Donald Trump
Comments
-
Yes it is. Presidents can't be charged with crimes while in office so the founders gave this political process power to congress to hold the president accountable.HughFreakingDillon said:
I fully understand it's not a legal process. it seems to be a political/popularity issue, but it's not supposed to be.Halifax2TheMax said:
Except one was a real witch hunt and one is not. I don’t remember “sexual assault” being one of the articles of impeachment against Clinton. Regardless, impeachment is not a legal process, and as Juggler stated, it’s a political process, which ultimately means it’s a “popularity” contest. Lying about a sexual affair during an investigation that started out as an investigation of a land deal isn’t the same degree of perjury as lying about a quid pro quo to influence an election, not to compare. At least a majority of elected senators thought so.HughFreakingDillon said:
not everything is "being compared" to. trump is not the benchmark for every other incident in history. clinton lied under oath. full stop. just because trump is a corrupt and potentially treasonous POS doesn't mean every other person less corrupt than him gets a pass. that's not how this works.Halifax2TheMax said:
Clinton also sat for a video taped deposition, of which his perjury charge emanated, for lying about consensual sex during an investigation that began with a failed land deal in Arkansas. Team Trump Treason potentially committed ten acts of obstruction of justice in providing written answers to questions provided by Team Mueller. Imagine Team Trump Treason’s perjury charges if he were to be deposed on camera. The current Ukraine impeachment centers around election interference, which is what the Team Mueller investigation centered around. Can’t even compare the two investigations, from the reason that initiated them, cooperation of witnesses and justice department involvement, to how they were conducted and the ultimate result (we’re still waiting on that piece but it ain’t gonna be the same).The Juggler said:
Wait....you think Clinton deserved to be removed from office?HughFreakingDillon said:
there has been innumerable reasons he should have been taken down by now. but the checks and balances just aren't there. to be honest, they have never been there. i was reading up on clinton's impeachment. he got off when he absolutely shouldn't have. almost all senators voted along party lines, not with non-partisan facts. he should have been removed easily. it's all a sham.mickeyrat said:HughFreakingDillon said:
this will amount to yet another nothing. unfortunately.mickeyrat said:maybe. but the phone records corroborate at least a portion of her story. lends credence to the rest.what I fail to understand is , is not just her but other women also continuing contact or pursuit of business or job opportunities with the same men who assualt them.
unfortunately, in today's climate, most women have no choice, they normalize it to themselves that this is just how it is, they feel as if they did something to deserve it, endless reasons.
Impeachment is about politics. Clinton was a popular president so he wasn't convicted in the senate. Nixon's popularity plunged after the tapes were released and he resigned to avoid embarrasment. Trump is historically unpopular, gotta see where his numbers are by the time this goes to the senate.
If it’s not being “compared,” then why did you bring up Clinton’s impeachment in the Team Trump Treason thread?www.myspace.com0 -
What is so fucking bad about Mike Pence?
If Senate R's remove Trumpito, ("We had no choice...") they'd still have an R in the executive, someone WAY closer to "traditional" (ie awful) R policy, and someone who wouldn't embarrass the snot out of them on twitter every day, pulling troops out of places they should stay and slamming NATO allies while figuratively BLOWING dictators. Mike Pence would NEVER.
Oh, turns out Pence is COMPLICIT and INVOLVED. Up above his chest in it.Bristow 05132010 to Amsterdam 2 061320180 -
Hello President Pelosi.ikiT said:What is so fucking bad about Mike Pence?
If Senate R's remove Trumpito, ("We had no choice...") they'd still have an R in the executive, someone WAY closer to "traditional" (ie awful) R policy, and someone who wouldn't embarrass the snot out of them on twitter every day, pulling troops out of places they should stay and slamming NATO allies while figuratively BLOWING dictators. Mike Pence would NEVER.
Oh, turns out Pence is COMPLICIT and INVOLVED. Up above his chest in it.09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
ok, we're just not understanding each other here. I KNOW A PRESIDENT CANNOT BE CHARGED WHILE IN OFFICE. I KNOW IT'S NOT A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING. When I stated it shouldn't be a political process, I suppose I should have said it shouldn't be a partisan process. but it is.The Juggler said:
Yes it is. Presidents can't be charged with crimes while in office so the founders gave this political process power to congress to hold the president accountable.HughFreakingDillon said:
I fully understand it's not a legal process. it seems to be a political/popularity issue, but it's not supposed to be.Halifax2TheMax said:
Except one was a real witch hunt and one is not. I don’t remember “sexual assault” being one of the articles of impeachment against Clinton. Regardless, impeachment is not a legal process, and as Juggler stated, it’s a political process, which ultimately means it’s a “popularity” contest. Lying about a sexual affair during an investigation that started out as an investigation of a land deal isn’t the same degree of perjury as lying about a quid pro quo to influence an election, not to compare. At least a majority of elected senators thought so.HughFreakingDillon said:
not everything is "being compared" to. trump is not the benchmark for every other incident in history. clinton lied under oath. full stop. just because trump is a corrupt and potentially treasonous POS doesn't mean every other person less corrupt than him gets a pass. that's not how this works.Halifax2TheMax said:
Clinton also sat for a video taped deposition, of which his perjury charge emanated, for lying about consensual sex during an investigation that began with a failed land deal in Arkansas. Team Trump Treason potentially committed ten acts of obstruction of justice in providing written answers to questions provided by Team Mueller. Imagine Team Trump Treason’s perjury charges if he were to be deposed on camera. The current Ukraine impeachment centers around election interference, which is what the Team Mueller investigation centered around. Can’t even compare the two investigations, from the reason that initiated them, cooperation of witnesses and justice department involvement, to how they were conducted and the ultimate result (we’re still waiting on that piece but it ain’t gonna be the same).The Juggler said:
Wait....you think Clinton deserved to be removed from office?HughFreakingDillon said:
there has been innumerable reasons he should have been taken down by now. but the checks and balances just aren't there. to be honest, they have never been there. i was reading up on clinton's impeachment. he got off when he absolutely shouldn't have. almost all senators voted along party lines, not with non-partisan facts. he should have been removed easily. it's all a sham.mickeyrat said:HughFreakingDillon said:
this will amount to yet another nothing. unfortunately.mickeyrat said:maybe. but the phone records corroborate at least a portion of her story. lends credence to the rest.what I fail to understand is , is not just her but other women also continuing contact or pursuit of business or job opportunities with the same men who assualt them.
