Impeachment

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lmao, because “we respect the office of the Presidency.” That’s hysterical. If Obama breathed funny, sure enough some congressman would ramble something about impeachment.

Unfortunately for them, even near Obama’s nadir in popularity, 66% of people opposed his impeachment. In 1998, 67% of Americans opposed impeaching President Bill Clinton and 69% opposed impeaching George W. Bush in 2006.. They didn’t impeach him because he was still too popular, too many Americans opposed it by historical standards, and it would die in the senate. It had nothing to do with respect for anyone or anything.

I think WE all learned from the Clinton impeachment that a partisan impeachment is destined to fail. We also learned that even when a President breaks the law, like committing perjury, the Senate won't remove him or her unless the action itself is clearly going to endanger the nation.

This impeachment will die in the Senate. I guarantee it. There is no way Schiff/Pelosi gets the 2/3 votes needed to remove Trump. Everyone knows this is the outcome. The entire process was a circus and show by the liberal democrats to satisfy their hatred of Trump.

You can laugh all you want to but there are lessons to be learned from the Clinton and Trump impeachments.
 
So your feelings on the Clinton impeachment are what?

Even when you commit perjury, lose your license to practice law and embarrass yourself with semen on a blue dress your party will stand behind you provided the nation was not endangered by your actions. Politics comes before all else these days.

The impeachment taught us that the U.S. Senate will not remove a sitting President from office for anything but the most egregious of crimes especially when his/her party is in control.
 
We don't like the way Trump acts but the remedy for that is called an ELECTION. Impeachment is reserved for the highest crimes and most egregious actions by a President. Trump derangement syndrome where the same members of Congress keep trying to impeach the guy day in and day out is not how we handle this issue in the USA. The election is just 9 months away. I, and all of the GOP, will abide by the results of the electoral college.
To be honest with you, I am conflicted about this impeachment saga. My fear is if the person who comes after Trump acts like that, I am afraid that our democracy will suffer... and no one will be held accountable.
 
Dude, really? This isn’t a proof of anything illegal or even close to corrupt. It’s just a list of Democratic policies you can’t stand. Try a little harder next time.

And liberals have been trying to impeach Trump since the day he was sworn into office. The only real alleged crime, "abuse of power," is what every political party has claimed about the opposing party's President for decades.
 
I think WE all learned from the Clinton impeachment that a partisan impeachment is destined to fail. We also learned that even when a President breaks the law, like committing perjury, the Senate won't remove him or her unless the action itself is clearly going to endanger the nation.

This impeachment will die in the Senate. I guarantee it. There is no way Schiff/Pelosi gets the 2/3 votes needed to remove Trump. Everyone knows this is the outcome. The entire process was a circus and show by the liberal democrats to satisfy their hatred of Trump.

You can laugh all you want to but there are lessons to be learned from the Clinton and Trump impeachments.

The lesson to be learned is that you have blinders on and not even an act of god could remove them. Pelosi really, really, really wanted to avoid impeachment. She and the rest of the dem house are not idiots, hence the reason the 2018 midterms were the biggest wave in modern electoral history. Trump has committed an act so egregious that impeachment is the only remedy and thus Pelosi’s hand was forced. This is not lying about a consensual blowjob. This is illegally interfering with an election, then obstructing congress’s investigation by telling them they cannot investigate because an election is coming up. Do you see how absurd the logic is? Indeed, if extorting a foreign leader to investigate your political rival and then covering it up isn’t impeachable, then nothing is.

You will never realize that this time, it is an act of necessity and an act of courage to bring impeachment even if it’ll fail. This whole spectacle will not reflect kindly on the GOP as time goes by, and I suspect the current batch’s legacy will be more akin to McCarthy’s supporters than to the Margaret Chase Smith’s of the world.
 
Last edited:
Dude, really? This isn’t a proof of anything illegal or even close to corrupt. It’s just a list of Democratic policies you can’t stand. Try a little harder next time.

Your response is so WRONG that anyone with a brain can clearly see that Obama used his pen and paper to literally create laws. He by-passed Congress and acted like a King.

DACA is the prime example of his illegal actions. It doesn't matter whether you agree with DACA or not the President doesn't have the authority to just make up his own immigration policy. The reason Trump doesn't bother me so much is OBAMA did far more to abuse power than TRUMP during his time in office.

