinformation campaign on social media.


Skydog32103 - 12/13/2019 at 07:03 PM

quote:
I repeat, hypocrites all.


You would know!


BIGV - 12/14/2019 at 12:41 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
The Republicans are supposed to care about the Constitution


Haha!...So are the Democrats. Like the 2nd amendment, "Hate speech" LOL & The Electoral College. Carved in stone they are serviceable everyday, not meant to be applicable only when it suits your argument.

I repeat, hypocrites all.
Bullsh!t. Tell me how Democrats are "anti 2nd amendment"?. The electorial college was put in place to help slave states hold on to power, and in the last 20 years, helped 2 Republican presidents win elections when they lost the popular vote. One of them had help from a Russian disinformation campaign on social media.


In your zeal, seems you've forgotten to defend the Dems obsession with "Hate speech"!


pops42 - 12/14/2019 at 01:13 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
The Republicans are supposed to care about the Constitution


Haha!...So are the Democrats. Like the 2nd amendment, "Hate speech" LOL & The Electoral College. Carved in stone they are serviceable everyday, not meant to be applicable only when it suits your argument.

I repeat, hypocrites all.
Bullsh!t. Tell me how Democrats are "anti 2nd amendment"?. The electorial college was put in place to help slave states hold on to power, and in the last 20 years, helped 2 Republican presidents win elections when they lost the popular vote. One of them had help from a Russian disinformation campaign on social media.


In your zeal, seems you've forgotten to defend the Dems obsession with "Hate speech"!
Its not a good way to make friends, BIG VEE. unless you want neo- nazi's and klansman as your friends.


BrerRabbit - 12/14/2019 at 01:37 AM

quote:
. . . a banana, some nuts and an apple . . .



goldtop - 12/14/2019 at 01:55 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
The Republicans are supposed to care about the Constitution


Haha!...So are the Democrats. Like the 2nd amendment, "Hate speech" LOL & The Electoral College. Carved in stone they are serviceable everyday, not meant to be applicable only when it suits your argument.

I repeat, hypocrites all.
Bullsh!t. Tell me how Democrats are "anti 2nd amendment"?. The electorial college was put in place to help slave states hold on to power, and in the last 20 years, helped 2 Republican presidents win elections when they lost the popular vote. One of them had help from a Russian disinformation campaign on social media.


In your zeal, seems you've forgotten to defend the Dems obsession with "Hate speech"!
Its not a good way to make friends, BIG VEE. unless you want neo- nazi's and klansman as your friends.




Puzzling how someone is so concerned for the right to spew hatred...


BIGV - 12/14/2019 at 02:43 AM

quote:
Puzzling how someone is so concerned for the right to spew hatred...


Yep, one of the Planets great mysteries.... "How can ANYONE disagree with the Democratic point of view concerning President Trump"?!!


BIGV - 12/14/2019 at 02:45 AM

quote:
unless you want neo- nazi's and klansman as your friends.


The next, will be the first.


Bhawk - 12/14/2019 at 03:56 AM

quote:
quote:
Puzzling how someone is so concerned for the right to spew hatred...


Yep, one of the Planets great mysteries.... "How can ANYONE disagree with the Democratic point of view concerning President Trump"?!!


Well, actually, no. He’s inferring you support hateful speech. It’s an easy conclusion to draw.


BIGV - 12/14/2019 at 04:00 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Puzzling how someone is so concerned for the right to spew hatred...


Yep, one of the Planets great mysteries.... "How can ANYONE disagree with the Democratic point of view concerning President Trump"?!!


Well, actually, no. He’s inferring you support hateful speech. It’s an easy conclusion to draw.


My bad... Dammit I keep forgetting that the Democrats have an entirely different take on the first Amendment!...You can say whatever you want, as long as it's OK with them.


Bhawk - 12/14/2019 at 04:22 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Puzzling how someone is so concerned for the right to spew hatred...


Yep, one of the Planets great mysteries.... "How can ANYONE disagree with the Democratic point of view concerning President Trump"?!!


Well, actually, no. He’s inferring you support hateful speech. It’s an easy conclusion to draw.


My bad... Dammit I keep forgetting that the Democrats have an entirely different take on the first Amendment!...You can say whatever you want, as long as it's OK with them.



Whoa there, Whiny McDramaqueen. People daring to disagree with you aren’t violating your First Amendment rights. Needling a tender ego, maybe, but that’s about it.


BIGV - 12/14/2019 at 05:33 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Puzzling how someone is so concerned for the right to spew hatred...


Yep, one of the Planets great mysteries.... "How can ANYONE disagree with the Democratic point of view concerning President Trump"?!!


Well, actually, no. He’s inferring you support hateful speech. It’s an easy conclusion to draw.


My bad... Dammit I keep forgetting that the Democrats have an entirely different take on the first Amendment!...You can say whatever you want, as long as it's OK with them.



Whoa there, Whiny McDramaqueen. People daring to disagree with you aren’t violating your First Amendment rights. Needling a tender ego, maybe, but that’s about it.


Interesting take in that I am Not the one claiming my 1st Amendment rights are being "violated"..lol. That burden falls on the snowflakes who continuously advocate "Hate speech" as somehow being "mean" and responsible for hurting peoples feelings. Funny in that no one here can legally define said infraction, just the constant allusion to it as being "hateful", does that have a meaning that is supposed intimidate someone? And for the record, disagree with me all you want, you will never see me hiding behind the skirt y'all refer to as "Hate speech". I will disagree as well, but try to stay out of the gutter in that I believe making these things personal is pretty chicken****.


Skydog32103 - 12/14/2019 at 11:32 AM

quote:
Interesting take in that I am Not the one claiming my 1st Amendment rights are being "violated"..lol. That burden falls on the snowflakes who continuously advocate "Hate speech" as somehow being "mean" and responsible for hurting peoples feelings. Funny in that no one here can legally define said infraction, just the constant allusion to it as being "hateful", does that have a meaning that is supposed intimidate someone? And for the record, disagree with me all you want, you will never see me hiding behind the skirt y'all refer to as "Hate speech". I will disagree as well, but try to stay out of the gutter in that I believe making these things personal is pretty chicken****.


Say whatever you want, it will be ok!


lukester420 - 12/14/2019 at 01:08 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Puzzling how someone is so concerned for the right to spew hatred...


Yep, one of the Planets great mysteries.... "How can ANYONE disagree with the Democratic point of view concerning President Trump"?!!


Well, actually, no. He’s inferring you support hateful speech. It’s an easy conclusion to draw.


My bad... Dammit I keep forgetting that the Democrats have an entirely different take on the first Amendment!...You can say whatever you want, as long as it's OK with them.



Whoa there, Whiny McDramaqueen. People daring to disagree with you aren’t violating your First Amendment rights. Needling a tender ego, maybe, but that’s about it.


Interesting take in that I am Not the one claiming my 1st Amendment rights are being "violated"..lol. That burden falls on the snowflakes who continuously advocate "Hate speech" as somehow being "mean" and responsible for hurting peoples feelings. Funny in that no one here can legally define said infraction, just the constant allusion to it as being "hateful", does that have a meaning that is supposed intimidate someone? And for the record, disagree with me all you want, you will never see me hiding behind the skirt y'all refer to as "Hate speech". I will disagree as well, but try to stay out of the gutter in that I believe making these things personal is pretty chicken****.


Hahah big vajayjay being big vajayjay.

You know the term snowflakes was actually spawned by someone referring to white people who are so chicken**** and insecure that anytime some say they are being racially discriminated against, said white person (see-snowflakes) throw a hissy fit about how racism doesn’t exist, these people should pull themselves up by their bootstraps etc etc.

So basically in a nutshell, The term snowflake originally referred to people like you, Bigman, before the meaning was misconstrued, taken and run with, kinda like fake news.


lukester420 - 12/14/2019 at 01:11 PM

Oh and by the way you do like to hide behind these blanket term “skirts”, probably more so than anyone here and of course you are always the first to cry hypocrisy.

Please see my last post and look up the origin of the term snowflake, you may learn a lot about yourself...or knowing your snowflake like tendencies you’ll find a reason that everyone but you is a racist hypocrite or claim that the term snowflake referring to anti-abolitionists is “fake news”....Snowflake

[Edited on 12/14/2019 by lukester420]


cyclone88 - 12/14/2019 at 01:34 PM

quote:

snowflakes who continuously advocate "Hate speech" as somehow being "mean" and responsible for hurting peoples feelings. Funny in that no one here can legally define said infraction

Someone here CAN provide the legal definition of hate speech - speech intended to incite a clear & present danger of imminent lawless action. Only a handful of cases have been heard by SCOTUS & their opinion is ALWAYS narrowly drawn so that no matter how vicious or offensive the words (or cross burnings or Nazi marches or funeral disruptions) are, the constitutional guarantee of free speech is sacred. The composition of the court doesn't affect how unwavering it is in its protection of free speech.


Skydog32103 - 12/14/2019 at 01:54 PM

quote:
Oh and by the way you do like to hide behind these blanket term “skirts”, probably more so than anyone here and of course you are always the first to cry hypocrisy.

Please see my last post and look up the origin of the term snowflake, you may learn a lot about yourself...or knowing your snowflake like tendencies you’ll find a reason that everyone but you is a racist hypocrite


Perfectly stated. People here rightfully criticize Trump for his awful behavior, a conscious choice he makes every morning, and in return he sees justification to bash the entire Democratic party, its values, teenage girls, migrants at the border, and anyone else in his path. And when I asked him why he hated Democrats so much, he said "Because I'm working class...", in case you were wondering what lies beneath all the vitriol.



[Edited on 12/14/2019 by Skydog32103]


lukester420 - 12/14/2019 at 02:04 PM

I always thought the vitriol was to cover up the crippling insecurity, fear and ignorance


Skydog32103 - 12/14/2019 at 02:04 PM

The only thing that's chicken**** is directing all your ire at an entire party's values, and the weaker smaller people in our government, like AOC. Courage is demanding better from the person leading us all, but go ahead and attack liberals and a bunch of candidates if that's what you need to do. But enough of your finger-pointing b.s. already. You do nothing but ridicule and bash liberals and Democrats on an Allman Brothers website, clearly looking for arguments, and then play the victim card. That's like a liberal going to the Ted Nugent site and bashing conservative values. Troll away.


Stephen - 12/14/2019 at 02:08 PM

Quite true that last sentence in cyclone88’s post, & it’s that very thing - protection of free speech - that inevitably leads to violence at the types of rallies mentioned - it’s events like that where the right to free speech should come with plenty of red flags -
The film Skokie based on what happened there, does a superb evenhanded job of portraying this schism
skinhead/KKK scum has no place in any civilized society, much less talking their violent psychopathic trash in public places

[Edited on 12/14/2019 by Stephen]


Jerry - 12/14/2019 at 03:06 PM

quote:
The only thing that's chicken**** is directing all your ire at an entire party's values


The pot calling the kettle black. My my, such "liberal" thinking going on here.

Tell me Skydog32103 (just so we don't get confused about the other skydog posters here) what have YOU been doing for the past couple of years.?

Have you been praising the Republicans for their progress in their duties? Have you said one good thing about the
Libertarians? Have you ever posted about how much you dislike a Democrat?

If you did, please remind me with a re-post of it.


BIGV - 12/14/2019 at 03:07 PM

quote:
The only thing that's chicken**** is directing all your ire at an entire party's values, and the weaker smaller people in our government, like AOC.


Thanks for finally admitting that! Although I will continue to refer to her simply as "Box of rocks", but, it is a step in the right direction.


Jerry - 12/14/2019 at 03:08 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
The Republicans are supposed to care about the Constitution


Haha!...So are the Democrats. Like the 2nd amendment, "Hate speech" LOL & The Electoral College. Carved in stone they are serviceable everyday, not meant to be applicable only when it suits your argument.

I repeat, hypocrites all.
Bullsh!t. Tell me how Democrats are "anti 2nd amendment"?. The electorial college was put in place to help slave states hold on to power, and in the last 20 years, helped 2 Republican presidents win elections when they lost the popular vote. One of them had help from a Russian disinformation campaign on social media.


In your zeal, seems you've forgotten to defend the Dems obsession with "Hate speech"!
Its not a good way to make friends, BIG VEE. unless you want neo- nazi's and klansman as your friends.


Why would he want you as a friend?


BIGV - 12/14/2019 at 03:10 PM

quote:
quote:
The only thing that's chicken**** is directing all your ire at an entire party's values


It is honestly how I feel. In reality NO different than the constant views and posts here about Conservatives and President Trump.

If you can hand it out, you better be able to take it.

Or is that "Hate speech"?


cyclone88 - 12/14/2019 at 03:29 PM

quote:
If you can hand it out, you better be able to take it. Or is that "Hate speech"?


Just STFU about hate speech. You said no one here could provide the legal definition. I did. My knowledge isn't just based on law school and the practice of law but clerking for one of the pre-eminent scholars of the First Amendment. I was legit answering your question, but your continued deliberate mis-use of the term indicates you're just a troll or a lame comedian.

Hate speech is not boyz slinging taunts at each other on a website. What you perpetuate is playground speech.



lukester420 - 12/14/2019 at 03:34 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
The only thing that's chicken**** is directing all your ire at an entire party's values


It is honestly how I feel. In reality NO different than the constant views and posts here about Conservatives and President Trump.

If you can hand it out, you better be able to take it.

Or is that "Hate speech"?




You certainly can't take anyone challenging you....Snowflake


goldtop - 12/14/2019 at 03:52 PM

quote:
quote:
If you can hand it out, you better be able to take it. Or is that "Hate speech"?


Just STFU about hate speech. You said no one here could provide the legal definition. I did. My knowledge isn't just based on law school and the practice of law but clerking for one of the pre-eminent scholars of the First Amendment. I was legit answering your question, but your continued deliberate mis-use of the term indicates you're just a troll or a lame comedian.

Hate speech is not boyz slinging taunts at each other on a website. What you perpetuate is playground speech.





Huh...He's gonna claim you're violating his 1A when asked him very eloquently to STFU....Thank you for the legal definition...BIGV is probably perfecting his B3 solo's right now and finding new lame justifications for wanting to scream racial slurs without consequences


BIGV - 12/14/2019 at 03:57 PM

quote:
Just STFU about hate speech.


Is this hate speech? lol




cyclone88 - 12/14/2019 at 04:04 PM

quote:
Huh...He's gonna claim you're violating his 1A when asked him very eloquently to STFU..


And w/o missing a beat he did AND thought he was funny.

At least he amuses himself. Didn't Freud say the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over & over again & expecting a different result? Wonder if he's ever gotten any laughs.


goldtop - 12/14/2019 at 04:43 PM

quote:
quote:
Huh...He's gonna claim you're violating his 1A when asked him very eloquently to STFU..


And w/o missing a beat he did AND thought he was funny.

At least he amuses himself. Didn't Freud say the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over & over again & expecting a different result? Wonder if he's ever gotten any laughs.




Oh he gets laughs...green shirt guy moment type of laughs


lukester420 - 12/14/2019 at 04:47 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Huh...He's gonna claim you're violating his 1A when asked him very eloquently to STFU..


And w/o missing a beat he did AND thought he was funny.

At least he amuses himself. Didn't Freud say the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over & over again & expecting a different result? Wonder if he's ever gotten any laughs.




Oh he gets laughs...green shirt guy moment type of laughs




I laugh at him pretty regularly, the BIG tough guy facade covering for massive insecurity and irrational unfounded fear of his rights being violated, the absolute obliviousness that he is in fact the snowflake, it actually is pretty damn funny


Skydog32103 - 12/14/2019 at 07:08 PM

quote:
The pot calling the kettle black. My my, such "liberal" thinking going on here.

Tell me Skydog32103 (just so we don't get confused about the other skydog posters here) what have YOU been doing for the past couple of years.?


Rightfully criticizing Trump’s choice to be an intentionally hostile and divisive jerk, and the segment of Trump supporters who used their vote as a weapon. You and BIGV can continue to go after a set of values, as you just did by your characterization of liberals.

When you insult someone for “hypocrisy” or “lying”, then you really have nothing at all since that describes all of us. There’s not one soul on this planet that hasn’t lied or isn’t a hypocrite in some way, so when you ha e criticism unique only to liberals, I might listen.


Skydog32103 - 12/14/2019 at 07:15 PM

quote:
Thanks for finally admitting that!


What, that you target women who don’t hold a fraction of the power Trump does?


Jerry - 12/14/2019 at 07:36 PM

quote:
quote:
The pot calling the kettle black. My my, such "liberal" thinking going on here.

Tell me Skydog32103 (just so we don't get confused about the other skydog posters here) what have YOU been doing for the past couple of years.?


Rightfully criticizing Trump’s choice to be an intentionally hostile and divisive jerk, and the segment of Trump supporters who used their vote as a weapon. You and BIGV can continue to go after a set of values, as you just did by your characterization of liberals.

When you insult someone for “hypocrisy” or “lying”, then you really have nothing at all since that describes all of us. There’s not one soul on this planet that hasn’t lied or isn’t a hypocrite in some way, so when you ha e criticism unique only to liberals, I might listen.



So it's ok for you to criticize and denigrate a large number of people, but for others it's wrong.
How "liberal" of your thought processes.

Where did I say all liberals, or even say anything about any liberals? Comprehensive reading is still not your forte is it?

Since you missed it, "My my, such "liberal" thinking going on here." Try again on what that phrase means since you thoroughly missed the point.

Also, you still didn't post a response on where I asked you about posts you might have made criticizing a Democrat, or praising a Republican. Have you ever done so?


Jerry - 12/14/2019 at 07:50 PM




Hahah big vajayjay being big vajayjay.

You know the term snowflakes was actually spawned by someone referring to white people who are so chicken**** and insecure that anytime some say they are being racially discriminated against, said white person (see-snowflakes) throw a hissy fit about how racism doesn’t exist, these people should pull themselves up by their bootstraps etc etc.

So basically in a nutshell, The term snowflake originally referred to people like you, Bigman, before the meaning was misconstrued, taken and run with, kinda like fake news.


Sorry, no. The original use of the word is to describe individual pieces of frozen crystals that fall from the sky to make up snow. Thought everybody knew that.
But, here are some various definitions to read:
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Snowflake

While these are not "Websters'" type definitions, it does give a variation of how the word has been used. The list is more than 5 pages long.


Skydog32103 - 12/14/2019 at 08:32 PM

quote:
So it's ok for you to criticize and denigrate a large number of people, but for others it's wrong.


Yes, it’s ok to criticize a segment of people who admit to using their vote as a weapon (behavior and choices). No, it’s not ok to hate liberals and Democratic values. The latter is the definition of a bigot.


lukester420 - 12/14/2019 at 08:49 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:



Hahah big vajayjay being big vajayjay.

You know the term snowflakes was actually spawned by someone referring to white people who are so chicken**** and insecure that anytime some say they are being racially discriminated against, said white person (see-snowflakes) throw a hissy fit about how racism doesn’t exist, these people should pull themselves up by their bootstraps etc etc.

So basically in a nutshell, The term snowflake originally referred to people like you, Bigman, before the meaning was misconstrued, taken and run with, kinda like fake news.


Sorry, no. The original use of the word is to describe individual pieces of frozen crystals that fall from the sky to make up snow. Thought everybody knew that.
But, here are some various definitions to read:
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Snowflake

While these are not "Websters'" type definitions, it does give a variation of how the word has been used. The list is more than 5 pages long.


Sorry, I didn’t think someone with such poor reading comprehension skills would take that so literally. Allow me to clarify, snowflakes as a politicized term.
Nice of you to stick up for your other snowflake buddy BIG vajayjay though.urban dictionary is probably unaware of the use of the term snowflake to refer to anti-abolitionists and other generally ignorant white folks. But hey good job using the tried and true right wing smug deflection to ignore the actual topic of the post....Snowflake


Jerry - 12/14/2019 at 09:24 PM

quote:
quote:
So it's ok for you to criticize and denigrate a large number of people, but for others it's wrong.


Yes, it’s ok to criticize a segment of people who admit to using their vote as a weapon (behavior and choices). No, it’s not ok to hate liberals and Democratic values. The latter is the definition of a bigot.


In other words, think like you, or else---
Correct.

That's the true meaning of a despot to me.


Jerry - 12/14/2019 at 09:27 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:



Hahah big vajayjay being big vajayjay.

You know the term snowflakes was actually spawned by someone referring to white people who are so chicken**** and insecure that anytime some say they are being racially discriminated against, said white person (see-snowflakes) throw a hissy fit about how racism doesn’t exist, these people should pull themselves up by their bootstraps etc etc.

So basically in a nutshell, The term snowflake originally referred to people like you, Bigman, before the meaning was misconstrued, taken and run with, kinda like fake news.


Sorry, no. The original use of the word is to describe individual pieces of frozen crystals that fall from the sky to make up snow. Thought everybody knew that.
But, here are some various definitions to read:
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Snowflake

While these are not "Websters'" type definitions, it does give a variation of how the word has been used. The list is more than 5 pages long.


Sorry, I didn’t think someone with such poor reading comprehension skills would take that so literally. Allow me to clarify, snowflakes as a politicized term.
Nice of you to stick up for your other snowflake buddy BIG vajayjay though.urban dictionary is probably unaware of the use of the term snowflake to refer to anti-abolitionists and other generally ignorant white folks. But hey good job using the tried and true right wing smug deflection to ignore the actual topic of the post....Snowflake


Now you're bad mouthing white people. Just how racist are you?


lukester420 - 12/14/2019 at 10:16 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:



Hahah big vajayjay being big vajayjay.

You know the term snowflakes was actually spawned by someone referring to white people who are so chicken**** and insecure that anytime some say they are being racially discriminated against, said white person (see-snowflakes) throw a hissy fit about how racism doesn’t exist, these people should pull themselves up by their bootstraps etc etc.

So basically in a nutshell, The term snowflake originally referred to people like you, Bigman, before the meaning was misconstrued, taken and run with, kinda like fake news.


Sorry, no. The original use of the word is to describe individual pieces of frozen crystals that fall from the sky to make up snow. Thought everybody knew that.
But, here are some various definitions to read:
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Snowflake

While these are not "Websters'" type definitions, it does give a variation of how the word has been used. The list is more than 5 pages long.


Sorry, I didn’t think someone with such poor reading comprehension skills would take that so literally. Allow me to clarify, snowflakes as a politicized term.
Nice of you to stick up for your other snowflake buddy BIG vajayjay though.urban dictionary is probably unaware of the use of the term snowflake to refer to anti-abolitionists and other generally ignorant white folks. But hey good job using the tried and true right wing smug deflection to ignore the actual topic of the post....Snowflake


Now you're bad mouthing white people. Just how racist are you?


Yep just keep deflecting funny man
And the concept of “racism” against white people is laughable, the term is prejudiced. And I am very prejudiced against ignorant white people who are a disgrace to their entire race. Ie. confederate flag wavers, neo-nazis, ya know all the poor white trash who have to blame all their shortcomings on everyone else

[Edited on 12/14/2019 by lukester420]

[Edited on 12/14/2019 by lukester420]


Jerry - 12/14/2019 at 10:47 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:



Hahah big vajayjay being big vajayjay.

You know the term snowflakes was actually spawned by someone referring to white people who are so chicken**** and insecure that anytime some say they are being racially discriminated against, said white person (see-snowflakes) throw a hissy fit about how racism doesn’t exist, these people should pull themselves up by their bootstraps etc etc.

So basically in a nutshell, The term snowflake originally referred to people like you, Bigman, before the meaning was misconstrued, taken and run with, kinda like fake news.


Sorry, no. The original use of the word is to describe individual pieces of frozen crystals that fall from the sky to make up snow. Thought everybody knew that.
But, here are some various definitions to read:
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Snowflake

While these are not "Websters'" type definitions, it does give a variation of how the word has been used. The list is more than 5 pages long.


Sorry, I didn’t think someone with such poor reading comprehension skills would take that so literally. Allow me to clarify, snowflakes as a politicized term.
Nice of you to stick up for your other snowflake buddy BIG vajayjay though.urban dictionary is probably unaware of the use of the term snowflake to refer to anti-abolitionists and other generally ignorant white folks. But hey good job using the tried and true right wing smug deflection to ignore the actual topic of the post....Snowflake


Now you're bad mouthing white people. Just how racist are you?


Yep just keep deflecting funny man
And the concept of “racism” against white people is laughable, the term is prejudiced. And I am very prejudiced against ignorant white people who are a disgrace to their entire race. Ie. confederate flag wavers, neo-nazis, ya know all the poor white trash who have to blame all their shortcomings on everyone else

[Edited on 12/14/2019 by lukester420]

[Edited on 12/14/2019 by lukester420]


What's really funny is how you and Skydog32103 go all kneejerk reactive to posts that YOU don't realize are poking fun at you, or ask you to post a response to a question.
Do we need to make the use of smiley faces mandatory, or can the comprehension of grammar usage be taught better in the public schools.
Also, what's up with your lapse of posting in 2016, and then spending most of your time in the Whipping Post since? You used to only post in Anything Goes.


lukester420 - 12/14/2019 at 11:02 PM

What’s up with you creeping on my activity. I got tired of seeing the same old slow traffic of anything goes and saw nothing that made me want to post. I came to whipping post for the entertainment and to see how long so called independents and free thinking libertarians would support an orange dictator. You guys have not disappointed.


lukester420 - 12/14/2019 at 11:08 PM

quote:
What’s up with you creeping on my activity. I got tired of seeing the same old slow traffic of anything goes and saw nothing that made me want to post. I came to whipping post for the entertainment and to see how long so called independents and free thinking libertarians would support an orange dictator. You guys have not disappointed.

Oh and by the way you are still doing a good job of deflecting. Snowflake


Jerry - 12/14/2019 at 11:09 PM

quote:
What’s up with you creeping on my activity. I got tired of seeing the same old slow traffic of anything goes and saw nothing that made me want to post. I came to whipping post for the entertainment and to see how long so called independents and free thinking libertarians would support an orange dictator. You guys have not disappointed.


Again, grouping people into those you don't like and those who you tolerate. Is that actual "liberal" thinking?

BTW, what does the citrus industry have to do with it?


lukester420 - 12/14/2019 at 11:19 PM

quote:
quote:
What’s up with you creeping on my activity. I got tired of seeing the same old slow traffic of anything goes and saw nothing that made me want to post. I came to whipping post for the entertainment and to see how long so called independents and free thinking libertarians would support an orange dictator. You guys have not disappointed.