unfortunately, in today's climate, most women have no choice, they normalize it to themselves that this is just how it is, they feel as if they did something to deserve it, endless reasons.
Impeachment is about politics. Clinton was a popular president so he wasn't convicted in the senate. Nixon's popularity plunged after the tapes were released and he resigned to avoid embarrasment. Trump is historically unpopular, gotta see where his numbers are by the time this goes to the senate.
If it’s not being “compared,” then why did you bring up Clinton’s impeachment in the Team Trump Treason thread?By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
impeachment is partisan. at least the 2 in my lifetime has been.
i think what is going to happen is all of this is going to become public in hearings. republicans will distract and bring obama and the clintons into it because their MO is whataboutism. they have nothing else. everyone knows they would have impeached obama for much less, and the dems will point that out and make that case to the public. the dems will point out that the gop was once the law and order party and they are abdicating that, and that will hurt the gop. once the whataboutism fails and the polls show 55-60% of americans favor impeachment and removal from office, the sane gop senators are going to start having conversations about how their own voters will vote for unnamed democrats over incumbant senators, and then the gop senators will begin to pull away. i now believe that once trump loses 2 or 3 sane gop senators it will be over. he will resign before he is voted out of office. he will try to make a deal with a country with no extradition so he can try to avoid being arrested the moment he is no longer president.
stone will not flip on him because he has been promised a pardon. but trump will resign and either pence will pardon stone, or stone will have been betrayed by the trump administration."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
yes, I think trump should be removed.Halifax2TheMax said:
Yes, it is an "employability issue," and the boss, the American people, through their elected representatives in the Senate, refused to fire Clinton because they believed his lying under oath for the transgression didn't rise to a fireable offense. Employees in work places lie all the time during investigations, sometimes while they're on unpaid leave. The period of unpaid leave may be considered "punishment enough."HughFreakingDillon said:
I fully understand it's not a legal process. it seems to be a political/popularity issue, but it's not supposed to be. it's supposed to be an employability issue. and lying under oath is a very good reason to remove from office. you can sugar coat it all you want, it was just a separate finding from a different issue, it makes no difference. he lied under oath. you lie to your superiors, you are gone. that's it. if I get caught doing something by my work and I'm questioned about it, and I lie to them during questioning, I'm history.Halifax2TheMax said:
Except one was a real witch hunt and one is not. I don’t remember “sexual assault” being one of the articles of impeachment against Clinton. Regardless, impeachment is not a legal process, and as Juggler stated, it’s a political process, which ultimately means it’s a “popularity” contest. Lying about a sexual affair during an investigation that started out as an investigation of a land deal isn’t the same degree of perjury as lying about a quid pro quo to influence an election, not to compare. At least a majority of elected senators thought so.HughFreakingDillon said:
not everything is "being compared" to. trump is not the benchmark for every other incident in history. clinton lied under oath. full stop. just because trump is a corrupt and potentially treasonous POS doesn't mean every other person less corrupt than him gets a pass. that's not how this works.Halifax2TheMax said:
Clinton also sat for a video taped deposition, of which his perjury charge emanated, for lying about consensual sex during an investigation that began with a failed land deal in Arkansas. Team Trump Treason potentially committed ten acts of obstruction of justice in providing written answers to questions provided by Team Mueller. Imagine Team Trump Treason’s perjury charges if he were to be deposed on camera. The current Ukraine impeachment centers around election interference, which is what the Team Mueller investigation centered around. Can’t even compare the two investigations, from the reason that initiated them, cooperation of witnesses and justice department involvement, to how they were conducted and the ultimate result (we’re still waiting on that piece but it ain’t gonna be the same).The Juggler said:
Wait....you think Clinton deserved to be removed from office?HughFreakingDillon said:
there has been innumerable reasons he should have been taken down by now. but the checks and balances just aren't there. to be honest, they have never been there. i was reading up on clinton's impeachment. he got off when he absolutely shouldn't have. almost all senators voted along party lines, not with non-partisan facts. he should have been removed easily. it's all a sham.mickeyrat said:HughFreakingDillon said:
this will amount to yet another nothing. unfortunately.mickeyrat said:maybe. but the phone records corroborate at least a portion of her story. lends credence to the rest.what I fail to understand is , is not just her but other women also continuing contact or pursuit of business or job opportunities with the same men who assualt them.
unfortunately, in today's climate, most women have no choice, they normalize it to themselves that this is just how it is, they feel as if they did something to deserve it, endless reasons.