ABUSE OF POWER. IMHO, Obama abused the power of the Presidency more than any other President in my lifetime. Just because the ignorant public and liberal hacks agreed with him didn't give OBAMA the power to make law. This is just another example of the bias of the liberal media and press against conservatives while ignoring the abuses of a Democrat President.
 

Here is further proof that Obama was just as bad, if not worse, than Trump in abusing the power of his office. But, the GOP did not and would not impeach him over these issues because we respect the office of the Presidency. We learned from Clinton that impeachment is a last resort for TRUE high Crimes against the nation.

lol did you even read your copy and paste?
 
The lesson to be learned is that you all have blinders on and not even an act of god could remove them. Pelosi really, really, really wanted to avoid impeachment. She and the rest of the dem house are not idiots, hence the reason the 2018 midterms were the biggest wave in modern electoral history. Trump has committed an act so egregious that impeachment is the only remedy and thus Pelosi’s hand was forced. This is not lying about a consensual blowjob. This is illegally interfering with an election, then obstructing congress’s investigation by telling them they cannot investigate because an election is coming up. Do you see how absurd the logic is?

You will never realize that this time, it is an act of necessity and an act of courage to bring impeachment even if it’ll fail. This whole spectacle will not reflect kindly on the GOP as time goes by, and I suspect the current batch’s legacy will be more akin to McCarthy’s supporters than to the Margaret Chase Smith’s of the world.

No way. The Democrats are the party of McCarthy. They have inherited his legacy of simply going after a person they do not like, despise, with a vengeance.

FYI, there is nothing CONSENSUAL about getting a blow job from a 21-22 year old intern when you are the President of the USA. Clinton's sexual abuse of Lewinsky would not be tolerated today. But, the Democrat Senate was not going to remove a President for just "perjury" because it didn't fit the definition of high crimes.
 
Your response is so WRONG that anyone with a brain can clearly see that Obama used his pen and paper to literally create laws. He by-passed Congress and acted like a King.

DACA is the prime example of his illegal actions. It doesn't matter whether you agree with DACA or not the President doesn't have the authority to just make up his own immigration policy. The reason Trump doesn't bother me so much is OBAMA did far more to abuse power than TRUMP during his time in office.

ABUSE OF POWER. IMHO, Obama abused the power of the Presidency more than any other President in my lifetime. Just because the ignorant public and liberal hacks agreed with him didn't give OBAMA the power to make law. This is just another example of the bias of the liberal media and press against conservatives while ignoring the abuses of a Democrat President.
 
No way. The Democrats are the party of McCarthy. They have inherited his legacy of simply going after a person they do not like, despise, with a vengeance.

FYI, there is nothing CONSENSUAL about getting a blow job from a 21-22 year old intern when you are the President of the USA. Clinton's sexual abuse of Lewinsky would not be tolerated today. But, the Democrat Senate was not going to remove a President for just "perjury" because it didn't fit the definition of high crimes.

No, they’re going after a guy who is an unindicted co-conspirator in an illegal donation case for which Michael Cohen is in jail, a guy who has told 15,000 lies or misleading statements, and who has committed impeachable offenses which involve the election of the most powerful political office in the world.

Lewinsky has maintained over and over and over for the last 20 years that it was consensual, so please don’t call her the liar. The relationship was disgusting, improper, unethical, and Clinton probably should’ve never been elected. But the relationship was consensual.
 
lol did you even read your copy and paste?

Do you understand the 2 charges against President Trump? Have you read them? They are NOT impeachable offenses. Pelosi et al is not alleging Bribery, Extortion, etc against Trump. The second charge would only be true is the COURTS ruled against Trump and THEN he refused to submit to Congress. The actual charges against TRUMP are NOT impeachable offenses.
 
No, they’re going after a guy who is an unindicted co-conspirator in an illegal donation case for which Michael Cohen is in jail, a guy who has told 15,000 lies or misleading statements, and who has committed impeachable offenses which involve the election of the most powerful political office in the world.

Lewinsky has maintained over and over and over for the last 20 years that it was consensual, so please don’t call her the liar. The relationship was disgusting, improper, unethical, and Clinton probably should’ve never been elected. But the relationship was consensual.

A POWER Relationship is NEVER consensual. If you have POWER over the individual you work with then that sexual act at work will not be consensual. That has been the basis for thousands of lawsuits in this country.
 
Here is an article (pro Liberal/Dems) claiming the charges against trump are more like "misdemeanors" than high crimes. A GOP Senate is not going to remove a GOP President for a misdemeanor.

