Impeach Trump

[Back]

Is there enough evidence of obstruction to impeach Trump? Is his continual stonewalling of Congress an impeachable offense? Is he just a very private person or is he hiding something?

[Tgo01]

Is there enough evidence of obstruction to impeach Trump? Is his continual stonewalling of Congress an impeachable offense? Is he just a very private person or is he hiding something?

Enough evidence to impeach? No.

Is he stonewalling? No.

As for your last question; seems like a "need to know" situation to me.

It's funny because you guys defended Obama's birth certificate thing tooth and nail, something that actually is actually important to the discussion because citizenship sure as shit is mentioned in the constitution for president. But when it comes to Democrats snooping around Trump's personal life and his business dealing (none of which has anything to do with anything) you guys defend Democrats and insist Trump is doing something wrong.

This should frighten any decent American; an established political party in congress is out there LOOKING for a crime they can pin on Trump. That's not how justice is supposed to work. You're supposed to see evidence of a crime or have a strong reason to believe someone has committed a crime then investigate said crime to uncover facts.

What the Democrats are doing is picking a target, in this case Trump, and saying "Okay let's just investigate everything until we uncover a crime." That's not justice, that's actual dictator type shit, you know, the thing you guys supposedly hate and call Trump.

[Parkbandit]

Enough evidence to impeach? No.

Is he stonewalling? No.

As for your last question; seems like a "need to know" situation to me.

It's funny because you guys defended Obama's birth certificate thing tooth and nail, something that actually is actually important to the discussion because citizenship sure as shit is mentioned in the constitution for president. But when it comes to Democrats snooping around Trump's personal life and his business dealing (none of which has anything to do with anything) you guys defend Democrats and insist Trump is doing something wrong.

This should frighten any decent American; an established political party in congress is out there LOOKING for a crime they can pin on Trump. That's not how justice is supposed to work. You're supposed to see evidence of a crime or have a strong reason to believe someone has committed a crime then investigate said crime to uncover facts.

What the Democrats are doing is picking a target, in this case Trump, and saying "Okay let's just investigate everything until we uncover a crime." That's not justice, that's actual dictator type shit, you know, the thing you guys supposedly hate and call Trump.

It's worse than that. This started in late 2015/early 2016 when the Obama Administration was actively spying on the opposing political party's candidate. When people in the upper echelon of the FBI/CIA/JD were doing political favors to who they believed was the next President of the United States and actively working to come up with dirt in case the unthinkable happened and the wrong candidate won.

[Tgo01]

It's worse than that. This started in late 2015/early 2016 when the Obama Administration was actively spying on the opposing political party's candidate. When people in the upper echelon of the FBI/CIA/JD were doing political favors to who they believed was the next President of the United States and actively working to come up with dirt in case the unthinkable happened and the wrong candidate won.

Yeah but Trump won't release his tax returns, truly the real evil here.

[Gelston]

I'd like them to try.

[Tgo01]

I'd like them to try.

I actually wish the Democrats would try to impeachment Trump. First of all it would settle this shit once and for all. Also we can get every Democrat in the House on record as to where they stand before we go into the 2020 elections.

But of course Democrats don't really want to impeach Trump because once it fails in the Senate (shit maybe even in the House if enough Democrats not in solidly blue districts realize what a shitshow this will be if they vote to impeach) it means they have literally nothing to campaign on against Trump in 2020. Right now literally all they have is shouting "Impeach Trump."

Well that and free abortions on demand, but the left has become so radicalized on this topic lately that they are just preaching to the choir at this point.

[Stanley Burrell]

Is there enough evidence of obstruction to impeach Trump? Is his continual stonewalling of Congress an impeachable offense? Is he just a very private person or is he hiding something?

I say F this, because Pence is like GWB's Born-again'ness on the crack/cocaine. Then "God" will just be like, "Halliburton."

Greatest post ever.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I say F this, because Pence is like GWB's Born-again'ness on the crack/cocaine. Then "God" will just be like, "Halliburton."

Greatest post ever.

But what about hating on the orange man? I laugh when people say impeach him. Pence is his best defense.

[Back]

I'm leaning towards NOT impeaching for several reasons.

The "blue wave" of 2018 is still building and should be a "blue tsunami" by 2020. It would be immensely satisfying to see Trump absolutely decimated at the polls.

While Pence may conduct himself in a more presidential fashion his archaic and primitive religious views do not align with the modern enlightened world. I would not want him making any presidential decisions. Still, should Trump be impeached, Pence would only be in office for less than a year so in that sense it isn't as bad as a petty dictator Trump full term.

The impeachment process is really agonizing and divisive. I think we don't need that kind of bullshit right now. I remember Clinton's impeachment and that was horrible for us as a country.

Trump's greatest accomplishment so far has been to undo things Obama did. When he is defeated in 2020 he can go back to being a reality TV star, write another book, and we can close the door on this awful chapter of American history.

[Ashlander]

https://media.giphy.com/media/3Xql95nByimPu/giphy.gif

Here have some digital blackface

[Parkbandit]

I'm leaning towards NOT impeaching for several reasons.

The "blue wave" of 2018 is still building and should be a "blue tsunami" by 2020. It would be immensely satisfying to see Trump absolutely decimated at the polls.

While Pence may conduct himself in a more presidential fashion his archaic and primitive religious views do not align with the modern enlightened world. I would not want him making any presidential decisions. Still, should Trump be impeached, Pence would only be in office for less than a year so in that sense it isn't as bad as a petty dictator Trump full term.