Impeachment is about politics. Clinton was a popular president so he wasn't convicted in the senate. Nixon's popularity plunged after the tapes were released and he resigned to avoid embarrasment. Trump is historically unpopular, gotta see where his numbers are by the time this goes to the senate.
If it’s not being “compared,” then why did you bring up Clinton’s impeachment in the Team Trump Treason thread?
a VERY SLIM majority of elected senators thought so, only because the democrats controlled the senate. come on. seems like you're trying to paint this is as both parties came to a consensus that he was innocent. haha.
all I said was I was reading up on clinton's impeachment as I got interested in it after thinking about how all these idiots vote along party lines and not along what's right and wrong, so I looked up how each senator voted during clinton's trial. I wasn't comparing the wrong doings of either. only the process which is contained within both. not sure why anyone has to constantly defend subjects they bring up here to you, especially when it's relevant.
To the first bolded statement, maybe Clinton had a better defense attorney representing him during the senate trial? The job of the repubs, in this case, was to convince 67 senators to vote to remove from office as the punishment. Maybe the repub prosecutors sucked badly or Clinton's defense attorney was stellar in her defense. If you can find a video of her on the senate floor in her defense, I highly suggest that you watch. Not everything is as black and white as you'd like it to be, particularly with the law, or in this case, politics or popularity. And nice projection on your part regarding my thoughts on consensus, haha.
To the second bolded part, you stated that Clinton should have been removed easily. Do you think the same of Team Trump Trump Treason? Do you think the impeachment process is easy? And feel free to ignore having to "having to constantly defend subjects" to me. You control you, I don't.
no, I don't think the impeachment process is easy. it's long and drawn out as it should be. it shouldn't be a cake walk to impeach or remove a sitting president. when I said "easily", I didn't mean it literally as in on a whim. I meant easily as in "lied under oath, so it's a slam dunk to me" easily. I don't think everything is black and white. But I don't constantly give dems a pass just because the other side is worse.
And trump won't be removed because the elected representatives will refuse to fire trump as well. the majority of clinton's "bosses" were dems, and the majority of trump's "bosses" are republicans. obviously not a coincidence. that's what I meant about the process being a sham, and the only reason I mentioned clinton's impeachment. it was designed with the thought that senators would vote what's good for the country, not for their party. that doesn't happen. hasn't in a long time.
you don't control me? then explain to me why I keep waking up in a cold sweat shouting:“There was no collusion.”“I have nothing to hide.”“I don’t know any Russians.”“I’ll sit down and talk with anyone.”“We do everything by the book.”“Only the guilty plea the fifth.”“Very legal, very cool.”“Fully exonerated.”“Essentially no obstruction.”“Very friendly and totally appropriate.”
Follow the money from Russia with love and a PTape all the way to impeachment every night?
Post edited by HughFreakingDillon onBy The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
I sincerely hope you're right. I just don't see it.gimmesometruth27 said:impeachment is partisan. at least the 2 in my lifetime has been.
i think what is going to happen is all of this is going to become public in hearings. republicans will distract and bring obama and the clintons into it because their MO is whataboutism. they have nothing else. everyone knows they would have impeached obama for much less, and the dems will point that out and make that case to the public. the dems will point out that the gop was once the law and order party and they are abdicating that, and that will hurt the gop. once the whataboutism fails and the polls show 55-60% of americans favor impeachment and removal from office, the sane gop senators are going to start having conversations about how their own voters will vote for unnamed democrats over incumbant senators, and then the gop senators will begin to pull away. i now believe that once trump loses 2 or 3 sane gop senators it will be over. he will resign before he is voted out of office. he will try to make a deal with a country with no extradition so he can try to avoid being arrested the moment he is no longer president.