Dershowitz is going to argue that the articles of impeachment against Trump are Unconstitutional. I am not advocating that position but rather taking the position that his phone call was wrong and improper but does not rise to the level of impeachment. This is the position many GOP Senators will likely take when they vote to acquit Donald J. Trump.

 
One can say about the same with United States and Ukraine.

1. The investigation into the Bidens NEVER happened
2. The military aid was released
3. There is a lot of doubt whether Ukraine knew the reason for the delay
4. Trump advocated for LETHAL military aid to help Ukraine unlike Obama

So, the phone call was improper and wrong but criminal? Impeachable? Nope.
 
A POWER Relationship is NEVER consensual. If you have POWER over the individual you work with then that sexual act at work will not be consensual. That has been the basis for thousands of lawsuits in this country.

Lol what in the hell are you rambling about? You are 100% confused and are mixing up the ethical concerns with a manager having a non-disclosed relationship with a subordinate with the definition of consensual.

“Consensual Relationship” shall mean and refer to any relationship, either past or present, which is romantic, intimate, or sexual in nature and to which both parties consent or consented. This includes marriage.”


Lewinsky maintains repeatedly she consented to the relationship
 
The lesson to be learned is that you have blinders on and not even an act of god could remove them. Pelosi really, really, really wanted to avoid impeachment. She and the rest of the dem house are not idiots, hence the reason the 2018 midterms were the biggest wave in modern electoral history. Trump has committed an act so egregious that impeachment is the only remedy and thus Pelosi’s hand was forced. This is not lying about a consensual blowjob. This is illegally interfering with an election, then obstructing congress’s investigation by telling them they cannot investigate because an election is coming up. Do you see how absurd the logic is? Indeed, if extorting a foreign leader to investigate your political rival and then covering it up isn’t impeachable, then nothing is.

You will never realize that this time, it is an act of necessity and an act of courage to bring impeachment even if it’ll fail. This whole spectacle will not reflect kindly on the GOP as time goes by, and I suspect the current batch’s legacy will be more akin to McCarthy’s supporters than to the Margaret Chase Smith’s of the world.

The irony is I don't even like Donald J. Trump. I don't like him as a human being or as my President. I reluctantly voted for him because he promised to preserve the Courts, particularly, SCOTUS so I can sleep well at night. I think he lies often and does a poor job at being "Presidential."

But, the Democrats have been out to get the guy since Day 1. Trump has been under investigation almost his entire Presidency. The hatred of Trump is so intense it blinds Liberals to the facts. All they want is to impeach 45.

Soon, we can move on as a nation. If Trump loses the election then TDS will finally end. But, the issues matter to most voters more than the person. Trump has an advantage when it comes to the issues vs a far left candidate like Sanders/Warren.
 
The movement has drawn attention to the power imbalances between bosses and their subordinates, and raised the question of whether sexual relationships between the two can ever be completely consensual. Clinton, as president, was perhaps the most powerful boss in the country — and today, Lewinsky believes that the power dynamics between the two made the issue of consent “very, very complicated.”

“I now see how problematic it was that the two of us even got to a place where there was a question of consent,” she wrote. “Instead, the road that led there was littered with inappropriate abuse of authority, station, and privilege.”


 
1. The investigation into the Bidens NEVER happened
2. The military aid was released

Nice try, but getting caught in the middle of a crime is still a crime. Trump got wind in late August of the whistleblower complaint. Congress announced an investigation into the hold on sept 9. Trump released the aid sept 11. Not to mention Z was dangerously close to announcing the investigations later that month on Fareed Zakaria had the aid not been released.

3. There is a lot of doubt whether Ukraine knew the reason for the delay

This is a lie. Ukraine knew of the aid hold as early as July and they knew it was related to investigations.

4. Trump advocated for LETHAL military aid to help Ukraine unlike Obama

“Trump” didn’t advocate for anything other than illegally holding up aid that Congress had approved.


Shall we go over the timeline again?


2017 - trump doesn’t care about Ukrainian corruption
2018 - trump doesn’t care about Ukrainian corruption
Jan 2019 - trump doesn’t care about Ukrainian corruption
Feb 2019 - trump doesn’t care about Ukrainian corruption
Mar 2019 - trump doesn’t care about Ukrainian corruption

Apr 2019 - Biden announces presidential run

May 2019 - Giuliani begins pressure campaign on Zelensky to start investigating Burisma and the Bidens
 
Monica Lewinsky says Bill Clinton affair was ‘gross abuse of power’

Former intern says she suffered from PTSD after relationship and praises #MeToo movement




Hell yea, blade is now a Vox fan and is joining the #MeToo movement. Welcome to the resistance, brother.