The impeachment process is really agonizing and divisive. I think we don't need that kind of bullshit right now. I remember Clinton's impeachment and that was horrible for us as a country.

Trump's greatest accomplishment so far has been to undo things Obama did. When he is defeated in 2020 he can go back to being a reality TV star, write another book, and we can close the door on this awful chapter of American history.

Problem with your "thought process": What happens if the House reverts back to Republicans, Trump wins the election and Republicans hold the Senate?

Do you really want to take that type of chance? It'll be 2016 all over again.. and you know how upset you were then.

Please, re"think" your position. Don't do it for me.. do it for your country.

[Stumplicker]

I'm leaning towards NOT impeaching for several reasons.

The "blue wave" of 2018 is still building and should be a "blue tsunami" by 2020. It would be immensely satisfying to see Trump absolutely decimated at the polls.

While Pence may conduct himself in a more presidential fashion his archaic and primitive religious views do not align with the modern enlightened world. I would not want him making any presidential decisions. Still, should Trump be impeached, Pence would only be in office for less than a year so in that sense it isn't as bad as a petty dictator Trump full term.

The impeachment process is really agonizing and divisive. I think we don't need that kind of bullshit right now. I remember Clinton's impeachment and that was horrible for us as a country.

Trump's greatest accomplishment so far has been to undo things Obama did. When he is defeated in 2020 he can go back to being a reality TV star, write another book, and we can close the door on this awful chapter of American history.

I think the one and only takeaway here should be that the public school system is failing our children greatly and is in desperate need of an overhaul.

[Parkbandit]

I think the one and only takeaway here should be that the public school system is failing our children greatly and is in desperate need of an overhaul.

Backlash gives off the stink of being home schooled though.

[Methais]

Is there enough evidence of obstruction to impeach Trump? Is his continual stonewalling of Congress an impeachable offense? Is he just a very private person or is he hiding something?

Shut the fuck up you fucking retard. :lol:

[Methais]

While Pence may conduct himself in a more presidential fashion his archaic and primitive religious views do not align with the modern enlightened world.

Coming from the tard from the tard party who embraces Islam and in some cases outright Sharia Law. :lol:


Trump's greatest accomplishment so far has been to undo things Obama did.

Even if that was the case, even if that's the only thing Trump did at all, that's still pretty fantastic.

[Alfster]

There's more than enough evidence to start the impeachment process, for obstruction of Justice. Do I think obstruction is worth removing a president? No.

Oversight committees routinely run investigations, so I don't see anything wrong with what they are doing. They were created for checks and balances. Obama was investigated by Republicans for loans that were defaulted, potential bias at the IRS, Benghazi, selling of guns, his birth certificate, and the rollout of the affordable Care act website. These same oversight committees are looking at Trump's finances through a lense of national security, which I do agree with. If you owe money to people, you're easier to influence...so it makes sense to dig into it.

Different types of investigations, but they do have a legitimate purpose. Much like it was a big deal to make sure Obama was a U.S. citizen, Trump's finances are a real threat. Plus, there's plenty of public information available that Trump is using the office to gain wealth through his businesses which is a problem for anyone in office excpet for the president apparently.

[Parkbandit]

There's more than enough evidence to start the impeachment process, for obstruction of Justice. Do I think obstruction is worth removing a president? No.

No there's not.


Oversight committees routinely run investigations, so I don't see anything wrong with what they are doing. They were created for checks and balances. Obama was investigated by Republicans for loans that were defaulted, potential bias at the IRS, Benghazi, selling of guns, his birth certificate, and the rollout of the affordable Care act website. These same oversight committees are looking at Trump's finances through a lense of national security, which I do agree with. If you owe money to people, you're easier to influence...so it makes sense to dig into it.

Different types of investigations, but they do have a legitimate purpose. Much like it was a big deal to make sure Obama was a U.S. citizen, Trump's finances are a real threat. Plus, there's plenty of public information available that Trump is using the office to gain wealth through his businesses which is a problem for anyone in office excpet for the president apparently.

You've been so vocal about Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Dick Durbin and John Kerry getting rich off questionable earmarks and inside trading... at least you've been consistent on this issue over the years.


https://media.giphy.com/media/V5NKqVALaArXG/giphy.gif

[Alfster]

No there's not.



You've been so vocal about Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Dick Durbin and John Kerry getting rich off questionable earmarks and inside trading... at least you've been consistent on this issue over the years.


https://media.giphy.com/media/V5NKqVALaArXG/giphy.gif

Sure is. Impeachment is a political tool. Removing him from office would require more than what's out there, but there sure is plenty of evidence to start the process if they wanted to.

As for those on insider trading, I'm not familiar with what they've done. I'd agree with an investigation into them too. I personally view that the same as giving kickbacks to your own business.

[BriarFox]

As much as I would love to see Trump impeached for general incompetence and attempts to obstruct justice, the only way impeachment would go anywhere is if several Republican senators flipped against Trump. The only way that's likely to happen is if something totally damning comes to light. So far, none of his self-serving interactions with Russia or his attempts to obstruct justice (which didn't go anywhere because people ignored him) seem to be enough to convince any senators to flip.