stone will not flip on him because he has been promised a pardon. but trump will resign and either pence will pardon stone, or stone will have been betrayed by the trump administration.By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
HughFreakingDillon said:
yes, I think trump should be removed.Halifax2TheMax said:
Yes, it is an "employability issue," and the boss, the American people, through their elected representatives in the Senate, refused to fire Clinton because they believed his lying under oath for the transgression didn't rise to a fireable offense. Employees in work places lie all the time during investigations, sometimes while they're on unpaid leave. The period of unpaid leave may be considered "punishment enough."HughFreakingDillon said:
I fully understand it's not a legal process. it seems to be a political/popularity issue, but it's not supposed to be. it's supposed to be an employability issue. and lying under oath is a very good reason to remove from office. you can sugar coat it all you want, it was just a separate finding from a different issue, it makes no difference. he lied under oath. you lie to your superiors, you are gone. that's it. if I get caught doing something by my work and I'm questioned about it, and I lie to them during questioning, I'm history.Halifax2TheMax said:
Except one was a real witch hunt and one is not. I don’t remember “sexual assault” being one of the articles of impeachment against Clinton. Regardless, impeachment is not a legal process, and as Juggler stated, it’s a political process, which ultimately means it’s a “popularity” contest. Lying about a sexual affair during an investigation that started out as an investigation of a land deal isn’t the same degree of perjury as lying about a quid pro quo to influence an election, not to compare. At least a majority of elected senators thought so.HughFreakingDillon said:
not everything is "being compared" to. trump is not the benchmark for every other incident in history. clinton lied under oath. full stop. just because trump is a corrupt and potentially treasonous POS doesn't mean every other person less corrupt than him gets a pass. that's not how this works.Halifax2TheMax said:The Juggler said:HughFreakingDillon said:mickeyrat said:HughFreakingDillon said:
this will amount to yet another nothing. unfortunately.mickeyrat said:maybe. but the phone records corroborate at least a portion of her story. lends credence to the rest.what I fail to understand is , is not just her but other women also continuing contact or pursuit of business or job opportunities with the same men who assualt them.
If it’s not being “compared,” then why did you bring up Clinton’s impeachment in the Team Trump Treason thread?
a VERY SLIM majority of elected senators thought so, only because the democrats controlled the senate. come on. seems like you're trying to paint this is as both parties came to a consensus that he was innocent. haha.
all I said was I was reading up on clinton's impeachment as I got interested in it after thinking about how all these idiots vote along party lines and not along what's right and wrong, so I looked up how each senator voted during clinton's trial. I wasn't comparing the wrong doings of either. only the process which is contained within both. not sure why anyone has to constantly defend subjects they bring up here to you, especially when it's relevant.
To the first bolded statement, maybe Clinton had a better defense attorney representing him during the senate trial? The job of the repubs, in this case, was to convince 67 senators to vote to remove from office as the punishment. Maybe the repub prosecutors sucked badly or Clinton's defense attorney was stellar in her defense. If you can find a video of her on the senate floor in her defense, I highly suggest that you watch. Not everything is as black and white as you'd like it to be, particularly with the law, or in this case, politics or popularity. And nice projection on your part regarding my thoughts on consensus, haha.
To the second bolded part, you stated that Clinton should have been removed easily. Do you think the same of Team Trump Trump Treason? Do you think the impeachment process is easy? And feel free to ignore having to "having to constantly defend subjects" to me. You control you, I don't.
no, I don't think the impeachment process is easy. it's long and drawn out as it should be. it shouldn't be a cake walk to impeach or remove a sitting president. when I said "easily", I didn't mean it literally as in on a whim. I meant easily as in "lied under oath, so it's a slam dunk to me" easily. I don't think everything is black and white. But I don't constantly give dems a pass just because the other side is worse.
And trump won't be removed because the elected representatives will refuse to fire trump as well. the majority of clinton's "bosses" were dems, and the majority of trump's "bosses" are republicans. obviously not a coincidence. that's what I meant about the process being a sham, and the only reason I mentioned clinton's impeachment. it was designed with the thought that senators would vote what's good for the country, not for their party. that doesn't happen. hasn't in a long time.
Asterisks denote up for re-election. 11 vote to convict, need 9 of13 to join along. 20 of the repubs are up for re-election. Public hearings begin next week. Kentucky appears to have gone blue in a statewide election. Pressure is going to be immense. More details emerge from Roger Dodger Stoned trial and tax return case. The “system” is working as it should.
* had to delete posts to post09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
oh boy. where to put this stuff......certainly dont want to start another precednt asshole thread....
Trump More Closely to 2016 Effort to Obtain Stolen Emails
Newly revealed calls between President Trump and Roger Stone dovetailed with key developments in the theft of Democratic emails, prosecutors said.
WASHINGTON — President Trump was more personally involved in his campaign’s effort to obtain Democratic emails stolen by Russian operatives in 2016 than was previously known, phone records introduced in federal court on Wednesday suggested.
Federal prosecutors disclosed the calls at the start of the criminal trial of Roger J. Stone Jr., Mr. Trump’s longtime friend, who faces charges of lying to federal investigators about his efforts to contact WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign. Russian intelligence officers had funneled tens of thousands of emails they stole from Democratic computers to WikiLeaks, which released them at critical points during the presidential race.
The records suggest that Mr. Trump spoke to Mr. Stone repeatedly during the summer of 2016, at a time when Mr. Stone was aggressively seeking to obtain the stolen emails from Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks. The prosecutors noted that they did not know what Mr. Stone and Mr. Trump had discussed. But they stressed that the timing of their calls dovetailed with other key developments related to the theft and release of the Democratic emails.
The phone records are the first concrete suggestion that Mr. Trump may have had a direct role in his campaign’s effort to benefit from Russia’s hidden hand in the election. At the very least, the calls and other evidence underscored the eagerness of senior campaign officials and other Trump associates to reap the rewards of what the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, later called a sophisticated and alarming covert Russian influence operation.
continues.....
