Impeach the MotherF%@KER!

[turtlespeed 220]

1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

Yes, those are indeed the right wing taking points. Maybe think for yourself next time?

The hatred is strong in you.

[nigel99 466]

5 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

The only reason the Ds are doing this is because they cannot beat him in an election.

This is their Hail Mary.

You have to see this.

It’s pretty sad to be honest. I used to think that you were right wing, but relatively open minded. 

It’s becoming more and more apparent that you aren’t. Or you are becoming more ‘Trumpian’ and being won over by the propaganda machine.

The President should be a person of moral character, dependable and of outstanding repute. He/She is THE face of a country and represents that countries values. Trump is a sad indictment of American values. Should he be re-elected America will lose all credibility as a nation to be respected.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

8 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

 

1. For using tax payer money to try and blackmail a foreign government into providing personal gain.

 

You are forgetting (or ignoring) the "obstruction of Congress" charge.

Trump has ignored legal Congressional subpoenas. He has directed his staff to do the same. 

That is a crime. 

Since the Justice Department has decided that a sitting President cannot be indicted, the only recourse is impeachment. 

The idea that any American is 'above the law' is abhorrent. The idea that Trump is 'immune from prosecution' is disgusting. 

Yet Trump has claimed just that. 

And historically, he has done just that. Sexual assault, tax evasion, fraud of various sorts. 
As a private citizen, that's really wrong, but not really damaging to the country.

For an elected official to be beyond reach of the law, to be immune from prosecution is. It puts us in the 'banana republic' class, where certain people are not held to the same standards as others. 

The funniest part about it is that this is exactly what the Alt-Right was claiming Obama was going to do. 

[wmw999 2,439]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

I do NOT know that, in fact I strongly disagree.  They may have censured him, but that is as far as it would have gotten.  At least I hope it would have been.

Given that they impeached Clinton over what really seems like less, and made a point of blocking Obama as much as possible, I disagree. Had they been able to find anything they could have impeached over I’m sure it would have been seen as a coup. 

Wendy P. 

[nigel99 466]

44 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Given that they impeached Clinton over what really seems like less, and made a point of blocking Obama as much as possible, I disagree. Had they been able to find anything they could have impeached over I’m sure it would have been seen as a coup. 

Wendy P. 

I am curious to see how things go for Trump. My understanding is that historically a large part of his base were evangelicals, and today’s news has their main magazine (Christianity today) saying he should be removed. 

Personal experience of evangelicals in my family is that the pastor is ‘god’ and they will ignore the law, morality and ethics to follow the pastors bidding - we have a couple of resident posters here who follow those same behaviours

[jakee 1,489]

7 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

I do NOT know that, in fact I strongly disagree.  They may have censured him, but that is as far as it would have gotten.  At least I hope it would have been.

So Turtle - everytime it’s pointed out that the Republicans have done something partisan or devious you say the Dems would have done the exact same thing. You ask why people can’t see that and call them naive for thinking both parties aren’t exactly the same. Every. Single. Time.

 

Now this one time you think the Dems are being partisan and devious you can’t believe the Reps would have done the same thing, despite their constant hyper-partisan behaviour and their numerous public statements that they will always put party loyalty above their public duty. 

 

Explain your position.

 

”I am willing to be able to look at it from almost an impartial point of view.  You can believe that or not.”

 

Err, right. See above.

Edited December 20, 2019 by jakee

[Stumpy 284]

13 hours ago, nigel99 said:

Should he be re-elected America will lose all credibility as a nation to be respected.

At this point, that ship has already sailed, as evidenced by other leaders attitude to him.

[Stumpy 284]

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html

 

Maybe there is hope for Christianity after all.

[ryoder 1,590]

3 minutes ago, Stumpy said:

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html

 

Maybe there is hope for Christianity after all.

I just heard this interview on NPR.

Nice to see some evangelicals opening their eyes to reality.

https://www.npr.org/2019/12/20/790077791/christianity-todays-editor-in-chief-on-calling-for-trumps-removal

[Coreece 190]

49 minutes ago, ryoder said:

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html

Interesting morning:

8:00 am - DJL and I were having a conversation about poker in one thread where I mentioned player tracking software.

8:30 am - Ron in another thread started talking about Game Theory and Stealth Bombers.

9:00 am - I check my email.  At 3am (before the above took place) I was sent a tip about the necessity of poker tracking software basically warning against using a sword and shield when your opponent has just constructed a stealth bomber.

10:00 am - Stumpy posts this link from Christianity Today that talks about a political poker game and it all crashing down when it's time to go all-in.

Edited December 20, 2019 by Coreece

[gowlerk 2,190]

2 hours ago, Stumpy said:

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html

 

Maybe there is hope for Christianity after all.

Please note, the guy who wrote the editorial is retiring at the end of this year. Nothing to lose. I heard him interviewed this morning.

[normiss 798]

2 hours ago, Coreece said:

Interesting morning:

8:00 am - DJL and I were having a conversation about poker in one thread where I mentioned player tracking software.

8:30 am - Ron in another thread started talking about Game Theory and Stealth Bombers.

9:00 am - I check my email.  At 3am (before the above took place) I was sent a tip about the necessity of poker tracking software basically warning against using a sword and shield when your opponent has just constructed a stealth bomber.