[sellstuff1]

Coming from the tard from the tard party who embraces Islam and in some cases outright Sharia Law. :lol:

I see your vast ignorance of politics extends well past our own borders, retard.

https://i.imgur.com/GiTqTtA.jpg

[sellstuff1]

Even Fox News admits that Mueller's investigation's results directly contradict Trump Administration's view on obstruction of justice.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=4kucJhCJvBM

So what does that say about the posters here? They can't admit they were wrong, they still adamantly hold to their belief that Trump Can Do No Wrong and Mueller cleared Trump of wrongdoing, despite Mueller's report AND Mueller's public statements before he resigned.

The posters here are off the deep end, now just relegated to alt-right brainwashed cretins. Impeachment is coming after Mueller's statement.

[Methais]

Even Fox News admits that Mueller's investigation's results directly contradict Trump Administration's view on obstruction of justice.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=4kucJhCJvBM

So what does that say about the posters here? They can't admit they were wrong, they still adamantly hold to their belief that Trump Can Do No Wrong and Mueller cleared Trump of wrongdoing, despite Mueller's report AND Mueller's public statements before he resigned.

The posters here are off the deep end, now just relegated to alt-right brainwashed cretins. Impeachment is coming after Mueller's statement.

Wait I thought Fox News was fake news and can't be trusted? Are they trustworthy today because their most left leaning anchor said something you agree with?


Impeachment is coming after Mueller's statement.

https://media.giphy.com/media/L8XuphFGqlSfe/giphy.gif

[sellstuff1]

Nevermind Methais' opinion on Trump's impeachment, or Mueller's statement. He's here to score some more "owned lib" points. Take those to the bank in 2020 for John Bolton's platform run on "complete annihilation of Iran".

[Parkbandit]

Impeachment is coming after Mueller's statement.

Do you know what Impeachment entails? Explain the process to us.

Then neck yourself because you're dumber than Briarfox, who actually was right in a political thread for once.

[sellstuff1]

Do you know what Impeachment entails? Explain the process to us.

Then neck yourself because you're dumber than Briarfox, who actually was right in a political thread for once.

Well if I remember correctly, it's an entire nation of conservative snowflakes getting triggered that the president got his dick sucked to start the process.

[Parkbandit]

Sure is. Impeachment is a political tool. Removing him from office would require more than what's out there, but there sure is plenty of evidence to start the process if they wanted to.

It's political.. so you don't actually need evidence. Just "ZOMG I STILL HATE ORANGE MAN!!!" has been enough since 2016 to investigate him....


As for those on insider trading, I'm not familiar with what they've done. I'd agree with an investigation into them too. I personally view that the same as giving kickbacks to your own business.

The information is out there if you really cared. And they are just the tip of the shitberg.

[Parkbandit]

Well if I remember correctly, it's an entire nation of conservative snowflakes getting triggered that the president got his dick sucked to start the process.

So, you didn't remember correctly.

I'm shocked.

But seriously... explain the Impeachment process and tell us why it won't happen.

We'll wait.

[sellstuff1]

So, you didn't remember correctly.

I'm shocked.

But seriously... explain the Impeachment process and tell us why it won't happen.

We'll wait.

Ask your son, he'll be glad to explain what you missed out while you were huffing glue during your high-school civics class.

[sellstuff1]

It's political.. so you don't actually need evidence. Just "ZOMG I STILL HATE ORANGE MAN!!!" has been enough since 2016 to investigate him....



The information is out there if you really cared. And they are just the tip of the shitberg.

"Do your own research because I'm too lazy to find sources for the baseless accusations I've just laid out" is a pretty tired alt-right tactic. You should try something new - maybe you can call your son to ask him what the latest tactics to own libs are?

[Parkbandit]

"Do your own research because I'm too lazy to find sources for the baseless accusations I've just laid out" is a pretty tired alt-right tactic. You should try something new - maybe you can call your son to ask him what the latest tactics to own libs are?

What? I already know what it takes to Impeach a President. You are the one calling for it when the GOP holds a majority in the Senate and it'll never go anywhere.

Also, I don't have a son.. unless you know something I don't...

PLEASE TELL ME YOU AREN'T MY SON FROM BANGING SOME UGLY CHICK WHEN I WAS DRUNK IN COLLEGE!?!

[sellstuff1]

What? I already know what it takes to Impeach a President. You are the one calling for it when the GOP holds a majority in the Senate and it'll never go anywhere.

Also, I don't have a son.. unless you know something I don't...

PLEASE TELL ME YOU AREN'T MY SON FROM BANGING SOME UGLY CHICK WHEN I WAS DRUNK IN COLLEGE!?!

So you think that after Mueller came out and straight-up said that Trump obstructed justice *and* that today, Trump admitted via tweet that Russia helped him win the election, that his impeachment won't get past the senate? Are you proud of the fact that your legislators will ignore the rule of law when it comes to the executive branch?

[Gelston]

He didnt say he obstructed justice. He said there wasn't enough evidence to prove he did. The burden of proof is in the Government and you're innocent until proven guilty. Not enough evidence = not guilty.

[Methais]

Nevermind Methais' opinion on Trump's impeachment, or Mueller's statement. He's here to score some more "owned lib" points. Take those to the bank in 2020 for John Bolton's platform run on "complete annihilation of Iran".

I'm really just here to watch your ongoing meltdowns because it never gets old despite how sad and pathetic you are.

I got 1m silvers that says this lasts until at least Sunday afternoon.