But anyway, since you feel so strongly about Monica and her thoughts on how #MeToo affects power dynamics, we should probably go ahead and start investigating the claims of the 25+ women who have accused trump of most decidedly NON-consensual sexual harassment and/or sexual assault, right?
 
. But, the issues matter to most voters more than the person.


As I posted earlier:

AB14A66F-A153-485B-A55C-956717E732DF.png




8A063A63-6BBB-44C1-8202-19037887EA57.jpeg


The approval part is really the disturbing section. Politicians should be working every day to earn your approval, and the fact that this poll even exists is a good enough reason to implement term limits.
 
Last edited:
Hell yea, blade is now a Vox fan and is joining the #MeToo movement. Welcome to the resistance, brother.


But anyway, since you feel so strongly about Monica and her thoughts on how #MeToo affects power dynamics, we should probably go ahead and start investigating the claims of the 25+ women who have accused trump of most decidedly NON-consensual sexual harassment and/or sexual assault, right?

So the second Blade destroys your consensual non-sense claim, you immediately turn to whataboutism?

I thought that was your pet peeve...

Pot, meet kettle.
 
So the second Blade destroys your consensual non-sense claim, you immediately turn to whataboutism?

I thought that was your pet peeve...

Pot, meet kettle.

Destroyed what now? Consensual by its strict definition and a relationship also being an abuse of the power of the office aren’t mutually exclusive. You’re better off lurking, bro.

E: Also, if you guys want to rewrite the definition of consensual, you might want to tell the hundreds of thousands of people in different power positions who met their spouse at work that they need to do some soul-searching.
 
Destroyed what now? Consensual by its strict definition and a relationship also being an abuse of the power of the office aren’t mutually exclusive. You’re better off lurking, bro.
You claiming that the Clinton/Lewinsky "relationship" was completely on the up and up, is about as laughable as anyone claiming Hunter's job at Burisma was legitimate. You can claim whatever you want, but no one believes it.
 
You claiming that the Clinton/Lewinsky "relationship" was completely on the up and up, is about as laughable as anyone claiming Hunter's job at Burisma was legitimate. You can claim whatever you want, but no one believes it.

Ahh yes, matty back to his classic lying and disingenuousness. Never did I say completely on the up and up. I said

“The relationship was disgusting, improper, unethical, and Clinton probably should’ve never been elected. But the relationship was consensual.”
 
Oh man...just breaking....if only the Senate had a mechanism hear from this guy under oath...

Trump Tied Ukraine Aid to Inquiries He Sought, Bolton Book Says
Drafts of the book outline the potential testimony of the former national security adviser if he were called as a witness in the president’s impeachment trial.


WASHINGTON — President Trump told his national security adviser in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens, according to an unpublished manuscript by the former adviser, John R. Bolton.

The president’s statement as described by Mr. Bolton could undercut a key element of his impeachment defense: that the holdup in aid was separate from Mr. Trump’s requests that Ukraine announce investigations into his perceived enemies, including former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter Biden, who had worked for a Ukrainian energy firm while his father was in office.

Mr. Bolton’s explosive account of the matter at the center of Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial, the third in American history, was included in drafts of a manuscript he has circulated in recent weeks to close associates. He also sent a draft to the White House for a standard review process for some current and former administration officials who write books.

Multiple people described Mr. Bolton’s account of the Ukraine affair.

The book presents an outline of what Mr. Bolton might testify to if he is called as a witness in the Senate impeachment trial, the people said. The White House could use the pre-publication review process, which has no set time frame, to delay or even kill the book’s publication or omit key passages.


Over dozens of pages, Mr. Bolton described how the Ukraine affair unfolded over several months until he departed the White House in September. He described not only the president’s private disparagement of Ukraine but also new details about senior cabinet officials who have publicly tried to sidestep involvement.

For example, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo acknowledged privately that there was no basis to claims by the president’s lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani that the ambassador to Ukraine was corrupt and believed Mr. Giuliani may have been acting on behalf of other clients, Mr. Bolton wrote.