Again, grouping people into those you don't like and those who you tolerate. Is that actual "liberal" thinking?

BTW, what does the citrus industry have to do with it?

You make several assumptions and no points.


BrerRabbit - 12/15/2019 at 12:28 AM

What do you call an ABB fan who thinks hate speech should be socially acceptable ?

A "Hates Peach"


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 12:34 AM

quote:
No, it’s not ok to hate liberals and Democratic values.


Sorry, WRONG. First amendment baby. Me, you, anyone can "hate" (Laughing MAO at that attempt) ANYTHING you please as long as you are NOT calling for violence. That is called Freedom. Did you take civics?

The LAW can be FUN when you try to understand it.

But hey, I understand, I really do


BrerRabbit - 12/15/2019 at 12:49 AM

Plenty of stuff that is legal but socially unacceptable. Not going to gross you out with examples, but with a little imagination it gets rough quick.

You think it is ok for folks to engage in hateful speech, cool, absolutely your rocksolid right, just don't expect polite society to applaud your performance. Same as it is your inalienable right to do all kinds of other really nasty antisocial things.


[Edited on 12/15/2019 by BrerRabbit]


Skydog32103 - 12/15/2019 at 01:19 AM

quote:
Sorry, WRONG. First amendment baby. Me, you, anyone can "hate" (Laughing MAO at that attempt) ANYTHING you please as long as you are NOT calling for violence. That is called Freedom. Did you take civics?

The LAW can be FUN when you try to understand it.

But hey, I understand, I really do


I’m not calling for your arrest moron. It ain’t my fault you are working class.


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 01:50 AM

quote:
quote:
Huh...He's gonna claim you're violating his 1A when asked him very eloquently to STFU..


This is hilarious. May I add that quite a few here don't seem to thoroughly grasp the definition of the word "Eloquent" and exactly what it takes to be.....

Since this goes directly to our continued discord regarding the idiom, "hate speech" perhaps someone here might enlighten us all about the way one might take on the prosecution of anyone accused of said infraction? I mean if you can not file suit under any banner of the Law, what exactly are you accomplishing with the mere allegation?


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 01:54 AM

quote:
quote:
Sorry, WRONG. First amendment baby. Me, you, anyone can "hate" (Laughing MAO at that attempt) ANYTHING you please as long as you are NOT calling for violence. That is called Freedom. Did you take civics?

The LAW can be FUN when you try to understand it.

But hey, I understand, I really do


I’m not calling for your arrest moron. It ain’t my fault you are working class.


Lock him up! Lock him up!
Send them back! send them back!


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 01:55 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Huh...He's gonna claim you're violating his 1A when asked him very eloquently to STFU..


This is hilarious. May I add that quite a few here don't seem to thoroughly grasp the definition of the word "Eloquent" and exactly what it takes to be.....

Since this goes directly to our continued discord regarding the idiom, "hate speech" perhaps someone here might enlighten us all about the way one might take on the prosecution of anyone accused of said infraction? I mean if you can not file suit under any banner of the Law, what exactly are you accomplishing with the mere allegation?



Pointing out that someone is an ignorant bigot.....snowflake


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 01:56 AM

quote:
Rightfully criticizing Trump’s choice to be an intentionally hostile and divisive jerk


You have every "right".....although, in case you are not aware, it is nothing more than your opinion and wishing it to be true, does not make it so.

quote:
and the segment of Trump supporters who used their vote as a weapon.


Is this against the law?

quote:
You and BIGV can continue to go after a set of values, as you just did by your characterization of liberals.


Is this not what every single person who goes to the polls and casts a ballot, is in effect......doing?

You guys (Liberals) are still pouting like children over the results from 2016; quite entertaining to watch.


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 02:00 AM

quote:
quote:
Rightfully criticizing Trump’s choice to be an intentionally hostile and divisive jerk


You have every "right".....although, in case you are not aware, it is nothing more than your opinion and wishing it to be true, does not make it so.

quote:
and the segment of Trump supporters who used their vote as a weapon.


Is this against the law?

quote:
You and BIGV can continue to go after a set of values, as you just did by your characterization of liberals.


Is this not what every single person who goes to the polls and casts a ballot, is in effect......doing?

You guys (Liberals) are still pouting like children over the results from 2016; quite entertaining to watch.



Nah we just don’t like that a conman is lining his pockets while rolling out the red carpet for Daddy Putin and the Russians. Ya know the Russians... our enemies remember, Mr. Patriot?


[Edited on 12/15/2019 by lukester420]

[Edited on 12/15/2019 by lukester420]


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 02:00 AM

quote:
I’m not calling for your arrest moron


This will always represent the work of a mind that has exhausted what little intellectual verbiage he has at his disposal......

What other gems await?

And yes, I am laughing at you.


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 02:07 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Huh...He's gonna claim you're violating his 1A when asked him very eloquently to STFU..


This is hilarious. May I add that quite a few here don't seem to thoroughly grasp the definition of the word "Eloquent" and exactly what it takes to be.....

Since this goes directly to our continued discord regarding the idiom, "hate speech" perhaps someone here might enlighten us all about the way one might take on the prosecution of anyone accused of said infraction? I mean if you can not file suit under any banner of the Law, what exactly are you accomplishing with the mere allegation?



Pointing out that someone is an ignorant bigot.....snowflake


And because of this coup you achieve what? I think the predictable part of this play is the reliance on the word "Bigot"...First, the word "Racist" is thrown around and when that fails, "bigot" is next.....All a smokescreen for the inability to deal with an opinion that differs from your own.


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 02:12 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Huh...He's gonna claim you're violating his 1A when asked him very eloquently to STFU..


This is hilarious. May I add that quite a few here don't seem to thoroughly grasp the definition of the word "Eloquent" and exactly what it takes to be.....

Since this goes directly to our continued discord regarding the idiom, "hate speech" perhaps someone here might enlighten us all about the way one might take on the prosecution of anyone accused of said infraction? I mean if you can not file suit under any banner of the Law, what exactly are you accomplishing with the mere allegation?



Pointing out that someone is an ignorant bigot.....snowflake


And because of this coup you achieve what? I think the predictable part of this play is the reliance on the word "Bigot"...First, the word "Racist" is thrown around and when that fails, "bigot" is next.....All a smokescreen for the inability to deal with an opinion that differs from your own.


I express my opinion, that is what is achieved. I can deal with your opinion, I just do it by pointing out that some of your opinions, to me, are bigoted and mirror those of white supremacists... who are indeed racists


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 02:14 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Huh...He's gonna claim you're violating his 1A when asked him very eloquently to STFU..


This is hilarious. May I add that quite a few here don't seem to thoroughly grasp the definition of the word "Eloquent" and exactly what it takes to be.....

Since this goes directly to our continued discord regarding the idiom, "hate speech" perhaps someone here might enlighten us all about the way one might take on the prosecution of anyone accused of said infraction? I mean if you can not file suit under any banner of the Law, what exactly are you accomplishing with the mere allegation?



Pointing out that someone is an ignorant bigot.....snowflake


And because of this coup you achieve what? I think the predictable part of this play is the reliance on the word "Bigot"...First, the word "Racist" is thrown around and when that fails, "bigot" is next.....All a smokescreen for the inability to deal with an opinion that differs from your own.

The predictable part of your play is that you like to say inflammatory things that you know will get a rise out of people and then cry that you’re the victim when someone points out that you sound like a maroon

[Edited on 12/15/2019 by lukester420]


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 02:29 AM

quote:
The predictable part of your play is that you like to say inflammatory things that you know will get a rise out of people and then cry that you’re the victim when someone points out that you sound like a maroon


quote:
cry that you’re the victim


Yet another Liberal response for a scenario when they can't concoct a sensible defense.

quote:
is that you like to say inflammatory things


Purely your definition, you might want to try a new approach?...Here's one that has been proven over time to be quite effective....

Walk away


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 02:33 AM

quote:
I express my opinion, that is what is achieved.


Fair enough

quote:
I can deal with your opinion


Not very well

quote:
I just do it by pointing out that some of your opinions, to me, are bigoted and mirror those of white supremacists... who are indeed racists


You are certainly entitled to your opinion and I welcome more of these attempts that fully demonstrate your lack of intellectual agility.


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 03:32 AM

quote:
quote:
I express my opinion, that is what is achieved.


Fair enough

quote:
I can deal with your opinion


Not very well

quote:
I just do it by pointing out that some of your opinions, to me, are bigoted and mirror those of white supremacists... who are indeed racists


You are certainly entitled to your opinion and I welcome more of these attempts that fully demonstrate your lack of intellectual agility.


How about I take one from your vast trolling playbook. Stating your opinion over and over again doesn't make it fact. It is your opinion that people pointing out that you play the victim is some kind of liberal defense when they've been bested by your massive intellect or whatever you think is happening. The fact is that you do indeed whine and play coy when someone bites on your bait, so no it's not some defense mechanism it's stating the obvious.

For such a clever fox with a BIG massive intellect I'd think you could have done better than "working class" snowflake


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 04:12 AM

quote:
people pointing out that you play the victim is some kind of liberal defense


"Playing the victim"..absolutely one of the most absurd defense mechanisms the Liberal mind has ever conjured.....

You remind me of a teenager who has brought a water balloon to a boxing match and then yells "Not fair" when he leaves with a black eye...


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 04:14 AM

quote:
Stating your opinion over and over again doesn't make it fact.


Not for an instant do I believe it does; keyword "opinion".


Jerry - 12/15/2019 at 04:18 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
What’s up with you creeping on my activity. I got tired of seeing the same old slow traffic of anything goes and saw nothing that made me want to post. I came to whipping post for the entertainment and to see how long so called independents and free thinking libertarians would support an orange dictator. You guys have not disappointed.


Again, grouping people into those you don't like and those who you tolerate. Is that actual "liberal" thinking?

BTW, what does the citrus industry have to do with it?

You make several assumptions and no points.


Who says there has to be a point to every post? Is there a point to several thousand posts in these forums that contain only one word, or even just one letter?

BUT, still, who is trying to take over the citrus industry?


Jerry - 12/15/2019 at 04:25 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I express my opinion, that is what is achieved.


Fair enough

quote:
I can deal with your opinion


Not very well

quote:
I just do it by pointing out that some of your opinions, to me, are bigoted and mirror those of white supremacists... who are indeed racists


You are certainly entitled to your opinion and I welcome more of these attempts that fully demonstrate your lack of intellectual agility.


How about I take one from your vast trolling playbook. Stating your opinion over and over again doesn't make it fact. It is your opinion that people pointing out that you play the victim is some kind of liberal defense when they've been bested by your massive intellect or whatever you think is happening. The fact is that you do indeed whine and play coy when someone bites on your bait, so no it's not some defense mechanism it's stating the obvious.

For such a clever fox with a BIG massive intellect I'd think you could have done better than "working class" snowflake


This coming from someone who can't comprehend the gist of the written word?

One question. What is wrong with being working class?

I think it's a hell of a lot better than being a politician. Don't you, or is this just your "elitism" showing through?


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 04:52 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I express my opinion, that is what is achieved.


Fair enough

quote:
I can deal with your opinion


Not very well

quote:
I just do it by pointing out that some of your opinions, to me, are bigoted and mirror those of white supremacists... who are indeed racists


You are certainly entitled to your opinion and I welcome more of these attempts that fully demonstrate your lack of intellectual agility.


How about I take one from your vast trolling playbook. Stating your opinion over and over again doesn't make it fact. It is your opinion that people pointing out that you play the victim is some kind of liberal defense when they've been bested by your massive intellect or whatever you think is happening. The fact is that you do indeed whine and play coy when someone bites on your bait, so no it's not some defense mechanism it's stating the obvious.

For such a clever fox with a BIG massive intellect I'd think you could have done better than "working class" snowflake


This coming from someone who can't comprehend the gist of the written word?

One question. What is wrong with being working class?

I think it's a hell of a lot better than being a politician. Don't you, or is this just your "elitism" showing through?


Ahhh just in time here comes the other snowflake to the defense.

1. I called you “funny man” I think that implies that I knew you were “poking fun” does it not? Or do you lack the reading comprehension skills that you boast.
2. There is nothing wrong with being working class. I have been my whole life, I’m certainly not a politician. I however do not think that the party currently being lead by a conman has the working class in mind.
My jab about working class is because BIg vajayjay says his working class status is why he’s anti democrat which I say is another bs excuse from an insecure man as to why he’s such a snowflake.

Yeah so you’re too busy stalking my profile to follow the gist of what’s being written here.
Besides he’s such a BIG tough man surely he wouldn’t need anyone to come to his aid, unless you too see him as an insecure snowflake in need of a buddy.
Good job sticking together and deflecting, we still know your snowflakes by the way. Once again you cast several assumptions and have no idea what you’re talking about and once again you have no point. Keep trying though I know you and the BIG guy strive on the stimulation you get showing us sorry liberals the errors of our ways.

[Edited on 12/15/2019 by lukester420]


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 04:58 AM

For such intelligent wordsmiths with amazing abilities to discern the point of a post, I still have seen no retort to the origins of snowflake as a political insult. Snowflakes.


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 05:01 AM

1)"Racist"
2)"Bigot"
3)"Hate Speech"
4)"Playing the victim"
5)"Snowflake"

These euphemisms are perfect defense mechanisms for the "Liberal on the go"!

LOL


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 05:01 AM

quote:
quote:
people pointing out that you play the victim is some kind of liberal defense


"Playing the victim"..absolutely one of the most absurd defense mechanisms the Liberal mind has ever conjured.....

You remind me of a teenager who has brought a water balloon to a boxing match and then yells "Not fair" when he leaves with a black eye...


Do you or do you not get your knickers in a twist when someone points out that you are a miserable human?


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 05:03 AM

quote:
1)"Racist"
2)"Bigot"
3)"Hate Speech"
4)"Playing the victim"
5)"Snowflake"

These euphemisms are perfect defense mechanisms for the "Liberal on the go"!

LOL


Hahah hypocrite. I dusted off the snowflake chestnut AFTER I saw you use it in a tirade where you were once again, playing the victim.

But no, everyone else is the hypocrite not you cause you’re sooo BIG and mighty, surely able to trounce anyone both physically and mentally. Your reality must be fun... for you


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 05:05 AM

quote:
quote:
people pointing out that you play the victim is some kind of liberal defense


"Playing the victim"..absolutely one of the most absurd defense mechanisms the Liberal mind has ever conjured.....

You remind me of a teenager who has brought a water balloon to a boxing match and then yells "Not fair" when he leaves with a black eye...


You remind me of the middle aged man who starts bar fights because he’s still such a BIG tough guy then cries “Elder abuse!” when someone retaliates


goldtop - 12/15/2019 at 05:18 AM


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 05:20 AM

quote:
Do you or do you not get your knickers in a twist when someone points out that you are a miserable human?


Yet again you are confusing what you wish to be believed as the almighty truth.

Some refer to this as "Delusion"....

quote:
You remind me of the middle aged man who starts bar fights because he’s still such a BIG tough guy then cries “Elder abuse!” when someone retaliates


You are certainly entitled to your opinion, thanks for sharing.


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 05:21 AM

quote:



Now that...is funny!


piacere - 12/15/2019 at 09:42 AM

quote:



LOL. Every thread in WP should be prefaced with this.


Skydog32103 - 12/15/2019 at 11:10 AM

quote:
You have every "right".....although, in case you are not aware, it is nothing more than your opinion


No kidding, point?

quote:
Is this not what every single person who goes to the polls and casts a ballot, is in effect......doing?


I'm only speaking about you coming to an Allman Brothers website and bashing liberal values.


quote:
And yes, I am laughing at you.


Sure you are.



[Edited on 12/15/2019 by Skydog32103]


BIGV - 12/15/2019 at 02:06 PM

quote:
I'm only speaking about you coming to an Allman Brothers website and bashing liberal values.


And......Which one of us is "playing the victim"?

LOL


Bhawk - 12/15/2019 at 04:38 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Puzzling how someone is so concerned for the right to spew hatred...


Yep, one of the Planets great mysteries.... "How can ANYONE disagree with the Democratic point of view concerning President Trump"?!!


Well, actually, no. He’s inferring you support hateful speech. It’s an easy conclusion to draw.


My bad... Dammit I keep forgetting that the Democrats have an entirely different take on the first Amendment!...You can say whatever you want, as long as it's OK with them.



Whoa there, Whiny McDramaqueen. People daring to disagree with you aren’t violating your First Amendment rights. Needling a tender ego, maybe, but that’s about it.


Interesting take in that I am Not the one claiming my 1st Amendment rights are being "violated"..lol. That burden falls on the snowflakes who continuously advocate "Hate speech" as somehow being "mean" and responsible for hurting peoples feelings. Funny in that no one here can legally define said infraction, just the constant allusion to it as being "hateful", does that have a meaning that is supposed intimidate someone? And for the record, disagree with me all you want, you will never see me hiding behind the skirt y'all refer to as "Hate speech". I will disagree as well, but try to stay out of the gutter in that I believe making these things personal is pretty chicken****.


Ok. Let me see if I have this straightened out after all these years.

1. Liberal says something
2. You disagree
3. Liberal disagrees with your dissent
4. By the liberal simply disagreeing with you in return, the liberal is a hypocrite on the very basis that you are not to be disagreed with. You simply wish to voice your opinion and not have it challenged.
5. Since you have your own strict personal definition of the word "tolerance," that definition being "As soon as you, lowly liberal, disagree with me, you are intolerant," you can apply it however you wish.
5a. Regardless of the substance or merit of the liberal's dissent, that substance or merit is null and void since there IS no substance or merit...the ONLY issue is that the liberal simply cannot handle the existence of your opinion (Which, I give you credit for...it's a fantastic way to deflect any inquiry that comes your way that you find to uncomfortable to reply to any further)

Is that about right? This is a pretty complicated matter.


goldtop - 12/15/2019 at 04:53 PM


lukester420 - 12/15/2019 at 04:54 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Puzzling how someone is so concerned for the right to spew hatred...


Yep, one of the Planets great mysteries.... "How can ANYONE disagree with the Democratic point of view concerning President Trump"?!!


Well, actually, no. He’s inferring you support hateful speech. It’s an easy conclusion to draw.


My bad... Dammit I keep forgetting that the Democrats have an entirely different take on the first Amendment!...You can say whatever you want, as long as it's OK with them.



Whoa there, Whiny McDramaqueen. People daring to disagree with you aren’t violating your First Amendment rights. Needling a tender ego, maybe, but that’s about it.


Interesting take in that I am Not the one claiming my 1st Amendment rights are being "violated"..lol. That burden falls on the snowflakes who continuously advocate "Hate speech" as somehow being "mean" and responsible for hurting peoples feelings. Funny in that no one here can legally define said infraction, just the constant allusion to it as being "hateful", does that have a meaning that is supposed intimidate someone? And for the record, disagree with me all you want, you will never see me hiding behind the skirt y'all refer to as "Hate speech". I will disagree as well, but try to stay out of the gutter in that I believe making these things personal is pretty chicken****.


Ok. Let me see if I have this straightened out after all these years.

1. Liberal says something
2. You disagree
3. Liberal disagrees with your dissent
4. By the liberal simply disagreeing with you in return, the liberal is a hypocrite on the very basis that you are not to be disagreed with. You simply wish to voice your opinion and not have it challenged.
5. Since you have your own strict personal definition of the word "tolerance," that definition being "As soon as you, lowly liberal, disagree with me, you are intolerant," you can apply it however you wish.
5a. Regardless of the substance or merit of the liberal's dissent, that substance or merit is null and void since there IS no substance or merit...the ONLY issue is that the liberal simply cannot handle the existence of your opinion (Which, I give you credit for...it's a fantastic way to deflect any inquiry that comes your way that you find to uncomfortable to reply to any further)

Is that about right? This is a pretty complicated matter.


Spot on. You forgot the part where anyone who disagrees with him is a labeled a snowflake, then when faced with the fact that he is the BIGGGEST snowflake here, the term snowflake is now just some buzzword used by "liberals" when they have no arguments left to make because being such a BIG man, his opinions are fact.

And somehow, hilariously everyone but him is a hypocrite here.
Either top notch 5 star trolling or painful unawareness of his own insecurities and buffoonery.


BrerRabbit - 12/15/2019 at 05:17 PM

I don't see why anyone would advocate hate speech. Sure it is your right to use racial slurs, gay bash, denigrate women what have you, but spare us the defense of antisocial tendencies. Hate speech is sick and wrong and you know it.

It is perfectly legal to eat dogsh!t but we don't go on websites and promote it, then get mad at people who are offended by it. And get all indignant when folks tell us our breath smells like dogsh!t.

Eat all the dogsh!t you like, as an American it is your Constitutional right. Just don't offer me any.


Jerry - 12/15/2019 at 09:01 PM

quote:
I don't see why anyone would advocate hate speech. Sure it is your right to use racial slurs, gay bash, denigrate women what have you,


I didn't like it when the Neo-Nazi party was allowed to march and chant in Skokie. It was their right under the 1st Amendment, and they did so.
My feelings are that if you wish to engage in spouting what we call in Georgia as "fighting words", then you must be ready to suffer the consequences.
A few civil lawsuits citing mental cruelty could go a long way to stop it.


BrerRabbit - 12/15/2019 at 10:24 PM

quote:
I didn't like it when the Neo-Nazi party was allowed to march and chant in Skokie. It was their right under the 1st Amendment, and they did so.
My feelings are that if you wish to engage in spouting what we call in Georgia as "fighting words", then you must be ready to suffer the consequences.
A few civil lawsuits citing mental cruelty could go a long way to stop it.


For sure. And I get and emphatically agree with the argument that we must defend the First Amendment. Maybe in our zealous rush to defend free speech we could at the very least buffer our denial of hate speech with a brief caveat that we view racial insults and the like as unacceptable.

If someone goes on ad nauseum about the right to hate speech and never once acknowledges the basic indecency, then we can only assume they are defending not only the right, but the offending language itself.


goldtop - 12/16/2019 at 01:17 AM

quote:
quote:
I didn't like it when the Neo-Nazi party was allowed to march and chant in Skokie. It was their right under the 1st Amendment, and they did so.
My feelings are that if you wish to engage in spouting what we call in Georgia as "fighting words", then you must be ready to suffer the consequences.
A few civil lawsuits citing mental cruelty could go a long way to stop it.


For sure. And I get and emphatically agree with the argument that we must defend the First Amendment. Maybe in our zealous rush to defend free speech we could at the very least buffer our denial of hate speech with a brief caveat that we view racial insults and the like as unacceptable.

If someone goes on ad nauseum about the right to hate speech and never once acknowledges the basic indecency, then we can only assume they are defending not only the right, but the offending language itself.



^^^ This all day. The argument that one should just stand by and allow such speech without rebuttal or hear that such speech is vile and disgusting and then claim you're intolerant is the most laughable moments I hear. As though tolerance for hate is some expected response is just mind numbing ignorance at its highest.

Sorry if you spew hatred and get backlash don't claim it's based on intolerance blame it on what it is hatred.

The tiresome word games for justifying bad behavior shows a lack of humanity beyond my logic


BIGV - 12/16/2019 at 01:39 AM

quote:


For sure. And I get and emphatically agree with the argument that we must defend the First Amendment. Maybe in our zealous rush to defend free speech we could at the very least buffer our denial of hate speech with a brief caveat that we view racial insults and the like as unacceptable.

If someone goes on ad nauseum about the right to hate speech and never once acknowledges the basic indecency, then we can only assume they are defending not only the right, but the offending language itself.


The problem here is that definition, A)....Differs from definition B)...So, where do you draw the line? Simply stating and "defining" something as "Hate speech" will never satisfy THE LAW. Thank God the Supreme Court has already set forth limitations that have stood for 2 centuries. You MAY NOT exercise any speech that is a CALL FOR VIOLENCE. Other than what you wish to describe as "Hateful" is extremely vague and opens a box that should remain closed. "Indecency" is in the eye of the beholder. Grow some thicker skin and quit being so easily offended all while claiming anyone who disagrees with you is a bigot, racist, homophobe or the best one yet, "playing the victim".

quote:
I don't see why anyone would advocate hate speech


No one here is "advocating Hate speech"...Period. Until the Supreme Court defines it legally, followed by the Prosecution of one who breaks this, Non-Existent "law". It is nothing more than yada-yada speak, a fictitious term coined by those who unknowingly wish to limit a Constitutionally protected activity. I don't care how much anyone here finds it "Objectionable" or "Indecent"....Is the LAW.


Skydog32103 - 12/16/2019 at 01:53 AM

I don't think any type of hate speech should be illegal, but I will exercise my right to free speech by saying that those who engage in it are a bunch of ignorant fools.


BIGV - 12/16/2019 at 01:56 AM

quote:
I don't think any type of hate speech should be illegal, but I will exercise my right to free speech by saying that those who engage in it are a bunch of ignorant fools.


"It"...... If you feel like it....Tell me/us how as an Attorney, YOU would prosecute someone accused of said "crime" ?...What would you say to the Judge/Court/Jury?


BrerRabbit - 12/16/2019 at 02:03 AM

quote:
So, where do you draw the line?


You draw the line wirh your own conscience. There are certain standards we all recognize as socially acceptable, so all this "legal definition" stuff is hoohah. You are a fairminded person, and you know well and good what is abhorrent. It would do wonders for your staunch defense of the First Anendment if you gave an inch and acknowledged that yes you find. law notwithstanding, certain language personally unacceptable.


lukester420 - 12/16/2019 at 02:08 AM

quote:
The tiresome word games for justifying bad behavior shows a lack of humanity beyond my logic


100%
Seems some are stuck in the semantics of legalities, why, I do not know. No one is being accused of crimes, only of being a miserable human being.

[Edited on 12/16/2019 by lukester420]


Skydog32103 - 12/16/2019 at 02:08 AM

quote:
"It"...... If you feel like it....Tell me/us how as an Attorney, YOU would prosecute someone accused of said "crime" ?...What would you say to the Judge/Court/Jury?


But it's not a crime.


lukester420 - 12/16/2019 at 02:12 AM

quote:
quote:
"It"...... If you feel like it....Tell me/us how as an Attorney, YOU would prosecute someone accused of said "crime" ?...What would you say to the Judge/Court/Jury?