10:00 am - Stumpy posts this link from Christianity Today that talks about a political poker game and it all crashing down when it's time to go all-in.

Wake up Neo. The Matrix has you. Follow the white rabbit.

[jakee 1,489]

27 minutes ago, normiss said:

Wake up Neo. The Matrix has you. Follow the white rabbit.

To be fair though, still the best evidence I’ve seen for Q being real

[JerryBaumchen 1,357]

3 hours ago, gowlerk said:

Nothing to lose. 

Hi Ken,

Nothing for him to lose but Trump seems to be coming unglued.

' . . . Donald Trump on Friday lashed out after the country’s top evangelical Christian magazine . . . '

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/20/trump-attacks-christian-magazine-impeachment-088591

Jerry Baumchen

 

[turtlespeed 220]

On 12/19/2019 at 7:03 PM, nigel99 said:

It’s pretty sad to be honest. I used to think that you were right wing, but relatively open minded. 

It’s becoming more and more apparent that you aren’t. Or you are becoming more ‘Trumpian’ and being won over by the propaganda machine.

The President should be a person of moral character, dependable and of outstanding repute. He/She is THE face of a country and represents that countries values. Trump is a sad indictment of American values. Should he be re-elected America will lose all credibility as a nation to be respected.

I don't disagree with Most of that.

He is not the best face - its cringe worthy.  But because you are an overtweeting asshole, doing what everyone before you has done shuldn't be reason enough to be brought into court.

IF - everyone thinks he is doing so bad a job, let the election speak for them.

What would it take to make America gain credibility that has been lost?  Become a more socialist nation?

Hmmmm.  I wonder why that would be?

[turtlespeed 220]

On 12/19/2019 at 7:49 PM, wmw999 said:

Given that they impeached Clinton over what really seems like less, and made a point of blocking Obama as much as possible, I disagree. Had they been able to find anything they could have impeached over I’m sure it would have been seen as a coup. 

Wendy P. 

Yeah - in retrospect, I have to agree with that.

How do we fix that?

It's obvious that nothing, really, is beyond either side if their ire is steeped long enough.

Whats the fix?

[headoverheels 333]

4 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

But because you are an overtweeting asshole, doing what everyone before you has done shuldn't be reason enough to be brought into court.

I agree, but that is not what he has done that he is being charged with.

 

[jakee 1,489]

4 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

He is not the best face - its cringe worthy.  But because you are an overtweeting asshole, doing what everyone before you has done shuldn't be reason enough to be brought into court.

IF - everyone thinks he is doing so bad a job, let the election speak for them.

He's not being impeached for that. He's being impeached for abusing the power of the office for personal gain. Effectively, he's been caught trying to cheat in the next election. So sure, obviously the answer is to do nothing and let the election play out. The election in which we know he's trying to cheat. Great!

[jakee 1,489]

4 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Yeah - in retrospect, I have to agree with that.

How do we fix that?

It's obvious that nothing, really, is beyond either side if their ire is steeped long enough.

Whats the fix?

There you go again. When you think you can claim the democrats are doing something bad, you say they’re worse than the Republicans. When it’s pointed out (and you agree) that the Republicans did something worse you’re back to saying they’re both equally bad.

 

Why do you have so much hatred for the Dems?

[turtlespeed 220]

4 hours ago, jakee said:

There you go again. When you think you can claim the democrats are doing something bad, you say they’re worse than the Republicans. When it’s pointed out (and you agree) that the Republicans did something worse you’re back to saying they’re both equally bad.

 

Why do you have so much hatred for the Dems?

Simply put, I don't HATE the democrats, I disagree with some of the things they do, and stand for.  Mostly because they generally take a situation and blow up to 100 times the actual size of the issue for dramatic effect.

[jakee 1,489]

25 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Simply put, I don't HATE the democrats, I disagree with some of the things they do, and stand for.  

Cool. But how come you seem to be incapable of understanding that this applies to other people as well? Be honest - how many times have you used the words hate or hatred this last week alone? 

 

“Mostly because they generally take a situation and blow up to 100 times the actual size of the issue for dramatic effect.”

 

But again, you don’t just blame them for that. You blame them for all the things the Republicans have done too - simply because you assume they’d do them too. But as evidenced above - never the other way around. You do see just how biased you still are, right?

[gowlerk 2,190]

1 hour ago, jakee said:

“Mostly because they generally take a situation and blow up to 100 times the actual size of the issue for dramatic effect.”

You are now exaggerating. Using the phrase "100 times the actual size" even though it is false. You did it for dramatic effect.

[jakee 1,489]

3 hours ago, gowlerk said:

You are now exaggerating. Using the phrase "100 times the actual size" even though it is false. You did it for dramatic effect.

I in fact did not exaggerate that Turtle said that 

[gowlerk 2,190]

9 minutes ago, jakee said:

I in fact did not exaggerate that Turtle said that 

Yes, I know I was quoting him and directing the comment at him. I dislike the new quote system here and sometimes make this error.

[jakee 1,489]

48 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Yes, I know I was quoting him and directing the comment at him. I dislike the new quote system here and sometimes make this error.

It suuuuuuucks!