[sellstuff1]

He didnt say he obstructed justice. He said there wasn't enough evidence to prove he did. The burden of proof is in the Government and you're innocent until proven guilty. Not enough evidence = not guilty.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpi-QNCk1uM

I understand that your ability to read between the lines is non-existant, but you're not this stupid. Mueller found evidence of obstruction on several counts in his report that you didn't read because of your crippling illiteracy, but he can't determine obstruction based on the 1970's DOJ memo that prevents him from indicting a sitting president. Congress must impeach at this point or they're betraying their constituents.

[Back]

Shut the fuck up you fucking retard. :lol:


I missed something where we cannot have rational discourse on political positions.

https://media.tenor.com/images/c787c2240ba0ceeb3b5746b2b4b6eb53/tenor.gif

[sellstuff1]

I'm really just here to watch your ongoing meltdowns because it never gets old despite how sad and pathetic you are.

I got 1m silvers that says this lasts until at least Sunday afternoon.

It's funny because I get to live rent-free in your head. You're just obsessed with me and you can't help it.

[Methais]

https://media.tenor.com/images/c787c2240ba0ceeb3b5746b2b4b6eb53/tenor.gif

How do you expect to be taken seriously about this without a one sentence statement about it in your sig?

https://media.tenor.com/images/c787c2240ba0ceeb3b5746b2b4b6eb53/tenor.gif

[Methais]

It's funny because I get to live rent-free in your head. You're just obsessed with me and you can't help it.

The only times I remember you even exist is when you're having these entertaining meltdowns spamming like 47832940273 pages of massively triggered rage posts and probably spraying saliva all over your monitor in your camper that's really only intended for camping and not as permanent living quarters.

When that's not happening, I literally forget you exist.

[sellstuff1]

The only times I remember you even exist is when you're having these entertaining meltdowns spamming like 47832940273 pages of massively triggered rage posts and probably spraying saliva all over your monitor in your camper that's really only intended for camping and not as permanent living quarters.

When that's not happening, I literally forget you exist.

That's why you've posted about me, using my name in threads I haven't posted in, right? Look the little stalker's bashful!

[Methais]

That's why you've posted about me, using my name in threads I haven't posted in, right? Look the little stalker's bashful!

Ah yes, thank you for reminding me that you're always in the conversation when we're talking about the PC's most unhinged and retarded posters.

Also:


sellstuff1: Join Date Jan 2018

Please stop stalking me.

Confirmed sellstuff is the offspring of pk and cwolff.

[sellstuff1]

Ah yes, thank you for reminding me that you're always in the conversation when we're talking about the PC's most unhinged and retarded posters.

Also:



Please stop stalking me.

Confirmed sellstuff is the offspring of pk and cwolff.

Rent-free, like I said. Who's dancing for who?

[Methais]

Rent-free, like I said. Who's dancing for who?

Considering that you're the one doing the entertaining and the rest of us are the ones being entertained, the answer is clear that you're dancing for us.

At least for another 45 minutes, in which case I'll be leaving work and closing this window and will instantly forget that you exist until I see you having another meltdown whenever I log back in tomorrow.

But keep telling yourself whatever it is you need to tell yourself to help make those suicidal thoughts go away.

[sellstuff1]

Considering that you're the one doing the entertaining and the rest of us are the ones being entertained, the answer is clear that you're dancing for us.

At least for another 45 minutes, in which case I'll be leaving work and closing this window and will instantly forget that you exist until I see you having another meltdown whenever I log back in tomorrow.

But keep telling yourself whatever it is you need to tell yourself to help make those suicidal thoughts go away.

Funny how you instantly forget me just long enough to post about me in other threads constantly.

[Methais]

Funny how you instantly forget me just long enough to post about me in other threads constantly.

Am I somehow doing this while I'm not logged onto the PC?

It's hard to forget you exist when I'm actively logged on, since when you're having your meltdowns, which is quite often, it's accompanied by like 500 posts in a row from you.

Once I'm not logged on, you cease to exist until I log back on and see you having more meltdowns.

Please let me know which parts you're having trouble understanding.

And please show us how mad you are while you're at it.

[Neveragain]

While Pence may conduct himself in a more presidential fashion his archaic and primitive religious views do not align with the modern enlightened world.


84 percent of the world population has faith; a third are Christian


“Worldwide, more than eight-in-ten people identify with a religious group,” says a new comprehensive demographic study of more than 230 countries and territories conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life.

Back = fake news.

P.S. The modern enlightened world stopped sacrificing innocent children centuries ago. There's a reason that song and story often use the terminology "to kill the child in the womb" to represent the most egregious of human acts.

[Alfster]

He didnt say he obstructed justice. He said there wasn't enough evidence to prove he did. The burden of proof is in the Government and you're innocent until proven guilty. Not enough evidence = not guilty.

Nah. That's not what he said. He stated it would be unconstitutional for them to accuse the president of a crime. Heres his quote.

We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime. The introduction to volume two of our report explains that decision.
It explains that under long-standing Department policy, a President cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view—that too is prohibited.
The Special Counsel’s Office is part of the Department of Justice and, by regulation, it was bound by that Department policy. Charging the President with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider.
The Department’s written opinion explaining the policy against charging a President makes several important points that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation. Those points are summarized in our report. And I will describe two of them:
First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting President because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents are available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could now be charged.
And second, the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting President of wrongdoing.

[Tgo01]

Nah. That's not what he said. He stated it would be unconstitutional for them to accuse the president of a crime. Heres his quote.