But it's not a crime.


I think you tripped up the bot mechanism, he was forced to ask a question that had nothing to do with what you said in order to ignore his ignorance. Faulty model


BIGV - 12/16/2019 at 02:14 AM

quote:
quote:
So, where do you draw the line?


You draw the line wirh your own conscience. There are certain standards we all recognize as socially acceptable, so all this "legal definition" stuff is hoohah. You are a fairminded person, and you know well and good what is abhorrent. It would do wonders for your staunch defense of the First Anendment if you gave an inch and acknowledged that yes you find. law notwithstanding, certain language personally unacceptable.


Words I find "Unacceptable" are few and far between. However, how I choose to use them is my decision alone. Tact plays a big part of my vocabulary and I do not choose to say things that others may find offensive, but if you "choose to be offended" by what I say/write/think that is on you and no one else.


BIGV - 12/16/2019 at 02:21 AM

quote:
quote:
"It"...... If you feel like it....Tell me/us how as an Attorney, YOU would prosecute someone accused of said "crime" ?...What would you say to the Judge/Court/Jury?


But it's not a crime.


"Said crime"

Thank God it is not.

Never mind


BrerRabbit - 12/16/2019 at 02:34 AM

quote:
. . . I do not choose to say things that others may find offensive . . .


That works. You choose freely to limit your free speech out of personal civil responsibility.

All noise aside, I would not want to be the unfortunate racist @sswipe that happened to be taunting passersby with racial slurs when you walked by. Something tells me that you would not hesitate to set aside your semantics and physically deprive me of my First Amendment rights. Just a hunch.


BIGV - 12/16/2019 at 03:43 AM

quote:
quote:
. . . I do not choose to say things that others may find offensive . . .


That works. You choose freely to limit your free speech out of personal civil responsibility.

All noise aside, I would not want to be the unfortunate racist @sswipe that happened to be taunting passersby with racial slurs when you walked by. Something tells me that you would not hesitate to set aside your semantics and physically deprive me of my First Amendment rights. Just a hunch.


Not my style; practice what you preach. But lay a hand on my girlfriend and we'll have more than words.

quote:
and physically deprive me of my First Amendment rights


I learned a long time ago to keep my nose out of other people's verbal altercations, nothing good ever comes out of uninvited involvement...


BrerRabbit - 12/16/2019 at 04:11 AM

Like I said, a hunch. Anyway, we seem to concur on voluntary limits and self policing on free speech.


BIGV - 12/16/2019 at 04:28 AM

quote:
Like I said, a hunch. Anyway, we seem to concur on voluntary limits and self policing on free speech.


Good stuff and right in line with one of my most fervent beliefs:

"Mow your own lawn"

Merry X-Mas my friend


alanwoods - 12/16/2019 at 04:30 AM

quote:
I don't see why anyone would advocate hate speech. Sure it is your right to use racial slurs, gay bash, denigrate women what have you, but spare us the defense of antisocial tendencies. Hate speech is sick and wrong and you know it.

It is perfectly legal to eat dogsh!t but we don't go on websites and promote it, then get mad at people who are offended by it. And get all indignant when folks tell us our breath smells like dogsh!t.

Eat all the dogsh!t you like, as an American it is your Constitutional right. Just don't offer me any.





[Edited on 12/16/2019 by alanwoods]

[Edited on 12/16/2019 by alanwoods]


Stephen - 12/16/2019 at 04:48 AM

quote:
quote:
Like I said, a hunch. Anyway, we seem to concur on voluntary limits and self policing on free speech.


Good stuff and right in line with one of my most fervent beliefs:

"Mow your own lawn"

Merry X-Mas my friend


“treat others as you would want to be treated”
That might be the common-sense caveat the founding fathers had in mind in guaranteeing the right to free speech

its a timeless meaningful axiom that belongs through the year, esp this time of year & bouncing back Yuletide best wishes

[Edited on 12/16/2019 by Stephen]


BrerRabbit - 12/16/2019 at 05:40 AM

Dammit alanwoods you just made me throw up in my mouth a little bit. After I just ate a peanut butter sandwich. You know, that awful little shot of bile cud? I hate that.


Skydog32103 - 12/16/2019 at 01:52 PM

quote:
I do not choose to say things that others may find offensive, but if you "choose to be offended" by what I say/write/think that is on you and no one else.


What a complete load of garbage, why do you lie to yourself? You LOVE to say things that others may find offensive.

[Edited on 12/16/2019 by Skydog32103]


BIGV - 12/16/2019 at 03:04 PM

quote:
quote:
I do not choose to say things that others may find offensive, but if you "choose to be offended" by what I say/write/think that is on you and no one else.


What a complete load of garbage, why do you lie to yourself? You LOVE to say things that others may find offensive.


This is a perfect example of how disconnected from the rights of others to speak their minds you really are. YOU don't like it and YOU speak for everyone. YOU find it "Offensive" and so it goes. YOU are CHOOSING to be offended.

Not my problem.


Skydog32103 - 12/16/2019 at 03:25 PM

quote:
This is a perfect example of how disconnected from the rights of others to speak their minds you really are. YOU don't like it and YOU speak for everyone. YOU find it "Offensive" and so it goes. YOU are CHOOSING to be offended.


Not the “rights of others”, just you. And I view you the same way I view a deranged belligerent drunk at a bar, but if you want to call it “offense”, go right ahead. Again, when asked why you are so angry and hateful towards Democrats and liberals, your very first words were, “because I’m working class”.....you hate being there and you need to blame someone. It just cheapens the site when you make every thread about yourself.


BIGV - 12/16/2019 at 03:41 PM

quote:
quote:
This is a perfect example of how disconnected from the rights of others to speak their minds you really are. YOU don't like it and YOU speak for everyone. YOU find it "Offensive" and so it goes. YOU are CHOOSING to be offended.


Not the “rights of others”, just you. And I view you the same way I view a deranged belligerent drunk at a bar, but if you want to call it “offense”, go right ahead. Again, when asked why you are so angry and hateful towards Democrats and liberals, your very first words were, “because I’m working class”.....you hate being there and you need to blame someone. It just cheapens the site when you make every thread about yourself.


YOU have judged that I am "angry" LOL.. WHO in the hell are you to feel as though YOU can demand answers from anyone?. ...Read through the whole thread and see just who has an "issue" here. LOL. YOU could CHOOSE to ignore it all.....couldn't you?

YOU continually make the CHOICE to be "offended"...

YOUR issue, NOT mine.


Skydog32103 - 12/16/2019 at 03:47 PM

quote:
YOU have judged that I am "angry" LOL.. WHO in the hell are you to feel as though YOU can demand answers from anyone?


No, you told me you were angry, and told me why you hated them. And i didn’t demand anything - I asked you, and you offered it up on a silver platter, lol. Uh oh, the conversation is getting hostile, isn’t this where you vow to be mature and walk away?


BIGV - 12/16/2019 at 04:01 PM

quote:
No, you told me you were angry, and told me why you hated them.


Never happened, not in my vocabulary and if you do not post/quote those exact words, well, you Sir, are a damn Liar.

Take your time, I will be here all day.


BrerRabbit - 12/16/2019 at 04:02 PM

I don't see anything wrong with hating a "political party". I hate Nazis. No, not dislike or disagree - in no uncertain terms "hate" is the accurate term. I hate Nazis. Every last one. I am intolerant of Nazis. I do not recognize their right to exist.
Every drop of Allied blood spilled in WW2 was worth kicking their ass, and may Nazi ass continue to be kicked for eternity.

There's my perfectly legal hate speech.


BIGV - 12/16/2019 at 04:04 PM

quote:
I don't see anything wrong with hating a "political party". I hate Nazis. No, not dislike or disagree - in no uncertain terms "hate" is the accurate term. I hate Nazis. Every last one. I am intolerant of Nazis. I do not recognize their right to exist.
Every drop of Allied blood spilled in WW2 was worth kicking their ass, and may Nazi ass continue to be kicked for eternity.

There's my perfectly legal hate speech.


Fair enough and to your earlier point YOU have made that judgement about your own choices.

Commendable.


Skydog32103 - 12/16/2019 at 04:41 PM

quote:
I don't see anything wrong with hating a "political party".


Based on your posts, I highly doubt you find it ok for Americans to hate one another’s set of values because they differ, am I right? Your Nazi example doesn’t really relate to the current political climate here in the U.S., but I get your point.


BrerRabbit - 12/16/2019 at 05:16 PM

quote:
Your Nazi example doesn’t really relate to the current political climate here in the U.S.,


It does relate to the current political climate. We have Nazis, wannabe Nazis, and "all but" Nazis. I respect their right to express their views, and I don't call for violence against them. That said, when I hear of an assault on a Nazi I see it as they earned it and it is just ongoing post WW2 mop up work.


Skydog32103 - 12/16/2019 at 05:57 PM

quote:
I don't see anything wrong with hating a "political party"


quote:
It does relate to the current political climate. We have Nazis, wannabe Nazis, and "all but" Nazis.


We might have some Neo Nazi wannabe scum, but The Nazi party does not exist here today.

Regarding the parties we do have today, if we are going to hate or condemn people, shouldn’t it be based on their behavior rather than a value they hold or how they vote? Shouldn’t we instead judge people on how they treat others? Pinning your ire on a party is scapegoating, and an excuse.



Jerry - 12/16/2019 at 06:38 PM

quote:
quote:
I don't see anything wrong with hating a "political party"


quote:
It does relate to the current political climate. We have Nazis, wannabe Nazis, and "all but" Nazis.


We might have some Neo Nazi wannabe scum, but The Nazi party does not exist here today.

Regarding the parties we do have today, if we are going to hate or condemn people, shouldn’t it be based on their behavior rather than a value they hold or how they vote? Shouldn’t we instead judge people on how they treat others? Pinning your ire on a party is scapegoating, and an excuse.





Man you will pick on anybody that doesn't agree with you.

So here goes. I admit defeat, I concede, I proudly and loudly proclaim that you win.

You sir are the nadir, no the absolute King, of insulting behavior and speech.

I bow to your greatness of using the written word to change statements done by others to fit your agenda, to proclaim people wrong when they are right, to run away when facts don't fit your purpose, to attack posters with subdued* wording, and to not go to, or acknowledge links posted that do not follow your idea of reality.

No, no. No need to respond to thank me. I, and others, will probably not respond/read it anyway.


Skydog32103 - 12/16/2019 at 06:46 PM

quote:
Man you will pick on anybody that doesn't agree with you.


You think my post to Brer was picking on him? LOL, how cute.


Skydog32103 - 12/16/2019 at 06:50 PM

quote:
and to not go to, or acknowledge links posted


LOL, he’s hurt I didn’t acknowledge one of his links. Cute as a button that Jerry.


Skydog32103 - 12/16/2019 at 06:58 PM

quote:
Man you will pick on anybody that doesn't agree with you.


I’m just making America great again. I can be President now - the right will love me!


Jerry - 12/17/2019 at 04:25 AM

quote:
. Cute as a button that Jerry.


Thank you for the compliment.


lukester420 - 12/17/2019 at 11:34 AM

quote:
quote:
I don't see anything wrong with hating a "political party"


quote:
It does relate to the current political climate. We have Nazis, wannabe Nazis, and "all but" Nazis.


We might have some Neo Nazi wannabe scum, but The Nazi party does not exist here today.



We may not have the same Nazi party as it was known in the 30’s but I think here Nazis is a catch all term for white supremacists, which yes we do still have.

Ask anyone who lives in a town in the south that these inbred mouth breathers have descended on to preserve a monument to their confederate “heroes” (or as I see them, treasonous dogs that needed a presidential pardon to avoid execution). Bunch of unemployment collecting turd burglars that have nothing to do but troll the internet and travel the south finding statues and monuments to use as evidence of the continued Northern aggression or whatever they like to cry about to compensate for their own failures and inadequacies.

They all are so quick to tell the AA community to “get over slavery, it was generations ago, get over mass violence aimed at keeping you oppressed for the next 100+ years after the war, you had a civil rights movement everything’s fine now get over it”
Yet they have nothing better to do than prop up some statues of a bunch of chumps that got slaughtered generations ago in the name of preserving the human livestock business. Yeah I get it they were veterans and yadda yadda, they were on the wrong side of history morally and their “heritage” and legacy doesn’t need to be preserved IMO. If that makes me “intolerant” then yes I am very intolerant of white supremacists, gotta fight fire with fire sometimes.


[Edited on 12/17/2019 by lukester420]

[Edited on 12/17/2019 by lukester420]


BrerRabbit - 12/17/2019 at 05:02 PM

American Nazis are probably more in number and more vicious now than they were in the 1930's. Disappeared for a few years after WW2 but resurfaced in 1960. They are all over the Southwest and Northwest. Arizona is infested - Oregon, Washington, Idaho. Might not be visible in Paramus.

There are none so blind as those who will nazi . . .

http://www.nsm88.org/ "NSM" stands for National Socialist Movement, not "Nazi Scum Matter".

http://www.americannaziparty.com/

Pretty sure there have been a few around here on WP.


Jerry - 12/17/2019 at 06:29 PM

quote:
American Nazis are probably more in number and more vicious now than they were in the 1930's. Disappeared for a few years after WW2 but resurfaced in 1960. They are all over the Southwest and Northwest. Arizona is infested - Oregon, Washington, Idaho. Might not be visible in Paramus.

There are none so blind as those who will nazi . . .

http://www.nsm88.org/ "NSM" stands for National Socialist Movement, not "Nazi Scum Matter".

http://www.americannaziparty.com/

Pretty sure there have been a few around here on WP.


I think there are a few on here now, but they can't make up their minds if they are Nazis or communists.

For lukester420, my grandfather was born in 1855. His dad, uncles, and older brothers joined the 3rd Ga. Cavalry in 1863 when Union troops were invading the southern states and the Anaconda Plan of Lincoln was taking it's toll.
None owned slaves, families with as many as 17 children (my Dad, born 1917, was #17 of his brood) was the labor force and worked in rotation with each others' farms.
A couple didn't return. One died at Camp Douglas where the bodies were for a while either given to the med school for dissection, or just dropped in the lake.
There is a memorial in CHICAGO over the mound where around 6,000 Confederate dead are entombed, but only 4,200 names are depicted on the plaques.
It was paid for by donations from citizens of Chicago and lodges of SCV chapters.

https://graveyards.com/IL/Cook/oakwoods/confederate.html

So pardon me if I take it personal about the Confederate remembrance monuments.

Also, my 3rd cousin is buried in the Confederate cemetery in Rose Hill, about 200 feet from Duane and Berry.


lukester420 - 12/17/2019 at 07:11 PM

quote:
quote:
American Nazis are probably more in number and more vicious now than they were in the 1930's. Disappeared for a few years after WW2 but resurfaced in 1960. They are all over the Southwest and Northwest. Arizona is infested - Oregon, Washington, Idaho. Might not be visible in Paramus.

There are none so blind as those who will nazi . . .

http://www.nsm88.org/ "NSM" stands for National Socialist Movement, not "Nazi Scum Matter".

http://www.americannaziparty.com/

Pretty sure there have been a few around here on WP.


I think there are a few on here now, but they can't make up their minds if they are Nazis or communists.

For lukester420, my grandfather was born in 1855. His dad, uncles, and older brothers joined the 3rd Ga. Cavalry in 1863 when Union troops were invading the southern states and the Anaconda Plan of Lincoln was taking it's toll.
None owned slaves, families with as many as 17 children (my Dad, born 1917, was #17 of his brood) was the labor force and worked in rotation with each others' farms.
A couple didn't return. One died at Camp Douglas where the bodies were for a while either given to the med school for dissection, or just dropped in the lake.
There is a memorial in CHICAGO over the mound where around 6,000 Confederate dead are entombed, but only 4,200 names are depicted on the plaques.
It was paid for by donations from citizens of Chicago and lodges of SCV chapters.

https://graveyards.com/IL/Cook/oakwoods/confederate.html

So pardon me if I take it personal about the Confederate remembrance monuments.

Also, my 3rd cousin is buried in the Confederate cemetery in Rose Hill, about 200 feet from Duane and Berry.


A cemetery is a good place for a monument to the memory of the deceased, not in front of a courthouse or a middle school.


Jerry - 12/17/2019 at 08:29 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
American Nazis are probably more in number and more vicious now than they were in the 1930's. Disappeared for a few years after WW2 but resurfaced in 1960. They are all over the Southwest and Northwest. Arizona is infested - Oregon, Washington, Idaho. Might not be visible in Paramus.

There are none so blind as those who will nazi . . .

http://www.nsm88.org/ "NSM" stands for National Socialist Movement, not "Nazi Scum Matter".

http://www.americannaziparty.com/

Pretty sure there have been a few around here on WP.


I think there are a few on here now, but they can't make up their minds if they are Nazis or communists.

For lukester420, my grandfather was born in 1855. His dad, uncles, and older brothers joined the 3rd Ga. Cavalry in 1863 when Union troops were invading the southern states and the Anaconda Plan of Lincoln was taking it's toll.
None owned slaves, families with as many as 17 children (my Dad, born 1917, was #17 of his brood) was the labor force and worked in rotation with each others' farms.
A couple didn't return. One died at Camp Douglas where the bodies were for a while either given to the med school for dissection, or just dropped in the lake.
There is a memorial in CHICAGO over the mound where around 6,000 Confederate dead are entombed, but only 4,200 names are depicted on the plaques.
It was paid for by donations from citizens of Chicago and lodges of SCV chapters.

https://graveyards.com/IL/Cook/oakwoods/confederate.html

So pardon me if I take it personal about the Confederate remembrance monuments.

Also, my 3rd cousin is buried in the Confederate cemetery in Rose Hill, about 200 feet from Duane and Berry.


A cemetery is a good place for a monument to the memory of the deceased, not in front of a courthouse or a middle school.

Not a bad point, but where do you put it when there are several cemeteries, with some being of separate faiths?
The one in Macon is in a small triangular park at the end of Cotton Ave. There are no government buildings anywhere close by. The old Capricorn Records office building is just up the street, and the music store where the Brothers bought supplies is across the street from it.
In small towns across the south when/if the bodies were returned, they were placed in family plots fairly close to the house.
Where would you put the memorials for those from the small towns?


lukester420 - 12/17/2019 at 09:57 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
American Nazis are probably more in number and more vicious now than they were in the 1930's. Disappeared for a few years after WW2 but resurfaced in 1960. They are all over the Southwest and Northwest. Arizona is infested - Oregon, Washington, Idaho. Might not be visible in Paramus.

There are none so blind as those who will nazi . . .

http://www.nsm88.org/ "NSM" stands for National Socialist Movement, not "Nazi Scum Matter".

http://www.americannaziparty.com/

Pretty sure there have been a few around here on WP.


I think there are a few on here now, but they can't make up their minds if they are Nazis or communists.

For lukester420, my grandfather was born in 1855. His dad, uncles, and older brothers joined the 3rd Ga. Cavalry in 1863 when Union troops were invading the southern states and the Anaconda Plan of Lincoln was taking it's toll.
None owned slaves, families with as many as 17 children (my Dad, born 1917, was #17 of his brood) was the labor force and worked in rotation with each others' farms.
A couple didn't return. One died at Camp Douglas where the bodies were for a while either given to the med school for dissection, or just dropped in the lake.
There is a memorial in CHICAGO over the mound where around 6,000 Confederate dead are entombed, but only 4,200 names are depicted on the plaques.
It was paid for by donations from citizens of Chicago and lodges of SCV chapters.

https://graveyards.com/IL/Cook/oakwoods/confederate.html

So pardon me if I take it personal about the Confederate remembrance monuments.

Also, my 3rd cousin is buried in the Confederate cemetery in Rose Hill, about 200 feet from Duane and Berry.


A cemetery is a good place for a monument to the memory of the deceased, not in front of a courthouse or a middle school.

Not a bad point, but where do you put it when there are several cemeteries, with some being of separate faiths?
The one in Macon is in a small triangular park at the end of Cotton Ave. There are no government buildings anywhere close by. The old Capricorn Records office building is just up the street, and the music store where the Brothers bought supplies is across the street from it.
In small towns across the south when/if the bodies were returned, they were placed in family plots fairly close to the house.
Where would you put the memorials for those from the small towns?


Nowhere. Why memorialize a losing effort for an unjust cause. Get over it.


Stephen - 12/18/2019 at 02:28 PM

quote:
1)"Racist"
2)"Bigot"
3)"Hate Speech"
4)"Playing the victim"
5)"Snowflake"

These euphemisms are perfect defense mechanisms for the "Liberal on the go"!

LOL


What a country - a Utah Jazz fan permanently banned from their gym for shouting racist epithets at Russell Westbrook earlier this season, is now suing the Jazz saying his Constitution rights were violated, nothing he shouted was off color etc etc

So that’s one of the downsides of free speech - trash like that - his lawsuit should be banished too


Skydog32103 - 12/18/2019 at 06:38 PM

quote:
What a country - a Utah Jazz fan permanently banned from their gym for shouting racist epithets at Russell Westbrook earlier this season, is now suing the Jazz saying his Constitution rights were violated, nothing he shouted was off color etc etc

So that’s one of the downsides of free speech - trash like that - his lawsuit should be banished too


Agreed. It's almost as if someone is winking to people that it's ok to say those things and behave that way.


Skydog32103 - 12/18/2019 at 06:48 PM

Boy, Trump sure didn't like Nancy's "say a prayer" line. It's really really under his skin.


MartinD28 - 12/18/2019 at 11:29 PM

quote:
Boy, Trump sure didn't like Nancy's "say a prayer" line. It's really really under his skin.

That's because Trump's a family man of morals & deep religious convictions.

Citing 'Two Corinthians,' Trump Struggles To Make The Sale To Evangelicals

https://www.npr.org/2016/01/18/463528847/citing-two-corinthians-trump-strug gles-to-make-the-sale-to-evangelicals


goldtop - 12/19/2019 at 01:54 AM

Article 1 and Article 2 passes 12/18/2019

He will forever be *Donald J Trump


OriginalGoober - 12/19/2019 at 04:41 AM

**Most partisan impeachment of the three led by house democrats

[Edited on 12/19/2019 by OriginalGoober]


adhill58 - 12/19/2019 at 02:10 PM

quote:
**Most partisan impeachment of the three led by house democrats

[Edited on 12/19/2019 by OriginalGoober]



"Since we cannot defend the president's actions and we don't have the numbers to stop the impeachment resolutions, we can all stick together and knock it for not being bi-partisan."

Great obfuscation strategy... really helps the public be able to be an informed electorate.


Skydog32103 - 12/19/2019 at 03:39 PM

Trump again makes fun of deceased Americans to a crowd of applause, as retaliation against a widow for voting against him. Trump also announced in his new Uncle Sam meme (google it if you haven't seen it), that an attack on Trump is an attack on "You", because his values are your values. His behavior is what YOU really want. It's YOU that makes fun of dead honorable Americans. It's YOU who throws tantrums on Twitter all day. It's YOU who likes to sink low and treat people horribly, because that's who YOU are.

He's convinced the right to distrust the United States, and instead trust the Russians, Putin, and the Ukraine to find "the truth". When will they realize they have been brainwashed by a bad person? He's sold you poor folks that the divide and conquer strategy will work. The temptation was too much to resist, so you bought it. Meanwhile, it's all for his own benefit, and nothing else. In the end, by 2025, just like Manafort, Cohen, and all the rest, his supporters will be the ones who suffered and lost the most.



[Edited on 12/19/2019 by Skydog32103]


Jerry - 12/19/2019 at 05:07 PM

quote:
quote:
**Most partisan impeachment of the three led by house democrats

[Edited on 12/19/2019 by OriginalGoober]



"Since we cannot defend the president's actions and we don't have the numbers to stop the impeachment resolutions, we can all stick together and knock it for not being bi-partisan."

Great obfuscation strategy... really helps the public be able to be an informed electorate.


Link to the quote please.


Jerry - 12/19/2019 at 09:39 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
American Nazis are probably more in number and more vicious now than they were in the 1930's. Disappeared for a few years after WW2 but resurfaced in 1960. They are all over the Southwest and Northwest. Arizona is infested - Oregon, Washington, Idaho. Might not be visible in Paramus.

There are none so blind as those who will nazi . . .

http://www.nsm88.org/ "NSM" stands for National Socialist Movement, not "Nazi Scum Matter".

http://www.americannaziparty.com/

Pretty sure there have been a few around here on WP.


I think there are a few on here now, but they can't make up their minds if they are Nazis or communists.

For lukester420, my grandfather was born in 1855. His dad, uncles, and older brothers joined the 3rd Ga. Cavalry in 1863 when Union troops were invading the southern states and the Anaconda Plan of Lincoln was taking it's toll.
None owned slaves, families with as many as 17 children (my Dad, born 1917, was #17 of his brood) was the labor force and worked in rotation with each others' farms.
A couple didn't return. One died at Camp Douglas where the bodies were for a while either given to the med school for dissection, or just dropped in the lake.
There is a memorial in CHICAGO over the mound where around 6,000 Confederate dead are entombed, but only 4,200 names are depicted on the plaques.
It was paid for by donations from citizens of Chicago and lodges of SCV chapters.

https://graveyards.com/IL/Cook/oakwoods/confederate.html

So pardon me if I take it personal about the Confederate remembrance monuments.

Also, my 3rd cousin is buried in the Confederate cemetery in Rose Hill, about 200 feet from Duane and Berry.


A cemetery is a good place for a monument to the memory of the deceased, not in front of a courthouse or a middle school.

Not a bad point, but where do you put it when there are several cemeteries, with some being of separate faiths?
The one in Macon is in a small triangular park at the end of Cotton Ave. There are no government buildings anywhere close by. The old Capricorn Records office building is just up the street, and the music store where the Brothers bought supplies is across the street from it.
In small towns across the south when/if the bodies were returned, they were placed in family plots fairly close to the house.
Where would you put the memorials for those from the small towns?


Nowhere. Why memorialize a losing effort for an unjust cause. Get over it.


What unjust cause are you talking about?


adhill58 - 12/20/2019 at 01:25 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
**Most partisan impeachment of the three led by house democrats

[Edited on 12/19/2019 by OriginalGoober]



"Since we cannot defend the president's actions and we don't have the numbers to stop the impeachment resolutions, we can all stick together and knock it for not being bi-partisan."

