Impeach Trump?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChurchSoldier
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
stinkcat_14 said:
I will give some reasons why I disapprove of Trump.
  1. No leadership on the repeal of Obamacare. He made a promise that he couldn’t deliver on.
  2. Incompetence in some of his appointments. Mooch was incompetent, but amusing while he lasted.
  3. Dishonest. He said Mexico was going to pay for the wall. Still waiting for the check.
  4. Does not believe in markets. Free trade between two countries benefits both countries, otherwise they wouldn’t trade.
Are these enough?
Click to expand...
Thank you for your list. But you don’t feel he should be impeached over these 4
points or do you think he should?
 
josie_L said:
I love how the NYT, which supports a multitude of progressive issues against those held by the Catholic Church and many other orthodox Christians has a right to moralize and preach, when they themselves are in need of self-reflection and “spiritual” awakening.

Their agenda/POV is neither objective and/or moral.
Click to expand...
+1
 
dvdjs said:
Please, you have no capacity whatsoever to speak for my “hopes”.

Here, however, is something for you, from David Brooks. A piece that does resonate with me on the why I view that Trump presidency as likely disastrous for America. Not the Trump obsession/addiction part, which presumes that people are just engaged in the spectacle, rather than watching with a serious concern about the

nytimes.com/2017/08/08/opinion/getting-trump-out-of-my-brain.html?_r=0

It is very disturbing to me that too many good Catholics here can see no further than the problems "secular progressivism that is spiritually formed by feminism, environmentalism and the quest for individual rights " and do not see what is so terribly wrong with the ostensible cure that they have adopted supported by “realist nationalism that gets its manners from reality TV and its spiritual succor from in-group/out-group solidarity” caritas-free evangelicals.

It is that barren lack of caritas that makes cure is far worse than the disease.
Click to expand...
Can you think of anything nice or positive to say about President Trump, his
family or his administration, his policies?
 
randomuser said:
It’s gossip. Lots of books to be sold. Lots of WND, NewsMax and Amazon affiliate links to buy more gossip and more garbage about Hillary. Lots of 10-point font posts from said books and fake news stories.

There’s no “there” there. Move on.
Click to expand...
Or you could just stop posting on threads that you consider are peddling “gossip”.

So don’t ask me to move on, when you can move over to let others who disagree with your assessment, the chance to muddle things out.

You do not have the last word on the matter.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
I don’t think they are impeachable offenses.
Click to expand...
I don’t think they are either, but many are wanting to have him removed from office because of his policies on climate change, health care, his demeanor, his tweets,
his hair. - they don’t like anything about him - like Maxine Waters.
 
7_Sorrows said:
I don’t think they are either, but many are wanting to have him removed from office because of his policies on climate change, health care, his demeanor, his tweets, his hair. - they don’t like anything about him - like Maxine Waters.
Click to expand...
Maxine should not be holding a public office. She is up there with Hank Johnson who was concerned the Island of Guam would tip over with the weight of military equipment.

The President has done nothing to be impeached yet Donald Trump is hurting the dignity of the office of the Presidency with that damn twitter account. Someone has to take away his phone…
 
josie_L said:
Because when taken in tandem with the Senate Judiciary Committee’s decision to reinvestigate Clinton, Comey, Rice, Lynch … . .etc., it kind lends itself to the belief that we are dealing with more than just mere gossip.
Click to expand...
Senate Judiciary Committee’s decision …
That is a political body. Their request for a special prosecutor was a 16-13 party line vote. It is not at all clear that Justice will move on that request.

And anyone can FOIA for any reason. And if you have money you can go to court to get compliance.
And the fact that Judicial watch was being stonewalled from getting those emails, just like other activist groups were stonewalled for almost a year before they received information concerning the Tarmac meeting, makes things that more suspicious.
Click to expand...
Stonewalled? Try inundated and having found nothing useful are looking into another crevice?
Calling everything gossip just because it does not fit your narrative, is no reason to believe we are dealing with gossip, especially when evidence to the contrary is mounting.
Click to expand...
The difference between an action that requires the judicial demonstration of cause, versus other that require only the will should be clear to all. The deflection that it is a matter of “fitting a narrative” lacks substance and is just an insult really.

And “evidence to the contrary is mounting”?
We are back to square one: we disagree on the meaning of “evidence”.
 
josie_L said:
Ok, dvdjs, I read the article and I have a few thoughts of my own, first, if the man is so gosh darned annoyed about all the space that Trump has taken up in his world, then why write another Trump-driven article, when that just defeats the purpose? Will he no longer be writing about Trump from this point on and/or is the NYT willing to write less about the president, if the circumstances are such that they can?

Moreover, whose to blame for this Trump 24/7 narrative, Trump, no, it’s the media, in fact, wasn’t it a CNN executive who stated that Trump was good for ratings and that the Russia/Trump narrative was a nothing burger?

