Jump to content


When will Trump get impeached?


  

47 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

 

 

 

On the topic of impeachment: no, I don't trust the Washington Post or the NYT or CNN to give me unbiased news. I don't trust Fox News either. I think arguing over impeachment is a waste of time, because 1) I think it's indicative of the pu&&y, whine-when-I-don't-get-my-way culture spreading in America, 2) I don't think any of his actions to this point are even close to impeachable, and 3) even if they were, like Knapp said, you're silly if you think this Congress is going to do it.

wrong. Not a whine because I don't get my way scenario. The divestment thing is a big issue why does no one see this? This is hugely unprecedented and he has been brokering deals for his family business with his title. That is an impeachable offense. He either divests or should be impeached plain and simple and to disagree with that would be completely ignorant.

 

He left all of his business to his kids...

 

 

Very srs

Link to comment

 

 

 

On the topic of impeachment: no, I don't trust the Washington Post or the NYT or CNN to give me unbiased news. I don't trust Fox News either. I think arguing over impeachment is a waste of time, because 1) I think it's indicative of the pu&&y, whine-when-I-don't-get-my-way culture spreading in America, 2) I don't think any of his actions to this point are even close to impeachable, and 3) even if they were, like Knapp said, you're silly if you think this Congress is going to do it.

wrong. Not a whine because I don't get my way scenario. The divestment thing is a big issue why does no one see this? This is hugely unprecedented and he has been brokering deals for his family business with his title. That is an impeachable offense. He either divests or should be impeached plain and simple and to disagree with that would be completely ignorant.

He left all of his business to his kids...
and has been using his position to benefit his kids in that role ever since. And as soon as he is no longer President he will be right back at the top of his company that will have likely received direct benefit from his presidency.

 

 

So?

Link to comment

Trump represents an existential threat to liberalism. For the first time in a long time, the makers (people who produce wealth and/or income) have a champion in the White House.

 

This is an existential threat to the takers. The takers have known for a long time, if they are unable to guilt the makers out of their wealth, they could rely on the state to force the makers out of their wealth.

 

With each passing day that a man like Trump is in the White House, the takers ability to take without resistance becomes less and less. That's what the takers really fear, the day the makers will no longer be guilted, or forced.

Holy sh#t.

  • Fire 3
Link to comment

 

 

 

 

On the topic of impeachment: no, I don't trust the Washington Post or the NYT or CNN to give me unbiased news. I don't trust Fox News either. I think arguing over impeachment is a waste of time, because 1) I think it's indicative of the pu&&y, whine-when-I-don't-get-my-way culture spreading in America, 2) I don't think any of his actions to this point are even close to impeachable, and 3) even if they were, like Knapp said, you're silly if you think this Congress is going to do it.

wrong. Not a whine because I don't get my way scenario. The divestment thing is a big issue why does no one see this? This is hugely unprecedented and he has been brokering deals for his family business with his title. That is an impeachable offense. He either divests or should be impeached plain and simple and to disagree with that would be completely ignorant.

 

He left all of his business to his kids...

 

and has been using his position to benefit his kids in that role ever since. And as soon as he is no longer President he will be right back at the top of his company that will have likely received direct benefit from his presidency.

 

So?

 

You just said taking was bad. Emoluments are taking.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

 

On the topic of impeachment: no, I don't trust the Washington Post or the NYT or CNN to give me unbiased news. I don't trust Fox News either. I think arguing over impeachment is a waste of time, because 1) I think it's indicative of the pu&&y, whine-when-I-don't-get-my-way culture spreading in America, 2) I don't think any of his actions to this point are even close to impeachable, and 3) even if they were, like Knapp said, you're silly if you think this Congress is going to do it.

wrong. Not a whine because I don't get my way scenario. The divestment thing is a big issue why does no one see this? This is hugely unprecedented and he has been brokering deals for his family business with his title. That is an impeachable offense. He either divests or should be impeached plain and simple and to disagree with that would be completely ignorant.

 

He left all of his business to his kids...

 

and has been using his position to benefit his kids in that role ever since. And as soon as he is no longer President he will be right back at the top of his company that will have likely received direct benefit from his presidency.

 

So?

 

You just said taking was bad. Emoluments are taking.

 

 

Everyone in a position to help their children does so, this isn't a Trump villainous act.

Link to comment

Everyone in a position to help their children does so, this isn't a Trump villainous act.

You think it's legal to benefit from the presidency as long as you're doing it to help your children?

 

Just trying to understand your thought process here.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

On the topic of impeachment: no, I don't trust the Washington Post or the NYT or CNN to give me unbiased news. I don't trust Fox News either. I think arguing over impeachment is a waste of time, because 1) I think it's indicative of the pu&&y, whine-when-I-don't-get-my-way culture spreading in America, 2) I don't think any of his actions to this point are even close to impeachable, and 3) even if they were, like Knapp said, you're silly if you think this Congress is going to do it.

wrong. Not a whine because I don't get my way scenario. The divestment thing is a big issue why does no one see this? This is hugely unprecedented and he has been brokering deals for his family business with his title. That is an impeachable offense. He either divests or should be impeached plain and simple and to disagree with that would be completely ignorant.

He left all of his business to his kids...
and has been using his position to benefit his kids in that role ever since. And as soon as he is no longer President he will be right back at the top of his company that will have likely received direct benefit from his presidency.