Great obfuscation strategy... really helps the public be able to be an informed electorate.


Link to the quote please.


It is not an actual quote, Jerry. It is my summation of what the GOP is doing right now. Paraphrasing and summary must be hard for some on your side to follow... like when Schiff was accused of adding words to the phone call during the inquiry.


Also, I assume the "unjust cause" mentioned in the other post refers to treason and armed rebellion against the United States in order to preserve the practice of buying, selling, and raping human beings in order to profit off of the forced labor of them and their offspring. This too seems like it shouldn't need an explainer.


lukester420 - 12/20/2019 at 06:14 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
**Most partisan impeachment of the three led by house democrats

[Edited on 12/19/2019 by OriginalGoober]



"Since we cannot defend the president's actions and we don't have the numbers to stop the impeachment resolutions, we can all stick together and knock it for not being bi-partisan."

Great obfuscation strategy... really helps the public be able to be an informed electorate.


Link to the quote please.


It is not an actual quote, Jerry. It is my summation of what the GOP is doing right now. Paraphrasing and summary must be hard for some on your side to follow... like when Schiff was accused of adding words to the phone call during the inquiry.


Also, I assume the "unjust cause" mentioned in the other post refers to treason and armed rebellion against the United States in order to preserve the practice of buying, selling, and raping human beings in order to profit off of the forced labor of them and their offspring. This too seems like it shouldn't need an explainer.


Some people just cant get the fist of the written. Word


BrerRabbit - 12/21/2019 at 03:34 AM

You owe Jerry an apology. He is simply honoring his fallen ancestors. You want to accuse about unjust causes - our entire history has been an unjust cause, only redeemed by the liberty we earned through all our mistakes. We lose that liberty and our history is nothing but a sordid chain of crime - slavery was just one aspect. It was a big New World, we had to kill and steal to dig in. No American is clean.

Yankees weren't so wonderful either, for starters they slaughtered and corraled Native Americans (as did the South). Let's talk about slavery, was it really abolished? Working conditions during the Industrial Revolution and well into the 20th century were as bad as slavery. Possibly worse in that the workers were disposable, while slaves were a costly investment that required maintenance.

quote:
Nowhere. Why memorialize a losing effort for an unjust cause.


How about the Vietnam War Memorial? Isn't that a monument to losers of an unjust cause? Of course not, it is remembrance of our brothers, fallen heroes. Whether or not Uncle Sam was totally f*ckedup makes no difference. Those guys fought for us. Generations carry grief, everyone gets their memorials.

Definition of presentism
: an attitude toward the past dominated by present-day attitudes and experiences.

Example of presentism in a sentence

Every critic today should beware of presentism: judging people from 50, 150, or 500 years ago based on 2017’s fragile sensitivities.
— Deroy Murdock, National Review, "Monuments to Racist Democrats Should Enrage Leftist Mobs," 30 Aug. 2017


[Edited on 12/22/2019 by BrerRabbit]


Skydog32103 - 12/21/2019 at 02:20 PM

Trump supporters are being victimized. He sold people on idealistic values that he knew he wouldn't be able to build, just so he could turn their hope into hostility towards the United States when they didn't come to fruition....hostility towards the FBI, our judges, our intelligence agencies, Democrats, liberals, McCain, Mueller, and the list goes on. This is what makes Trump and his supporters 100% unique in American history. No other politician has ever tried to turn his voters against his, and their, own country. Gonna be tough to explain supporting that in about 10-20 years. I'm glad I won't have to do that, and I'm glad I won't have to lie about myself.


Chain - 12/21/2019 at 04:12 PM

quote:
Trump supporters are being victimized. He sold people on idealistic values that he knew he wouldn't be able to build, just so he could turn their hope into hostility towards the United States when they didn't come to fruition....hostility towards the FBI, our judges, our intelligence agencies, Democrats, liberals, McCain, Mueller, and the list goes on. This is what makes Trump and his supporters 100% unique in American history. No other politician has ever tried to turn his voters against his, and their, own country. Gonna be tough to explain supporting that in about 10-20 years. I'm glad I won't have to do that, and I'm glad I won't have to lie about myself.


Well said....Perhaps most sad is his supporters are so stuck in their herd mentality that his con still holds sway over them. Ironic given his and by extension their mantra is "Make America Great Again" when in reality Trump and also by extension they are actually destroying America...


BrerRabbit - 12/21/2019 at 08:23 PM

quote:
. . . so he could turn their hope into hostility towards the United States when they didn't come to fruition....hostility towards the FBI, our judges, our intelligence agencies, Democrats, liberals, McCain, Mueller, and the list goes on. This is what makes Trump and his supporters 100% unique in American history.


Standard operating procedure for fascists. Notice how not one Redhat disagrees whenever I mention they are done with democracy and want this president for life, and Prince Baron for monarch after that? Of course most fascists will say they aren't fascist because they don't know what fascism is. Except that it happened in Germany and how dare anyone say it could happen here.


lukester420 - 12/22/2019 at 03:57 PM

I owe Jerry nothing. Vietnam memorials can be separated from Confederate monuments because Vietnam vets were serving their country (just cause or not) not taking up arms against it.

Yes agreed all us Americans have blood on hands from the past, everyone does. However, vehemently denying this blood and knowing our families did horrible things, why organize gatherings that will attract Hate groups and violence (see every protest about taking down a statue or flag).
You can honor your families memory on your own amongst your family and friends, don’t hold up traffic and progress while demanding legislation to honor your family’s memory. Could it be that “honoring the memory of our confederate veterans” is just a convenient cover up for one’s true motives. Anyone who has Neo-Confederate hate groups showing up to support them should have the backbone or brains to realize they are representing hate not heritage period.



[Edited on 12/22/2019 by lukester420]


BrerRabbit - 12/22/2019 at 04:21 PM

I was wondering when the liberal version of Muleman would show up. I may not agree with Jerry on some things, but he is civil and doesn't come around and belittle people.


lukester420 - 12/22/2019 at 04:47 PM

quote:
I was wondering when the liberal version of Muleman would show up. I may not agree with Jerry on some things, but he is civil and doesn't come around and belittle people.


True I have turned crass and crude, but like someone else said, we can’t give peace a chance our way out of this muck, time to fight ignorance and vitriol with more stubborn bullheadedness and vitriol, maybe a poor disposition to have but meh civility has gotten us nowhere.
But seriously, screw Jerry and especially BIG P


PhotoRon286 - 12/22/2019 at 05:15 PM

quote:
quote:
I was wondering when the liberal version of Muleman would show up. I may not agree with Jerry on some things, but he is civil and doesn't come around and belittle people.


True I have turned crass and crude, but like someone else said, we can’t give peace a chance our way out of this muck, time to fight ignorance and vitriol with more stubborn bullheadedness and vitriol, maybe a poor disposition to have but meh civility has gotten us nowhere.
But seriously, screw Jerry and especially BIG P


I hardly see lukester as a liberal equal of muleturd.

Not even close.

I don't find him the least bit condescending, for one, and that was a muleturd specialty.


BrerRabbit - 12/22/2019 at 05:40 PM

Yeah, ok, I have my share of grudges too I guess. I consider Jerry one of the few friends I have made here, even though I don't think we should be mounting machine guns on baby carriages.

For sure, the Muleklan comparison was too much. Also gotta agree liberals need to start being @ssholes - it was the moral high road and politeness that cost Hillary the election - nobody knew that flat out fascist hostility would be embraced by half the voting population. She should have just ripped him a new @sshole from the gitgo.

Gonna disengage from the Civil War, Indian Wars, and Vietnam, and general exploitation of workers - there be dragons.



[Edited on 12/22/2019 by BrerRabbit]


lukester420 - 12/22/2019 at 05:51 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I was wondering when the liberal version of Muleman would show up. I may not agree with Jerry on some things, but he is civil and doesn't come around and belittle people.


True I have turned crass and crude, but like someone else said, we can’t give peace a chance our way out of this muck, time to fight ignorance and vitriol with more stubborn bullheadedness and vitriol, maybe a poor disposition to have but meh civility has gotten us nowhere.
But seriously, screw Jerry and especially BIG P


I hardly see lukester as a liberal equal of muleturd.

Not even close.

I don't find him the least bit condescending, for one, and that was a muleturd specialty.




I get the comparison,
I’m not as bad as that jerkoff was but I am capable of being a stubborn and rude at the very least.


goldtop - 12/22/2019 at 06:00 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I was wondering when the liberal version of Muleman would show up. I may not agree with Jerry on some things, but he is civil and doesn't come around and belittle people.


True I have turned crass and crude, but like someone else said, we can’t give peace a chance our way out of this muck, time to fight ignorance and vitriol with more stubborn bullheadedness and vitriol, maybe a poor disposition to have but meh civility has gotten us nowhere.
But seriously, screw Jerry and especially BIG P


I hardly see lukester as a liberal equal of muleturd.

Not even close.

I don't find him the least bit condescending, for one, and that was a muleturd specialty.




I get the comparison,
I’m not as bad as that jerkoff was but I am capable of being a stubborn and rude at the very least.


Seems being politically incorrect is reserved for Rep only because I've found when you use it against them they get their britches all in a bunch.

They want to be rude and use all sorts of decisive language that is simply rude but to them it's being blunt not rude until it's applied to them.



[Edited on 12/22/2019 by goldtop]


BrerRabbit - 12/22/2019 at 06:08 PM

quote:
Seems being politically incorrect is reserved for Rep only because I've found when you use it against them they get their britches all in a bunch.

They want to be rude and use all sorts of decisive language that is simply rude but to them it's being blunt not rude until it's applied to them.


True. They dish it out but can't take it. They freak at the smallest criticism. Like really freak, actually lose it. One thing is real strange is how they can't say one bad thing about their leader, it is like a cult.


lukester420 - 12/22/2019 at 06:34 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I was wondering when the liberal version of Muleman would show up. I may not agree with Jerry on some things, but he is civil and doesn't come around and belittle people.


True I have turned crass and crude, but like someone else said, we can’t give peace a chance our way out of this muck, time to fight ignorance and vitriol with more stubborn bullheadedness and vitriol, maybe a poor disposition to have but meh civility has gotten us nowhere.
But seriously, screw Jerry and especially BIG P


I hardly see lukester as a liberal equal of muleturd.

Not even close.

I don't find him the least bit condescending, for one, and that was a muleturd specialty.




I get the comparison,
I’m not as bad as that jerkoff was but I am capable of being a stubborn and rude at the very least.


Seems being politically incorrect is reserved for Rep only because I've found when you use it against them they get their britches all in a bunch.

They want to be rude and use all sorts of decisive language that is simply rude but to them it's being blunt not rude until it's applied to them.



[Edited on 12/22/2019 by goldtop]


And infringing on their rights lol


Jerry - 12/23/2019 at 12:47 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
**Most partisan impeachment of the three led by house democrats

[Edited on 12/19/2019 by OriginalGoober]



"Since we cannot defend the president's actions and we don't have the numbers to stop the impeachment resolutions, we can all stick together and knock it for not being bi-partisan."

Great obfuscation strategy... really helps the public be able to be an informed electorate.


Link to the quote please.


It is not an actual quote, Jerry. It is my summation of what the GOP is doing right now. Paraphrasing and summary must be hard for some on your side to follow... like when Schiff was accused of adding words to the phone call during the inquiry.


Also, I assume the "unjust cause" mentioned in the other post refers to treason and armed rebellion against the United States in order to preserve the practice of buying, selling, and raping human beings in order to profit off of the forced labor of them and their offspring. This too seems like it shouldn't need an explainer.


Sorry for the delay, but I tend not to post under painkillers.

1) Since you had your summation in quotation marks, I thought it was a quotation from another source. I was taught that in grade school English.

2) I was wondering if he was posting about that, except that slavery was still a money making venture even after the War of 1861-65 in some Union states.
I keep hearing and people keep posting about how that war was to end slavery. It wasn't. If it was, wouldn't you think that the slaves held in Union states and Washington, DC should have been freed before the war started?


Jerry - 12/23/2019 at 12:57 AM

quote:

But seriously, screw Jerry and especially BIG P


Even if you think I'm cute as a button, no.

Who's big P?


Bhawk - 12/23/2019 at 02:54 AM

quote:
“I never understood wind. You know, I know windmills very much... Gases are spewing into the atmosphere. You know we have a world, right? So the world is tiny compared to the universe. So tremendous, tremendous amount of fumes & everything.”


goldtop - 12/23/2019 at 03:56 AM

quote:
quote:
“I never understood wind. You know, I know windmills very much... Gases are spewing into the atmosphere. You know we have a world, right? So the world is tiny compared to the universe. So tremendous, tremendous amount of fumes & everything.”



Remember they "Like the way he talks"

Another right wing publication calls for his removal

BREAKING NEWS: The National Review, the conservative publication founded by William F. Buckley, Jr., has called for Trump to be removed from office!!

Here's their comments

The National Review, a conservative publication, is calling for Trump’s removal.

“The Constitution provides for impeachment & removal to protect us from officials, including presidents, who are unable or unwilling to distinguish between the common good.”


[Edited on 12/23/2019 by goldtop]


lukester420 - 12/23/2019 at 04:51 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
**Most partisan impeachment of the three led by house democrats

[Edited on 12/19/2019 by OriginalGoober]



"Since we cannot defend the president's actions and we don't have the numbers to stop the impeachment resolutions, we can all stick together and knock it for not being bi-partisan."

Great obfuscation strategy... really helps the public be able to be an informed electorate.


Link to the quote please.


It is not an actual quote, Jerry. It is my summation of what the GOP is doing right now. Paraphrasing and summary must be hard for some on your side to follow... like when Schiff was accused of adding words to the phone call during the inquiry.


Also, I assume the "unjust cause" mentioned in the other post refers to treason and armed rebellion against the United States in order to preserve the practice of buying, selling, and raping human beings in order to profit off of the forced labor of them and their offspring. This too seems like it shouldn't need an explainer.


Sorry for the delay, but I tend not to post under painkillers.

1) Since you had your summation in quotation marks, I thought it was a quotation from another source. I was taught that in grade school English.

2) I was wondering if he was posting about that, except that slavery was still a money making venture even after the War of 1861-65 in some Union states.
I keep hearing and people keep posting about how that war was to end slavery. It wasn't. If it was, wouldn't you think that the slaves held in Union states and Washington, DC should have been freed before the war started?


Why did the Confederacy secede? Don’t give me that state’s rights crap because that is a narrative spun by confederate apologists (and white supremacists) to save face. Name some state’s right they cared about that was not tied in to preserving the slavery based economy.

And you’ve got me confused with another, I do not find you cute as a button.
And seriously man, understand context, who could BIG P possibly be? Maybe the only person here with a name relatively close to that. I take it you were trying to be snarky and point out a typo, but alas your misunderstanding of the gist of the written word has yet another joke (albeit a stupid one) going over your head.


BrerRabbit - 12/23/2019 at 06:37 PM

quote:
Why did the Confederacy secede?


Slavery was the trigger issue, but the Civil War had been brewing since the Revolution. The Civil War was pretty much the USA testing the Union - filling in the blanks of the Constitution and figuring out the hard way that the idea of secession was officially and forever crushed. Sort of like a married couple that fights and destroys the house but stays together after. Anti-federalism was a huge factor in the original debates on the Constitution. - "Disunion" was the main political worry of the early US. Other states, even Northern states had argued for secession long before the Civil Wsr. The Southern Confederacy was the first attempt to actually secede. Talk of secession in the South had been going on since the early 1800s.

A lot of people killed, all Americans, so let''s not go feeling all bitter about one side or other, in the 21st century.


Jerry - 12/23/2019 at 09:43 PM

quote:
**Most partisan impeachment of the three led by house democrats

[Edited on 12/19/2019 by OriginalGoober]



"Since we cannot defend the president's actions and we don't have the numbers to stop the impeachment resolutions, we can all stick together and knock it for not being bi-partisan."

Great obfuscation strategy... really helps the public be able to be an informed electorate.


Link to the quote please.


It is not an actual quote, Jerry. It is my summation of what the GOP is doing right now. Paraphrasing and summary must be hard for some on your side to follow... like when Schiff was accused of adding words to the phone call during the inquiry.


Also, I assume the "unjust cause" mentioned in the other post refers to treason and armed rebellion against the United States in order to preserve the practice of buying, selling, and raping human beings in order to profit off of the forced labor of them and their offspring. This too seems like it shouldn't need an explainer.


Sorry for the delay, but I tend not to post under painkillers.

1) Since you had your summation in quotation marks, I thought it was a quotation from another source. I was taught that in grade school English.

2) I was wondering if he was posting about that, except that slavery was still a money making venture even after the War of 1861-65 in some Union states.
I keep hearing and people keep posting about how that war was to end slavery. It wasn't. If it was, wouldn't you think that the slaves held in Union states and Washington, DC should have been freed before the war started?


Why did the Confederacy secede? Don’t give me that state’s rights crap because that is a narrative spun by confederate apologists (and white supremacists) to save face. Name some state’s right they cared about that was not tied in to preserving the slavery based economy.
___________________________________________________________ 1)Tariffs imposed on goods imported in southern ports, but used to improve what we would now call infrastructure in the northern states.
2) Export restrictions. Even though tobacco and pine resin was produced in the south, it pretty much had to go through northern ports for export.
3) Slavery was a large reason for secession, it was not the reason the Union invaded the Confederacy.
4) Do a search and read the proposals from New York City for secession to join the Confederacy.
5) Do a search also for when slaves were freed from Kentucky, Maryland, West Virginia, New York state and city, Delaware, and Washington, DC. Notice that they weren't all freed, but some were sold to Cuba and South American countries. Note: Delaware didn't vote to ratify the 13th amendment until 1991
______________________________________________________________

And you’ve got me confused with another, I do not find you cute as a button.
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

Oh, that hurts me to the core, but the answer is still no.
___________________________________________________________________________ ____________-
And seriously man, understand context, who could BIG P possibly be? Maybe the only person here with a name relatively close to that. I take it you were trying to be snarky and point out a typo, but alas your misunderstanding of the gist of the written word has yet another joke (albeit a stupid one) going over your head.


I understand context very well, but it's so much fun to watch you when I act like I don't. You get all worked up and post funny things, just like this--about nothing.


lukester420 - 12/23/2019 at 11:30 PM

I didn't ask why the union invaded, I asked why the Confederacy seceded. Tariffs and export restrictions are tied into the slavery based economy so you gave me nothing. You did your typical deflection followed by "yeah but the evil Yankees waaah waaah waah"


adhill58 - 12/24/2019 at 02:11 PM

quote:
quote:
Why did the Confederacy secede?


Slavery was the trigger issue, but the Civil War had been brewing since the Revolution. The Civil War was pretty much the USA testing the Union - filling in the blanks of the Constitution and figuring out the hard way that the idea of secession was officially and forever crushed. Sort of like a married couple that fights and destroys the house but stays together after. Anti-federalism was a huge factor in the original debates on the Constitution. - "Disunion" was the main political worry of the early US. Other states, even Northern states had argued for secession long before the Civil Wsr. The Southern Confederacy was the first attempt to actually secede. Talk of secession in the South had been going on since the early 1800s.

A lot of people killed, all Americans, so let''s not go feeling all bitter about one side or other, in the 21st century.


Also, I assume the "unjust cause" mentioned in the other post refers to treason and armed rebellion against the United States in order to preserve the practice of buying, selling, and raping human beings in order to profit off of the forced labor of them and their offspring. This too seems like it shouldn't need an explainer.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------

I was not trying to say that slavery is the only or even the worst problem in our past, just agreeing that it seems pretty lame to celebrate the men who died fighting to preserve it.


Jerry - 1/2/2020 at 02:38 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Why did the Confederacy secede?


Slavery was the trigger issue, but the Civil War had been brewing since the Revolution. The Civil War was pretty much the USA testing the Union - filling in the blanks of the Constitution and figuring out the hard way that the idea of secession was officially and forever crushed. Sort of like a married couple that fights and destroys the house but stays together after. Anti-federalism was a huge factor in the original debates on the Constitution. - "Disunion" was the main political worry of the early US. Other states, even Northern states had argued for secession long before the Civil Wsr. The Southern Confederacy was the first attempt to actually secede. Talk of secession in the South had been going on since the early 1800s.

A lot of people killed, all Americans, so let''s not go feeling all bitter about one side or other, in the 21st century.


Also, I assume the "unjust cause" mentioned in the other post refers to treason and armed rebellion against the United States in order to preserve the practice of buying, selling, and raping human beings in order to profit off of the forced labor of them and their offspring. This too seems like it shouldn't need an explainer.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------

I was not trying to say that slavery is the only or even the worst problem in our past, just agreeing that it seems pretty lame to celebrate the men who died fighting to preserve it.


If the War of 1861 to 1865 was to free slaves, why didn't the Union Army go in and free all the slaves held in Union States, including Washington, DC, before invading the Confederacy?
It's a simple question, no need to worry it to death.
Just why did the Union Army invade the Confederacy to free slaves when there were slaves in Union States?


Jerry - 1/2/2020 at 04:24 AM

quote:
I didn't ask why the union invaded, I asked why the Confederacy seceded. Tariffs and export restrictions are tied into the slavery based economy so you gave me nothing. You did your typical deflection followed by "yeah but the evil Yankees waaah waaah waah"


You have it all wrong since OBVIOUSLY you didn't do the searches I asked you to on the subjects listed.
You instead chose to be ignorant about FACTS and decided to keep the bigoted, misguided, untrue, and downright misguided stuff you have been taught.
You would have learned so much about what really happened rather than the legends, lies, and deception passed on through the years.

I suggest you go to Google Books and download, and read, a series of books called:
"The War of The Rebellion: a Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. Prepared under The Direction Of The Secretary Of War, By Brvt Lieut Col Robert Scott, Third U.S, Artillery, And published Pursuant to Act Of Congress Approved June 16, 1880."
I know, it's a long title, and the link is even longer.
Just go to Google Books, search for "Official Records" and start downloading. It's only enough to fill 3 DVDs.
to help you along, don't download ones scanned by OCR. Every wrinkle, bug mark, or pencil mark messes up the page and can make it unreadable. Download the ones scanned as images.
They are also in searchable pdf form, so you won't have to read everything. It helps when searching each of the 150 volumes, some with parts I,II,III, and IV, all about 1000 pages each.

There's your challenge. Learn, or continue to be ignorant of facts.


BIGV - 1/2/2020 at 05:48 AM

quote:
quote:
I didn't ask why the union invaded, I asked why the Confederacy seceded. Tariffs and export restrictions are tied into the slavery based economy so you gave me nothing. You did your typical deflection followed by "yeah but the evil Yankees waaah waaah waah"


You have it all wrong since OBVIOUSLY you didn't do the searches I asked you to on the subjects listed.
You instead chose to be ignorant about FACTS and decided to keep the bigoted, misguided, untrue, and downright misguided stuff you have been taught.
You would have learned so much about what really happened rather than the legends, lies, and deception passed on through the years.

I suggest you go to Google Books and download, and read, a series of books called:
"The War of The Rebellion: a Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. Prepared under The Direction Of The Secretary Of War, By Brvt Lieut Col Robert Scott, Third U.S, Artillery, And published Pursuant to Act Of Congress Approved June 16, 1880."
I know, it's a long title, and the link is even longer.
Just go to Google Books, search for "Official Records" and start downloading. It's only enough to fill 3 DVDs.
to help you along, don't download ones scanned by OCR. Every wrinkle, bug mark, or pencil mark messes up the page and can make it unreadable. Download the ones scanned as images.
They are also in searchable pdf form, so you won't have to read everything. It helps when searching each of the 150 volumes, some with parts I,II,III, and IV, all about 1000 pages each.

There's your challenge. Learn, or continue to be ignorant of facts.


Jerry, it does not fit their narrative.

Slavery was an abomination. Period. But here are Lincoln's thoughts about The Union as written to Horace Greely :

quote:
I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.


BrerRabbit - 1/2/2020 at 06:41 AM

Lol, man old Abe sure knew how to cover all the angles.


lukester420 - 1/2/2020 at 11:38 AM

quote:


There's your challenge. Learn, or continue to be ignorant of facts.




I prefer your method. Pick and choose what facts I want to remember.

You don’t think anything your family passed down about their history could be legend or revised to fit the narrative that they were just protecting themselves from the evil Yankees?

Yeah, families NEVER change stories to cover up things they don’t want to be remembered.

And ps. I did search a couple of the things you mentioned despite already being aware of them, I still humored you, I am well aware that there were no angels in the Civil War but none of this changes nor will you acknowledge the fact that the south seceded because they had no fail safe to preserve their economy and infrastructure should slavery be outlawed.

There’s not really any good guys, just lesser of two evils. My initial point was that I’m just tired of these groups of lazy entitled white trash like Quantrill’s Raiders showing up in towns they are not welcome in trying to stir sh** up and preserve a heritage of treason.

Rather than address any of the stuff about these morons who run over innocent people or try to intimidate African American store owners in the 21st century, you give a lecture about why the Union was just as bad....160 years ago. Interesting that any time someone mentions violent crimes perpetrated to by Neo-Confederate tools people immediately go on the defensive and cite Union atrocities as if it excuses White Supremacy in today’s society.


goldtop - 1/2/2020 at 03:43 PM

As a brief reminder *Donald J Trump has been impeached as of 12/19/2019





Skydog32103 - 1/2/2020 at 03:57 PM

Here’s a fact: An American man slandered the United States law enforcement, U.S. judges, U.S. intelligence, landed his staff in prison, banged a pornstar, and harasses dead American war heroes, all while trusting foreign dictators instead......and Republicans want him to be their leader. This speaks volumes about their self-esteem and regard for this country. In the near future, Trump will be universally seen as an evil domestic terrorist, and his voters will wear this Scarlett letter for the rest of their lives, or be forced to lie and hide. I can’t help but pity the fools who want to be led by such a horrible person. What a nightmare that must be.


goldtop - 1/2/2020 at 04:26 PM

quote:
Here’s a fact: An American man slandered the United States law enforcement, U.S. judges, U.S. intelligence, landed his staff in prison, banged a pornstar, and harasses dead American war heroes, all while trusting foreign dictators instead......and Republicans want him to be their leader. This speaks volumes about their self-esteem and regard for this country. In the near future, Trump will be universally seen as an evil domestic terrorist, and his voters will wear this Scarlett letter for the rest of their lives, or be forced to lie and hide. I can’t help but pity the fools who want to be led by such a horrible person. What a nightmare that must be.