Mr. Bolton also said that after the president’s July phone call with the president of Ukraine, he raised with Attorney General William P. Barr his concerns about Mr. Giuliani, who was pursuing a shadow Ukraine policy encouraged by the president, and told Mr. Barr that the president had mentioned him on the call. A spokeswoman for Mr. Barr denied that he learned of the call from Mr. Bolton; the Justice Department has said he learned about itonly in mid-August.

And the acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, was present for at least one phone call where the president and Mr. Giuliani discussed the ambassador, Mr. Bolton wrote. Mr. Mulvaney has told associates he would always step away when the president spoke with his lawyer to protect their attorney-client privilege.

During a previously reported May 23 meeting where top advisers and Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, briefed him about their trip to Kyiv for the inauguration of President Volodymyr Zelensky, Mr. Trump railed about Ukraine trying to damage him and mentioned a conspiracy theory about a hacked Democratic server, according to Mr. Bolton.

The White House did not provide responses to questions about Mr. Bolton’s assertions, and representatives for Mr. Johnson, Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Mulvaney did not respond to emails and calls seeking comment on Sunday afternoon.

Mr. Bolton’s lawyer blamed the White House for the disclosure of the book’s contents. “It is clear, regrettably, from the New York Times article published today that the pre-publication review process has been corrupted and that information has been disclosed by persons other than those properly involved in reviewing the manuscript,” the lawyer, Charles J. Cooper, said Sunday night.


He said he provided a copy of the book to the White House on Dec. 30 — 12 days after Mr. Trump was impeached — to be reviewed for classified information, though, he said, Mr. Bolton believed it contained none.

The submission to the White House may have given Mr. Trump’s aides and lawyers direct insight into what Mr. Bolton would say if he were called to testify at Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial. It also intensified concerns among some of his advisers that they needed to block Mr. Bolton from testifying, according to two people familiar with their concerns.

The White House has ordered Mr. Bolton and other key officials with firsthand knowledge of Mr. Trump’s dealings not to cooperatewith the impeachment inquiry. Mr. Bolton said in a statement this month that he would testify if subpoenaed.
...
 
Last edited:
Consent implies that both parties are equal in their desire to engage in a relationship. Free of pressure, free of coercion, free of intimidation. You try to play fancy word games or something, but everyone sees through that nonsense. And as was clearly laid out by Lewinsky, that was not a relationship that she was even truly able to give real consent to given the age, experience, and power differences between a young intern and the most powerful man in the world.

YOU my friend are the disingenuous one trying to muddy the waters saying it was consensual so it wasn't that big of a deal. You'd be crying from the rooftops, or should I say, cutting and pasting from the roof tops, if Trump had a sexual affair with an intern.
 
Your response is so WRONG that anyone with a brain can clearly see that Obama used his pen and paper to literally create laws. He by-passed Congress and acted like a King.

I'm sorry, but if we're talking about anyone turning our Republic into a Dictatorship/Monarchy, Obama is a terrible example for it. He did the most he could with a Republican House and Senate that stonewalled everything he did. So don't blame the guy for trying to do some good for the American people. You're just butthurt about the policies he tried to set forth.

DACA is the prime example of his illegal actions. It doesn't matter whether you agree with DACA or not the President doesn't have the authority to just make up his own immigration policy. The reason Trump doesn't bother me so much is OBAMA did far more to abuse power than TRUMP during his time in office.

Yea because Trump totally isn't bypassing Congress by creating his own immigration policy using executive orders to ban Muslims or reappropriate funds for his stupid border wall. It's also pathetic that for two years he had a Republican House and Senate and still couldn't get this stuff done. That's just how reprehensible most people find it and this is only with regards to immigration. Trump constantly bypasses Congress for his own political and personal benefit (scroll up for another example involving Ukraine aid).

ABUSE OF POWER. IMHO, Obama abused the power of the Presidency more than any other President in my lifetime. Just because the ignorant public and liberal hacks agreed with him didn't give OBAMA the power to make law. This is just another example of the bias of the liberal media and press against conservatives while ignoring the abuses of a Democrat President.

You're again letting your personal political views and bias clould your judgement. Step back for a minute and quit being so angry.
 
Last edited:
Consent implies that both parties are equal in their desire to engage in a relationship. Free of pressure, free of coercion, free of intimidation. You try to play fancy word games or something, but everyone sees through that nonsense. And as was clearly laid out by Lewinsky, that was not a relationship that she was even truly able to give real consent to given the age, experience, and power differences between a young intern and the most powerful man in the world.

