I encourage everyone to remember that Trump is not an accomplished politician.Lol, no, he's a "businessman". Hopefully this gets rid of the boner Republicans have had for decades about getting a "businessman" into the office.
And being unqualified for the position you ran for is no excuse for not even attempting to do that job within the limits of the law.
I think calling him a businessman, is generous. He is a scamming New York real estate wheeler dealer, who has always skirted the law, using mostly inherited money, and probably no dearth of crooked money.
A real businessman of decent character, would probably do as well at POTUS as someone from most other occupations, as long as they are of decent character. But T rump is a man of despicable character.
They say that the office of Presidency reveals one’s true character. In T rump’s case, it is a seriously flawed, and hence, eventually dangerous, character. Giving the awesome power of the Presidency to a man who has used it to gain MORE and MORE power, with primary regard for himself above all else, was Americans’ biggest mistake in my lifetime. And Americans have made some big mistakes in my lifetime.
Mriana: “He was in bed with Putin when he stole the election from Hillary. The Electoral College was paid off to vote against the people (popular vote). … we do not have a democracy or a Republic”.
Wow, so we had a conspiracy between Putin and the Electoral College? Many people have accepted that at any minute we will find out that “the Russians are coming”. They aren’t; they never were. They are afraid of Germany, China and India. They lost a third of their population to Hitler in WW-II. They were our allies; we sent them all sorts of support. The “military industrial complex” that Ike warned us about in his farewell speech has used the USSR and now Russia as the bogeyman to get more taxpayer dollars.
Don’t look now, but we do not elect our President by popular vote. Never have. Its in the Constitution. Indeed we do not have a democracy; we have a representative Republic. That’s in the Constitution too. We elect representatives to do government, the same representatives that are trying to overturn the last election, contradicting their oath to uphold the Constitution. Check the history of how the Constitution was written. Our founding fathers, including Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton and others wrote - put their signatures on documents stating - that the masses are not fit to govern themselves. True then, true today. We use representatives in order to protect ourselves from ourselves.
In every election they don’t win the Dems pull out the popular vote and wave it like a flag. It is a straw man. It means nothing. They even went so far as to take it to the Supreme Court. They lost. One of Tom Steyer’s talking points is that he will work for a “national referendum”. This is political speak for overthrowing the Constitution and having officials elected by popular vote. Apparently, the majority of Dems aren’t quite that radical - yet.
I suspect if Trump is re-elected many more Dems will be moved to embrace the far left. If they do we will have a Republican elected in 2024. I believe in the 2016 election people voted against a continued swing towards socialism much more than they voted for Trump. Trump just happened to be the beneficiary of the anti-socialism vote. The majority of people in this country have the work ethic and they know socialism doesn’t work; given a chance, they will vote it down.
TimB: “If you tried to rob a bank, and were stopped, would they say, “no harm, no foul”?” … " this love of corruption is growing"
No, but you wouldn’t be charged with bank robbery, but attempted robbery.
I suspect the best way to track corruption is by the size of our national budget. More government, more corruption. Smaller government, less corruption. Ever heard “that government is best which governs least”? I believe it.
Sree: “We are talking about cockeyed crazy people and their points of view.”
Well, I think that may be a bit extreme. Some Dems I know are mostly reasonable people. Although I have found they don’t like to think about hard things too much. They just accept the party line and vote a straight ticket.
I’ll take two fingers of Glenlivet straight up, but I won’t turn down The Famous Grouse. I do not remember seeing Talisker in any store here. I will have to ask for it.
Bob, give it a rest. The dotard committed crimes right before your face, everyone’s face, and you are one of the minions who refuse to see them, thinking he’s a good guy, but in reality, he’s a wannabe dictator and we all know wannabes are very dangerous. Wannabes are more dangerous than the real thing, even for dictators, but you don’t care, you have your red hat, which can’t be spelled without hatred, hat red. He’s making the U.S. worse, but you have your hat red thinking MAGA, refusing to see the truth before your eyes.
Steyer’s talking points is that he will work for a “national referendum”. This is political speak for overthrowing the Constitution and having officials elected by popular vote.How to change the Constitution is also in the Constitution. Slavery is allowed in the original, but we amended it. Really Bob, this is so tiresome, claiming one thing based on the Constitution and ignoring the other.
Many people have accepted that at any minute we will find out that “the Russians are coming”. They aren’t; they never were.Another one of those amazing flips I've seen in my lifetime. The commie threat was used to justify Vietnam and other acts of US empiricism, on up through Ollie North funding right wing groups in Central America. Then, when there was a bipartisan effort to defeat Russia in Afghanistan, that actually worked, the threat narrative had to change.