They "Like the way he talks"...


Skydog32103 - 1/2/2020 at 04:36 PM

DT doesn’t just stand for his name. It’s also the abbreviation for what he is - a Domestic Terrorist.


BrerRabbit - 1/2/2020 at 05:47 PM

quote:
Slavery was an abomination. Period. But . . .





[Edited on 1/2/2020 by BrerRabbit]


BrerRabbit - 1/2/2020 at 05:55 PM

quote:
Here’s a fact: An American man slandered the United States law enforcement, U.S. judges, U.S. intelligence, landed his staff in prison, banged a pornstar, and harasses dead American war heroes, all while trusting foreign dictators instead . . .


You are just saying that stuff because you are a Trump hater. The way to prove your love and loyalty is to love the sinner, not the sin. Trump is just kidding around when he does all those things, and the Left takes the bait every time.


Skydog32103 - 1/2/2020 at 06:03 PM

"The word BUT negates or cancels everything that goes before it. And is generally accepted as a signal that the really important part of the sentence is coming up. When you use it most people listening to you will give more attention and more weight to what you say after you say BUT."

https://nlp-now.co.uk › be-careful-with-but


Jerry - 1/2/2020 at 06:17 PM

quote:
quote:


There's your challenge. Learn, or continue to be ignorant of facts.




I prefer your method. Pick and choose what facts I want to remember.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----
I don't pick and chose which facts to remember. I follow history, and don't try to make history fit my beliefs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----

You don’t think anything your family passed down about their history could be legend or revised to fit the narrative that they were just protecting themselves from the evil Yankees?

Yeah, families NEVER change stories to cover up things they don’t want to be remembered.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----
My family had no dog in the fight for slavery, as I've said before. No slave was ever owned by any of my family.
The Union had invaded the Confederacy, the blockades kept goods from going out, and coming in, Ft. Pulaski had been bombarded and Savannah pretty much shut down. All of that is history, not family "legend". Family members joined after that point since the Union army had worked it's way down as far as Shilo Church in Tennessee. Again, history, not family legend.
They weren't there to defend slavery. They were there to defend their homes.
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

And ps. I did search a couple of the things you mentioned despite already being aware of them, I still humored you, I am well aware that there were no angels in the Civil War but none of this changes nor will you acknowledge the fact that the south seceded because they had no fail safe to preserve their economy and infrastructure should slavery be outlawed.
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

I don't believe that you did. Why did you post at 6:30 pm on 12/23/2019 the following? "Tariffs and export restrictions are tied into the slavery economy, so you gave me nothing."
They weren't tied into the slavery economy as you claim. It's all history as to what the tariffs and restrictions were put in place for. You didn't check it, and the proof was in your response.
If you had checked on when slaves were freed in the areas I mentioned, you would have found some interesting facts. The best one being the District of Columbia compensated Emancipation Act of 1862.
The government purchased 3,185 slaves from their owners. Close to $1, 000,000 was spent. The freed slaves were offered an additional $100 and passage to colonize part of Central America.
You would have known that if you had checked.
I bet you didn't even check why New York City wanted to secede from the Union and join the Confederacy, even before the Union invaded.

If you had checked, you would have found out that proposals had been made in the south for compensated emancipation, and freedom for enlistment.


So again, if the war was fought to free slaves, why did they not free the slaves in the north before invading the south? Easy question, Shouldn't take too long with a Google search.
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

There’s not really any good guys, just lesser of two evils. My initial point was that I’m just tired of these groups of lazy entitled white trash like Quantrill’s Raiders showing up in towns they are not welcome in trying to stir sh** up and preserve a heritage of treason.
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________
In other words you want to deny them their right to free speech. You know that they have that right, even if we don't agree with what they say.
Your opinion of them notwithstanding.
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

Rather than address any of the stuff about these morons who run over innocent people or try to intimidate African American store owners in the 21st century, you give a lecture about why the Union was just as bad....160 years ago. Interesting that any time someone mentions violent crimes perpetrated to by Neo-Confederate tools people immediately go on the defensive and cite Union atrocities as if it excuses White Supremacy in today’s society.


___________________________________________________________________________ _____________
Where have I said anything about how bad the Union was? Please quote where I did.
I have tried to get you to learn facts and real history so you don't look like a fool repeating myths, lies, and deception that has been forced on you since childhood.
I thought that maybe as an adult you would like to know what really happened,
what the real history of the conflict was.
It seems you just want to remain ignorant of facts.


BrerRabbit - 1/2/2020 at 06:31 PM

quote:
"I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.


The Lincoln quote is just old Abe playing singlehanded tennis against multiple opponents. The man was the greatest master of rhetoric since Plato. He could talk the Devil into sending him to Heaven because Heaven is actually Hell.

He is simply saying that he is not going to allow disunion. That is his motive. He ripped slavery out by the roots, so we can infer that he viewed slavery as a threat to the Union. He set up that argument so that slavery would damn itself and his personal ethics would not be part of the equation.

This quote is not any indication of Lincoln's personal views on slavery. It actually has no bearing on slavery other than how it pertains to the Union.


Skydog32103 - 1/2/2020 at 06:44 PM

quote:
This quote is not any indication of Lincoln's personal views on slavery. It actually has no bearing on slavery other than how it pertains to the Union.


Agreed. The Lincoln quote shows a leader doing whatever is necessary to protect the vision of the Founding Fathers, and went against a popular opinion to do so. Sounds to me like he doesn't really have an opinion one way or another on slavery, and was willing to toss it in the garbage pretty quickly and easily when he saw how divisive it was, which goes to show us how much he valued it to begin with.

Maybe a better preface to the quote would have been, "Slavery was an abomination, period. And here's evidence of how divisive and destructive it was."


goldtop - 1/2/2020 at 06:58 PM

As a reminder *Donald J Trump was impeached 12/19/2019



How's about you guys make a civil war thread and go have the next Gettysburg there

Let's get back to the topic at hand....

*Donald J Trump will always have an asterisk next to his name because he was impeached on 12/19/2019


BrerRabbit - 1/2/2020 at 07:25 PM

quote:
How's about you guys make a civil war thread and go have the next Gettysburg there


This thread would be a tiny fraction of its length if it had not veered wildly off topic multiple times - why single out the civil war digression?

Anyway we were working our way back around to impeachment, until you tried to rush the process.



[Edited on 1/2/2020 by BrerRabbit]


goldtop - 1/2/2020 at 08:12 PM

quote:
quote:
How's about you guys make a civil war thread and go have the next Gettysburg there


This thread would be a tiny fraction of its length if it had not veered wildly off topic multiple times - why single out the civil war digression?




It's just time to get back to the topic...I let it go way too long and now it has no relevance to what the topic was suppose to be about. If the thread dies so be it...he's been impeached lets talk about the trial and witnesses.

I'm all good with people creating a civil war thread and talking about that. Let's talk impeachment here

*Donald J Trump impeached as of 12/19/2019 There will always be an asterisk next to his name

[Edited on 1/2/2020 by goldtop]


BrerRabbit - 1/2/2020 at 08:15 PM

ok, here is a tie in - what's up with the hints at civil war if president booted?


goldtop - 1/2/2020 at 08:21 PM

quote:
ok, here is a tie in - what's up with the hints at civil war if president booted?


Does anyone here really think people are going to leave their jobs, take their kids out of school...form militias to go fight each other over *Donald J Trump

Will there be a few wack-a-do's that will try something sure...they already have. isn't there a guy siting in jail for sending bombs to people like Obama and HC???

Who here is going to reneg on their house payment to go fight for *Donald J Trump and exactly where will this big battle be on the highway during rush hour traffic....it's different world we live in...get real about what peoples lives are like.

Who here is going to join a militia and quit their job???

I want witnesses...all the *Prez mens


lukester420 - 1/2/2020 at 09:24 PM

quote:
quote:
Why did the Confederacy secede?


Slavery was the trigger issue, but the Civil War had been brewing since the Revolution. The Civil War was pretty much the USA testing the Union - filling in the blanks of the Constitution and figuring out the hard way that the idea of secession was officially and forever crushed. Sort of like a married couple that fights and destroys the house but stays together after. Anti-federalism was a huge factor in the original debates on the Constitution. - "Disunion" was the main political worry of the early US. Other states, even Northern states had argued for secession long before the Civil Wsr. The Southern Confederacy was the first attempt to actually secede. Talk of secession in the South had been going on since the early 1800s.

A lot of people killed, all Americans, so let''s not go feeling all bitter about one side or other, in the 21st century.


Thank you for answering the question because Jerry sure wasn't going to


lukester420 - 1/2/2020 at 09:58 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Why did the Confederacy secede?


Slavery was the trigger issue, but the Civil War had been brewing since the Revolution. The Civil War was pretty much the USA testing the Union - filling in the blanks of the Constitution and figuring out the hard way that the idea of secession was officially and forever crushed. Sort of like a married couple that fights and destroys the house but stays together after. Anti-federalism was a huge factor in the original debates on the Constitution. - "Disunion" was the main political worry of the early US. Other states, even Northern states had argued for secession long before the Civil Wsr. The Southern Confederacy was the first attempt to actually secede. Talk of secession in the South had been going on since the early 1800s.

A lot of people killed, all Americans, so let''s not go feeling all bitter about one side or other, in the 21st century.


Also, I assume the "unjust cause" mentioned in the other post refers to treason and armed rebellion against the United States in order to preserve the practice of buying, selling, and raping human beings in order to profit off of the forced labor of them and their offspring. This too seems like it shouldn't need an explainer.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------

I was not trying to say that slavery is the only or even the worst problem in our past, just agreeing that it seems pretty lame to celebrate the men who died fighting to preserve it.


If the War of 1861 to 1865 was to free slaves, why didn't the Union Army go in and free all the slaves held in Union States, including Washington, DC, before invading the Confederacy?
It's a simple question, no need to worry it to death.
Just why did the Union Army invade the Confederacy to free slaves when there were slaves in Union States?


I never said the war was to free the slaves anywhere, that was the route you took. I simply asked why the south seceded. Literally everything you said was about what the Union did and didn't do while giving me nothing other than economic factors that hurt an economy that needed the Trans Atlantic slave trade to flourish. In short, you have dodged everything I've put out there, why should I humor you and answer your question when you keep intentionally dodging the issue of Neo Confederates in 2019? I don't don't really have any reason to think you are a racist or a member of a hate group like Quantrill's raiders but you apparently feel the need to justify their behaivor which seems odd. You can cite all the history you want but it is now 2020 and when it comes to Confederate monuments you are on the same side as the White Supremacists so I'm done talking Civil War here with you. Feel free to start another thread on the subject and you can continue to educate me while dodging the questions you don't like.

As for this turning into the Gettysburg of the whipping post, all I did was mention Neo Confederate dbags in 2019, sorry I should have known the resident snowflakes wouldn't have taken kindly to white bashing.




goldtop - 1/2/2020 at 10:32 PM

I'm all good with the direction the thread took it's just time to put it back on track and civil war thread might be a good topic...but I'm with you they don't have any statues of Hitler in Germany or statues of Mussolini in Italy

They fought against the US and they wanted to preserve the right to use humans as livestock EOS...How can you condone that??? The Union gave up their slaves and they didn't fight to preserve the right to use people as livestock.

Oh and by the way *Donald J Trump was impeached on 12/19/2019 and will forever have a asterisk next to his name

So who's for seeing witnesses in the Senate trial. I think the entire WH should testify


Jerry - 1/2/2020 at 10:42 PM

quote:
I'm all good with the direction the thread took it's just time to put it back on track and civil war thread might be a good topic...but I'm with you they don't have any statues of Hitler in Germany or statues of Mussolini in Italy

They fought against the US and they wanted to preserve the right to use humans as livestock EOS...How can you condone that??? The Union gave up their slaves and they didn't fight to preserve the right to use people as livestock.
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

Nope, they didn't. Four states and DC held slaves mostly until the 13th Amendment.
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

Oh and by the way *Donald J Trump was impeached on 12/19/2019 and will forever have a asterisk next to his name
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________
Nope, only thing that has happened so far is the House voted on Articles of Impeachment. The trial to Impeach can't be held until the Articles have been presented to the Senate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---

So who's for seeing witnesses in the Senate trial. I think the entire WH should testify


I am, but some might not want to see the list of possible witnesses the Senate can call up to testify under oath.


BrerRabbit - 1/2/2020 at 10:53 PM

quote:
So who's for seeing witnesses in the Senate trial


Why is this even a question? Legal trials have witnesses, or what? maybe our legal eagle cyclone could help me out here. Just looks off to me, we are down to for or against witnesses when here I thought it was a right - just a given part of the process.


goldtop - 1/2/2020 at 11:02 PM

quote:
quote:
So who's for seeing witnesses in the Senate trial


Why is this even a question? Legal trials have witnesses, or what? maybe our legal eagle cyclone could help me out here. Just looks off to me, we are down to for or against witnesses when here I thought it was a right - just a given part of the process.


I'm asking because Moscow Mitch doesn't want any

Jerry with all due respect Clinton is an impeached president that didn't get removed as was Johnson. The trial isn't about if, it's about removal or not. So stop the BS *Donald J Trump was impeached on 12/19/2019 and will forever be one of the 3 impeached prez no matter how hard you wish it not to be true, it is.

[Edited on 1/2/2020 by goldtop]


BrerRabbit - 1/2/2020 at 11:08 PM

quote:
I'm asking because Moscow Mitch doesn't want any


I get that, my question was rhetorical - point being how can McConnell legally refuse witness testimony?


goldtop - 1/2/2020 at 11:18 PM

quote:
quote:
I'm asking because Moscow Mitch doesn't want any


I get that, my question was rhetorical - point being how can McConnell legally refuse witness testimony?


Seems norms aren't the norm anymore. I don't know what he's trying to pull I just know he gets away with all sorts of crap. Holding up close to 300 bi-partisan bills.

What do they all think the end game is? *Donald J Trump is Indiviual1 co-conspirator with his attorney that is sitting in jail...he's gonna be indicted when he leaves office. And why would anyone else go down with him while standing there and watching him throw anyone under the bus he wants. Any one of those GOP senators could be Brutus and end the madness if they actually gave a crap

[Edited on 1/2/2020 by goldtop]

[Edited on 1/2/2020 by goldtop]


OriginalGoober - 1/3/2020 at 01:40 AM

Why witnesses? It would just be another spectacle and not really helpful for the country. Mitch is in favor of following the Clinton impeachment model. If I recall, no witnesses were ever called to impeach Bill Clinton and history says he was afforded a fair process but screwed himself by lying.


BIGV - 1/3/2020 at 02:33 AM

quote:
As a reminder *Donald J Trump was impeached 12/19/2019


Do us a favor and "remind" of us of just exactly what this means.

Please


goldtop - 1/15/2020 at 04:12 PM

The impeachment managers


Jerry - 1/15/2020 at 05:22 PM

quote:
[

Jerry with all due respect Clinton is an impeached president that didn't get removed as was Johnson. The trial isn't about if, it's about removal or not.

[Edited on 1/2/2020 by goldtop]


Goldtop, you are correct in that. Wikipedia, about the Articles of Impeachment. "Upon passage, the defendant has been "impeached."
Sometimes it pays to check more than two reference points.


goldtop - 1/15/2020 at 05:43 PM

quote:
quote:
[

Jerry with all due respect Clinton is an impeached president that didn't get removed as was Johnson. The trial isn't about if, it's about removal or not.

[Edited on 1/2/2020 by goldtop]


Goldtop, you are correct in that. Wikipedia, about the Articles of Impeachment. "Upon passage, the defendant has been "impeached."
Sometimes it pays to check more than two reference points.


Thanks Jerry


Rusty - 1/15/2020 at 06:31 PM

Without removal from office, impeachment becomes little more than a very expensive (to taxpayers) slap on the wrist.


Jerry - 1/15/2020 at 06:45 PM

quote:
Without removal from office, impeachment becomes little more than a very expensive (to taxpayers) slap on the wrist.


It's already been expensive. What's bad is what could have been done for the voters if they hadn't spent so much time over the past three years trying to find something to impeach Trump with.
The same thing happen pretty much when Clinton was impeached. Lot of money, and time spent for nothing.


2112 - 1/15/2020 at 08:33 PM

quote:
Why witnesses? It would just be another spectacle and not really helpful for the country. Mitch is in favor of following the Clinton impeachment model. If I recall, no witnesses were ever called to impeach Bill Clinton and history says he was afforded a fair process but screwed himself by lying.




Witnesses were called in both the Clinton and Johnson impeachment trials. Without witnesses, it will go down as a sham trial in the history books.


goldtop - 1/15/2020 at 09:41 PM

quote:
quote:
Without removal from office, impeachment becomes little more than a very expensive (to taxpayers) slap on the wrist.


It's already been expensive. What's bad is what could have been done for the voters if they hadn't spent so much time over the past three years trying to find something to impeach Trump with.
The same thing happen pretty much when Clinton was impeached. Lot of money, and time spent for nothing.


I'm going to have to differ here. The impeachment of *Donald J Trump has significance because when he leaves office and the state of NY will indicts him he won't be able to be pardoned for those crimes as he's already Individual1 with his co-conspirator, Michael Cohen, who sits in jail. Those aren't the only crimes he's going to face in the future and his impeachment means no pardon for state crimes. So any state that is now investigating him and finds charges they wish to bring. He will have to stand trial and if convicted again, can't be pardoned. And Nancy Pelosi knew that so removal would be great because that lessens the time we have to wait for him to go to jail. But either way he's cooked and he's knows it


cyclone88 - 1/15/2020 at 09:51 PM

quote:
Jerry with all due respect Clinton is an impeached president that didn't get removed as was Johnson. The trial isn't about if, it's about removal or not.
Goldtop, you are correct in that. Wikipedia, about the Articles of Impeachment. "Upon passage, the defendant has been "impeached." Sometimes it pays to check more than two reference points.


THIS is the stuff of basic civics. The country and people on this forum have discussed impeachment for months and people are STILL looking to Wiki (which can be edited by almost anyone who wants to screw w/it) as a "second source" for the meaning of the word impeachment.

I have been polite and respectful and impersonal. I even started another thread to get out of the morass of the Civil War, but it is astounding to me that there is such a fundamental lack of knowledge of what impeachment is much less what it means. Impeachment is a constitutional process (& yes, I'm fully aware that I keep banging on about the constitution, but it's WHY impeachment is important.)

Impeachment is the same as an indictment. It's a charge. It sticks. Johnson was impeached. Clinton was impeached. Trump was impeached. Nixon was about to be impeached when he decided to resign rather than have that permanent asterisk by his name. Now, there will be a trial in the Senate to determine whether Trump should be removed from office. Johnson wasn't removed. Clinton wasn't removed. There is speculation that Trump won't be removed, but it is just that - speculation - until there is a vote.

It's especially staggering that most of us lived through Clinton's impeachment trial and can't seem to remember anything about it, including the meaning of impeachment or the fact that there were witnesses.

I suggest people read any one of the zillion sites that has basic "Impeachment 101" - even foreign news sites have one to inform their citizens of what's going on in the US. - if you want to have any credibility at all. Of course, this is a music site & the WP isn't known for its credibility.


Jerry - 1/16/2020 at 01:33 AM

quote:
quote:
Jerry with all due respect Clinton is an impeached president that didn't get removed as was Johnson. The trial isn't about if, it's about removal or not.
Goldtop, you are correct in that. Wikipedia, about the Articles of Impeachment. "Upon passage, the defendant has been "impeached." Sometimes it pays to check more than two reference points.


THIS is the stuff of basic civics. The country and people on this forum have discussed impeachment for months and people are STILL looking to Wiki (which can be edited by almost anyone who wants to screw w/it) as a "second source" for the meaning of the word impeachment.


Cyclone88, I said "sometimes it pays to check more than two reference points." Wiki was not the third, or fourth. It had the shortest line I could find to quote that put the message across. You do notice that I didn't say "according to wiki"?


OriginalGoober - 1/17/2020 at 02:53 AM



So now Nancy is demanding the Senate is tasked with cleaning up her shoddy mess? Since when can Nancy have the gall to call out the Senate when under her process she has not put together a compelling case?

Congrats to the elected democrats for your one and only big accomplishment- Impeachment


goldtop - 1/17/2020 at 04:06 AM

quote:


So now Nancy is demanding the Senate is tasked with cleaning up her shoddy mess? Since when can Nancy have the gall to call out the Senate when under her process she has not put together a compelling case?

Congrats to the elected democrats for your one and only big accomplishment- Impeachment




In every impeachment of either judges or presidents the senate has in every single impeachment trial had witnesses and documents. Why is this different?

So exactly what is it you can't come to terms with? The fact that he's a conman and you didn't care or the fact that now that he's been impeached he will be indicted once he's out of office and can't be pardoned for the current state crimes he's committed and the one's I'm sure they have under lock and seal just waiting for him to leave the WH.

Ton's of extra evidence and the GOA's assessment that he in fact did commit a crime when he held back aid to Ukraine. Lot's more evidence to come and if there's a trial it should be heard. If's he's innocent it'll come out.


Jerry - 1/21/2020 at 01:26 AM

quote:
quote:


So now Nancy is demanding the Senate is tasked with cleaning up her shoddy mess? Since when can Nancy have the gall to call out the Senate when under her process she has not put together a compelling case?

Congrats to the elected democrats for your one and only big accomplishment- Impeachment




In every impeachment of either judges or presidents the senate has in every single impeachment trial had witnesses and documents. Why is this different?
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

I don't see why it should. Myself, I'd like to see them call the Bidens to testify under oath, along with others.
___________________________________________________________________________ ____________

Ton's of extra evidence and the GOA's assessment that he in fact did commit a crime when he held back aid to Ukraine. Lot's more evidence to come and if there's a trial it should be heard. If's he's innocent it'll come out.


___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

Doesn't he still fall under the presumption of innocence, and the testimony has to prove the crimes, not that he has to prove his innocence?


2112 - 1/21/2020 at 03:14 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:


So now Nancy is demanding the Senate is tasked with cleaning up her shoddy mess? Since when can Nancy have the gall to call out the Senate when under her process she has not put together a compelling case?

Congrats to the elected democrats for your one and only big accomplishment- Impeachment




In every impeachment of either judges or presidents the senate has in every single impeachment trial had witnesses and documents. Why is this different?
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

I don't see why it should. Myself, I'd like to see them call the Bidens to testify under oath, along with others.
___________________________________________________________________________ ____________

Ton's of extra evidence and the GOA's assessment that he in fact did commit a crime when he held back aid to Ukraine. Lot's more evidence to come and if there's a trial it should be heard. If's he's innocent it'll come out.


___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

Doesn't he still fall under the presumption of innocence, and the testimony has to prove the crimes, not that he has to prove his innocence?




Kind of hard to prove anything when they won't allow for witnesses. Why not conduct a real honest to goodness trial that the history books will consider ligit. The only reason I can think of is because it will further make Trump look bad and make it harder for Republican senators to vote for acquittal.


cyclone88 - 1/21/2020 at 03:31 PM

quote:
Doesn't he still fall under the presumption of innocence, and the testimony has to prove the crimes, not that he has to prove his innocence?

Jerry, I posted the full texts of both the prosecution and defense cases on the other impeachment thread. I know you like to read the original source & not rely on some filtered/subjective version. They seem long, but you can skip the Appendix in both docs & still get the gist. Also, unless McConnell's Organizational Rules change, the arguments are 12 hrs long from 1 pm to 1 am for 4 days. I'd rather read than listen to that.

This isn't a case of guilt or innocence. This is a case where the Senate has to decide if the wrongdoings presented by the HR are supported by evidence & if so, rise to the level of being removed from office.

IMO, the prosecution case is well laid out in terms of historical intentions of the Founders, actions undertaken by the president, and the concept that asking for help from a foreign government to improve personal political prospects is exactly what the Founders had in mind when they included impeachment in the constitution. The defense case is that although he did do what's charged it doesn't mean he should be removed from office. They're not defending his actions as much as arguing the purpose of impeachment.

One thing is clear. The Founders didn't include a mechanism for over-turning the electoral vote (except in court as w/GWB & Gore). They specifically said impeachment is the mechanism by which a DULY-ELECTED president can be removed from office if his acts warrant it as determined by the Senate. The prosecution completely accepts the results of the 2016 election.


goldtop - 1/21/2020 at 03:36 PM

quote:
quote:
Doesn't he still fall under the presumption of innocence, and the testimony has to prove the crimes, not that he has to prove his innocence?

Jerry, I posted the full texts of both the prosecution and defense cases on the other impeachment thread. I know you like to read the original source & not rely on some filtered/subjective version. They seem long, but you can skip the Appendix in both docs & still get the gist. Also, unless McConnell's Organizational Rules change, the arguments are 12 hrs long from 1 pm to 1 am for 4 days. I'd rather read than listen to that.

This isn't a case of guilt or innocence. This is a case where the Senate has to decide if the wrongdoings presented by the HR are supported by evidence & if so, rise to the level of being removed from office.

IMO, the prosecution case is well laid out in terms of historical intentions of the Founders, actions undertaken by the president, and the concept that asking for help from a foreign government to improve personal political prospects is exactly what the Founders had in mind when they included impeachment in the constitution. The defense case is that although he did do what's charged it doesn't mean he should be removed from office. They're not defending his actions as much as arguing the purpose of impeachment.

One thing is clear. The Founders didn't include a mechanism for over-turning the electoral vote (except in court as w/GWB & Gore). They specifically said impeachment is the mechanism by which a DULY-ELECTED president can be removed from office if his acts warrant it as determined by the Senate. The prosecution completely accepts the results of the 2016 election.


You can lead him down the road all you want. He and many others can't come to terms that *tRump is a conman and that they didn't care when they voted for him so all is just great now that he does nothing but be a conman


BrerRabbit - 1/21/2020 at 04:11 PM

quote:
Congrats to the elected democrats for your one and only big accomplishment- Impeachment


x2. Showed some spirit for sure. I didn't think those wishy washy gutless bureaucrats had it it in them to pull off such a historic achievement.



cyclone88 - 1/21/2020 at 04:14 PM


You can lead him down the road all you want. He and many others can't come to terms that *tRump is a conman and that they didn't care when they voted for him so all is just great now that he does nothing but be a conman


He's asked for info in the past & based on the questions he asks, he does read it. I'm not preaching. I'm providing info. He's entitled to his opinion.

