|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,784 Year: 4,041/9,624 Month: 912/974 Week: 239/286 Day: 0/46 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Trump Presidency | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
Looks like something a teenager or adolescent would have patched together. The making of the video is not so much the question, but rather the motivation of this grossly misnamed "American Priority" group in showing it at their conference. Apparently this is what passes for humor for some conservative people.
Admittedly, that is the absolutely best scenario. If destroying America would get him more money, then he would not hesitate. Nor if it would offer him revenge against anyone who had ever criticized him or tried to hold him responsible for his actions. And he want's to remake America so he can rule for another 12 years (or longer). He said so in Florida. All (any) of that takes destroying America to accomplish. I no longer give him any benefit of doubt. He sold state secrets to Saudi Arabia right after they murdered khashoggi so they could work on a nuclear bomb. Now he's sending US troops there to do Saudi dirty work. He's turning Syria over the the Russians. He's chipping away at all environmental regulations. He's taking money from the treasury to give to people who don't need it while taking it and services away from those that do. He is a traitor. It certainly is Putin's goal. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : .by our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
Trump did not explicitly and clearly state what the quid pro quo was. ... Actually just asking a foreign country for help with your election is against the law, the bullying/extortion over the weapons was/is icing on the cake -- a second crime on top of the first -- especially as congress had approved the weapons and withholding them was due only to Humpty Dumpty wanting to use them as leverage on the new Ukrainian President. Publicly asking China to also provide help with his campaign is also against the law. China's rebuff was poetic. It was also NOT about corruption, rather obviously as no other investigation on corruption exists.
What he meant was glaringly obvious to many of the people listening to the call and anyone who reads the "transcript" with an open mind. A group which does not include you. (ICANT) and many other conservatives that think this monster is god's gift to America. ICANT is not alone in their blindness. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
If the house were to recommend impeaching Trump today the Senate would never convict him (that takes 67 votes) so why waste the time and run the risk of losing the majority in the house? Because it is the right thing to do, and because it is their job. It only takes 10 "turncoats" and there are rumored 20 republicans that are undecided. If the house were NOT to recommend impeaching Trump today, whatever the Senate would decide, why would anyone vote ever again?
I was a staunch democrat until the early ninties and I realized the party had left my views that I supported. So I left the party. If today's republican party fits your views, you were never a democrat. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Because there is a presidential election in 369 days. The people voted Trump in and they can vote him out, if they want him out. That is still an option if the Senate does not convict him of his many crimes and misdemeanors in spite of the evidence already public. But if the house fails to impeach it will be seen as an ineffectual party that is functionally no different than the GOP and just as corrupted by corporate interests. A lot of people already feel this way, saying there is no difference between the parties. Certainly this appears true when you consider neo-libs like Clinton and DINOs in the DNC that rigged the last election against Bernie.
If today's republican party fits your views, you were never a democrat. There are a lot of old democrats that would disagree with you. Tell me what current GOP party behavior is like old DEM party behavior you supported. Caging Children? Preventing people from voting? Perhaps it is racism?
I did not leave the beliefs I had in the 50's, and the 60'. The democratic party left their core beliefs they held back then. What were they, and how are they part of the current GOP ore beliefs?
I find some republicans just as revolting as the democrats. ... There are very few that I don't find revolting, and I generally them more revolting than the corporate corrupted DINOs.
... But this president has done more for the poor man than any president in my lifetime. Curiously I am not aware of a single thing he has done for the poor man ... other that "liberate" poor white racism. Certainly not wages. Certainly not healthcare and other benefits that he has cut. Certainly not Veteran's care, where he is stealing money from their approved funding to build his stupid ineffectual ridiculous fantasy wall. Perhaps you could enlighten me: Tell me what he has done. Detail it. Good luck. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
ICANT writes: By doing what the democrats are doing they are running the same risk that the republicans did with the Clinton impeachment. They lost control of the house because of the backlash from the people with their vote. And by failing to do "what the democrats are doing" they run the risk of losing control of the house as they are voted out for not doing their job.
quote: quote: That's FAUX NOISE NUTWERK, not CNN, for frack sake, the network that went to court to get permission to lie about whatever they wanted to.