No one is forcing the media to report every tittle tattle regarding Trump, yet they are quick to do so, because they are angry at Trump (and his supporters) for ruining their presidential dreams of a female president whose agenda ran along the same lines as theirs.
Click to expand...
You reaction has not the merest bit to do with the point he made and that I echoed. too bad.
My answer to all this is: GET OVER IT!
Click to expand...
And also with you.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
I will give some reasons why I disapprove of Trump.
  1. No leadership on the repeal of Obamacare. He made a promise that he couldn’t deliver on.
  2. Incompetence in some of his appointments. Mooch was incompetent, but amusing while he lasted.
  3. Dishonest. He said Mexico was going to pay for the wall. Still waiting for the check.
  4. Does not believe in markets. Free trade between two countries benefits both countries, otherwise they wouldn’t trade.
Are these enough?
Click to expand...
I think you are confused on what has been happening.
  1. Leaders aren’t always followed, which is the case with healthcare reform. The opposition to reform in healthcare is very strong. He certainly hasn’t been ignoring the problem.
  2. Yes, he’s had some bad hires, but at least he changes them out. Obama kept Sebilius in place for years after she had shown gross incompetence.
  3. It’s only been 7 months, don’t get so far ahead of yourself. FYI, his supporters are delighted that illegal immigration is down over 70% vs Obama, so he’s delivering where it counts.
  4. You are very confused about trade, we’ve never had free trade. What he is targeting is ‘balanced trade’ which is good for both countries. One sided trade does not benefit both countries in the long run. Our long term trade deficit shows adjustment is required. Other countries have not equally opened their markets.
 
Theo520 said:
I think you are confused on what has been happening.
  1. Leaders aren’t always followed, which is the case with healthcare reform. The opposition to reform in healthcare is very strong. He certainly hasn’t been ignoring the problem.
  2. Yes, he’s had some bad hires, but at least he changes them out. Obama kept Sebilius in place for years after she had shown gross incompetence.
  3. It’s only been 7 months, don’t get so far ahead of yourself. FYI, his supporters are delighted that illegal immigration is down over 70% vs Obama, so he’s delivering where it counts.
  4. You are very confused about trade, we’ve never had free trade. What he is targeting is ‘balanced trade’ which is good for both countries. One sided trade does not benefit both countries in the long run. Our long term trade deficit shows adjustment is required. Other countries have not equally opened their markets.
Click to expand...
So you are saying he is going to get Mexico to write us a check?

Also, what credentials do you have on trade to say I am confused on trade? Weren’t you the one who claimed that the unemployment rate was determined by looking at people receiving unemployment benefits? That of course was patently false. When you learn a little economics, then perhaps we can have an intelligent discussion.
 
dvdjs said:
Senate Judiciary Committee’s decision …
That is a political body. Their request for a special prosecutor was a 16-13 party line vote. It is not at all clear that Justice will move on that request.

And anyone can FOIA for any reason. And if you have money you can go to court to get compliance.

Stonewalled? Try inundated and having found nothing useful are looking into another crevice?

The difference between an action that requires the judicial demonstration of cause, versus other that require only the will should be clear to all. The deflection that it is a matter of “fitting a narrative” lacks substance and is just an insult really.

And “evidence to the contrary is mounting”?
We are back to square one: we disagree on the meaning of “evidence”.
Click to expand...
I’m not going to get into a semantic war with you, but suffice it to say, that people do not redact pages and pages of information of DOJ files that were requested, without wanting to hide something.

p.s. The investigation has to start somewhere, so give it time to grow.
 
dvdjs said:
You reaction has not the merest bit to do with the point he made and that I echoed. too bad.
Click to expand...
If people want to know why people voted for Trump then just ask them, anything else is just rubbish, and this man who is clearly not a Trump supporter is doing just that, i.e., he believes he can easily place people into categories, when, if you look at why people voted for Trump, many did so for reasons of economics and immigration. That is why states that were once blue turned red, and why the Democrats who believed they could rely on blue collar Democrats were blown away by Hillary’s defeat, i.e., they took for granted that these voters would continue to vote Democratic.
And also with you.
Click to expand...
You take things way too personally, i.e, I wasn’t referring to you when I made that comment.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
So you are saying he is going to get Mexico to write us a check?

Also, what credentials do you have on trade to say I am confused on trade? Weren’t you the one who claimed that the unemployment rate was determined by looking at people receiving unemployment benefits? That of course was patently false. When you learn a little economics, then perhaps we can have an intelligent discussion.
Click to expand...
I made very clear points. In the future, please respond to them, not ignore them (or just don’t respond).

Since you forced me to be repetetive
  • it’s too early to close the book on who pays for the border wall. I’m happy with the significant drop in illegal immigration though.
  • you do exhibit confusion on trade since you characterized what we have/had as free trade.
Stop deflecting by introducing employment and respond to my comment on balanced trade. If you understood the theory, you would know specialization and adjustment in exchange rates is meant to result in balanced trade.

Free trade doesn’t exist anywhere in the world between nations.
 
Theo520 said:
I made very clear points. In the future, please respond to them, not ignore them (or just don’t respond).

Since you forced me to be repetetive
  • it’s too early to close the book on who pays for the border wall. I’m happy with the significant drop in illegal immigration though.
  • you do exhibit confusion on trade since you characterized what we have/had as free trade.
Stop deflecting by introducing employment and respond to my comment on balanced trade. If you understood the theory, you would know specialization and adjustment in exchange rates is meant to result in balanced trade.

Free trade doesn’t exist anywhere in the world between nations.
Click to expand...
I didn’t say we had free trade, don’t put words in my mouth. I said free trade benefits both parties, otherwise they wouldn’t trade. Don does not propose anything that makes trade freer.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
I didn’t say we had free trade, don’t put words in my mouth. I said free trade benefits both parties, otherwise they wouldn’t trade. Don does not propose anything that makes trade freer.
Click to expand...
So you are acknowledging that free trade only exists in theory, not in the real world?

I said driving for balanced trade is reasonable and in the best interests of our country,
please counter IF you have an argument.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top