We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime. The introduction to volume two of our report explains that decision.
It explains that under long-standing Department policy, a President cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view—that too is prohibited.
The Special Counsel’s Office is part of the Department of Justice and, by regulation, it was bound by that Department policy. Charging the President with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider.
The Department’s written opinion explaining the policy against charging a President makes several important points that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation. Those points are summarized in our report. And I will describe two of them:
First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting President because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents are available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could now be charged.
And second, the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting President of wrongdoing.

He stated charging the president with a crime was not an option. He could have said the evidence was there, but that regulations prevented him from bringing charges. But he didn't say that, hence sellstuff1's claim that "Mueller came out and straight-up said that Trump obstructed justice" is complete horseshit.

[Gelston]

Nah. That's not what he said. He stated it would be unconstitutional for them to accuse the president of a crime. Heres his quote.

We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime. The introduction to volume two of our report explains that decision.
It explains that under long-standing Department policy, a President cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view—that too is prohibited.
The Special Counsel’s Office is part of the Department of Justice and, by regulation, it was bound by that Department policy. Charging the President with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider.
The Department’s written opinion explaining the policy against charging a President makes several important points that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation. Those points are summarized in our report. And I will describe two of them:
First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting President because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents are available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could now be charged.
And second, the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting President of wrongdoing.

He literally said there was not enough evidence to charge him, but that it does not exonerate him. He also said that it'd be Unconstitutional to charge him, yes, but that was after the report. I don't know wtf you're reading.

[Parkbandit]

I'm leaning towards NOT impeaching for several reasons.

The "blue wave" of 2018 is still building and should be a "blue tsunami" by 2020. It would be immensely satisfying to see Trump absolutely decimated at the polls.

While Pence may conduct himself in a more presidential fashion his archaic and primitive religious views do not align with the modern enlightened world. I would not want him making any presidential decisions. Still, should Trump be impeached, Pence would only be in office for less than a year so in that sense it isn't as bad as a petty dictator Trump full term.

The impeachment process is really agonizing and divisive. I think we don't need that kind of bullshit right now. I remember Clinton's impeachment and that was horrible for us as a country.

Trump's greatest accomplishment so far has been to undo things Obama did. When he is defeated in 2020 he can go back to being a reality TV star, write another book, and we can close the door on this awful chapter of American history.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/446136-professor-who-has-correctly-predicted-nine-presidential-elections-says

Professor who has correctly predicted 9 presidential elections says Trump will win in 2020 unless Democrats impeach
You might want to "rethink" your stance.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I laugh snorted at blue tsunami

[Back]

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/446136-professor-who-has-correctly-predicted-nine-presidential-elections-says

Professor who has correctly predicted 9 presidential elections says Trump will win in 2020 unless Democrats impeach


You might want to "rethink" your stance.

You might want to mind your own damn business.


Elections expert: 2020 turnout could be highest since 1916 (https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news-campaigns/444978-elections-expert-2020-turnout-could-be-highest-since)

An elections expert is predicting that the 2020 presidential election could have the highest voter turnout since at least 1916, Axios reports (https://www.axios.com/2020-presidential-election-turnout-predictions-democrats-143cced4-cda7-4665-9fc3-911387416119.html).

Michael McDonald, a political science associate professor at the University of Florida and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, told Axios that 2020 voter turnout could be as high as 67 percent.

McDonald said the prediction partially comes from President Trump (https://thehill.com/people/donald-trump), who is driving unhappy voters to the polls. He added that the number of Trump voters is not increasing.

[Gelston]

You might want to mind your own damn business.

I don't think that means what you think it means. As he is a US Citizen, US Presidential elections are his business. You fucking tart.

[Tgo01]

You might want to mind your own damn business.

Well that professor is full of shit. This is the first presidential election I'll be voting in since 2000, and guess who is getting my vote and why?

I personally know a lot of people in my exact same position; they didn't used to be too involved in politics until lunatics such as sellstuff1 started going crazy because of Hillary's lose. I'm not saying Trump is a shoe-in for reelection, but the idea that ONLY people who oppose Trump are being mobilized to vote in 2020 is complete bullshit.

[Back]

Well that professor is full of shit. This is the first presidential election I'll be voting in since 2000, and guess who is getting my vote and why?

I personally know a lot of people in my exact same position; they didn't used to be too involved in politics until lunatics such as sellstuff1 started going crazy because of Hillary's lose. I'm not saying Trump is a shoe-in for reelection, but the idea that ONLY people who oppose Trump are being mobilized to vote in 2020 is complete bullshit.

Trump lost the popular vote in 2016. It will be even more of a loss in 2020. You heard it here.

[Tgo01]

Trump lost the popular vote in 2016. It will be even more of a loss in 2020. You heard it here.

Trump won more counties while Hillary mostly won the rich counties.

[Ashlander]

Trump lost the popular vote in 2016. It will be even more of a loss in 2020. You heard it here.

And if he still wins the same number of electorial votes he'll still become the president you stupid fuck.

[Parkbandit]

You might want to mind your own damn business.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/8VwkGKA5wXBN6/source.gif

[Gelston]

OH no! Millions of more Californians and New Yorkers are going to head to the polls!

It means jack shit.

[Wrathbringer]

Shut the fuck up you fucking retard. :lol:

This is correct.

[~Rocktar~]

Well if I remember correctly, it's an entire nation of conservative snowflakes getting triggered that the president got his dick sucked to start the process.