By doing what the democrats are doing they are running the same risk that the republicans did with the Clinton impeachment. They lost control of the house because of the backlash from the people with their vote. Prior to impeachment, how popular was Clinton vs Trump's current popularity? How many people (voters) were in favor of Clinton's impeachment vs Trump's?
quote: People in general did not care about the sexual behavior, considering it a personal matter that did not affect his job performance. Here we have higher popularity for impeachment, popularity that is growing, and the charges are much more serious than personal sexual behavior -- getting bribes via his companies, favoring certain foreign countries for personal reasons contrary to US foreign policy (Ukraine), etc. plus a lot of people are fed up with his childish brat behavior, lack of leadership and failure to confront climate change. His behavior with Putin appears treasonous, and his caving to Recep Tayyip Erdoan was seen as pathetic, spineless, and a total betrayal of allies, and linked to his having two hotel properties in Turkey making a HUGE conflict of interest. Similar with Putin. This is national betrayal rather that sexual behavior. This has adversely affected relations with ALL our allies. Meanwhile:
quote: Prior to impeachment, how popular was Clinton vs Trump's current popularity? About 71% vs 39% How many people (voters) were in favor of Clinton's impeachment vs Trump's? About 30% vs 55% Big difference.
... There are 46 no votes already committed to in the Senate. I... Before they have even been presented with the evidence? Fascinating. Looks like a good reason to vote those senators out if they don't even consider the evidence before making an unpopular vote. Curiously, I think when it comes to an actual vote, a lot of GOP senators will be looking over their shoulders at the public reactions from their districts and worry about getting re-elected if they don't vote for what their constituents want. I expect the democrat contenders to hold the GOP feet to the fire on this ... and it looks like the timing has been arranged by Pelosi to accomplish just that scenario. We'll see when the evidence becomes public and the public reacts. Remember that once they have made the vote in the house that the Administrations pathetic stonewalling on subpoenas becomes null and void: they will have to comply and testify of go to jail. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
RAZD's math needs a little work as I said it takes 67 votes in the Senate to impeach the President. There are 46 no votes already committed to in the Senate. ... To begin with the US constitution requires
quote: So indictments for other crimes can be made if he is removed from office either by impeachment or by the November election.
... There are 46 no votes already committed to in the Senate. ... Curiously I have different information:
quote: So I would say at this point that any counting of senate votes is premature and irrelevant. Especially as there will be a much longer list of misdoings than just the Ukrain issue. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Good to see you did realize that it takes 67 votes to convict a President of high crimes and misdemeanors. I've never said otherwise.
Do you actually think anyone of the 46 Senators that signed Lindsey Grahams resolution will change their mind? Do you think that anyone who votes before seeing the actual evidence should be re-elected? Do you think they are honorable or represent values you have? And I await your answer to Message 3544. This is no highly popular Clinton getting BJs from an intern not affecting the US Government operation impeachment. It's a bit more serious than that, don't you think? Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
So I sometimes look back to find the first message of a certain subtitle that keeps popping up even though the posts no longer have any relevance to it.
Perhaps subtitles should expire after a certain number of replies.... ... or a person replying should have to click a "RE:" button to have it used. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
Hi RAZD
RAZD writes: Do you think that anyone who votes before seeing the actual evidence should be re-elected? Do you think they are honorable or represent values you have? You have already voted for impeachment as has most of the democratic party. You didn't answer my questions: do you that anyone who votes before seeing the actual evidence should be re-elected? Do you think they are honorable or represent values you have? What I have said is that several actions taken by Trump are sufficient to start the impeachment process. The emoluments clause in the constitution for one. I have not seen all the evidence.
So those senators have the same information that you have and have made the determination that there is no impeachable offense. They have not seen all the evidence yet. They have not even seen the criminal charges. The GOP is pretending that the evidence is insufficient by attacking the witnesses, not the actual evidence. That's ad hominem and basically admitting a losing position. There is a big difference between saying evidence supports an impeachment and saying whether or not it supports removal of the President.
Could you name just one impeachable offense? Emoluments clause -- making a profit off foreigners for personal gain through hotels and golf courses Obstruction of justice -- detailed in the Mueller report Obstruction of congress -- failure to comply with subpoenas to furnish evidence Treason -- giving classified information and favor to an enemy state (Russia) against Congressional approval, not enforcing sanctions approved by bipartisan Congress with > veto votes Treason -- giving classified information to a foreign state (nuclear bomb building information to Saudi Arabia) against Congressional approval Election law violations -- asking other countries for help in his election, Russia, Ukraine, China.