 

 

So?

 

I'm interested.

 

How did you feel about Hillary receiving donations from world leaders to her personal foundation when she was Secretary of State?

  • Fire 2
Link to comment

 

I think its worth reminding people that while "impeachment" sounds great - it doesn't mean a president necessarily leaves office.

No it means the Congress grows a spine and decides to call Trump forward to defend his bullsh#t. I don't see that going well for Trump, so while impeachment doesn't mean Trump out of office, it might as well mean as much.

I want him to exeroence the embarrassment of public testimony for sure, but want him and his cohorts to be legally held accountable as well. He belongs in prison. #FreeMelania

 

(Can you imagine what he would try to do and the damage he would make for us internationally if he was impeached but remained in office?)

Link to comment

Also just because his kids are in control of the business, does that also means Trump is receiving no funds whatsoever from the Trump empire? I highly doubt that personally.

After the big "look at all theses folders" press conference didnt he make an amendment to that "im giving my kids the business" contract that said he could withdrawl/obtain funds from his businesses at amytime? One of those things that got lost in all the other bs.

Link to comment

 

 

I think its worth reminding people that while "impeachment" sounds great - it doesn't mean a president necessarily leaves office.

No it means the Congress grows a spine and decides to call Trump forward to defend his bullsh#t. I don't see that going well for Trump, so while impeachment doesn't mean Trump out of office, it might as well mean as much.
I want him to exeroence the embarrassment of public testimony for sure, but want him and his cohorts to be legally held accountable as well. He belongs in prison. #FreeMelania

 

(Can you imagine what he would try to do and the damage he would make for us internationally if he was impeached but remained in office?)

I agree before we proceed with an impeachment we need to be sure he can be removed from office nearly immediately, or extreme chaos that makes his presidency thus far seem like a well organized outfit will ensue
Link to comment

 

Trump represents an existential threat to liberalism. For the first time in a long time, the makers (people who produce wealth and/or income) have a champion in the White House.

This is an existential threat to the takers. The takers have known for a long time, if they are unable to guilt the makers out of their wealth, they could rely on the state to force the makers out of their wealth.

With each passing day that a man like Trump is in the White House, the takers ability to take without resistance becomes less and less. That's what the takers really fear, the day the makers will no longer be guilted, or forced.

 

 

What in bloody hell are you trying to say here?

BigRedBuster reply:

 

This is why you're seeing such vitriol against Trump. His very existence in the White House is a threat to those who make their living off other people's taxes, and contribute nothing back.

 

A large segment of the population is now a taker from the public treasury, and a massive bureaucracy has grown to administer this involuntary wealth redistribution. Also, a massive media complex that has become has arisen to assure every taker that their looting of others is somehow moral, at the same time, brow-beat and shame any maker who dares say they wish to not be looted.

 

These are the people fighting tooth and nail against Trump. This is why the calls for impeachment are so emotion driven.

Link to comment

 

 

Trump represents an existential threat to liberalism. For the first time in a long time, the makers (people who produce wealth and/or income) have a champion in the White House.

This is an existential threat to the takers. The takers have known for a long time, if they are unable to guilt the makers out of their wealth, they could rely on the state to force the makers out of their wealth.

With each passing day that a man like Trump is in the White House, the takers ability to take without resistance becomes less and less. That's what the takers really fear, the day the makers will no longer be guilted, or forced.

 

What in bloody hell are you trying to say here?

BigRedBuster reply:

 

This is why you're seeing such vitriol against Trump. His very existence in the White House is a threat to those who make their living off other people's taxes, and contribute nothing back.

 

A large segment of the population is now a taker from the public treasury, and a massive bureaucracy has grown to administer this involuntary wealth redistribution. Also, a massive media complex that has become has arisen to assure every taker that their looting of others is somehow moral, at the same time, brow-beat and shame any maker who dares say they wish to not be looted.

 

These are the people fighting tooth and nail against Trump. This is why the calls for impeachment are so emotion driven.

 

Ummm.....no.

 

There are lots of fiscal conservatives (like me) who are disgusted this idiot is in office.

  • Fire 3
Link to comment

 

 

 

 

 

 

On the topic of impeachment: no, I don't trust the Washington Post or the NYT or CNN to give me unbiased news. I don't trust Fox News either. I think arguing over impeachment is a waste of time, because 1) I think it's indicative of the pu&&y, whine-when-I-don't-get-my-way culture spreading in America, 2) I don't think any of his actions to this point are even close to impeachable, and 3) even if they were, like Knapp said, you're silly if you think this Congress is going to do it.

wrong. Not a whine because I don't get my way scenario. The divestment thing is a big issue why does no one see this? This is hugely unprecedented and he has been brokering deals for his family business with his title. That is an impeachable offense. He either divests or should be impeached plain and simple and to disagree with that would be completely ignorant.

 

He left all of his business to his kids...

 

and has been using his position to benefit his kids in that role ever since. And as soon as he is no longer President he will be right back at the top of his company that will have likely received direct benefit from his presidency.

 

So?

 

You just said taking was bad. Emoluments are taking.

 

 

Everyone in a position to help their children does so, this isn't a Trump villainous act.

 

You do realize that a person in government power using that power to help their children gain power is the very definition of an aristocracy, right? Are you advocating for a ruling class or even a monarchy?

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...