Agreed. Trump has been a conman his entire adult life & voters knew it. Now, he's a guy who has asked for foreign interference in 2 elections - multiple times. From Russia, Ukraine, & China that we know of. That sounds more like a traitor than a conman to me, but that's off the table.


goldtop - 1/21/2020 at 04:58 PM

quote:

You can lead him down the road all you want. He and many others can't come to terms that *tRump is a conman and that they didn't care when they voted for him so all is just great now that he does nothing but be a conman


He's asked for info in the past & based on the questions he asks, he does read it. I'm not preaching. I'm providing info. He's entitled to his opinion.

Agreed. Trump has been a conman his entire adult life & voters knew it. Now, he's a guy who has asked for foreign interference in 2 elections - multiple times. From Russia, Ukraine, & China that we know of. That sounds more like a traitor than a conman to me, but that's off the table.




Yes traitor works very well for me...What amazes me most is the fact *tRump would phuck any of them sideways and backwards to get what he wants and not give it a second thought....yet they stand there and support the con against themselves with pride to be that ignorant and wave the flag that they are proud of being ignorant...remember they "Like the way he talks"...yep like the drunk at the end of the bar screaming madness at the TV while all his friends say "You tell em Donny"..."yeah Donny for prez"...woo hoo....what a bunch of maroons...


cyclone88 - 1/21/2020 at 07:16 PM

quote:
Yes traitor works very well for me...What amazes me most is the fact *tRump would phuck any of them sideways and backwards to get what he wants and not give it a second thought....yet they stand there and support the con against themselves with pride to be that ignorant and wave the flag that they are proud of being ignorant


Which is why I, who am NOT a conspiracy theorist in the least, don't understand why even the ones who are in Congress, don't say "this guy is a traitor & a lunatic." Not one. Occasionally, Susan Collins of Maine will make a disgruntled noise. Otherwise, they act like he's the Messiah or more appropriately, the Mafia Don.


MartinD28 - 1/22/2020 at 12:23 AM

quote:
quote:
Yes traitor works very well for me...What amazes me most is the fact *tRump would phuck any of them sideways and backwards to get what he wants and not give it a second thought....yet they stand there and support the con against themselves with pride to be that ignorant and wave the flag that they are proud of being ignorant


Which is why I, who am NOT a conspiracy theorist in the least, don't understand why even the ones who are in Congress, don't say "this guy is a traitor & a lunatic." Not one. Occasionally, Susan Collins of Maine will make a disgruntled noise. Otherwise, they act like he's the Messiah or more appropriately, the Mafia Don.


Collins makes noise but in the end votes party line for the most part. See her Judge Cav statements and her vote. I expect little difference here. In the end she probably lines up behind Trump. The people in Maine need to vote her out. She is really not a moderate - only pretends to be. See if she follows through on votes for 1) witnesses and 2) impeachment.


OriginalGoober - 1/23/2020 at 12:48 AM

The trial has not started yet so no ones mind is made up yet on how to vote. Once you strip away all the democrats puffery, and get down to laying out the evidence worthy to vote on. Call witnesses and include cross-examining the whisssle blower.


Skydog32103 - 1/23/2020 at 01:01 AM

Republicans are correct that witnesses aren't needed. what for? we have video of Trump asking for foreign interference multiple times. we know that the right is ok with it. there's no need for documents and witnesses. if the right says they are cool with this, fine, but they had better shut the F up when Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and VP Omar start making calls overseas to go and git McConnell and Graham. Imagine AOC bribing Venezuela to investigate Graham - Graham goes to prison on bogus charges, and the right has to watch AOC and Omar laugh about it on TV and on Twitter everyday. if this happens, the blame would be 100% on the entire right for betraying their country and their God.


BrerRabbit - 1/23/2020 at 09:42 PM


goldtop - 1/23/2020 at 10:48 PM

quote:



They should send him to one of those "Summer camps" on the southern border and give him a tinfoil blanket to go with his tinfoil hat

I'd love if we shipped him off to the Hague to stand trial for world crimes against humanity and mass child abuse, along with his entire administration


Chain - 1/23/2020 at 11:24 PM

quote:
quote:
Yes traitor works very well for me...What amazes me most is the fact *tRump would phuck any of them sideways and backwards to get what he wants and not give it a second thought....yet they stand there and support the con against themselves with pride to be that ignorant and wave the flag that they are proud of being ignorant


Which is why I, who am NOT a conspiracy theorist in the least, don't understand why even the ones who are in Congress, don't say "this guy is a traitor & a lunatic." Not one. Occasionally, Susan Collins of Maine will make a disgruntled noise. Otherwise, they act like he's the Messiah or more appropriately, the Mafia Don.


I'll tell you why I think they can't say "this guy is a traitor and a lunatic"....They're simply afraid of being voted out of office by the Republican base and losing the power and privilege that comes with being a member of the Congress. In other words, it's purely for their own survival the republic be damned.

Susan Collins, Mitt Romney, Lindsey Graham, and many, many others are cowards plain and simple....

As I've said numerous times, this is exactly why Trump immediately flies off to some wacky rally immediately following any buffoonery he engages in. The rallies are meant to remind Congressional Republicans that the base, especially the red hats, are behind him no matter what stupidity and dangerous behavior he engages in. It's all saber rattling for the Republicans in Congress who know Trump is a traitor.


MartinD28 - 1/23/2020 at 11:32 PM

quote:

Susan Collins, Mitt Romney, Lindsey Graham, and many, many others are cowards plain and simple....

As I've said numerous times, this is exactly why Trump immediately flies off to some wacky rally immediately following any buffoonery he engages in. The rallies are meant to remind Congressional Republicans that the base, especially the red hats, are behind him no matter what stupidity and dangerous behavior he engages in. It's all saber rattling for the Republicans in Congress who know Trump is a traitor.


Lindsey is the worst of the bunch. Went from a Never Trumper to the guy who carries Trump's golf clubs.

The Republicans in Congress do know he's a traitor, but as they don't stand up to him that makes them all complicit traitors and a bunch of big pu$$ies. They sold their souls.


pops42 - 1/23/2020 at 11:35 PM

Rudy Giuliani needs to be locked up, and disbarred. Horse whipped would be a nice touch.


cyclone88 - 1/24/2020 at 12:15 AM

quote:
Rudy Giuliani needs to be locked up

I kept thinking yesterday when the detailed facts of the Ukraine scheme were presented w/the overarching theme of "if you want something from Trump, don't go through official channels, go thru Rudy" that he must've committed a crime somewhere in all those months & he most likely will end up in jail. The bad thing is that Guiliani was once the best US attorney in the SDNY - successfully prosecuting Wall St. & mafia defendants that no one thought could be touched. He peaked. He was a great prosecutor & that's where he should've stayed. It was all downhill after that. He was a lousy mayor & now he's a blowhard's bag man.


goldtop - 1/24/2020 at 12:37 AM

quote:
quote:
Rudy Giuliani needs to be locked up

I kept thinking yesterday when the detailed facts of the Ukraine scheme were presented w/the overarching theme of "if you want something from Trump, don't go through official channels, go thru Rudy" that he must've committed a crime somewhere in all those months & he most likely will end up in jail. The bad thing is that Guiliani was once the best US attorney in the SDNY - successfully prosecuting Wall St. & mafia defendants that no one thought could be touched. He peaked. He was a great prosecutor & that's where he should've stayed. It was all downhill after that. He was a lousy mayor & now he's a blowhard's bag man.


I keep wondering what's their end game. Most will probably roll over and croak in the few years and the last time I looked there were no luggage racks on coffins so exactly what is it all for? Rudy's revels in being a troll...sounds like a low T problem to me...screaming and acting like an idiot is one of the signs...they just need to get on some good roids and boost their true manhood back up....LOL...sorry I just had to go there...

Look at them all, the manboob trope


BrerRabbit - 1/24/2020 at 01:40 AM

quote:
I keep wondering what's their end game


This is their end game - scattering the game board like brats - pitiful last gasps and death throes of a fading demographic.


Skydog32103 - 1/24/2020 at 03:42 AM

quote:
I keep wondering what's their end game


to own the libs. to feel the thrill of victory, after suffering for years in the agony of defeat. the feeling of loss and losing will make a man become drastic, irrational, desperate, and dangerous. we must accept that bad immoral people have infiltrated our leadership and poisoned our people. at this point we just have to hope the good people can prevent the fall of the United States.


MartinD28 - 1/24/2020 at 12:27 PM

quote:
quote:
Rudy Giuliani needs to be locked up

I kept thinking yesterday when the detailed facts of the Ukraine scheme were presented w/the overarching theme of "if you want something from Trump, don't go through official channels, go thru Rudy" that he must've committed a crime somewhere in all those months & he most likely will end up in jail. The bad thing is that Guiliani was once the best US attorney in the SDNY - successfully prosecuting Wall St. & mafia defendants that no one thought could be touched. He peaked. He was a great prosecutor & that's where he should've stayed. It was all downhill after that. He was a lousy mayor & now he's a blowhard's bag man.


There's a theme in play here. It's not just Rudy. Seems most individuals who hitch their wagons to Trump end up either on the wrong end of the law (see Flynn), some find jail time (see Cohen & Manafort), and others function in conflict & outside the boundaries and supposed functions of their offices (see - Barr, Pompeo, etc.). This will be their legacy, and history will probably judge them on the negative side. Trump certainly has a skill to spread toxicity to wide range of people; what an admirable management skill.


gina - 1/27/2020 at 10:48 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Rudy Giuliani needs to be locked up

I kept thinking yesterday when the detailed facts of the Ukraine scheme were presented w/the overarching theme of "if you want something from Trump, don't go through official channels, go thru Rudy" that he must've committed a crime somewhere in all those months & he most likely will end up in jail. The bad thing is that Guiliani was once the best US attorney in the SDNY - successfully prosecuting Wall St. & mafia defendants that no one thought could be touched. He peaked. He was a great prosecutor & that's where he should've stayed. It was all downhill after that. He was a lousy mayor & now he's a blowhard's bag man.


I keep wondering what's their end game. Most will probably roll over and croak in the few years and the last time I looked there were no luggage racks on coffins so exactly what is it all for? Rudy's revels in being a troll...sounds like a low T problem to me...screaming and acting like an idiot is one of the signs...they just need to get on some good roids and boost their true manhood back up....LOL...sorry I just had to go there...

Look at them all, the manboob trope


Luggage racks on coffins is a million dollar idea for the rich people who want to take a few things with them when they go. Seriously, it is a novel idea. I'll bet there are people who would like to do that. First women will take purses, then an overnight or weekender bag, and a carry-on for men.


goldtop - 1/29/2020 at 03:54 PM



Just a thought for the day


BrerRabbit - 1/29/2020 at 04:53 PM

quote:
Just a thought for the day


Everything on that list is better than Hilary.





nebish - 1/29/2020 at 06:55 PM

quote:
Luggage racks on coffins is a million dollar idea for the rich people who want to take a few things with them when they go. Seriously, it is a novel idea. I'll bet there are people who would like to do that. First women will take purses, then an overnight or weekender bag, and a carry-on for men.


Sounds like a song I heard -

"In the next life, I'm tryna stay paid
When I die, put my money in the grave"


goldtop - 1/29/2020 at 09:19 PM

quote:
quote:
Luggage racks on coffins is a million dollar idea for the rich people who want to take a few things with them when they go. Seriously, it is a novel idea. I'll bet there are people who would like to do that. First women will take purses, then an overnight or weekender bag, and a carry-on for men.


Sounds like a song I heard -

"In the next life, I'm tryna stay paid
When I die, put my money in the grave"


The only thing I hear is the twilight zone theme on tape loop...do do de da do do de da do do de da do do de da...


goldtop - 1/31/2020 at 02:26 PM

Thought for the day


BrerRabbit - 1/31/2020 at 03:11 PM

I'm just Biden my time until November.


Skydog32103 - 1/31/2020 at 03:33 PM

i think the Democrats in Washington should be spending all of their time and resources on working with the military to have a plan in place to remove him after 2024. the second there is any resistance from anyone in that administration, should result in immediate arrest by military officers.


BrerRabbit - 1/31/2020 at 03:47 PM

What you don't want Prince Baron for Emperor of Darkness?


Skydog32103 - 1/31/2020 at 04:30 PM

quote:
What you don't want Prince Baron for Emperor of Darkness?


LOL!!!!!


BrerRabbit - 1/31/2020 at 04:53 PM

pops42 post January 2017:

quote:
Trump will be impeached for multiple ethics violations, and several of his staff will be facing prison sentences for various crimes.


You nailed it back on page 1. Good call.


MartinD28 - 1/31/2020 at 05:08 PM

quote:
i think the Democrats in Washington should be spending all of their time and resources on working with the military to have a plan in place to remove him after 2024. the second there is any resistance from anyone in that administration, should result in immediate arrest by military officers.

By then it'll be the US military vs Trump's Russian military.


playallnite - 1/31/2020 at 08:04 PM

Inside every republican is a klansmen or natzi waiting to bloom.


Jerry - 1/31/2020 at 08:15 PM

quote:
Republicans are correct that witnesses aren't needed. what for? we have video of Trump asking for foreign interference multiple times. we know that the right is ok with it. there's no need for documents and witnesses. if the right says they are cool with this, fine, but they had better shut the F up when Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and VP Omar start making calls overseas to go and git McConnell and Graham. Imagine AOC bribing Venezuela to investigate Graham - Graham goes to prison on bogus charges, and the right has to watch AOC and Omar laugh about it on TV and on Twitter everyday. if this happens, the blame would be 100% on the entire right for betraying their country and their God.


Which video are you posting about?


adhill58 - 1/31/2020 at 08:31 PM

quote:
quote:
Republicans are correct that witnesses aren't needed. what for? we have video of Trump asking for foreign interference multiple times. we know that the right is ok with it. there's no need for documents and witnesses. if the right says they are cool with this, fine, but they had better shut the F up when Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and VP Omar start making calls overseas to go and git McConnell and Graham. Imagine AOC bribing Venezuela to investigate Graham - Graham goes to prison on bogus charges, and the right has to watch AOC and Omar laugh about it on TV and on Twitter everyday. if this happens, the blame would be 100% on the entire right for betraying their country and their God.


Which video are you posting about?


Are you serious, Jerry? Probably the one from 2016 when your clown candidate says, "Russia, If you're listening..." and the one from last fall when your clown president is walking to a helicopter and stops to tell TV cameras that Biden should be investigated by Ukraine and China.

Nothing at all wrong with that kind of behavior, right?


Skydog32103 - 1/31/2020 at 08:32 PM

quote:
Which video are you posting about?


Donald Trump: "russia, if you're listening, I hope you find those emails. you'll be mightily rewarded." case closed...treason in the wide open.


BIGV - 1/31/2020 at 08:38 PM

The most interesting thing about this snoozefest of a "procedure" will be how many in the Senate cross party lines when it is time to Vote.


Jerry - 1/31/2020 at 08:47 PM

quote:
quote:
Which video are you posting about?


Donald Trump: "russia, if you're listening, I hope you find those emails. you'll be mightily rewarded." case closed...treason in the wide open.




I thought you might be talking about this one.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/full-video-trump-order-ukraine-ambassador-yo vanovitch_n_5e2cb9eac5b67d8874b2eeaf

Scroll down and watch the video. It's about 1 hour 20 minutes long.


LeglizHemp - 1/31/2020 at 11:39 PM

Looks like any President will now be allowed to do whatever he wants as long as his party controls the Senate.

Party over national interest.

[Edited on 1/31/2020 by LeglizHemp]


Chain - 2/1/2020 at 12:32 AM

quote:
The most interesting thing about this snoozefest of a "procedure" will be how many in the Senate cross party lines when it is time to Vote.


Nothing at all interesting about who crossed party lines as it was predetermined. McConnell decided who needed to do so to ensure their re-election (Collins from Maine) and who was immune from Trump's wrath as he was just elected to a 6 year term (Good ole Mitt Romney from Utah). The coward Lamar from Tennessee feared the wrath of the Republican machine and the Trump syndicate while the spineless one from Alaska is afraid of losing her seat.

McConnell of course blew the dog whistle a few days ago about "Not having the votes to prevent witnesses" just in time to get the Fox News crowd engaged enough to scare the you know what out of Lamar and Claire...In the end it's all about self preservation and to hell with the republic.


alanwoods - 2/1/2020 at 02:10 AM

quote:
quote:
The most interesting thing about this snoozefest of a "procedure" will be how many in the Senate cross party lines when it is time to Vote.


Nothing at all interesting about who crossed party lines as it was predetermined. McConnell decided who needed to do so to ensure their re-election (Collins from Maine) and who was immune from Trump's wrath as he was just elected to a 6 year term (Good ole Mitt Romney from Utah). The coward Lamar from Tennessee feared the wrath of the Republican machine and the Trump syndicate while the spineless one from Alaska is afraid of losing her seat.

McConnell of course blew the dog whistle a few days ago about "Not having the votes to prevent witnesses" just in time to get the Fox News crowd engaged enough to scare the you know what out of Lamar and Claire...In the end it's all about self preservation and to hell with the republic.




His name is Lamar Alexander, he is from Maryville, Tennessee. He previously was governor of Tennessee, President of the University of Tennessee, and Secretary of Education.


goldtop - 2/1/2020 at 03:25 AM

quote:
quote:
Which video are you posting about?


Donald Trump: "russia, if you're listening, I hope you find those emails. you'll be mightily rewarded." case closed...treason in the wide open.




How the FBI didn't arrest him that day is beyond me. That was my thought the moment I heard him say that...where's the handcuffs...take him away


Jerry - 2/1/2020 at 05:15 AM




Which video are you posting about?


Are you serious, Jerry?


Yes, I was serious since there are several videos about Trump bouncing around the internet.


Skydog32103 - 2/1/2020 at 11:51 AM

In all seriousness, why does the impeachment trial need witnesses? We’ve heard from Bolton. We know what he did. Everybody knows what he did. What more could witnesses add? It’s not a matter of whether he did it or not. It’s a matter of whether people care or not. Remember, he could shoot somebody in the middle of fifth Avenue and not lose a single vote. That is very very very true, so what is the point of witnesses?

It is not a cover-up at all by the Republicans. They are actually open and bragging about what they did. Nor are they denying any of the allegations. This is a direct and open statement to the world. The only way to fight back, per the constitution, is to vote him out. That is it. That is the only option for anything. The only thing we have to truly hope for, is that the United States government enforces a transition of power after his administration has ended. If there is one ounce of resistance from this administration when the time comes to transition the power over to the next president, then we are going to witness the end of the United States.


Chain - 2/1/2020 at 02:03 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
The most interesting thing about this snoozefest of a "procedure" will be how many in the Senate cross party lines when it is time to Vote.


Nothing at all interesting about who crossed party lines as it was predetermined. McConnell decided who needed to do so to ensure their re-election (Collins from Maine) and who was immune from Trump's wrath as he was just elected to a 6 year term (Good ole Mitt Romney from Utah). The coward Lamar from Tennessee feared the wrath of the Republican machine and the Trump syndicate while the spineless one from Alaska is afraid of losing her seat.

McConnell of course blew the dog whistle a few days ago about "Not having the votes to prevent witnesses" just in time to get the Fox News crowd engaged enough to scare the you know what out of Lamar and Claire...In the end it's all about self preservation and to hell with the republic.




His name is Lamar Alexander, he is from Maryville, Tennessee. He previously was governor of Tennessee, President of the University of Tennessee, and Secretary of Education.


I would add coward and enabler to your list....Oh, and co-conspirator given he's failed in his duty to uphold the constitution.


cyclone88 - 2/1/2020 at 02:34 PM

quote:
In all seriousness, why does the impeachment trial need witnesses? We’ve heard from Bolton. We know what he did. Everybody knows what he did. What more could witnesses add? It’s not a matter of whether he did it or not. It’s a matter of whether people care or not. Remember, he could shoot somebody in the middle of fifth Avenue and not lose a single vote. That is very very very true, so what is the point of witnesses?

It is not a cover-up at all by the Republicans. They are actually open and bragging about what they did. Nor are they denying any of the allegations. This is a direct and open statement to the world. The only way to fight back, per the constitution, is to vote him out. That is it. That is the only option for anything. The only thing we have to truly hope for, is that the United States government enforces a transition of power after his administration has ended. If there is one ounce of resistance from this administration when the time comes to transition the power over to the next president, then we are going to witness the end of the United States.



What anyone "knows" from media isn't the same as having it said under oath in the senate trial & preserved in the Senate record & record of the trial. When lawyers from either side looked back at other impeachment trials, they only had the written record. They didn't read the transcript & then say "oh, but my father told me (because I was 5 then) Monika Lewinsky said X on ABC news, too" or "My great-grandfather told me (because I wasn't born yet) everyone knew Nixon paid Rosemary Woods $$$ to lie about the tapes." The whole point of the trial is to be FAIR TO THE DEFENDANT. The facts are presented by witnesses who are then cross-examined. That was reason for impeachment - stop this rumor, lies, secrecy surrounding the Ukraine issue & have a trial where everything is on the record & under oath, the senators weigh the evidence & vote whether the prez should remain in office. The only official record of Trump's extortion from Ukraine is the impeachment trial transcript. The End. No Appeal.

So far, none of the senators have said anything in the trial - where it counts - that they "knew" Trump did it. They've said it via media but not where it counts. Starting Monday, each senator will be allowed 10 minutes to make a statement. Some may very well say "I believe the facts presented by the House Managers, the prez did it & tried to cover it up, but I don't think he should be removed from office." They could also say he did it & should be removed from office because it meets the constitutional standards or they don't believe he did it because John Bolton didn't come into the chamber & say under oath what the prez did. The issue was never whether the GOP tried to cover up; it was whether Trump - by ignoring subpoenas, refusing to provide documents, & threatening potential witnesses during the HR hearings - abused his position in order to cover it up.

There is an alternative - the judiciary. In this case, there were already trials underway about Trump's non-compliance w/the HR investigation. The HR decided NOT to pursue the issue of witnesses because it could take years for it to make its way through the courts. The president's lawyer told them he would tie them up for years & he admitted he said that in the trial.

The end of the US as we know it will be when ANY president says "I can do anything I want & Congress can't stop me because that's what was said in the Trump trial."




alanwoods - 2/1/2020 at 02:38 PM

You can call him what you wish. I, in turn, think you are obviously blinded by hatred.To me, he is a principled man with a distinguished career. Read his statement. He offered no support for Trumps's actions.

"If this shallow, hurried and wholly partisan impeachment were to succeed, it would rip the country apart, pouring gasoline on the fire of cultural divisions that already exist. It would create the weapon of perpetual impeachment to be used against future presidents whenever the House of Representatives is of a different political party."

https://www.wate.com/news/national-world/sen-lamar-alexanders-full-statemen t-on-impeachment-trial-witnesses/


nebish - 2/1/2020 at 02:51 PM

quote:
The end of the US as we know it will be when ANY president says "I can do anything I want & Congress can't stop me because that's what was said in the Trump trial."


Congress can, or can in the future, stop a President or remove him...it just depends who is in Congress.

I'm really not surprised that members of one political party are protecting their President. Why would partisan politics surprise anyone at this point? End the duopoly!


Chain - 2/1/2020 at 03:06 PM

quote:
You can call him what you wish. I, in turn, think you are obviously blinded by hatred.To me, he is a principled man with a distinguished career. Read his statement. He offered no support for Trumps's actions.

"If this shallow, hurried and wholly partisan impeachment were to succeed, it would rip the country apart, pouring gasoline on the fire of cultural divisions that already exist. It would create the weapon of perpetual impeachment to be used against future presidents whenever the House of Representatives is of a different political party."

https://www.wate.com/news/national-world/sen-lamar-alexanders-full-statemen t-on-impeachment-trial-witnesses/


So because I observe that his loyalty lies with his party and not the constitution it must be hatred?

It's not hatred, just my opinion that his entire career has been enabled by his membership in the Republican party and in the end that's the group he sided with rather than the republic and the constitution he swore an oath to uphold. And the same party above the country attitude can be said for many Democrats too.



Chain - 2/1/2020 at 03:14 PM

quote:
quote:
The end of the US as we know it will be when ANY president says "I can do anything I want & Congress can't stop me because that's what was said in the Trump trial."


Congress can, or can in the future, stop a President or remove him...it just depends who is in Congress.

I'm really not surprised that members of one political party are protecting their President. Why would partisan politics surprise anyone at this point? End the duopoly!


I agree on the duopoly issue....I'm a registered Republican and am considering changing my registration to Independent as it's hypocritical of me to bitch about party devotion yet be a member of the same party.


cyclone88 - 2/1/2020 at 04:38 PM

quote:
I agree on the duopoly issue....I'm a registered Republican and am considering changing my registration to Independent as it's hypocritical of me to bitch about party devotion yet be a member of the same party.

Excellent theory. If the party w/whom we're aligned ceases to represent our principles, then the affiliation should end. Congress seems to have lost the ability to produce bipartisan legislation it once had. It's worth considering whether elected representatives are acting in our interests or out of fear of party leadership's wrath. The only drawback of becoming Independent is the inability to vote in primaries in some states; that's a small price to pay.


BrerRabbit - 2/1/2020 at 05:00 PM

I wonder how this situation would have been handled by the Founding Fathers. They were faced with extreme polarization of two sides as well. It would be interesting to see how they would have resolved the problem of a rogue executive.


Chain - 2/1/2020 at 05:39 PM

quote:
quote:
I agree on the duopoly issue....I'm a registered Republican and am considering changing my registration to Independent as it's hypocritical of me to bitch about party devotion yet be a member of the same party.

Excellent theory. If the party w/whom we're aligned ceases to represent our principles, then the affiliation should end. Congress seems to have lost the ability to produce bipartisan legislation it once had. It's worth considering whether elected representatives are acting in our interests or out of fear of party leadership's wrath. The only drawback of becoming Independent is the inability to vote in primaries in some states; that's a small price to pay.