Hillary and the DNC bought and paid for the phony Russian dossier to interfere with the 2016 election, not Trump. The original contract was with never-Trump Republicans. It has not been proven phony yet.
I have read the phone transcript and there is no impeachable offense in it. Muller did not find an impeachable offense. False. He said he could not acquit Trump of obstruction of justice and that it was up to congress to determine whether or not the evidence was impeachable. He said he could not charge Trump because of DOJ policy not because of lack of evidence.
Just because he beat Hillary in an election is not an impeachable offense. Although the day after the votes were counted the impeachment was declared to have begun. False. What action was taken in the GOP controlled house to impeach him? What evidence do you have? There was talk that he was in violation of the emoluments clause, but it was not in congress which is where declarations of impeachment occur.
If no one in the Ukraine government knew anything about money being withheld for any reason and Zelinsky said he did not feel pressured in any way ... While sitting in public next to Trump, who pats him on the knee. He looked uncomfortable to me. Countries where corruption is rampant are familiar with this behavior and accept as the cost of doing business.
... where in the conversation is there an impeachable offense? Trump: "I want you do do us a favor though" investigate Biden and you can have the aid previously approved by the US Congress but held back by Trump. Seeking foreign aid in an election is against federal election law. And we now know that the "transcript" that is not a transcript was edited to take out even more damaging information. You should read this about the phone call:
quote: and from Faux Noise Nutwerk:
Trump's Ukraine call transcript: Read the document See bottom of page 2 and top of page 3.
quote: How does request for more arms turn into a discussion of Biden and a favor for Trump? We now know that those ellipses represent additional information that has not been publicly shared.
If no one in the Ukraine government knew anything about money being withheld for any reason and Zelinsky said he did not feel pressured in any way where in the conversation is there an impeachable offense? Because they did know, because Giuliani has said he told them. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Doesn't change the fact that Biden has the support of Congress and our allies when he pushed for the firing of Shokin. Does not change the fact that Trump was looking for US internal election assistance from a foreign country in violation of federal election law. Biden was not doing that no matter how the GOPers spin it. Doesn't change the fact that Ivanka, Eric, Little Don, Jared Kushner and Barr's son are not that different from the hiring of son Biden ... if one is corruption then the other is as well, and if Dumbty is honestly looking for corruption he need look no further than the white house Don't get distracted Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
quote: (See link for more information on capitalism and socialism popularity for different age groups.) So 1 in 4 see Trump as a threat to world peace ... in all age groups ... Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
... you have already convicted Trump of an impeachable offense. ... Gathering information on evidence of wrong doing is not convicting. There is no conviction until the senate votes. But I'm glad you think the actions listed are bad.
He has lost over a billion dollars since becoming President. Don't sound like he is making a profit to me. Evidence for this claim is ...? His tax returns? You can lose money in one business and make a profit in another. The fact that he profits from using his golf resorts and having the taxpayers pay for it and his staff etc. is still counter to the emoluments clause no matter how much he loses in other businesses (he, after all, is a known business failure with many bankruptcies to his name)
No charges of obstruction was presented. The report listed several instances of obstruction, but said that DOJ policy to not charge a sitting president prevented him from making charges so they were left for congress to deal with.
quote: And we know that Barr lied about the report.
The executive and the congress are co-equal branches of government. If the congress wants to make Trump comply all they have to do is take him to court and let the court decide. They haven't because they are afraid the court will support Trumps decision. Actually it is in the courts
quote: So I strongly urge you (and other readers) to read this article in full, it could be very pivotal to the whole issue of balance of power. And they are still working on other witnesses. Funny how there are so many people that are convicted of illegal behavior, plus so many willing to testify under oath if there is no there there. Funny how the Administration is scrambling to cover up information if there is no wrongdoing.
Veto votes are not treason, that is just the president disagreeing with congress. Trump has been tougher on Russia than any previous president. Especially the one that stated, you can tell putin that after the election I can be more flexable. You're not reading -- that ">" means "greater than" -- the bipartisan votes for imposing sanctions on Russia exceeded the number needed to overturn a veto, and that means that he has to comply. He didn't.