Most people didn't give 2 shits that he got his dick sucked though he is a serial sexual abuser who used his power and position to elicit sexual favors from employees. We got mad when he lied to a grand jury. If you or I lied to a grand jury we would go to prison for a couple years. He got censure.

[~Rocktar~]

Trump has a real shot of winning especially if the Dems field someone particularly unappetizing.

Which is their entire lineup right now including Hillary. Creepy Joe has the best shot and his past is lining up to be fired out of a torpedo tube straight at him. Unless something amazing happens, he will be the nominee and he will get beat and beat hard because Trump and other will drag up every racist, homophobic, patronizing and just creepy interaction or sound bite there ever was of him. I hope they bring back the scream from his first run, that should sink him right there.

[Alfster]

He literally said there was not enough evidence to charge him, but that it does not exonerate him. He also said that it'd be Unconstitutional to charge him, yes, but that was after the report. I don't know wtf you're reading.

Can you point to where he said that? I listened to him and read the transcripts and I don't see that. He talked about Russian interference then moved into obstruction .. after the quote above he stated this...

And beyond Department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of an actual charge.
So that was the Justice Department policy and those were the principles under which we operated. From them we concluded that we would not reach a determination – one way or the other – about whether the President committed a crime. That is the office’s final position and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the President.

[sellstuff1]

Most people didn't give 2 shits that he got his dick sucked though he is a serial sexual abuser who used his power and position to elicit sexual favors from employees. We got mad when he lied to a grand jury. If you or I lied to a grand jury we would go to prison for a couple years. He got censure.

Yeah you're still triggered about Clinton getting his dick sucked 20 years later.

[Tgo01]

Can you point to where he said that? I listened to him and read the transcripts and I don't see that. He talked about Russian interference then moved into obstruction .. after the quote above he stated this...

And beyond Department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of an actual charge.
So that was the Justice Department policy and those were the principles under which we operated. From them we concluded that we would not reach a determination – one way or the other – about whether the President committed a crime. That is the office’s final position and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the President.

Mueller's press conference was all kinds of shit anyways. He goes on and on about how there was insufficient evidence that points towards collusion/conspiracy, but then when it comes to obstruction he simply says they cannot prosecute a sitting president therefore they never investigated it from that angle. Well why the hell did he do any investigating at all then? Why does he say there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute for collusion but then say he can't comment on obstruction at all? He's talking out of both sides of his ass.

Also this part of his speech is even more bullshit:

"And as set forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

That's not how prosecutors operate. Prosecutors don't prove a crime didn't happen, they gather enough evidence to prove a crime did happen.

Mueller's press conference was just him basically saying "Look, Democrats, I couldn't find enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction, but since impeachment has a much lower threshold of evidence (which is basically zero, you can impeach a president for literally anything you want) I handed you everything you needed in the report to impeach Trump on obstruction but apparently you need me to spell it out for you even more."

If anyone thought Mueller was conducting a non-partisan investigation to arrive at the truth then his press conference gave you all of the proof you need that he was conducting a political witch hunt and wanted one specific outcome.

[~Rocktar~]

Yeah you're still triggered about Clinton getting his dick sucked 20 years later.

Oooo, such a burn, I don't know how I can handle it.

J/K

I would say something along the lines of stop being a triggered loser bitch but I know you won't and it would put and end to the fun of watching you melt down all the time.

[sellstuff1]

Mueller's press conference was all kinds of shit anyways. He goes on and on about how there was insufficient evidence that points towards collusion/conspiracy, but then when it comes to obstruction he simply says they cannot prosecute a sitting president therefore they never investigated it from that angle. Well why the hell did he do any investigating at all then? Why does he say there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute for collusion but then say he can't comment on obstruction at all? He's talking out of both sides of his ass.

Also this part of his speech is even more bullshit:

"And as set forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

That's not how prosecutors operate. Prosecutors don't prove a crime didn't happen, they gather enough evidence to prove a crime did happen.

Mueller's press conference was just him basically saying "Look, Democrats, I couldn't find enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction, but since impeachment has a much lower threshold of evidence (which is basically zero, you can impeach a president for literally anything you want) I handed you everything you needed in the report to impeach Trump on obstruction but apparently you need me to spell it out for you even more."

If anyone thought Mueller was conducting a non-partisan investigation to arrive at the truth then his press conference gave you all of the proof you need that he was conducting a political witch hunt and wanted one specific outcome.

"Let's wait for the Mueller report to be released to form any conclusion." ~Dreaven, circa 8 months ago

"WITCH HUNT WITCH HUNT TOTALLY UNFAIR AND BULLSHIT" ~Dreaven, today.

[Methais]

You might want to mind your own damn business.

What kind of fucking pussy posts on a public message board and then keeps crying this line?

Jesus Christ Back stop being such a fucking twat. :lol:

Do you understand how message boards work? If not, let me know which parts you're having trouble understanding and I'll do my best to help.

[Back]

What kind of fucking pussy posts on a public message board and then keeps crying this line?

Jesus Christ Back stop being such a fucking twat. :lol:

Do you understand how message boards work? If not, let me know which parts you're having trouble understanding and I'll do my best to help.

You're the one having trouble understanding how this works. I responded to something PB posted in response to something that I posted. He got the message. Thats how a public message board works.

No one on a message board owes anyone anything. Especially the way people conduct themselves here on the PC. Stop acting like an entitled little baby and get over it.

[Parkbandit]

You're the one having trouble understanding how this works. I responded to something PB posted in response to something that I posted. He got the message. Thats how a public message board works.

