Impeach Trump?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChurchSoldier
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Reasons to impeach Trump…
  1. Obstruction of justice
  2. His non stop lies.
  3. Using his presidential powers to amass wealth for himself e.g.( foreign dignataries that rent from him.)
  4. He is threatening war to North Korea and could get us in a nuclear war.
  5. Economic ties with Russia making him compromised.
  1. His sympathies with white nationalist and Nazi groups.
Many successful businessmen were Nazi sympathizers, too. Henry Ford, for example.
 
I do not profess to belong to either major party, but I have good friends who are very active in each party. The Dems are unhappy, no question, but you would expect that. The interesting thing is that my GOP friends are talking about Trump serving less than 4 years, and speculating about what a Pence presidency would be like. The impeachment threat is not that Dems would like to oust him - its that more and more in the GOP want him out.
 
Some of us think both Clinton AND Trump were horrible choices, and neither have any business being president. Just because someone calls Trump out for what he is doesn’t mean they love, or even supported, Clinton.
Yes, but there were only two presidential candidates. So, that didn’t leave people with much choice, hence, the comparisons.
 
Yes, but there were only two presidential candidates. So, that didn’t leave people with much choice, hence, the comparisons.
There were 17 choices in the Republican Party. Primaries are part of the election process. Maybe they’ll take that process a little more seriously next time.
 
There were 17 choices in the Republican Party. Primaries are part of the election process. Maybe they’ll take that process a little more seriously next time.
C’mon,you know darn well that outside ofvTrump and Carley Fiorina( who BTY I was reallly hoping would get more traction) the remaining candidates where just tired old retreads. No one in particular stood out as being able to bring real change and or defeat HC.
 
Could you point to the place where they correct false reports favoring the right side of the political spectrum? I could not find that. Instead, I find complaints about the lack of coverage of a movie that flopped? (Really?)

It is not a good sign when a bias watchdog obviously has its own bias. You want to find critical eyes that do not have partisan blinders.

In the end, though, if you really care you are stuck looking at primary sources yourself. There is not a substitute for it, and in our information age there is not much excuse for failing to try to do it.
Well, we have the New York Times … and the folks who gave us the fake Russia story.
 
There were 17 choices in the Republican Party. Primaries are part of the election process. Maybe they’ll take that process a little more seriously next time.
The people did pick who they wanted from the 17 Republicans … they picked Trump!
 
The people did pick who they wanted from the 17 Republicans … they picked Trump!
I don’t think ProVobis is arguing that the Republican primary voters picked Trump; he/she is saying it was a bad choice. And it’s disingenuous to say now, “Well, look, we had to support Trump because the only other option was Hillary.” There were plenty of other options.
 
The people were SUPPOSED to pick Bush.

After all, Bush had all the money and all the support and the name.

[And then Bush was going to lose to Hillary. ]

[Done deal.]
 
I don’t think ProVobis is arguing that the Republican primary voters picked Trump; he/she is saying it was a bad choice. And it’s disingenuous to say now, “Well, look, we had to support Trump because the only other option was Hillary.” There were plenty of other options.
And yet if the DNC had not rigged the primaries, maybe just maybe a Democrat would be POTUS.
 
And yet if the DNC had not rigged the primaries, maybe just maybe a Democrat would be POTUS.
You make this claim about rigging often.
What are your facts? What is this “rigging” that you are talking about? What was its effect? ANd what is you evidence for it.
 
The people were SUPPOSED to pick Bush.

After all, Bush had all the money and all the support and the name.

[And then Bush was going to lose to Hillary. ]

[Done deal.]
I don’t think it was ever a foregone conclusion that Jeb Bush was going to be the nominee. His brother got there first, and the Bush family have not established themselves as an acceptable “dynasty.” He is by far the least interesting candidate the family has produced so far. I don’t think he ever had a chance.
 
You make this claim about rigging often.
What are your facts? What is this “rigging” that you are talking about? What was its effect? ANd what is you evidence for it.
There are people who believe the entire superdelegate system the Democrats had in place for the last presidential nomination process put too much say in the hands of the party elite, to the point that the voice of the voters were suppressed by comparison.

It isn’t “rigged” in the sense of the nominee being chosen by a means other than the means announced. It is that people think those rules put too much power in the hands of a ruling clique, who were the ones who made the rules. They think the decision-making process in setting the nomination rules was tainted by self-dealing.
 
You make this claim about rigging often.
What are your facts? What is this “rigging” that you are talking about? What was its effect? ANd what is you evidence for it.
Wouldn’t the use of super-delegates apply here? In some cases, Sanders got more votes in a state, but Clinton got more delegates. (WY comes to mind)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top