YOU my friend are the disingenuous one trying to muddy the waters saying it was consensual so it wasn't that big of a deal. You'd be crying from the rooftops, or should I say, cutting and pasting from the roof tops, if Trump had a sexual affair with an intern.

It’s like we’re in some kind of bizarro world where defenders of the most notorious louse of the decade, a guy that cheated on his first wife with second, second wife with his third, third wife with not one, but two porn stars, a guy who has two bakers’ dozens worth of sexual harassment/assault accusations....it’s fcking hilarious how little self-awareness you have to think that anyone would take any of your thoughts about consent or coercion or intimidation seriously when you claim that all your god-emperors accusers are all lying. You don’t really care about women or consent or power dynamics, you only pretend to care about those things inasmuch as you think you can make a point about Clinton. So give it a rest, cause you’re not fooling anyone.

Regardless, there’s no need to respond to you further until you acknowledge once again that you were just flat-out lying by claiming I said their relationship was completely on the up and up and continue to lie by claiming I said it wasn’t that big of a deal.
 
Last edited:
It’s like we’re in some kind of bizarro world where defenders of the most notorious louse of the decade, a guy that cheated on his first wife with second, second wife with his third, third wife with not one, but two porn stars, a guy who has two bakers’ dozens worth of sexual harassment/assault accusations....it’s fcking hilarious how little self-awareness you have to think that anyone would take any of your thoughts about consent or coercion or intimidation seriously when you claim that all your god-emperors accusers are all lying. You don’t really care about women or consent or power dynamics, you only pretend to care about those things inasmuch as you think you can make a point about Clinton. So give it a rest, cause you’re not fooling anyone.

Regardless, there’s no need to respond to you further until you acknowledge once again that you were just flat-out lying by claiming I said their relationship was completely on the up and up..

Do you ever get tired of being so angry and vile towards others? Just curious....

Anyways.

'On the up and up' is a phrase that means "open and honest, legitimate." 'Open and honest' don't really apply. I was using it as synonymous with legitimate, and consensual, which was your claim. Sheesh....

You're so big on calling people liars and disingenuous, yet you love to make false statements like "you claim all your god-emperors accusers are lying." When I've never said anything of the sort.

And then you claim I don't care about women?!

Wow.

You really are such a sad, hateful individual.
 
Vector,

I have already posted that the phone call with Zelensky was wrong and improper for Trump. I believe the call does not warrant impeachment and removal from office. While you may disagree the U.S. Senate will confirm my opinion in the upcoming weeks.

As for Bolton, I already suspected his "drug deal" comment was in reference in tying the aid to the investigation of the Bidens. Bolton was correct in advising the President that behavior was unacceptable. Ultimately, there was no crime committed as the investigation never occurred and the aid was released.

Pelosi et al never charged Trump with attempted Bribery which seemed odd to me since that is the crime he had likely committed if any.
 
Vector,

I have already posted that the phone call with Zelensky was wrong and improper for Trump. I believe the call does not warrant impeachment and removal from office. While you may disagree the U.S. Senate will confirm my opinion in the upcoming weeks.

"Wrong and improper" is putting pineapple on your pizza and then eating it with a knife and fork. A president extorting a foreign leader for aid in an election is something else entirely.

As for Bolton, I already suspected his "drug deal" comment was in reference in tying the aid to the investigation of the Bidens. Bolton was correct in advising the President that behavior was unacceptable. Ultimately, there was no crime committed as the investigation never occurred and the aid was released.

You can say this as many times as you want but it doesnt make it any more true. Over and over and over you can go on about the how the aid was released, but the holding of the aid was the crime and the attempted extortion and coverup were the impeachable acts. They violated the Impoundment Control Act just holding the aid as long as they did. And as I said before, and which you continue to fail to acknowledge because you know it's damning, trump only released the aid after he heard about the whistleblower and congress started an investigation. He. Got. Caught.

And just to dispel another piece of propaganda, no crime as listed in a statute actually needs to be present for a president to be impeached.

This is according to Tribe, a million Constitutional law scholars, and even Dershowitz back in 1998

“The argument that only criminal offenses are impeachable has died a thousand deaths in the writings of all the experts on the subject, but it staggers on like a vengeful zombie,” Tribe continued. “In fact, there is no evidence that the phrase “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” was understood in the 1780s to mean indictable crimes.”
 
Since Vector is so convinced that Trump should be removed from office and is a criminal the 2020 election should be a slam dunk for the Democrats.