No one on a message board owes anyone anything. Especially the way people conduct themselves here on the PC. Stop acting like an entitled little baby and get over it.

When you post something on a public forum such as this message board, telling someone to "mind their own business" to a response of a post you made is literally the dumbest thing you can post.

If you want people to "mind their own business", don't post your "business" on a public message board.

Stop being a gigantic retard every time you type something out. It's a bad look, even for someone like you.

[Methais]

You're the one having trouble understanding how this works. I responded to something PB posted in response to something that I posted. He got the message. Thats how a public message board works.

No one on a message board owes anyone anything. Especially the way people conduct themselves here on the PC. Stop acting like an entitled little baby and get over it.

The way it works is this:

- You post something publicly
- Anyone who reads it is free to respond to it


No one on a message board owes anyone anything. Especially the way people conduct themselves here on the PC. Stop acting like an entitled little baby and get over it.

Who did I say was owed anything, and what specifically did I say they were owed?

Also, since no one on a message board is owed anything, wouldn't this include that nobody owes it to you to "stay out of your business" when responding to your public posts?


Stop acting like an entitled little baby and get over it.

You're the one crying over PB responding to your public post on a public message board. How does that add up to anyone but you acting like an entitled baby?

I bet you make vague posts on Facebook like:

You: I'M SOOOOO DONE!!!!

Random: What happened?

You: I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT!!!

10 minutes later...

You: I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS OMG!!!

Random: ?

You: STOP BEING SO NOSEY I SAID I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT!!!

20 minutes later:

You: *duck face selfie*

[Alfster]

Mueller's press conference was all kinds of shit anyways. He goes on and on about how there was insufficient evidence that points towards collusion/conspiracy, but then when it comes to obstruction he simply says they cannot prosecute a sitting president therefore they never investigated it from that angle. Well why the hell did he do any investigating at all then? Why does he say there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute for collusion but then say he can't comment on obstruction at all? He's talking out of both sides of his ass.

Also this part of his speech is even more bullshit:

"And as set forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

That's not how prosecutors operate. Prosecutors don't prove a crime didn't happen, they gather enough evidence to prove a crime did happen.

Mueller's press conference was just him basically saying "Look, Democrats, I couldn't find enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction, but since impeachment has a much lower threshold of evidence (which is basically zero, you can impeach a president for literally anything you want) I handed you everything you needed in the report to impeach Trump on obstruction but apparently you need me to spell it out for you even more."

If anyone thought Mueller was conducting a non-partisan investigation to arrive at the truth then his press conference gave you all of the proof you need that he was conducting a political witch hunt and wanted one specific outcome.

The message appears to be that he clearly couldnt find a true conspiracy on the Russian front. He then states he can't indict a sitting president and that it would be unconstitutional to accuse him of a crime when there's no way they can prosecute him from the DOJ.

The rules are different for a president, and the way he speaks leads me to the conclusion that Trump himself was never the target of the investigation. That's how I interpret what he is stating.

[Tgo01]

The message appears to be that he clearly couldnt find a true conspiracy on the Russian front. He then states he can't indict a sitting president and that it would be unconstitutional to accuse him of a crime when there's no way they can prosecute him from the DOJ.

He's full of it. There is nothing unconstitutional about saying the evidence is there to suggest a crime happened. It might be in bad taste to accuse someone of a crime if they can't be charged, but it's certainly not unconstitutional. If that's the case then why comment on it at all? Why say "If we felt he did not commit a crime we would have said so." Isn't that like exactly the same thing? "I'm not saying he did commit a crime because that would be unconstitutional...but I will say I don't NOT think he committed a crime."


The rules are different for a president, and the way he speaks leads me to the conclusion that Trump himself was never the target of the investigation.

If Trump was never the target of the investigation then why wasn't that spelled out for us all from the very beginning? Why didn't Mueller tell us from the very beginning that Trump couldn't be charged with a crime and therefore that's not how they chose to conduct this investigation? It's all bullshit. He wanted to give the impression for over 2 years that Trump was the target of the investigation. When he couldn't find evidence of conspiracy he put that theory to rest once and for all but left open the possibility for obstruction of justice...obstruction of a crime which apparently did not even happen.

He's a partisan hack. The liberal media were circling around him like vultures for not giving them the story they wanted and he knew it and had to fix it somehow. He almost left this all behind with his integrity in tact but that sham of a press conference dispelled all doubt of his true motives.

[Methais]

The rules are different for a president, and the way he speaks leads me to the conclusion that Trump himself was never the target of the investigation. That's how I interpret what he is stating.

Confirmed Alfster is an alt-right Nazi who hates women and minorities.

[Back]

When you post something on a public forum such as this message board, telling someone to "mind their own business" to a response of a post you made is literally the dumbest thing you can post.

If you want people to "mind their own business", don't post your "business" on a public message board.

Stop being a gigantic retard every time you type something out. It's a bad look, even for someone like you.

There you go again dispensing unwanted advice no one asked you for.

When you, PB the raging fuckwit, tells me to do anything, "rethink" something, don't post, to post more, or anything, I'm well within my rights to tell you to fuck off, let alone mind your own business. You don't like it? Find something else to do.

I'm laughing my ass off at how riled up everyone is getting over such a mild rebuke.

Your opinions, advice, comments, and suggestions are like piles of shit people should avoid on a sidewalk. You've brought more toxicity to this community than anyone so don't act all hurt an innocent about anything ever, douchebag.

