|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Trump Presidency | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Hi Taq
Taq writes: Someone has to be the adult in the room, and it appears to be the Democrats at the moment. I guess you did not understand what I was saying. 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. I would not like to see what I described take place.
Taq writes: Because it is the right thing to do. The house has already had 3 votes in the full house on an impeachment inquiry and they all failed. If the 4th vote Thursday is successful the impeachment will still be ongoing during the up coming election. That puts a lot of House dem's in jeopardy in the election in states Trump won. But what the heck do I care. Pelosi tried every trick in the book and some that wasn't in the book to keep the Thursday vote from ever taking place trying to protect those representatives. 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. If all the other republicans voted to impeach that would only be 64 votes to impeach which would be 2 votes short. Which makes the whole exercise of impeachment a waste of time. It will still be up to the voter's in 369 days. God Bless"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
ICANT writes: By doing what the democrats are doing they are running the same risk that the republicans did with the Clinton impeachment. They are weighing that risk against the risks the President poses to national security and our sovereignty as a country. Right now, they are putting country ahead of party.
The house has already had 3 votes in the full house on an impeachment inquiry and they all failed. These were before the Ukraine scandal erupted.
If the 4th vote Thursday is successful the impeachment will still be ongoing during the up coming election. Doubtful. Many think Articles of Impeachment will be sent over to the Senate before New Year's. The simplicity of the case will make for a short trial. Senator's already know almost everything they need to know which is Trump withheld aid and other support for Ukraine in exchange for investigations into his political rivals. They will have to decide if this is something a President should be allowed to do.
There are 46 no votes already committed to in the Senate. If all the other republicans voted to impeach that would only be 64 votes to impeach which would be 2 votes short. Which makes the whole exercise of impeachment a waste of time. It will still be up to the voter's in 369 days. I disagree. A no vote on removal from office will be used as a beating stick against Republicans. It will demonstrate that those Republicans put their party ahead of Americans.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 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 1405 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 1405 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Hi RAZD
RAZD writes: 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. Good to see you did realize that it takes 67 votes to convict a President of high crimes and misdemeanors. Do you actually think anyone of the 46 Senators that signed Lindsey Grahams resolution will change their mind? God Bless"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5
|
Hi Taq
Taq writes: These were before the Ukraine scandal erupted. What scandal are you talking about? The one where Vice President Biden gave the Ukraine 6 hours to fire a prosecutor or they was not going to get the billion dollars of aid. That prosecutor just happened to be investigating a company that his son Hunter Biden sat on the board. No that was OK. But that is exactly what everyone is saying Trump did. No one in the Ukraine government knew anything about money being with held for a favor. I would think you guys here that claim to follow the evidence would look at exactly what the evidence is. The transcript is available for you to read.
Taq writes: Doubtful. Many think Articles of Impeachment will be sent over to the Senate before New Year's. The first thing they have to do is find an impeachable offense.
Taq writes: I disagree. A no vote on removal from office will be used as a beating stick against Republicans. It will demonstrate that those Republicans put their party ahead of Americans. Was you around when Newt lost the house over the Clinton impeachment? If you don't know history it will repeat itself. You guys are possessed with getting rid of Trump as are the never Trumper RINO'S. But the normal person is more concerned with illegal immigration, take home pay, 401k"s, with all minorities having the lowest unemployment rate in over 50 years. Its the economy God Bless "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2284 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.8 |
What scandal are you talking about? The one where Vice President Biden gave the Ukraine 6 hours to fire a prosecutor or they was not going to get the billion dollars of aid. That prosecutor just happened to be investigating a company that his son Hunter Biden sat on the board.
no scandal there, the removal of the prosecutor had bipartisan and international support, Biden was not acting on his own.It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds soon I discovered that this rock thing was true Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world And so there was only one thing I could do Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
ICANT writes: What scandal are you talking about? The scandal where Trump conditioned military aid on investigations into his political opponents. In fact, just asking Ukraine to dig up dirt on his political opponents is a scandal in itself.
The one where Vice President Biden gave the Ukraine 6 hours to fire a prosecutor or they was not going to get the billion dollars of aid. That prosecutor just happened to be investigating a company that his son Hunter Biden sat on the board. No that was OK. But that is exactly what everyone is saying Trump did. Trump did not ask Ukraine to fire a corrupt prosecutor, and Trump's actions did not have bipartisan support in Congress nor the support of our allies. Trump also ran this outside of normal channels, and tried to hide it. They aren't the same.
The first thing they have to do is find an impeachable offense. They've already found two: abuse of power and obstruction of congress.
Was you around when Newt lost the house over the Clinton impeachment? If you don't know history it will repeat itself. I know history. Do you? What was Clinton's approval rating at the time of his impeachment trial? What did public support for Clinton's removal look like, and how does it compare to now? Edited by Taq, : No reason given. Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
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. Impeachment is a political process, not a legal process. So those senators have the same information that you have and have made the determination that there is no impeachable offense. Could you name just one impeachable offense? I have read the phone transcript and there is no impeachable offense in it. Muller did not find an impeachable offense. 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. Hillary and the DNC bought and paid for the phony Russian dossier to interfere with the 2016 election, not Trump. Which is what Trump was asking Zelinsky to have his people help our Attorney General investigate. 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? God Bless"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Hi Dr
DrJones writes: no scandal there, the removal of the prosecutor had bipartisan and international support, Biden was not acting on his own. So a bunch of crooks wanted the prosecutor fired. That does not have anything to do with the fact that Vice President Joe Biden said fire him in the next 6 hours or you don't get 1 billion+ dollars, and he was fired. Nothing changes the fact that Hunter Biden was a board member of a company that was under investigation at the time. God Bless Edited by AdminPhat, : fixed subtitle"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2284 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.8 |
So a bunch of crooks wanted the prosecutor fired
what evidence do you have that Republican senators Rob Portman, Mark Kirk and Ron Johnson are crooks?
Nothing changes the fact that Hunter Biden was a board member of a company that was under investigation at the time.
indeed, just like nothing changes the fact that the prosecutor was widely viewed as corrupt and his removal had bipartisan and international support.It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds soon I discovered that this rock thing was true Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world And so there was only one thing I could do Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
ICANT writes: So those senators have the same information that you have and have made the determination that there is no impeachable offense. Do you think it is ok for any president to withhold military aid from a foreign country in exchange for help with their personal political campaign?
Could you name just one impeachable offense? 1. Soliciting campaign help from a foreign power using tax payer dollars and the power of the presidency. 2. Refusing subpoenas which is obstruction of congress, a charge that Nixon was also accused of.
Hillary and the DNC bought and paid for the phony Russian dossier to interfere with the 2016 election, not Trump. Yes, they paid a private company which is entirely legal. It is illegal to solicit campaign help from foreign governments, especially when you are a government official and using tax payer dollars as leverage.
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? Yes. Soliciting campaign help from foreign powers is illegal whether they pressure them or not. Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024