But to say the Russians were never coming, is to simply ignore history, ignore the nuclear weapons that were and a few still are, pointed at us and ready to go. Plus, Kruschev’s threat to take us over without firing a shot. Thing is, Jane Fonda has apologized for sitting with communists on an anti-aircraft gun. But now people like Bob are ready to go back on our promise to protect Ukraine, because, well, it’s just Russia.
Bob, attempted robbery is a crime. Now to continue the metaphor, T rump is still trying to rob the bank, and no one can or will stop him. He is also continuing to commit the crime of obstructing investigation into his original crime. He is also continuing (with the audacity of a true criminal) to try to get his 1st crime to come to his wanted fruition, i.e., to defame Biden and son. He is trying to get his own trial to be a trial of Biden and son. T rump does not stop when he is allowed to get away with his wrongdoings. He just keeps breaking down the institutions of our govt.
Breaking down govt must be good within your stilted perspective. But corruption IS NOT caused by more govt. There are many examples of corruption benefitting from less govt. Corruption is caused by men of corrupt character. If those of poor character are in power, as is the case now, big time, then they will take advantage of less govt to increase their advantages and power.
Bob, there are people who call climate change a hoax. There are people who believe that evolution is no more valid than “intelligent design”. There are people who believe that Russia did nothing wrong in our last election. There are people who believe in T rump. And now there are beginning to be people who believe that corruption is a good thing. (That’s one of the craziest beliefs yet. I am sure it is becoming a popular belief now, because T rump, himself, is so corrupt, that the T rump lovers have to believe that corruption itself is to be desired. All of these people’s f#@%d up beliefs are a pox on reality.
And you bring up the fake boogeyman of “socialism”. T rump has arranged for many billions of tax dollars to go to farmers. Isn’t that socialism? Yet we are all ok with it, because the farmers have been screwed over by T rump’s tariffs (tariffs are taxes, btw).
I think calling him a businessman, is generous.It was in quotes. He's only rich because he was born rich. If you're born rich you have opportunities that most people do not. I remember an interview with Ivanka where she said that her father called her to the window, pointed out a homeless man and said, "That man is $8 billion richer than me." If we're $80 in debt for too long it goes on our credit report and we can't borrow money. But $8 BILLION in the hole and he still came back.
To be clear, though, he never made a dime of his own money. Everything he did was a massive flop because he doesn’t plan or learn or study. He has money today because he was able to borrow money to pay smarter people to make money for him.
In every election they don’t win the Dems pull out the popular vote and wave it like a flag. It is a straw man. It means nothing. They even went so far as to take it to the Supreme Court. They lost. One of Tom Steyer’s talking points is that he will work for a “national referendum”. This is political speak for overthrowing the Constitution and having officials elected by popular vote. Apparently, the majority of Dems aren’t quite that radical – yet.Isn't it easy to bitch about the other side whining about it when your side wins elections by losing them bigly?
Bob, the high crime of obstructing Congress, is an article of impeachment. T rump has committed unparalleled and more sweeping obstruction than even Nixon, during his impeachment. (MUCH more obstruction than Nixon.) T rump continues to obstruct throughout this impeachment, and this will help him to avoid any prosecution for his crime. Hence, he will have the power to obstruct justice for however long he retains the office. (And barring the Congress taking steps to get their constitutional power of executive oversight back, any other POTUS will also <b><i>be able </i></b>to obstruct justice, as long as he/she has 51 or more Senators in Congress.)
What Bob? How do we keep T rump from breaking ANY law that he wishes in order to insure he wins the next election? When the current Senate sham is done and the Trumpublicans in the Senate help him get off Scott-free, he will have free reign as DOTUS.
I caught the last few minutes of Schiff’s performance last night. He should get an Oscar. I can hardly wait to see how much money he, Pelosi and their helpers will make from the books which will be written and the films which will be made, not to mention the “gratuities” from interviews and speaking engagements. I wonder if the government could claim copyrights on the documents, testimonies, videos and speeches all made at taxpayer expense. If so, we might be able to pay off a big chunk of the national debt from the royalties.
Reason for the House not to go to court to get documents and witnesses was that it would take too long. Of course it is OK if it takes too long now. Shame on Trump for possibly using the courts to defend himself. He hasn’t yet, but he might. Pre-guilty in Schiff’s pre-buttal. New law needed: the President shall be the only person in the country not allowed to defend himself through the courts.
Abuse of power. Not defined, but we know it when we see it, just like porn - or art. When my guy does something I like it is wise “use of power” when your guy does something I don’t like it is obviously “abuse of power”. Just like “executive orders” eh, Mr. Obama?