Your last sentence is primarily the reason why i initially registered as Republican many, many years ago. Here in very rural, very upstate, NY, the Republican party rules local elections and most of local government and so I determined at the time that I wanted a small say in the primary process.

I did also believe in some of what the Republican party at that time at least represented but find the older I've gotten and the more the Republican party has drifted away from my beliefs the less I support it. Frankly I should have changed my affiliation a long time ago.


cyclone88 - 2/1/2020 at 06:01 PM

quote:
I wonder how this situation would have been handled by the Founding Fathers. They were faced with extreme polarization of two sides as well. It would be interesting to see how they would have resolved the problem of a rogue executive.

They were snobs. They put impeachment in the hands of the most exclusive division of government - the Senate. They expected the Senate to be gentlemen who subscribed to codes of honor (good god, they still had duels), knew 1st hand what powerful monarchs were like, and were intellectuals. Almost all of them were lawyers & knew precisely why the constitution was worded as it was. [In fact, until the last decades most senators WERE lawyers (75%) - not that they're smarter than anyone else, but they know con law.] And, for good measure, they weren't likely to have any rogue executives electing affable guys like washington & drafting constitutional creators like jefferson when no one else would step up. An ungentlemanly businessman wouldn't have been considered for the presidency & in fact, Hoover was the 1st in 1928. In the event someone went rogue, the mere charge that he acted dishonorably would have him impeached & removed ASAP.


dutchoneill - 2/1/2020 at 06:12 PM

Has the NYTs decided what the Blockbuster revelation will be next Tuesday before the final vote?


BrerRabbit - 2/1/2020 at 07:48 PM

quote:
. . . Blockbuster . . .


The only Blockbuster I know of as a proper noun is Blockbuster Video. Blockbuster went out of business quite a while ago - matter of fact the last remaining Blockbuster is right here in Central Oregon, it has become a retro tourist attraction for millenials. I doubt they have much to reveal to the New York Times.


MartinD28 - 2/1/2020 at 09:32 PM

quote:
quote:
. . . Blockbuster . . .


The only Blockbuster I know of as a proper noun is Blockbuster Video. Blockbuster went out of business quite a while ago - matter of fact the last remaining Blockbuster is right here in Central Oregon, it has become a retro tourist attraction for millenials. I doubt they have much to reveal to the New York Times.


Maybe the Senate should go out of business like Blockbuster. That body no longer represents the "people" and abdicated its dutiful responsibilities to the Executive Branch. The Senate showed that that there are really only two branches - the Executive & the Judicial. If we blink, the Judicial may be gone too. That's what happens in autocratic societies.


BrerRabbit - 2/1/2020 at 09:57 PM

quote:
That's what happens in autocratic societies.


They know. No point in warning them - it is what they want. Trump is simply the figurehead of a grassroots fascist movement. More a return to monarchy. There was a demand vacuum for a dictator and Trump appeared. If not him it would have been someone else. They are done with democracy, it requires individual mind and conscience to function, and there is too much uncertainty. The main thing all Redhats want is certainty - even if what they are certain of is total bullsh!t.




Skydog32103 - 2/1/2020 at 10:41 PM

quote:
The end of the US as we know it will be when ANY president says "I can do anything I want & Congress can't stop me because that's what was said in the Trump trial."


so you are saying that we've already seen the end of the United States? not to me. we've lost the United States the second there is any legal positioning to exceed 8 years in office. if Trump is able to sell the idea that a transition of power is a threat to national security, then democracy is gone. The right should remember that, despite "Russia if you're listening, I hope you find those emails", Democrats peacefully handed over power to Trump per the rules of the Constitution. I pray the right shows the same respect for the Constitution and their fellow Americans.


Skydog32103 - 2/1/2020 at 10:45 PM

quote:
Starting Monday, each senator will be allowed 10 minutes to make a statement. Some may very well say "I believe the facts presented by the House Managers, the prez did it & tried to cover it up, but I don't think he should be removed from office."


this is what they all will say even with witnesses, is my point. they accept the charges by Democrats, but disagree that he should be removed; therefore, no need for witnesses. i do see why there is value to getting it on legal record, but it appears that the outcome would be exactly the same. i just don't see how or why witness testimony is relevant when the defense is admitting and accepting everything already.


Skydog32103 - 2/1/2020 at 10:56 PM

quote:
I wonder how this situation would have been handled by the Founding Fathers. They were faced with extreme polarization of two sides as well. It would be interesting to see how they would have resolved the problem of a rogue executive.


i believe this is acting out exactly as the Founding Fathers intended - they just never imagined that the people of the United States would ever allow themselves to be brainwashed by an evil dictator. that's the only mistake the Founding Fathers made.

but this is exactly how it's supposed to work. this is democracy because it's what the people are voting for and continue to support in masses. trials have been held. due process is happening, and juries are deciding "not guilty". if the majority of the country was in fear and wanted Trump gone, then the Senate would have him behind bars already.

but the entire point of the United States and the Constitution is to build what the majority of the people vote for (the electorate v. popular vote is different story), and right now the majority supports Trump's vision and expanded powers. because the people are voting for it, because the Senators believe they will lose their jobs if they convict, it becomes perfectly legal, regardless of what's in the Constitution - because the Constitution can be amended with enough votes and support, which they have.

to manage a rogue evil President in the White House, they created the 8-year term limit. that's the last, final, only resort we have. it's the only thing left to protect. if we lose this, then we've seen the fall of the United States, and we'll all remember who the people were that wanted to destroy the free democracy the Fathers created.


Chain - 2/1/2020 at 11:09 PM

quote:
quote:
Starting Monday, each senator will be allowed 10 minutes to make a statement. Some may very well say "I believe the facts presented by the House Managers, the prez did it & tried to cover it up, but I don't think he should be removed from office."


this is what they all will say even with witnesses, is my point. they accept the charges by Democrats, but disagree that he should be removed; therefore, no need for witnesses. i do see why there is value to getting it on legal record, but it appears that the outcome would be exactly the same. i just don't see how or why witness testimony is relevant when the defense is admitting and accepting everything already.


I think you have a valid point. However, more witness testimony that supports the allegations against Trump may sway a few independents or even previous Trump supporters to vote against him this coming November.

But yes, Mitch McConnell and the spineless Republican Senators made up their mind that they'd exonerate Trump the second the House completed the Impeachment. The actual trial was in the bag immediately. I only hope the public remembers this travesty when they enter the voting booth.


BIGV - 2/2/2020 at 01:07 AM

quote:
Looks like any President will now be allowed to do whatever he wants as long as his party controls the Senate.

Party over national interest.


I love this argument and point of view, the Democrats have accusations and "proof" lol, so therefore to disagree with us....


Chain - 2/2/2020 at 01:42 AM

quote:
quote:
Looks like any President will now be allowed to do whatever he wants as long as his party controls the Senate.

Party over national interest.


I love this argument and point of view, the Democrats have accusations and "proof" lol, so therefore to disagree with us....


Don't forget witness testimony....From several people. A rather important thing to ignore in any trial.

If they were able to obtain it, I suspect there's documents, emails, texts, etc. to corroborate the witness testimony but little Caligula and his merry band of henchman (including the Senate majority leader) refused to allow such potential evidence to be provided to both the House and Senate....

Presume away that there's no real proof, but given the length dear leader has gone to suppress testimony and documentation from his inner circle, it seems pretty certain to me and many others that there certainly is...and probably a lot of it.


BIGV - 2/2/2020 at 02:13 AM

quote:
If they were able to obtain it


quote:
I suspect there's documents, emails, texts, etc.


quote:
Presume away that there's no real proof


quote:
it seems pretty certain to me


quote:
and probably


"if'
"I suspect"
"presumption of 'real' proof"
"pretty certain"
"probably"

"Pretty tough to argue with these points as they've been presented"

I "hope" you are not an Attorney


Stephen - 2/2/2020 at 02:23 AM

Indications as of now point toward the same outcome as Clinton’s outcome 21 years ago almost to the day - acquittal - but there’s still time for more political football before next week’s Senate vote - that’s all it is - a political process

- if it’s indeed acquittal, the Democrats can then focus on Plan B, the election, as a means for removal

This is where I think Hillary Clinton could make a big-splash announcement of her entrance into the race

She went through the whole impeachment process w/Bill, she knows how the game is played, she almost beat Trump the 1st time, there’s no real Dem candidate of note right now, many still like the idea of a woman president, & her advisers might just be saying - “we could be the front runner almost right out of the gate”

But who knows


BrerRabbit - 2/2/2020 at 02:38 AM

quote:
Don't forget witness testimony....From several people. A rather important thing to ignore in any trial.


They already forgot. And not ignored but an in-your-face upyours to this country. The behavior is worse than any of the impeachment charges. Anyone supporting all this obstruction and nonsense is on the wrong side of history.



BIGV - 2/2/2020 at 02:52 AM

quote:
This is where I think Hillary Clinton could make a big-splash announcement of her entrance into the race


I've been saying this all along. She is truly the gift that keeps on giving....


BrerRabbit - 2/2/2020 at 03:45 AM

Have another s'more, roast another marshmallow, tell another scary campfire story about THE BOOGEYWOMAN.

She is not coming back, relax.

[Edited on 2/2/2020 by BrerRabbit]


BIGV - 2/2/2020 at 03:48 AM

quote:
Have another s'more, roast another marshmallow, tell another scary campfire story about THE BOOGEYWOMAN.

She is not coming back, relax.


Worth saving. Thanks


Skydog32103 - 2/2/2020 at 04:17 AM

quote:
"if'
"I suspect"
"presumption of 'real' proof"
"pretty certain"
"probably"

"Pretty tough to argue with these points as they've been presented"

I "hope" you are not an Attorney








[Edited on 2/2/2020 by Skydog32103]


BIGV - 2/2/2020 at 04:25 AM

quote:
quote:
"if'
"I suspect"
"presumption of 'real' proof"
"pretty certain"
"probably"

"Pretty tough to argue with these points as they've been presented"

I "hope" you are not an Attorney





Is that you?...Not what I expected at all.


cyclone88 - 2/2/2020 at 01:33 PM

quote:
i believe this is acting out exactly as the Founding Fathers intended - they just never imagined that the people of the United States would ever allow themselves to be brainwashed by an evil dictator. that's the only mistake the Founding Fathers made.

but this is exactly how it's supposed to work. this is democracy because it's what the people are voting for and continue to support in masses. trials have been held. due process is happening, and juries are deciding "not guilty". if the majority of the country was in fear and wanted Trump gone, then the Senate would have him behind bars already.

but the entire point of the United States and the Constitution is to build what the majority of the people vote for (the electorate v. popular vote is different story), and right now the majority supports Trump's vision and expanded powers. because the people are voting for it, because the Senators believe they will lose their jobs if they convict, it becomes perfectly legal, regardless of what's in the Constitution - because the Constitution can be amended with enough votes and support, which they have.

to manage a rogue evil President in the White House, they created the 8-year term limit. that's the last, final, only resort we have. it's the only thing left to protect. if we lose this, then we've seen the fall of the United States, and we'll all remember who the people were that wanted to destroy the free democracy the Fathers created.


The Founders had nothing to do w/term limits. Washington decided not to serve more than 2 terms & it became a practice followed until Roosevelt ran for 3rd & 4th terms. Congress didn't pass a 2 term limit amendment until 1947 and it wasn't ratified until 1950-51.

They also weren't as concerned w/what the people wanted as they were w/structure. [And "the people" didn't include women and African-Americans.] They never envisioned a senate that wasn't an elite body of honorable men who would toss a power-mad egomaniac out w/a unanimous vote.

They DID envision a Trump-like figure as Hamilton described in 1792 & was Schiff's opening quote in the trial:

"When a man unprincipled in private life desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper, possessed of considerable talents, having the ability of military habits—despotic in his ordinary demeanor—known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty—when such a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity—to join in the cry of danger to liberty—to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion—to flatter and fall in with all the nonsense of the zealots of the day—It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may 'ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.'"

Their expectation was that the Senate would have the ballz to toss him.


goldtop - 2/2/2020 at 03:20 PM

quote:
quote:
i believe this is acting out exactly as the Founding Fathers intended - they just never imagined that the people of the United States would ever allow themselves to be brainwashed by an evil dictator. that's the only mistake the Founding Fathers made.

but this is exactly how it's supposed to work. this is democracy because it's what the people are voting for and continue to support in masses. trials have been held. due process is happening, and juries are deciding "not guilty". if the majority of the country was in fear and wanted Trump gone, then the Senate would have him behind bars already.

but the entire point of the United States and the Constitution is to build what the majority of the people vote for (the electorate v. popular vote is different story), and right now the majority supports Trump's vision and expanded powers. because the people are voting for it, because the Senators believe they will lose their jobs if they convict, it becomes perfectly legal, regardless of what's in the Constitution - because the Constitution can be amended with enough votes and support, which they have.

to manage a rogue evil President in the White House, they created the 8-year term limit. that's the last, final, only resort we have. it's the only thing left to protect. if we lose this, then we've seen the fall of the United States, and we'll all remember who the people were that wanted to destroy the free democracy the Fathers created.


The Founders had nothing to do w/term limits. Washington decided not to serve more than 2 terms & it became a practice followed until Roosevelt ran for 3rd & 4th terms. Congress didn't pass a 2 term limit amendment until 1947 and it wasn't ratified until 1950-51.

They also weren't as concerned w/what the people wanted as they were w/structure. [And "the people" didn't include women and African-Americans.] They never envisioned a senate that wasn't an elite body of honorable men who would toss a power-mad egomaniac out w/a unanimous vote.

They DID envision a Trump-like figure as Hamilton described in 1792 & was Schiff's opening quote in the trial:

"When a man unprincipled in private life desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper, possessed of considerable talents, having the ability of military habits—despotic in his ordinary demeanor—known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty—when such a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity—to join in the cry of danger to liberty—to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion—to flatter and fall in with all the nonsense of the zealots of the day—It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may 'ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.'"

Their expectation was that the Senate would have the ballz to toss him.



This even makes me feel more like those Senators were threatened by the *tRump base.


Jerry - 2/5/2020 at 12:32 AM






[Edited on 2/2/2020 by Skydog32103]


Sometimes I feel some of the posters actually live in a "van down by the river" and go to the local library to get on the internet.


goldtop - 2/5/2020 at 04:16 PM

quote:





[Edited on 2/2/2020 by Skydog32103]


Sometimes I feel some of the posters actually live in a "van down by the river" and go to the local library to get on the internet.


Says the man who's bathes himself in the conspiracy theory world...Go design a new tinfoil hat...Did you know there's a guy in AZ that got arrested for making threats against Adam Schiff and don't you remember the guy who's sitting in jail for sending bombs to politicians?? The AZ guy got drunk and was watching FOX news when he decided to make the call. But I guess briebart and Alex Jones didn't tell you about those incidents. In fact during the trial Adam Schiff made the same reference to the GOP sitting there


Jerry - 2/5/2020 at 09:35 PM

quote:
quote:





[Edited on 2/2/2020 by Skydog32103]


Sometimes I feel some of the posters actually live in a "van down by the river" and go to the local library to get on the internet.


Says the man who's bathes himself in the conspiracy theory world...Go design a new tinfoil hat...Did you know there's a guy in AZ that got arrested for making threats against Adam Schiff and don't you remember the guy who's sitting in jail for sending bombs to politicians?? The AZ guy got drunk and was watching FOX news when he decided to make the call. But I guess briebart and Alex Jones didn't tell you about those incidents. In fact during the trial Adam Schiff made the same reference to the GOP sitting there


Hey Goldtop, just exactly what does that have to do with my post?


OriginalGoober - 2/6/2020 at 01:22 AM

The whole country watched as the democrats placed a party "win" or "victory" over the American people's agenda, spending millions of dollars and 6 months of investigation, grinding to a halt any bills like infrastructure, Dangerous socialist ideas are rising to the top of this party. This is too serious to be considered comedy in my opinion. These reckless socialist ideas need to be stomped under the boot of the USA and we need to maintain a thriving democracy. This version of the democratic party will answer for these sins in November.


Skydog32103 - 2/6/2020 at 02:39 AM

quote:
These reckless socialist ideas need to be stomped under the boot of the USA and we need to maintain a thriving democracy. This version of the democratic party will answer for these sins in November.


you speak the same way as Al-Queda and ISIS.


Jerry - 2/6/2020 at 04:46 AM

quote:
quote:
These reckless socialist ideas need to be stomped under the boot of the USA and we need to maintain a thriving democracy. This version of the democratic party will answer for these sins in November.


you speak the same way as Al-Queda and ISIS.


You need to study history and the news a little bit better. Your statement makes no sense what so ever.

Of course it would possibly have some basis if you are an Al Queda or Isis operative here to sow dissent and misinformation.


goldtop - 2/6/2020 at 06:06 AM

Ya all should have a good listen and maybe you'll find your way back from the absurd

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4sxYqh-V3k


OriginalGoober - 2/7/2020 at 12:43 AM

I'm going to miss green shirt guy..... Last angry ranting democrat turn out the lights on the DJTrump impeachment. Why is nancy pelosi thinking impeachment is so bad for DJT ? WJC is the best democratic prez in the last 40 years who was impeached and found guilty. Nancy Pelosis impeachment play is a hollow victory in the big picture.


playallnite - 2/7/2020 at 03:26 AM

If Trump were emotionally healthy, he would have just shut up and use actions to show his resolve to move forward with the country's agendas. However being the narcissistic psychopath that he is, he can't just say nothing or say something that would bring the country together again.


goldtop - 2/13/2020 at 02:37 PM

Note for the day from John Kelly

John Kelly: ''So if you only watch Fox News, because it's reinforcing what you believe, you are not an informed citizen."

John Kelly, Trump's former chief of staff and ex-DHS secretary, says the press is not "the enemy of the people," and that migrants crossing the southern border are overwhelmingly good people who are looking for jobs.

[Edited on 2/13/2020 by goldtop]


gotdrumz - 2/13/2020 at 03:37 PM

This just in...NEWS FLASH from NIGS (Normal Information Gathering Service)


All corporate media is propaganda, brainwashing the Lemmings that tune in to get spoon-red their psudeo-intellectual nuggets -o-spin that a consensus of federally funded scientists agree increases polarization via uniform process of thought and action. The vibration in the various forms of broadcasted signals has an encompassing effect on those in high dense population areas, The same phenomenon occurs in rural areas as well, but attracts itself to an opposite connotation.




MartinD28 - 2/13/2020 at 05:30 PM

quote:
Note for the day from John Kelly

John Kelly: ''So if you only watch Fox News, because it's reinforcing what you believe, you are not an informed citizen."

John Kelly, Trump's former chief of staff and ex-DHS secretary, says the press is not "the enemy of the people," and that migrants crossing the southern border are overwhelmingly good people who are looking for jobs.

[Edited on 2/13/2020 by goldtop]

Why should we listen to anyone who has worked for Trump such as John Kelly, General Mattis, the Colonel with a Purple Heart - Vindman, Rex Tillerson, prosecutors who resigned at DOJ over Trump & Barr's unethical behavior, and countless others who have left this admin? They all are unpatriotic and didn't play ball with the emperor. None of them are the great patriotic American / Russian lover that Trump is and none of them know how to achieve anything or do their jobs like Trump. Long live the MAGA King.

[Edited on 2/13/2020 by MartinD28]


Skydog32103 - 2/13/2020 at 06:36 PM

quote:
This just in...NEWS FLASH from NIGS (Normal Information Gathering Service)


either google erased this acronym from its existence, or this is something inappropriate for a public forum.

quote:
All corporate media is propaganda, brainwashing the Lemmings that tune in to get spoon-red their psudeo-intellectual nuggets -o-spin that a consensus of federally funded scientists agree increases polarization via uniform process of thought and action. The vibration in the various forms of broadcasted signals has an encompassing effect on those in high dense population areas, The same phenomenon occurs in rural areas as well, but attracts itself to an opposite connotation.


what media isn't corporate? all local news is owned by cbs, abc, nbc, fox, etc., but they aren't propaganda. the local affiliates tend to deliver non-biased factual reporting. where do you get your information on current events? how do you stay informed?


gotdrumz - 2/13/2020 at 06:52 PM

quote:


either google erased this acronym from its existence, or this is something inappropriate for a public forum.

quote:


Your sense of humor is as useless as your self imposed moral policing of a crime that never took place.

So does DIC mean Democratic Iowa Caucus or is it inappropriate for a public forum. Cause somebody with an agenda driven mentality thinks it "means" penis?


BrerRabbit - 2/13/2020 at 07:10 PM

quote:
All corporate media is propaganda, brainwashing the Lemmings that tune in to get spoon-red their psudeo-intellectual nuggets -o-spin that a consensus of federally funded scientists agree increases polarization via uniform process of thought and action. The vibration in the various forms of broadcasted signals has an encompassing effect on those in high dense population areas, The same phenomenon occurs in rural areas as well, but attracts itself to an opposite connotation.







gotdrumz - 2/13/2020 at 07:30 PM

quote:


what media isn't corporate? all local news is owned by cbs, abc, nbc, fox, etc., but they aren't propaganda. the local affiliates tend to deliver non-biased factual reporting. where do you get your information on current events? how do you stay informed?


My entire post was humor-izing what a lot of people believe
There is a difference between reporting a car crash killed three, the high school quarterback threw 3 TD passes, or the price of wheat is down this week and the agenda driven policies of their parent companies, the types of products advertised to the base audience, much less the type of human interest stories covered at t the local level is based on agenda of the parent company.

You don't need to own a TV or use Twitter/Facebook to get info. Actual journalism still exists and it isn,t found on Fox, CNN, MSNBC and that ilk. The internet is the worse place to get info from it you are lazy. It is the best place to look if you have the patience to see past the bias, the agenda, and the propaganda.

You can watch what you want, believe what you want, I can 't control that or want to. When an individual can admit that learning is possible from somsthing/someone they disagree with, they no longer follow the precept of being told what truth is or what truth isn't. A liberating thing!


Skydog32103 - 2/13/2020 at 07:51 PM

almost half of our country, including people on this message board, at his rallies, in the media, our friends and family that support him, have all demonstrated distrust and condemnation towards our federal law enforcement, our intelligence, our courts, and our distinguished war heroes. there’s never been a denial about this distrust and hostility towards these once revered people and institutions. we all look for the cause of the distrust. why excuse the person in charge who is openly pleading for it and promising it in front of our eyes?


goldtop - 2/13/2020 at 11:07 PM

quote:
quote:


what media isn't corporate? all local news is owned by cbs, abc, nbc, fox, etc., but they aren't propaganda. the local affiliates tend to deliver non-biased factual reporting. where do you get your information on current events? how do you stay informed?


My entire post was humor-izing what a lot of people believe
There is a difference between reporting a car crash killed three, the high school quarterback threw 3 TD passes, or the price of wheat is down this week and the agenda driven policies of their parent companies, the types of products advertised to the base audience, much less the type of human interest stories covered at t the local level is based on agenda of the parent company.

You don't need to own a TV or use Twitter/Facebook to get info. Actual journalism still exists and it isn,t found on Fox, CNN, MSNBC and that ilk. The internet is the worse place to get info from it you are lazy. It is the best place to look if you have the patience to see past the bias, the agenda, and the propaganda.

You can watch what you want, believe what you want, I can 't control that or want to. When an individual can admit that learning is possible from somsthing/someone they disagree with, they no longer follow the precept of being told what truth is or what truth isn't. A liberating thing!


On all the cable news stations you have a cross of journalists and pundits. You can get honest information from any of them if you listen at the right time and know that most of the shows are opinion shows but they also bring in politicians and others with knowledge and they ask them questions. It's up to you to decide who's blowing smoke up your azz and who isn't...they all aren't...some actually have something to say if you're willing to listen.

It seems to be a stretch to say that they all are lying...Some people actually have some dignity on each of those stations and there are those that don't. The prime time FOX pundits are especially far right and the ones from MSNBC and CNN are more far left. They each bring on those who tell a story. It's up to each of us to filter out the static.

But all you really have to do is look at what *tRump is doing and decide if you can handle that or not...all of other crap is static. Just watch what he does...me I'm not good with any of it and there isn't anything on any of those stations that could change my mind I'm just watching *tRump phuck our entire country up while the senate stands by and does nothing but "Hope he learned a lesson" People... we are the laughing stock of the world when we use to lead...If you can't see that I have no help for you. If this is what you wanted I feel sorry for you


BrerRabbit - 2/14/2020 at 12:35 AM

You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows


gotdrumz - 2/14/2020 at 01:26 AM

Goldtop:

A media outlet gets caught lying outright or is lying by omission, my ability to trust their credibility is gone. First off, what is the motive for not being truthful? It has to more than just making money. There are part-truths in any agenda, some are cool accepting that, I am not. Making a decision based on any kind of deceptive practice is foolish. If you need to make your choices based on the opinions of people on TV, I feel sorry for you.


goldtop - 2/14/2020 at 01:50 AM

quote:
Goldtop:

A media outlet gets caught lying outright or is lying by omission, my ability to trust their credibility is gone. First off, what is the motive for not being truthful? It has to more than just making money. There are part-truths in any agenda, some are cool accepting that, I am not. Making a decision based on any kind of deceptive practice is foolish. If you need to make your choices based on the opinions of people on TV, I feel sorry for you.


quote:
But all you really have to do is look at what *tRump is doing and decide if you can handle that or not...all of other crap is static. Just watch what he does...me I'm not good with any of it and there isn't anything on any of those stations that could change my mind I'm just watching *tRump phuck our entire country up while the senate stands by and does nothing but "Hope he learned a lesson" People... we are the laughing stock of the world when we use to lead...If you can't see that I have no help for you. If this is what you wanted I feel sorry for you




I guess you didn't read this part

[Edited on 2/14/2020 by goldtop]


Skydog32103 - 2/14/2020 at 12:40 PM

quote:
A media outlet gets caught lying outright or is lying by omission, my ability to trust their credibility is gone. First off, what is the motive for not being truthful? It has to more than just making money. There are part-truths in any agenda, some are cool accepting that, I am not. Making a decision based on any kind of deceptive practice is foolish. If you need to make your choices based on the opinions of people on TV, I feel sorry for you.


which outlets do you use to stay informed?


goldtop - 2/14/2020 at 01:55 PM

quote:
quote:
A media outlet gets caught lying outright or is lying by omission, my ability to trust their credibility is gone. First off, what is the motive for not being truthful? It has to more than just making money. There are part-truths in any agenda, some are cool accepting that, I am not. Making a decision based on any kind of deceptive practice is foolish. If you need to make your choices based on the opinions of people on TV, I feel sorry for you.


which outlets do you use to stay informed?