Nuclear power plants are a long way from giving information on nuclear bomb making. Saudi Arabia could have nuclear bomb making information as simple as making a deal with North Korea, they have the money to buy anything they want. Again, you are not getting it: the congress had voted to withhold the information, again bipartisan greater than veto proof, and he did it anyway. This means he violated the constitution balance of power, again, and the rest of your excuse is irrelevant.
The closest I have seen to that is him telling Russia if they had Hillary's email's he would like to have them. Then you are not looking. He asked both Ukraine and China to help him. It was on tv.
As far as asking a foreign government to investigate a US citizen's dealings in their country is not asking to help him in his election. Except that the only citizen in question is linked directly to a candidate, and the information requested could be used against that candidate. It wasn't John Doe from Puxatauny NJ selling illegal cigarettes.
Get your head out of the sand. What RINO republican paid anything for the dossier? Really?
quote: Free Beacon started the process. Hillary's lawyer just paid to continue the investigations.
No prosecutor can acquit a suspect of anything as that is not their job. ... Right. I should have said that Mueller could not exonerate Trump from obstruction of justice, because there was evidence of it and that he could not indict Trump on it because of DOJ policy against indicting a sitting president, so he was leaving it for Congress to pursue.
... A prosecutors job is to gather the evidence and then state he has enough evidence to proceed with a prosecution or that does not have enough evidence to proceed. He did not have enough evidence to proceed with a prosecution. No -- he was prevented from proceeding to indict/prosecute by DOJ policy regarding a sitting president. Remember Barr just became AG and it was his firm belief that they could not prosecute a sitting president. Mueller had to comply with his new boss on this.
So I ask you now is there any statement in green that is soliciting military aid from Trump? quote: Zelenskyy asks for the aid, and Trump responds
quote: Those ellipses (...) we now know omitted some information. Further, before saying anything about approving the foreign aid:
quote: "It's very important that you do it ..." with still no mention of allowing the aid to proceed. The implication is clear: do this and we can talk about the aid. You have to be willingly blind not to see it.
On the other hand Biden said fire the prosecutor or you will not get the billion dollars. At the same time his Son Hunter sat on the board of a company the prosecutor was investigating and had been ordered to wind up the investigation. Biden plus bipartisan congress plus US allies wanted the prosecutor fired because they were not investigating the rampant corruption.
Biden's actions is declared OK but Trumps requests for an investigation into things that took place involving US citizens in Ukraine is not OK. Biden plus bipartisan congress plus US allies wanted the prosecutor fired because they were not investigating the rampant corruption. This did not involve US political campaigns, this did not involve asking them to investigate US citizens. Trumps request involving a single US citizen that is tied to a Dem candidate does involve US political campaigning, and Trump singled out Biden for investigation and that is what is not okay. See the distinction? Let's look at the "corruption" involved ... Hunter Biden on the board of a company. What do we see that is similar or worse? Try the whole Trump family ... like Ivanka getting Chinese patents and exemption from Chinese tariffs?
I don't see any place in the transcript where Giuliani said anything. Are you playing dumb? He was mentioned in the transcript as a contact, and he has since confirmed that he discussed the arms aid conditional on help with the "favor" ... on tv. Keep trying, the evidence keeps mounting.
So you would impeach the president on what someone else said. If by impeach you mean gather incriminating evidence sufficient to include in articles of impeachment to present in a senate hearing then yes. Clinton was impeached, then it went to the senate where he was not convicted. Impeachment is like a grand jury hearing, gathering information, it is not a trial.
BTW I just saw Sen Manchin D WV say there had been no evidence presented so for to support impeachment. So he is presently a NO vote in the Senate. He's a DINO and one of the worst DINOs in congress. He has voted with republicans more than democrats. What he says is worthless. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : addedby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
The first applies to the republican obsession with diverting the discussion to Biden:
quote: Hunter Biden is a red herring non-issue, only brought up to muddy the impeachment process (repubicans, it sems, do not have any other defense) and
quote: More at link. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
What Trump did is more accurately described as extortion, which is using threats to force some action, often paying money, but it could be anything of value. Trump held the threat of withholding military aid over Ukraine's head in order to force them into a publicly announced investigation of his political rival for his own political advantage in the 2020 election. That's the obvious one that everyone has focused on. He was also asking a foreign government for assistance in his election, which is a crime according to federal election law. He has also blatantly done this with Russia and China. On TV.
... and there was absolutely no quid pro quo. Trump has been right about this all along. Trump is very good at revising the conversation by near truths. Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024