_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
Who’s the deplorablemostest? Find it on CNN. Com and give it a watch and listen. I got news for you, gubmint snot a business.
09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
But....the reason Nixon resigned was because REPUBLICAN congressmen went to him and told him he would be impeached and convicted in the senate. There is literally no way a president can be convicted in the senate without bipartisan support--unless one party, some day, gains control of 2/3's of the senate which will never happen.HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, we're just not understanding each other here. I KNOW A PRESIDENT CANNOT BE CHARGED WHILE IN OFFICE. I KNOW IT'S NOT A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING. When I stated it shouldn't be a political process, I suppose I should have said it shouldn't be a partisan process. but it is.The Juggler said:
Yes it is. Presidents can't be charged with crimes while in office so the founders gave this political process power to congress to hold the president accountable.HughFreakingDillon said:
I fully understand it's not a legal process. it seems to be a political/popularity issue, but it's not supposed to be.Halifax2TheMax said:
Except one was a real witch hunt and one is not. I don’t remember “sexual assault” being one of the articles of impeachment against Clinton. Regardless, impeachment is not a legal process, and as Juggler stated, it’s a political process, which ultimately means it’s a “popularity” contest. Lying about a sexual affair during an investigation that started out as an investigation of a land deal isn’t the same degree of perjury as lying about a quid pro quo to influence an election, not to compare. At least a majority of elected senators thought so.HughFreakingDillon said:
not everything is "being compared" to. trump is not the benchmark for every other incident in history. clinton lied under oath. full stop. just because trump is a corrupt and potentially treasonous POS doesn't mean every other person less corrupt than him gets a pass. that's not how this works.Halifax2TheMax said:
Clinton also sat for a video taped deposition, of which his perjury charge emanated, for lying about consensual sex during an investigation that began with a failed land deal in Arkansas. Team Trump Treason potentially committed ten acts of obstruction of justice in providing written answers to questions provided by Team Mueller. Imagine Team Trump Treason’s perjury charges if he were to be deposed on camera. The current Ukraine impeachment centers around election interference, which is what the Team Mueller investigation centered around. Can’t even compare the two investigations, from the reason that initiated them, cooperation of witnesses and justice department involvement, to how they were conducted and the ultimate result (we’re still waiting on that piece but it ain’t gonna be the same).The Juggler said:
Wait....you think Clinton deserved to be removed from office?HughFreakingDillon said:
there has been innumerable reasons he should have been taken down by now. but the checks and balances just aren't there. to be honest, they have never been there. i was reading up on clinton's impeachment. he got off when he absolutely shouldn't have. almost all senators voted along party lines, not with non-partisan facts. he should have been removed easily. it's all a sham.mickeyrat said:HughFreakingDillon said:
this will amount to yet another nothing. unfortunately.mickeyrat said:maybe. but the phone records corroborate at least a portion of her story. lends credence to the rest.what I fail to understand is , is not just her but other women also continuing contact or pursuit of business or job opportunities with the same men who assualt them.
unfortunately, in today's climate, most women have no choice, they normalize it to themselves that this is just how it is, they feel as if they did something to deserve it, endless reasons.
Impeachment is about politics. Clinton was a popular president so he wasn't convicted in the senate. Nixon's popularity plunged after the tapes were released and he resigned to avoid embarrasment. Trump is historically unpopular, gotta see where his numbers are by the time this goes to the senate.
If it’s not being “compared,” then why did you bring up Clinton’s impeachment in the Team Trump Treason thread?
So I believe your original point about checks and balances never having been there is inherently flawed and just not true.www.myspace.com0 -
Are these your notes?Halifax2TheMax said:HughFreakingDillon said:
yes, I think trump should be removed.Halifax2TheMax said:
Yes, it is an "employability issue," and the boss, the American people, through their elected representatives in the Senate, refused to fire Clinton because they believed his lying under oath for the transgression didn't rise to a fireable offense. Employees in work places lie all the time during investigations, sometimes while they're on unpaid leave. The period of unpaid leave may be considered "punishment enough."HughFreakingDillon said:
I fully understand it's not a legal process. it seems to be a political/popularity issue, but it's not supposed to be. it's supposed to be an employability issue. and lying under oath is a very good reason to remove from office. you can sugar coat it all you want, it was just a separate finding from a different issue, it makes no difference. he lied under oath. you lie to your superiors, you are gone. that's it. if I get caught doing something by my work and I'm questioned about it, and I lie to them during questioning, I'm history.Halifax2TheMax said:
Except one was a real witch hunt and one is not. I don’t remember “sexual assault” being one of the articles of impeachment against Clinton. Regardless, impeachment is not a legal process, and as Juggler stated, it’s a political process, which ultimately means it’s a “popularity” contest. Lying about a sexual affair during an investigation that started out as an investigation of a land deal isn’t the same degree of perjury as lying about a quid pro quo to influence an election, not to compare. At least a majority of elected senators thought so.HughFreakingDillon said:
not everything is "being compared" to. trump is not the benchmark for every other incident in history. clinton lied under oath. full stop. just because trump is a corrupt and potentially treasonous POS doesn't mean every other person less corrupt than him gets a pass. that's not how this works.Halifax2TheMax said:The Juggler said:HughFreakingDillon said:mickeyrat said:HughFreakingDillon said:
this will amount to yet another nothing. unfortunately.mickeyrat said:maybe. but the phone records corroborate at least a portion of her story. lends credence to the rest.what I fail to understand is , is not just her but other women also continuing contact or pursuit of business or job opportunities with the same men who assualt them.