I have a cousin that claims all the same things and told me to watch BBC so I did...they were saying the exact same things as the cable news stations, as does the local stations when they start talking about *tRump...same things discussed different people. The fact that people think everyone is lying to them tells me they believe only the absurd thoughts they conjure up in their own heads. To say that they all lie is a self lie. It saying those people have no self respect and no dignity and I'm the only one who tells the truth...a self lie


gotdrumz - 2/14/2020 at 02:08 PM

quote:
. The fact that people think everyone is lying to them tells me they believe only the absurd thoughts they conjure up in their own heads. To say that they all lie is a self lie. It saying those people have no self respect and no dignity and I'm the only one who tells the truth...a self lie


So now you are giving psychoanalysis. Coming from a person who cares about the world laughing, but excuses/accepts being lied to is comedy gold.


gotdrumz - 2/14/2020 at 02:12 PM

quote:


which outlets do you use to stay informed?


Already answered that in part of another reply to you a few posts back.


goldtop - 2/14/2020 at 02:16 PM

quote:
quote:
. The fact that people think everyone is lying to them tells me they believe only the absurd thoughts they conjure up in their own heads. To say that they all lie is a self lie. It saying those people have no self respect and no dignity and I'm the only one who tells the truth...a self lie


So now you are giving psychoanalysis. Coming from a person who cares about the world laughing, but excuses/accepts being lied to is comedy gold.


Please read this.

quote:
But all you really have to do is look at what *tRump is doing and decide if you can handle that or not...all of other crap is static. Just watch what he does...me I'm not good with any of it and there isn't anything on any of those stations that could change my mind I'm just watching *tRump phuck our entire country up while the senate stands by and does nothing but "Hope he learned a lesson" People... we are the laughing stock of the world when we use to lead...If you can't see that I have no help for you. If this is what you wanted I feel sorry for you


And no I don't think the entire world is lying and if would actually pay attention you'd know we're being laughed at. I have family and friends that live in other countries and they tell me we are being laughed at. But I guess they're lying too and of course only you hold all the truths...absurd



Skydog32103 - 2/14/2020 at 02:53 PM

quote:
The internet is the worse place to get info from it you are lazy. It is the best place to look if you have the patience to see past the bias, the agenda, and the propaganda.


the internet is not an outlet, it's a medium. which outlets do you trust to keep you informed of true, non-biased, factual reporting?

a reminder - nobody is trying to debate liberal versus conservative values. nobody is debating whether your personal behavior is ok or not ok. nobody is questioning your own values. we are only debating what is acceptable for the office of the President of the United States. you seem to be going down a rabbit hole about truth.



[Edited on 2/14/2020 by Skydog32103]


gotdrumz - 2/14/2020 at 02:57 PM

quote:


And no I don't think the entire world is lying and if would actually pay attention you'd know we're being laughed at. I have family and friends that live in other countries and they tell me we are being laughed at. But I guess they're lying too and of course only you hold all the truths...absurd




I don't think the entire world is lying.Yet, once a liar, always a liar applies for the most part.

I don't care we are being laughed at. They laughed before, they'll laugh again.Millions want to come here, so in the grand scheme of things, why does it matter?

People in this country laugh at what the party Trump doesn't belong to is doing, does that bother you too?I

As far as you saying only I hold all the truths? Condescending should be a taxable attribute in California. That might give it some worth? Right now it's as valuable as the carp on the sidewalks. That is laughable too, but humans are less tangible than the antics of a person in office from the opposing party.

I actually don't want to know the real truth about most things. People blowing gaskets over stuff they have no control over is insanity. Fun to watch, until you run out of popcorn.





gotdrumz - 2/14/2020 at 03:12 PM

quote:

the internet is not an outlet, it's a medium. which outlets do you trust to keep you informed of true, non-biased, factual reporting?



Outlets are a form of medium too. You just click a remote instead of a mouse or touch a screen. Look for a more personal connotation/connection when researching something of interest. For example the Raiders went 7-9 last season. If you have the patience and skillset, you can find the college transcripts of every player they had since1960. I can't explain it any simpler. You have to do the work, it doesn't just fall out of the sky.


goldtop - 2/14/2020 at 03:12 PM

And of course saying every person in MSM is lying all the time isn't condescending.


gotdrumz - 2/14/2020 at 03:15 PM

quote:
And of course saying every person in MSM is lying all the time isn't condescending.



You are pretty dense, I never said they lie all the time. Just don't care to sit watch/listen/wait for the next time they do


Skydog32103 - 2/14/2020 at 03:23 PM

quote:
I actually don't want to know the real truth about most things.


i felt this way too once, when the truths about my life and the world were too much for me to handle. it was easier for me to stay high all day and night and blame anything getting in my way.

quote:
Yet, once a liar, always a liar applies for the most part.


we've all lied. it's human nature. surely you don't mean this, otherwise you think everyone you know will always be a liar and cannot be trusted. i respect your opinion about lying, but your way of responding to it isn't going to solve anything.

quote:
I don't care we are being laughed at. They laughed before, they'll laugh again.Millions want to come here, so in the grand scheme of things, why does it matter?


for centuries now, all the world's biggest nations have competed to recruit the brightest minds. this is critical in remaining the strongest superpower, and critical for maitaining national security. if the world's brightest minds are turned off by the cruelty and crude behavior of our President, then they will go to our competitors, like China and Russia. you know it matters.


goldtop - 2/14/2020 at 03:24 PM

quote:
quote:
And of course saying every person in MSM is lying all the time isn't condescending.



You are pretty dense, I never said they lie all the time. Just don't care to sit watch/listen/wait for the next time they do


Are we talking about being condescending again.??


Skydog32103 - 2/14/2020 at 03:28 PM

quote:
outlets are a form of medium too. You just click a remote instead of a mouse or touch a screen.


mediums are the delivery method: TV, radio, newspaper/magazines (print), and internet. the outlets are the individual companies operating within the mediums.

quote:
Look for a more personal connotation/connection when researching something of interest. For example the Raiders went 7-9 last season. If you have the patience and skillset, you can find the college transcripts of every player they had since1960. I can't explain it any simpler. You have to do the work, it doesn't just fall out of the sky.


what do the college transcripts of former Raiders players have to do with their 7-9 record in 2019? are you ok bro? you seem troubled.


goldtop - 2/14/2020 at 03:40 PM

quote:
quote:
outlets are a form of medium too. You just click a remote instead of a mouse or touch a screen.


mediums are the delivery method: TV, radio, newspaper/magazines (print), and internet. the outlets are the individual companies operating within the mediums.

quote:
Look for a more personal connotation/connection when researching something of interest. For example the Raiders went 7-9 last season. If you have the patience and skillset, you can find the college transcripts of every player they had since1960. I can't explain it any simpler. You have to do the work, it doesn't just fall out of the sky.


what do the college transcripts of former Raiders players have to do with their 7-9 record in 2019? are you ok bro? you seem troubled.


it actually doesn't take much time at all. MLB NFL NBA NHL all have this info on their sites. It's easy to find. Just go to google and type a players name in and it'll give you links to all that info. Or go directly to the major sport leagues sites and look up anyone and their entire career from college through pro will all the stats. Not brain surgery.

The entire MAGA crowd is disenfranchised and it seems none of them own a mirror so they can have a strong look at who their problem is

[Edited on 2/14/2020 by goldtop]


Stephen - 2/14/2020 at 03:42 PM

Believe he was mentioning it in the context of usefulness of internet/info superhighway, in research - it’s hog heaven for us sports nuts

Impeachment is over, I say why not change thread to “Now we can vote him out - nine more months” updating it as November approaches


goldtop - 2/14/2020 at 04:17 PM

quote:
Believe he was mentioning it in the context of usefulness of internet/info superhighway, in research - it’s hog heaven for us sports nuts

Impeachment is over, I say why not change thread to “Now we can vote him out - nine more months” updating it as November approaches


After yesterday's tweet storm he might be impeached for a second time...or are you not aware he told NY that he'll stop the ban when they stop investigating him...that's called a quid pro quo...or bribe if you want to speak English

Hakeem Jeffries spoke about this happening during the impeachment trial. He said what will stop him from bribing states or cities, and then yesterday he did.


Stephen - 2/14/2020 at 04:30 PM

impeachment has had its day for now, that’s why I thought just for a change why not....then return it to its original name after the election, if he isn’t voted out, as a renewed round of impeachments are called for
Wasn’t aware of what you mentioned in NY, bribery by tweet, yikes

[Edited on 2/14/2020 by Stephen]


BrerRabbit - 2/14/2020 at 05:25 PM

quote:
. . .are you not aware he told NY that he'll stop the ban when they stop investigating him . . .


Thanks for the heads up - I was not aware of this. Link to a short article on it - thought it would be a good little case study for the "Fake News" debate. I have zero idea whether American Independent's editors are lib or con - I didn't have to carefully sift thru a landfill of liberal lies to find this article. It was the first search hit. Every word is a simple statement of current events.

Other than op-eds, I really don't see what the "Fake News" thing is. I am liberal and I listen to FOX radio every day - because it is the only news on the radio. It is just plain old news. I don't read or listen to opinion pieces, never have.

I think that the term "Fake News" is a way to deny things that are occurring in plain sight.

Read it yourself, tell me where the left or right spin is in this short article. Is it automatically "Fake News" because it is daring to report on Trump, is that it?

https://americanindependent.com/donald-trump-administration-new-york-truste d-traveler-sanctuary-cities-dhs-homeland-security/


goldtop - 2/14/2020 at 05:37 PM

quote:
quote:
. . .are you not aware he told NY that he'll stop the ban when they stop investigating him . . .


Thanks for the heads up - I was not aware of this. Link to a short article on it - thought it would be a good little case study for the "Fake News" debate. I have zero idea whether American Independent's editors are lib or con - I didn't have to carefully sift thru a landfill of liberal lies to find this article. It was the first search hit. Every word is a simple statement of current events.

Other than op-eds, I really don't see what the "Fake News" thing is. I am liberal and I listen to FOX radio every day - because it is the only news on the radio. It is just plain old news. I don't read or listen to opinion pieces, never have.

I think that the term "Fake News" is a way to deny things that are occurring in plain sight.

Read it yourself, tell me where the left or right spin is in this short article. Is it automatically "Fake News" because it is daring to report on Trump, is that it?

https://americanindependent.com/donald-trump-administration-new-york-truste d-traveler-sanctuary-cities-dhs-homeland-security/


The local news station I watch is a FOX affiliate. I've watched BBC, CNN and MSNBC and when the conversation turns to *tRump they all say the same things including the local FOX affiliate...so are they all lying or just putting out the information they have? now FOX News simply ignores those stories and concentrates on HC emails or some other absurd conspiracy crap...except for Chris Wallace, Niel Cavuto and Judge Napolitano. and before he left Shepard Smith...so there are those on FOX who will deal with real facts while the Pundits create stories, Carlson, Ingaham, Hannity and the other Judge...

Again its not only absurd to say they all lie it's also arrogant stupidity and a stance that says I hold all the truths and only I...Much like *tRump ...the MAGA's are just find with a dictator


BrerRabbit - 2/14/2020 at 05:59 PM

quote:
. . .they all say the same things including the local FOX affiliate . . .


Exactly right. The closest I have seen to "Fake News" are the FOX blackouts on Trump f*ckups. Literally EVERY paper on the planet will be covering something and twenty pages of search wont turn up one FOX article. It is blatant muzzling. But when FOX does allow coverage it is generally the exact same as everyone else, just reporting everyday same old sh!t that happened.


[Edited on 2/14/2020 by BrerRabbit]


gotdrumz - 2/14/2020 at 09:39 PM

quote:
[

mediums are the delivery method: TV, radio, newspaper/magazines (print), and internet. the outlets are the individual companies operating within the mediums. .


I already understand thanks. There are different ways to look at it.
Router (device) ISP (medium) internet (outlet/source of information)
Depends on the context of how "outlet" is defined and used.


gotdrumz - 2/14/2020 at 10:38 PM

I can explain my outlet as medium comment as well (if anyone really cares)

YouTube = outlet

Hypothetical, old tart in a rural area is too far away from metro area with digital broadcast TV and no cellphone. He has Roku and no way to actually browse the internet. He has a YouTube app and used it to search different channels for info. So technically in this scenario, YouTube (an outlet) becomes a medium (delivery method) and the channels within are the outlets.

Actually, I talked myself into a corner by not paying attention to what I said. Did I succeed in escape? Probably not, but in the end who gives a crap.


gotdrumz - 2/14/2020 at 10:46 PM

quote:


what do the college transcripts of former Raiders players have to do with their 7-9 record in 2019?


You asked me how I get my info. It was an example "Raiders 7-9" as subject, and the " college transcripts of former players" is what you can glean it you want to be diligent and dig deep when researching on the internet


gotdrumz - 2/14/2020 at 10:48 PM

quote:


Are we talking about being condescending again.??




Actually, I was being "judgemental. So my bad!


goldtop - 2/16/2020 at 08:58 PM

quote:
quote:


Are we talking about being condescending again.??




Actually, I was being "judgemental. So my bad!


It's all good we're all a bit over the top with the entire process and have run to the corners. I think most of us are searching for what the greatest generation created after WWII. As a child of that generation here's what they didn't do that we do. They didn't talk about politics or religion. They didn't accept the absurd or extreme thinking. They had gone through too much(The depression and WWI and WWII) to allow others to talk BS and it be acceptable. They found middle ground...they visited each others and had social clubs. Personal relationships and your word really meant something. They didn't hate you based on your politics or faith because they didn't see the need to discuss those topics. They figured that you already knew what was right wrong and lived as such the rest was static...They paid more in taxes than we do percentage wise and unions were strong. My father was a teamster and he got full med, dental and vision benefits and 2 retirement plans one through the company he worked for and one through the teamsters along with SS. That's how well a truck driver/loading dock worker could live during that time. He made over $20 an hour in the 60's gas was 29cents a gallon and our house payment was $105 a month. Ronny Ray Gun and the GOP didn't like the middle class living like that so they've gutted all of it and now we talk about politics and religion

And *tRump ain't gonna give anyone any of that.

[Edited on 2/16/2020 by goldtop]


Skydog32103 - 2/17/2020 at 11:28 PM

in the meantime, the U.S. Attorney General said that the President has made it "impossible to do my job". nothing to see here i guess.


BrerRabbit - 2/18/2020 at 12:38 AM

quote:
In the meantime, the U.S. Attorney General said that the President has made it "impossible to do my job". nothing to see here i guess.


What, even the U.S. Attorney General is insulting the president now?


goldtop - 2/18/2020 at 06:43 AM

quote:
quote:
In the meantime, the U.S. Attorney General said that the President has made it "impossible to do my job". nothing to see here i guess.


What, even the U.S. Attorney General is insulting the president now?


Well maybe this thread can now cover Barr's upcoming impeachment that might be coming at him soon...55,000 signatures for his resignation


Chain - 2/18/2020 at 11:56 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
In the meantime, the U.S. Attorney General said that the President has made it "impossible to do my job". nothing to see here i guess.


What, even the U.S. Attorney General is insulting the president now?


Well maybe this thread can now cover Barr's upcoming impeachment that might be coming at him soon...55,000 signatures for his resignation


Yet another waste of time given McConnell will torpedo any attempt to impeach Barr should the House actually do so. But it would embarrass Barr on some level I suspect given it would certainly tarnish his legacy. God knows his reputation is already in tatters so why not add his legacy too...


MartinD28 - 2/18/2020 at 01:10 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
In the meantime, the U.S. Attorney General said that the President has made it "impossible to do my job". nothing to see here i guess.


What, even the U.S. Attorney General is insulting the president now?


Well maybe this thread can now cover Barr's upcoming impeachment that might be coming at him soon...55,000 signatures for his resignation


Yet another waste of time given McConnell will torpedo any attempt to impeach Barr should the House actually do so. But it would embarrass Barr on some level I suspect given it would certainly tarnish his legacy. God knows his reputation is already in tatters so why not add his legacy too...

I call BS on Barr's comment. He's been Trump's stooge ever since he auditioned for the job. His statements and actions since appointment back that up. He horribly misled the American public on the contents of the Mueller Report. And in the last week, his actions have done nothing to dismiss the fact that he's Trump's guy and following Trump's desires. Barr's unprecented actions have 2000 former DOJ officials & prosecutors calling for his resignation. Additionally, the Judges Association has called for an emergency meeting in the wake of Barr's action into the Roger Stone (Trump crony) case.

Make no mistake about it, Barr is at the top of the swamp creature list and an embarrassment to our expected norms at DOJ.

He needs to be purged so he will no longer overstep and continue to make a mockery of our justice system. This is what the Trump cult got for their vote? This is OK with them? Guess so.


cyclone88 - 2/18/2020 at 02:37 PM

quote:
Well maybe this thread can now cover Barr's upcoming impeachment that might be coming at him soon...55,000 signatures for his resignation


Yet another waste of time given McConnell will torpedo any attempt to impeach Barr should the House actually do so. But it would embarrass Barr on some level I suspect given it would certainly tarnish his legacy. God knows his reputation is already in tatters so why not add his legacy too...


I call BS on Barr's comment.


Barr's "I can't do my job" tweet was 100% BS. If anything, it was a wink to POTUS that "Hey, you really can't FU the courts, jurors, or judges because you can screw up a case. I genuflect to you, but I got this under control. Trust me." Anyone who hadn't signaled Trump in advance would've been fired on the spot for daring to reprimand him.

Stone's case is in jeopardy right now. The defendant is ALWAYS given the benefit of any screw-ups - you know the "innocent until proven guilty" part of the constitution. However, Stone HAD been judged guilty & was merely awaiting sentencing on Thurs until Trump riled everyone up w/a tweet, Barr rushed to change the sentencing recommendations (which the judge reads but makes up her own mind), the 4 DOJ prosecutors withdrew from the case leaving their C+ team in charge, Trump is intimidating the foreperson, Stone's asked for a new trial again, & a witness against Stone is making statements in support of the withdrawn attorneys. There's a conference call today w/the judge & remaining defendants to see if they can even proceed to sentencing on Thursday. This is the judge Stone had in his rifle sight logo on his web site AFTER his arrest. And in the end, Trump will pardon him so he's disrupted a federal case big time for nothing.

Barr, McConnell, & the rest of Trump's acolytes are incapable of embarrassment or concern w/their legacy. These aren't people who can be shamed into doing the right thing. Barr isn't going to be impeached. The only people who get hurt are the regular civil servant lawyers who work for DOJ & now know every single case they have can be tampered w/by POTUS to the point that they could get disbarred.

The spotlight is too often on the top level guys & Trump. Let's not forget the civil servants who were furloughed & unpaid during Trump's 2018 Christmas government shutdown or those in any of the endangered agencies like energy. Hell, he's even got his fingers in orders for military staff like Vindman. Now, there's an exodus of experienced lawyers from DOJ all stemming from Trump's ego. Yeah, he cares about "everday Americans."





MartinD28 - 2/18/2020 at 04:26 PM

quote:
quote:
Well maybe this thread can now cover Barr's upcoming impeachment that might be coming at him soon...55,000 signatures for his resignation


Yet another waste of time given McConnell will torpedo any attempt to impeach Barr should the House actually do so. But it would embarrass Barr on some level I suspect given it would certainly tarnish his legacy. God knows his reputation is already in tatters so why not add his legacy too...


I call BS on Barr's comment.


Barr's "I can't do my job" tweet was 100% BS. If anything, it was a wink to POTUS that "Hey, you really can't FU the courts, jurors, or judges because you can screw up a case. I genuflect to you, but I got this under control. Trust me." Anyone who hadn't signaled Trump in advance would've been fired on the spot for daring to reprimand him.

Stone's case is in jeopardy right now. The defendant is ALWAYS given the benefit of any screw-ups - you know the "innocent until proven guilty" part of the constitution. However, Stone HAD been judged guilty & was merely awaiting sentencing on Thurs until Trump riled everyone up w/a tweet, Barr rushed to change the sentencing recommendations (which the judge reads but makes up her own mind), the 4 DOJ prosecutors withdrew from the case leaving their C+ team in charge, Trump is intimidating the foreperson, Stone's asked for a new trial again, & a witness against Stone is making statements in support of the withdrawn attorneys. There's a conference call today w/the judge & remaining defendants to see if they can even proceed to sentencing on Thursday. This is the judge Stone had in his rifle sight logo on his web site AFTER his arrest. And in the end, Trump will pardon him so he's disrupted a federal case big time for nothing.

Barr, McConnell, & the rest of Trump's acolytes are incapable of embarrassment or concern w/their legacy. These aren't people who can be shamed into doing the right thing. Barr isn't going to be impeached. The only people who get hurt are the regular civil servant lawyers who work for DOJ & now know every single case they have can be tampered w/by POTUS to the point that they could get disbarred.

The spotlight is too often on the top level guys & Trump. Let's not forget the civil servants who were furloughed & unpaid during Trump's 2018 Christmas government shutdown or those in any of the endangered agencies like energy. Hell, he's even got his fingers in orders for military staff like Vindman. Now, there's an exodus of experienced lawyers from DOJ all stemming from Trump's ego. Yeah, he cares about "everday Americans."




Your last paragraph is oh so true. Trump and his team of lackeys have destroyed the careers and livelihoods of many dedicated and qualified / skilled employees and civil servants. This was all done to coverup and protect Trump and his activities to perpetuate his political career and crimes / unethical behavior. And it has continued without shame.


BrerRabbit - 2/18/2020 at 06:39 PM

. . . Aaannd the insults and hate continue unabated like clockwork. When will you socialiberal sheeples learn that the way to MAGA is to suture your lips securely into the Redhat Centipede?


pops42 - 2/18/2020 at 08:22 PM

https://ifunny.co/picture/don-t-cry-i-won-t-let-them-impeach-you-SDgdcAMr6


Skydog32103 - 2/18/2020 at 09:18 PM

if Barr is admitting that he cannot do his job, then we should take him at his word and remove him. imagine you walked into your manager's office and told them it was impossible for you to do your job because of the way they manage. that would surely be your last day at that job.


cyclone88 - 2/18/2020 at 10:46 PM

quote:
if Barr is admitting that he cannot do his job, then we should take him at his word and remove him. imagine you walked into your manager's office and told them it was impossible for you to do your job because of the way they manage. that would surely be your last day at that job.


Which is why, if it hadn't been pre-arranged, Trump would've fired him on the spot. Trump gave a couple of days before today when he announced that "I'm allowed to be totally involved. "I'm actually, I guess, the chief law enforcement officer of the country. But I've chosen not to be involved."

Then he pardoned 11 criminals, including Junk Bond King Michael Milken, the former NYPD police chief, & former dem IL gov Blagojevich despite GOP opposition. He's REALLY feeling himself after his "impeachment exoneration." He shrugged off the idea that pardoning Stone have never crossed his mind.

Guess Barr's leash has been shortened.


MartinD28 - 2/19/2020 at 01:10 PM

quote:
quote:
if Barr is admitting that he cannot do his job, then we should take him at his word and remove him. imagine you walked into your manager's office and told them it was impossible for you to do your job because of the way they manage. that would surely be your last day at that job.


Which is why, if it hadn't been pre-arranged, Trump would've fired him on the spot. Trump gave a couple of days before today when he announced that "I'm allowed to be totally involved. "I'm actually, I guess, the chief law enforcement officer of the country. But I've chosen not to be involved."

Then he pardoned 11 criminals, including Junk Bond King Michael Milken, the former NYPD police chief, & former dem IL gov Blagojevich despite GOP opposition. He's REALLY feeling himself after his "impeachment exoneration." He shrugged off the idea that pardoning Stone have never crossed his mind.

Guess Barr's leash has been shortened.



If we haven't seen enough of who Trump is in the last 3 years, amped up actions up after the Mueller investigation, exponetially amped up actions since the GOP gave him a pass on impeachment, then buckle up your seatbelt if he gets reelected. He feels there are no check & balances and that there is one branch of gov't - the Executive Branch with him as dictator in chief. He has neutered the GOP Senate, castrated Bill Barr, and appointed judges that will most likely not challenge his perceived unbridled power.


BrerRabbit - 2/19/2020 at 04:30 PM

The harder they come
The harder they fall
One and all


goldtop - 2/20/2020 at 12:35 AM

quote:
The harder they come
The harder they fall
One and all



and he will...great tune by the way...one of my fav's

on another note someone else has been arrested for making death threats to both Schiff and Shumer

A Western New York man was arrested Wednesday on charges that he threatened to kill Rep. Adam Schiff and Sen. Chuck Schumer.

Salvatore Lippa, 57, of Greece, New York, was charged with threatening to assault and murder a federal official on account of the performance of their official duties.

According to the criminal complaint, on Jan. 23, Schiff's Washington, D.C., office received a threatening voicemail that included a death threat.

Lippa started the threatening message by calling the congressman "Schiff, Shifty Schiff," invoking the nickname used by President Donald Trump for Schiff, the lead House manager during Trump's impeachment trial.

Almost two weeks later, on Feb. 4, Schumer received a threatening voicemail at his New York office that also contained a death threat.

In the threat, Lippa paired Schumer with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, saying "Hey, Schumer, you and Nancy Pelosi are..." according to the complaint. When questioned by U.S Capitol Police, Lippa admitted to making the threatening calls to Schiff and Schumer because he said he was upset about the impeachment proceedings, prosecutors said.

When questioned by U.S Capitol Police, Lippa admitted to making the threatening calls to Schiff and Schumer
because he said he was upset about the impeachment proceedings, prosecutors said.

“The rights secured in our Constitution carry with them certain responsibilities. When it comes to the First Amendment, that responsibility includes the obligation not to threaten to kill others,” U.S Attorney James Kennedy said in a statement.

Lippa is due in federal court in Rochester on Wednesday afternoon. He faces up to 10 years in prison.

When I read this it makes me think the GOP is also getting similar threats


This thread come from : Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band
https://allmanbrothersband.com/

Url of this website:
https://allmanbrothersband.com//modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&fid=127&tid=143282