The voters will decide whether to remove Trump from office in 9 months not Pelosi or Vector

The US Senate will acquit Trump.
 
Since Vector is so convinced that Trump should be removed from office and is a criminal the 2020 election should be a slam dunk for the Democrats.

The voters will decide whether to remove Trump from office in 9 months not Pelosi or Vector

The US Senate will acquit Trump.

8A063A63-6BBB-44C1-8202-19037887EA57.jpeg


When at least 60% of Republicans are deep in the personality cult and say that the orange one can quite literally do no wrong or do anything to change their minds, it's not really that strong a rhetorical point to say that he's gonna get acquitted or that the election will still be close.
 
View attachment 293862

When at least 60% of Republicans are deep in the personality cult and say that the orange one can quite literally do no wrong or do anything to change their minds, it's not really that strong a rhetorical point to say that he's gonna get acquitted or that the election will still be close.
I find both parts of that graph concerning
 
View attachment 293862

When at least 60% of Republicans are deep in the personality cult and say that the orange one can quite literally do no wrong or do anything to change their minds, it's not really that strong a rhetorical point to say that he's gonna get acquitted or that the election will still be close.

There YOU go being disingenuous again. You conflate people saying they won’t change their mind about approval of the president with them saying he can “quite literally do no wrong.” Those are obviously two different things. Basically, that poll is just saying people are stubborn and don’t want to support the other party/claim their president is an overall bad president. It’s just as “outrageous” for people who don’t approve of him to say that there’s nothing he could do to change their mind. Both sides were about 60% in the ‘there’s nothing that can change my mind” category, which is obviously a dumb statement for anyone to make, about any politician.

But for you to try and use this poll as a “whoa! Look how crazy the right is in their unwavering support for the crazy cult leader!” is either disingenuous or just ignorant.

Also, FYI the poll is nearly 3 years old.

Good effort though


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I find both parts of that graph concerning

I mean a good number are set in their ways and won’t be swayed. Fine. Politics isn’t about being right it’s about winning at all costs. Right now the prospect of a Bernie presidency is far more frightening than anything DT promised to do to the Ukrainians. But some people have different priorities.
 
I mean a good number are set in their ways and won’t be swayed. Fine. Politics isn’t about being right it’s about winning at all costs. Right now the prospect of a Bernie presidency is far more frightening than anything DT promised to do to the Ukrainians. But some people have different priorities.
Right, that's the concerning part.
 
I find both parts of that graph concerning

At first glance you would think so, but I think in the case of trump the people who say that they would never change their mind from negative to positive, it's because those ppl have already been egregiously wronged or have seen what they perceive to be absolutely irredeemable behavior.

For instance, there are some folks in 2015-2016 who saw his infidelity, his numerous accusations of sexual assault, his grab them by the pus sy video, his statements about Mexicans and Muslims, his insult of a gold star family, his unrepentant lying, and his wild gesture mocking of a disabled reporter during a trump rally, and these people just said to themselves that getting a tax cut or the Dow going up or whatever policy does not make up for those things.

Ultimately, you should be 10x more scared of politicians with supporters who think said politician walks on water no questions asked. After all, dictators don't come from politicians who are universally hated.
 
At first glance you would think so, but I think in the case of trump the people who say that they would never change their mind from negative to positive, it's because those ppl have already been egregiously wronged or have seen what they perceive to be absolutely irredeemable behavior.

For instance, there are some folks in 2015-2016 who saw his infidelity, his numerous accusations of sexual assault, his grab them by the pus sy video, his statements about Mexicans and Muslims, his insult of a gold star family, his unrepentant lying, and his wild gesture mocking of a disabled reporter during a trump rally, and these people just said to themselves that getting a tax cut or the Dow going up or whatever policy does not make up for those things.

Ultimately, you should be 10x more scared of politicians with supporters who think said politician walks on water no questions asked. After all, dictators don't come from politicians who are universally hated.
Right, but the question wasn't "if the Dow keeps going up will you like Trump?", it was (paraphrasing) is there anything you can imagine that Trump could do that would make you change your mind on him. Anything you can imagine.

The fact that neither side would change there mind to the limits of their imagination is concerning.

I'm not worried about him becoming a dictator. If this time next year or this time 2025 he refuses to leave office and the army/law enforcement doesn't immediately remove him, feel free to remind me of this and I'll take my lumps.
 
Right, but the question wasn't "if the Dow keeps going up will you like Trump?", it was (paraphrasing) is there anything you can imagine that Trump could do that would make you change your mind on him. Anything you can imagine.