If it’s not being “compared,” then why did you bring up Clinton’s impeachment in the Team Trump Treason thread?
a VERY SLIM majority of elected senators thought so, only because the democrats controlled the senate. come on. seems like you're trying to paint this is as both parties came to a consensus that he was innocent. haha.
all I said was I was reading up on clinton's impeachment as I got interested in it after thinking about how all these idiots vote along party lines and not along what's right and wrong, so I looked up how each senator voted during clinton's trial. I wasn't comparing the wrong doings of either. only the process which is contained within both. not sure why anyone has to constantly defend subjects they bring up here to you, especially when it's relevant.
To the first bolded statement, maybe Clinton had a better defense attorney representing him during the senate trial? The job of the repubs, in this case, was to convince 67 senators to vote to remove from office as the punishment. Maybe the repub prosecutors sucked badly or Clinton's defense attorney was stellar in her defense. If you can find a video of her on the senate floor in her defense, I highly suggest that you watch. Not everything is as black and white as you'd like it to be, particularly with the law, or in this case, politics or popularity. And nice projection on your part regarding my thoughts on consensus, haha.
To the second bolded part, you stated that Clinton should have been removed easily. Do you think the same of Team Trump Trump Treason? Do you think the impeachment process is easy? And feel free to ignore having to "having to constantly defend subjects" to me. You control you, I don't.
no, I don't think the impeachment process is easy. it's long and drawn out as it should be. it shouldn't be a cake walk to impeach or remove a sitting president. when I said "easily", I didn't mean it literally as in on a whim. I meant easily as in "lied under oath, so it's a slam dunk to me" easily. I don't think everything is black and white. But I don't constantly give dems a pass just because the other side is worse.
And trump won't be removed because the elected representatives will refuse to fire trump as well. the majority of clinton's "bosses" were dems, and the majority of trump's "bosses" are republicans. obviously not a coincidence. that's what I meant about the process being a sham, and the only reason I mentioned clinton's impeachment. it was designed with the thought that senators would vote what's good for the country, not for their party. that doesn't happen. hasn't in a long time.Asterisks denote up for re-election. 11 vote to convict, need 9 of13 to join along. 20 of the repubs are up for re-election. Public hearings begin next week. Kentucky appears to have gone blue in a statewide election. Pressure is going to be immense. More details emerge from Roger Dodger Stoned trial and tax return case. The “system” is working as it should.
* had to delete posts to postwww.myspace.com0 -
I can neither confirm nor deny the provenance of the notes, taken, on what appears to be scrap paper. They may or may not have been found in an employee break room. Or just as likely, or not, on a commuter train or perhaps in an airport terminal. If I may, I’d like to consult with legal counsel?The Juggler said:
Are these your notes?Halifax2TheMax said:HughFreakingDillon said:
yes, I think trump should be removed.Halifax2TheMax said:
Yes, it is an "employability issue," and the boss, the American people, through their elected representatives in the Senate, refused to fire Clinton because they believed his lying under oath for the transgression didn't rise to a fireable offense. Employees in work places lie all the time during investigations, sometimes while they're on unpaid leave. The period of unpaid leave may be considered "punishment enough."HughFreakingDillon said:
I fully understand it's not a legal process. it seems to be a political/popularity issue, but it's not supposed to be. it's supposed to be an employability issue. and lying under oath is a very good reason to remove from office. you can sugar coat it all you want, it was just a separate finding from a different issue, it makes no difference. he lied under oath. you lie to your superiors, you are gone. that's it. if I get caught doing something by my work and I'm questioned about it, and I lie to them during questioning, I'm history.Halifax2TheMax said:
Except one was a real witch hunt and one is not. I don’t remember “sexual assault” being one of the articles of impeachment against Clinton. Regardless, impeachment is not a legal process, and as Juggler stated, it’s a political process, which ultimately means it’s a “popularity” contest. Lying about a sexual affair during an investigation that started out as an investigation of a land deal isn’t the same degree of perjury as lying about a quid pro quo to influence an election, not to compare. At least a majority of elected senators thought so.HughFreakingDillon said:
not everything is "being compared" to. trump is not the benchmark for every other incident in history. clinton lied under oath. full stop. just because trump is a corrupt and potentially treasonous POS doesn't mean every other person less corrupt than him gets a pass. that's not how this works.Halifax2TheMax said:The Juggler said:HughFreakingDillon said:mickeyrat said:HughFreakingDillon said:
this will amount to yet another nothing. unfortunately.mickeyrat said:maybe. but the phone records corroborate at least a portion of her story. lends credence to the rest.what I fail to understand is , is not just her but other women also continuing contact or pursuit of business or job opportunities with the same men who assualt them.