I do hope the people of this country will come to their senses when we are past what I hope we will eventually call “the recent unpleasantness”. They say history repeats itself. Maybe. Rome’s transition from a republic to an empire began with constitutional “reforms” followed by a civil war and an assassination. Machiavelli warned against striking at the king without the power to kill him. I think it is very possible, and even somewhat probable, that this impeachment, whether it succeeds or fails, will spark another civil war; maybe not with guns and pikes, but with weapons even more powerful - pens and words.
Bob, all you just said made no sense. It sounds to me you are against justice and anything that demands it is nothing more than an act. If this is true, then that means you want a dictatorship to run this country, but you have no comprehension that that is what you are asking for. I also don’t understand how you see what President Obama did was abuse of powers, but don’t see how what the dotard has done and is doing is an abuse of power. Seems to me you have everything insanely backwards and don’t have a clue what abuse of power is.
When my guy does something I like it is wise “use of power” when your guy does something I don’t like it is obviously “abuse of power”.
If you like the guy, nothing he does is an abuse of power and if you don’t like the guy, everything he does is an abuse of power? Like I said, I don’t think you have a clue as to what “abuse of power” means. Either that or you are so racist that, in your mind, orange is the new white and white can’t do anything bad, but everything a black person does is all wrong. That makes absolutely no sense.
Like I said before you can’t see a criminal committing crimes before you face and the dotard has been committing many crimes in front of our faces. On the border are crimes against humanity, but that’s OK they’ll never come for you because you’re not Latino. With Russia and the Ukraine, he’s asking for them to help rig the election right in front of your face, but you refuse to see it because orange dude can’t do any wrong. None of that crap is a crime in your mind. Orange dude, in your opinion, is doing a great job by killing brown people and rigging the election. rolling eyes Nothing you’ve said makes one bit of sense and IMHO you should be ignored on this forum.
Mriana: :It sounds to me you are against justice".
It sounds to me you are out for revenge.
Mriana: “On the border are crimes”.
Yep, people entering the country illegally. Illegally, as in not legal, as in against the law, as in criminal. I am amazed that the Dems want and support illegal immigration - a criminal act. What are they after, more votes? Illegals can’t vote - legally. Maybe they don’t care if the votes aren’t legal as long as their guy wins. Do they want more people to sign up for gov’t programs? More people on the dole means more socialism? That might be it. Do they really want more people who believe in God? Do they know the illegals are 97% practicing Catholics? Don’t tell the secularists, they’ll help build the wall. Do they want more people with a strong work ethic - an ethic which opposes socialism? After all they come here to work don’t they? It seems to me that the anti-God secular socialist folks should be lobbying to stop illegal immigration across our southern border, unless they’re just looking for cheap laborers who are afraid to report abuses and bad working and housing conditions to the authorities. Bondage has many forms.
Mriana: “you’re not Latino”.
You don’t know that, and you’re wrong. If fact I have quite a mix of ethnic ancestors, including some from Mexico (who came in legally). Maybe that’s why I like tacos, burritos and flamenco music. Maybe my genes are why I like Scotch, but not Irish whiskey.
Bob, would you please fact check yourself before posting. Mexicans use welfare at a lower rate than US citizens. That’s just one error in your post.
No, Bob, I’m out for justice and following the Constitution, not having a dictator. Why does it matter if Latinos are Catholics? I don’t think you know what Secularism is, so please explore CFI, American Humanist Association, Americans United, and other secular sites to learn what secularism is. Also, it’s not worth going through the rest of your questions that don’t make any sense at all. I’m with Lausten, you need to go to factcheck.org and check your facts, because not only does what you’re saying makes no sense, but nothing you’ve been saying is even true.
Lausten: “Mexicans use welfare at a lower rate than US citizens.”
Of course the statistics will show that. Welfare is for citizens, no? Mexicans are not US citizens. Nice try.
Mriana: “I’m out for justice and following the Constitution”
So, you’re OK with the Electoral College picking the President?
Of course the statistics will show that. Welfare is for citizens, no? Mexicans are not US citizens. Nice try.I'm using "welfare" in the broad sense, meaning government services. The ones that you are claiming they use more of. So, if you think statistics support what I say, then what support do you have for what you say?
Mriana: “I’m out for justice and following the Constitution”
Bob: So, you’re OK with the Electoral College picking the President?
Maybe you haven’t noticed, but no one is shooting up churches or driving their cars into peaceful crowds because they don’t accept the results of the Electoral College. What is happening is people are being fact checked and are being held to standards of law that have recent as well as historically based precedent.
Let me ask you this. Do you believe that there are massive investments and large companies around the world who are using techniques that are tested and proven effective to influence the thoughts and actions of average people, i.e. the people who vote? Is that happening or not?