I'm not sure what point you're making? I'm assuming that the question is using the verbiage "anything" to refer to "anything" that is usually within the power or purview or general duties of the president. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you really trying to imply that the pollsters meant "anything" including absurdist things like trump magically switching to the D party and matching Bernie's positions 100%, or trump giving you a million dollars and taking you to disneyworld?
 
I'm not sure what point you're making? I'm assuming that the question is using the verbiage "anything" to refer to "anything" that is usually within the power or purview or general duties of the president. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you really trying to imply that the pollsters meant "anything" including absurdist things like trump magically switching to the D party and matching Bernie's positions 100%, or trump giving you a million dollars and taking you to disneyworld?
Obviously there are limits since the question specifically asked about his performance as President. The point I'm making is that even within the limits of what a President can do (which is quite a lot in truth) roughly 2/3rds of people would still disapprove of his job as President. Meaning that if he was the absolute best President we've ever had by every objective measure, they'd still disapprove of him (and the same for approving if the worst ever President). That worries me.

I didn't vote for Obama either time, but even I can see that there are some things he did well. Same with Bush (I'm not old enough to have voted before that).
 
At first glance you would think so, but I think in the case of trump the people who say that they would never change their mind from negative to positive, it's because those ppl have already been egregiously wronged or have seen what they perceive to be absolutely irredeemable behavior.

For instance, there are some folks in 2015-2016 who saw his infidelity, his numerous accusations of sexual assault, his grab them by the pus sy video, his statements about Mexicans and Muslims, his insult of a gold star family, his unrepentant lying, and his wild gesture mocking of a disabled reporter during a trump rally, and these people just said to themselves that getting a tax cut or the Dow going up or whatever policy does not make up for those things.

Ultimately, you should be 10x more scared of politicians with supporters who think said politician walks on water no questions asked. After all, dictators don't come from politicians who are universally hated.

His supporters don’t think he walks on water(well not many). They just don’t care that he is completely at home in the cesspool.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
Obviously there are limits since the question specifically asked about his performance as President. The point I'm making is that even within the limits of what a President can do (which is quite a lot in truth) roughly 2/3rds of people would still disapprove of his job as President. Meaning that if he was the absolute best President we've ever had by every objective measure, they'd still disapprove of him (and the same for approving if the worst ever President). That worries me.

I didn't vote for Obama either time, but even I can see that there are some things he did well. Same with Bush (I'm not old enough to have voted before that).

Think about his policy platform + his personality/demeanor. Right off the bat you have at least 50% who are trying to defeat his policy platform (banning abortion, banning immigrants, easing gun restrictions, tax cuts aimed at the wealthy, repealing environmental regulations, repealing obamacare/medicare/medicaid etc). So, you have to state what you mean by "every objective measure" because if trump is succeeding at marking off the boxes on his list then that doesnt really make him more popular for the disapprove group, right?

Now, say he is succeeding at what I think you mean by objective measure, which is essentially the economy and jobs, that should certainly sway some of the second group. But as I said in my other posts, there are a fair number of people who will still see his character, racism, sexual assault accusations, and his unrepentant, neverending lying as deal breaker, especially if there is a notion that he didn't do much for the economy but is possibly just riding a continuing uptrend. Ergo, there is not a lot of "anything" within trump's capabilities and powers or duties which is magically gonna make people who disapprove of him rethink their position.
 
Think about his policy platform + his personality/demeanor. Right off the bat you have at least 50% who are trying to defeat his policy platform (banning abortion, banning immigrants, easing gun restrictions, tax cuts aimed at the wealthy, repealing environmental regulations, repealing obamacare/medicare/medicaid etc). So, you have to state what you mean by "every objective measure" because if trump is succeeding at marking off the boxes on his list then that doesnt really make him more popular for the disapprove group, right?

Now, say he is succeeding at what I think you mean by objective measure, which is essentially the economy and jobs, that should certainly sway some of the second group. But as I said in my other posts, there are a fair number of people who will still see his character, racism, sexual assault accusations, and his unrepentant, neverending lying as deal breaker, especially if there is a notion that he didn't do much for the economy but is possibly just riding a continuing uptrend. Ergo, there is not a lot of "anything" within trump's capabilities and powers or duties which is magically gonna make people who disapprove of him rethink their position.
If that's what you believe, what was the point of you posting that graph?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top