If it’s not being “compared,” then why did you bring up Clinton’s impeachment in the Team Trump Treason thread?
a VERY SLIM majority of elected senators thought so, only because the democrats controlled the senate. come on. seems like you're trying to paint this is as both parties came to a consensus that he was innocent. haha.
all I said was I was reading up on clinton's impeachment as I got interested in it after thinking about how all these idiots vote along party lines and not along what's right and wrong, so I looked up how each senator voted during clinton's trial. I wasn't comparing the wrong doings of either. only the process which is contained within both. not sure why anyone has to constantly defend subjects they bring up here to you, especially when it's relevant.
To the first bolded statement, maybe Clinton had a better defense attorney representing him during the senate trial? The job of the repubs, in this case, was to convince 67 senators to vote to remove from office as the punishment. Maybe the repub prosecutors sucked badly or Clinton's defense attorney was stellar in her defense. If you can find a video of her on the senate floor in her defense, I highly suggest that you watch. Not everything is as black and white as you'd like it to be, particularly with the law, or in this case, politics or popularity. And nice projection on your part regarding my thoughts on consensus, haha.
To the second bolded part, you stated that Clinton should have been removed easily. Do you think the same of Team Trump Trump Treason? Do you think the impeachment process is easy? And feel free to ignore having to "having to constantly defend subjects" to me. You control you, I don't.
no, I don't think the impeachment process is easy. it's long and drawn out as it should be. it shouldn't be a cake walk to impeach or remove a sitting president. when I said "easily", I didn't mean it literally as in on a whim. I meant easily as in "lied under oath, so it's a slam dunk to me" easily. I don't think everything is black and white. But I don't constantly give dems a pass just because the other side is worse.
And trump won't be removed because the elected representatives will refuse to fire trump as well. the majority of clinton's "bosses" were dems, and the majority of trump's "bosses" are republicans. obviously not a coincidence. that's what I meant about the process being a sham, and the only reason I mentioned clinton's impeachment. it was designed with the thought that senators would vote what's good for the country, not for their party. that doesn't happen. hasn't in a long time.Asterisks denote up for re-election. 11 vote to convict, need 9 of13 to join along. 20 of the repubs are up for re-election. Public hearings begin next week. Kentucky appears to have gone blue in a statewide election. Pressure is going to be immense. More details emerge from Roger Dodger Stoned trial and tax return case. The “system” is working as it should.
* had to delete posts to post09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
HughFreakingDillon said:
I fully understand it's not a legal process. it seems to be a political/popularity issue, but it's not supposed to be. it's supposed to be an employability issue. and lying under oath is a very good reason to remove from office. you can sugar coat it all you want, it was just a separate finding from a different issue, it makes no difference. he lied under oath. you lie to your superiors, you are gone. that's it. if I get caught doing something by my work and I'm questioned about it, and I lie to them during questioning, I'm history.Halifax2TheMax said:
Except one was a real witch hunt and one is not. I don’t remember “sexual assault” being one of the articles of impeachment against Clinton. Regardless, impeachment is not a legal process, and as Juggler stated, it’s a political process, which ultimately means it’s a “popularity” contest. Lying about a sexual affair during an investigation that started out as an investigation of a land deal isn’t the same degree of perjury as lying about a quid pro quo to influence an election, not to compare. At least a majority of elected senators thought so.HughFreakingDillon said:
not everything is "being compared" to. trump is not the benchmark for every other incident in history. clinton lied under oath. full stop. just because trump is a corrupt and potentially treasonous POS doesn't mean every other person less corrupt than him gets a pass. that's not how this works.Halifax2TheMax said:
Clinton also sat for a video taped deposition, of which his perjury charge emanated, for lying about consensual sex during an investigation that began with a failed land deal in Arkansas. Team Trump Treason potentially committed ten acts of obstruction of justice in providing written answers to questions provided by Team Mueller. Imagine Team Trump Treason’s perjury charges if he were to be deposed on camera. The current Ukraine impeachment centers around election interference, which is what the Team Mueller investigation centered around. Can’t even compare the two investigations, from the reason that initiated them, cooperation of witnesses and justice department involvement, to how they were conducted and the ultimate result (we’re still waiting on that piece but it ain’t gonna be the same).The Juggler said:
Wait....you think Clinton deserved to be removed from office?HughFreakingDillon said:
there has been innumerable reasons he should have been taken down by now. but the checks and balances just aren't there. to be honest, they have never been there. i was reading up on clinton's impeachment. he got off when he absolutely shouldn't have. almost all senators voted along party lines, not with non-partisan facts. he should have been removed easily. it's all a sham.mickeyrat said:HughFreakingDillon said:
this will amount to yet another nothing. unfortunately.mickeyrat said:maybe. but the phone records corroborate at least a portion of her story. lends credence to the rest.what I fail to understand is , is not just her but other women also continuing contact or pursuit of business or job opportunities with the same men who assualt them.
unfortunately, in today's climate, most women have no choice, they normalize it to themselves that this is just how it is, they feel as if they did something to deserve it, endless reasons.
Impeachment is about politics. Clinton was a popular president so he wasn't convicted in the senate. Nixon's popularity plunged after the tapes were released and he resigned to avoid embarrasment. Trump is historically unpopular, gotta see where his numbers are by the time this goes to the senate.
If it’s not being “compared,” then why did you bring up Clinton’s impeachment in the Team Trump Treason thread?
a VERY SLIM majority of elected senators thought so, only because the democrats controlled the senate. come on. seems like you're trying to paint this is as both parties came to a consensus that he was innocent. haha.
all I said was I was reading up on clinton's impeachment as I got interested in it after thinking about how all these idiots vote along party lines and not along what's right and wrong, so I looked up how each senator voted during clinton's trial. I wasn't comparing the wrong doings of either. only the process which is contained within both. not sure why anyone has to constantly defend subjects they bring up here to you, especially when it's relevant.
The POTUS is always under oath.0 -
let it fucking go already for fucks sake.The Juggler said:
But....the reason Nixon resigned was because REPUBLICAN congressmen went to him and told him he would be impeached and convicted in the senate. There is literally no way a president can be convicted in the senate without bipartisan support--unless one party, some day, gains control of 2/3's of the senate which will never happen.HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, we're just not understanding each other here. I KNOW A PRESIDENT CANNOT BE CHARGED WHILE IN OFFICE. I KNOW IT'S NOT A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING. When I stated it shouldn't be a political process, I suppose I should have said it shouldn't be a partisan process. but it is.The Juggler said:
Yes it is. Presidents can't be charged with crimes while in office so the founders gave this political process power to congress to hold the president accountable.HughFreakingDillon said:
I fully understand it's not a legal process. it seems to be a political/popularity issue, but it's not supposed to be.Halifax2TheMax said:
Except one was a real witch hunt and one is not. I don’t remember “sexual assault” being one of the articles of impeachment against Clinton. Regardless, impeachment is not a legal process, and as Juggler stated, it’s a political process, which ultimately means it’s a “popularity” contest. Lying about a sexual affair during an investigation that started out as an investigation of a land deal isn’t the same degree of perjury as lying about a quid pro quo to influence an election, not to compare. At least a majority of elected senators thought so.HughFreakingDillon said:
not everything is "being compared" to. trump is not the benchmark for every other incident in history. clinton lied under oath. full stop. just because trump is a corrupt and potentially treasonous POS doesn't mean every other person less corrupt than him gets a pass. that's not how this works.Halifax2TheMax said:
Clinton also sat for a video taped deposition, of which his perjury charge emanated, for lying about consensual sex during an investigation that began with a failed land deal in Arkansas. Team Trump Treason potentially committed ten acts of obstruction of justice in providing written answers to questions provided by Team Mueller. Imagine Team Trump Treason’s perjury charges if he were to be deposed on camera. The current Ukraine impeachment centers around election interference, which is what the Team Mueller investigation centered around. Can’t even compare the two investigations, from the reason that initiated them, cooperation of witnesses and justice department involvement, to how they were conducted and the ultimate result (we’re still waiting on that piece but it ain’t gonna be the same).The Juggler said:
Wait....you think Clinton deserved to be removed from office?HughFreakingDillon said:
there has been innumerable reasons he should have been taken down by now. but the checks and balances just aren't there. to be honest, they have never been there. i was reading up on clinton's impeachment. he got off when he absolutely shouldn't have. almost all senators voted along party lines, not with non-partisan facts. he should have been removed easily. it's all a sham.mickeyrat said:HughFreakingDillon said:
this will amount to yet another nothing. unfortunately.mickeyrat said:maybe. but the phone records corroborate at least a portion of her story. lends credence to the rest.what I fail to understand is , is not just her but other women also continuing contact or pursuit of business or job opportunities with the same men who assualt them.
unfortunately, in today's climate, most women have no choice, they normalize it to themselves that this is just how it is, they feel as if they did something to deserve it, endless reasons.
Impeachment is about politics. Clinton was a popular president so he wasn't convicted in the senate. Nixon's popularity plunged after the tapes were released and he resigned to avoid embarrasment. Trump is historically unpopular, gotta see where his numbers are by the time this goes to the senate.
If it’s not being “compared,” then why did you bring up Clinton’s impeachment in the Team Trump Treason thread?
So I believe your original point about checks and balances never having been there is inherently flawed and just not true.
_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
Doesn't seem like a good strategy to me.
Falling down,...not staying down0 -
heres the ONLY thing that matters as far as impeachment history goes. 2 trials have happened in the Senate. ZERO CONVICTIONS FOR REMOVAL.
_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
I've seen John Kennedy do a number of interviews and he always seems nice, reasonable, and pretty gregarious. But to your point about "souleater", Trump just corrupts everyone and brings out the worst in them. I would have never have guessed him to say something like this, but he does it at a Trump rally of course. It's really very sad.Kat said:Doesn't seem like a good strategy to me.0 -
You know, I got that tag from James Comey. He wrote an article a number of months ago and talked about how the soul-eater just eats the souls of those around him. He noticed it and I thought it was right...so that's the name he deserves. It's insane how people are afraid of him and allow themselves to be bullied by him. I really don't get it at all.So glad for VA, mrussel1.Added: I think it was this article but I can't access it now.
Post edited by Kat onFalling down,...not staying down0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help