[sellstuff1]

He's full of it. There is nothing unconstitutional about saying the evidence is there to suggest a crime happened. It might be in bad taste to accuse someone of a crime if they can't be charged, but it's certainly not unconstitutional. If that's the case then why comment on it at all? Why say "If we felt he did not commit a crime we would have said so." Isn't that like exactly the same thing? "I'm not saying he did commit a crime because that would be unconstitutional...but I will say I don't NOT think he committed a crime."



If Trump was never the target of the investigation then why wasn't that spelled out for us all from the very beginning? Why didn't Mueller tell us from the very beginning that Trump couldn't be charged with a crime and therefore that's not how they chose to conduct this investigation? It's all bullshit. He wanted to give the impression for over 2 years that Trump was the target of the investigation. When he couldn't find evidence of conspiracy he put that theory to rest once and for all but left open the possibility for obstruction of justice...obstruction of a crime which apparently did not even happen.

He's a partisan hack. The liberal media were circling around him like vultures for not giving them the story they wanted and he knew it and had to fix it somehow. He almost left this all behind with his integrity in tact but that sham of a press conference dispelled all doubt of his true motives.

The policy blocking indicting a sitting president dates back to the presidency of Richard Nixon. In September 1973, just under a year before Nixon resigned, the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel determined that a criminal case against the president “would interfere with the President’s unique official duties, most of which cannot be performed by anyone else.” Therefore, impeachment is the only manner by which a sitting president can be penalized for wrongdoing.

This memo—titled “Amenability of the President, Vice President, and other Civil Officers to Federal Criminal Prosecution while in Office”—analyzed historical texts over 41 pages to weigh the pros and cons of charging a sitting president. Upon his conclusion, Assistant Attorney General Robert G. Dixon, Jr. noted “certain drawbacks” to preventing the indictment of a sitting president—namely that the statute of limitations on the alleged crimes could run their course before the president leaves office, creating a “complete hiatus in criminal liability.”

Still, the OLC argued this “gap in the law” is not enough to overcome the downsides to indicting a sitting president, stating “in this difficult area all courses of action have costs.” According to the memo, the president’s role is too vital to be disrupted by criminal charges.

“To wound him by a criminal proceeding is to hamstring the operation of the whole governmental apparatus, both in foreign and domestic affairs,” reads the memo. “The spectacle of an indicted President still trying to serve as Chief Executive boggles the imagination.”

The DOJ reaffirmed its position on the matter decades later, in an October 2000 memo titled “A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution.” This memo ultimately decided the 1973 memo’s reasoning remains true, and “that subsequent developments in the law validate both the analytical framework applied and the conclusions reached at that time.”

The Supreme Court has addressed matters surrounding the indictment of a president since 1973: United States v. Nixon determined that a president’s desire for confidentiality does not outweigh a criminal subpoena for information, Nixon v. Fitzgerald determined a president cannot be tried for civil damages arising from official conduct, and Clinton v. Jones determined certain civil proceedings unrelated to the presidential office can be taken up against a sitting president.

If you actually watched Mueller's press conference, you'd know this - he explains it. But instead you just pulled up alexjones.com so you could look up your own opinion and reaction to the goings on.

[Methais]

There you go again dispensing unwanted advice no one asked you for.

When you, PB the raging fuckwit, tells me to do anything, "rethink" something, don't post, to post more, or anything, I'm well within my rights to tell you to fuck off, let alone mind your own business. You don't like it? Find something else to do.

Aside from the fact that you're in your 40s and still can't identify a rhetorical statement, is PB or anyone else well within their rights to ignore your demands to stay out of your business, with said business being responding to your public posts on a public message board? Please advise with a direct answer that doesn't contain any deflection.


I'm laughing my ass off at how riled up everyone is getting over such a mild rebuke.

As has been the case since 2003, no one's riled up, people are just amazed by how stupid you are.


My opinions, advice, comments, and suggestions are like piles of shit people should avoid on a sidewalk. I've brought more stupidity to this planet than anyone but still act all hurt an innocent about anything ever, like a douchebag.

This is correct.

[Methais]

The policy blocking indicting a sitting president dates back to the presidency of Richard Nixon. In September 1973, just under a year before Nixon resigned, the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel determined that a criminal case against the president “would interfere with the President’s unique official duties, most of which cannot be performed by anyone else.” Therefore, impeachment is the only manner by which a sitting president can be penalized for wrongdoing.

This memo—titled “Amenability of the President, Vice President, and other Civil Officers to Federal Criminal Prosecution while in Office”—analyzed historical texts over 41 pages to weigh the pros and cons of charging a sitting president. Upon his conclusion, Assistant Attorney General Robert G. Dixon, Jr. noted “certain drawbacks” to preventing the indictment of a sitting president—namely that the statute of limitations on the alleged crimes could run their course before the president leaves office, creating a “complete hiatus in criminal liability.”

Still, the OLC argued this “gap in the law” is not enough to overcome the downsides to indicting a sitting president, stating “in this difficult area all courses of action have costs.” According to the memo, the president’s role is too vital to be disrupted by criminal charges.

“To wound him by a criminal proceeding is to hamstring the operation of the whole governmental apparatus, both in foreign and domestic affairs,” reads the memo. “The spectacle of an indicted President still trying to serve as Chief Executive boggles the imagination.”

The DOJ reaffirmed its position on the matter decades later, in an October 2000 memo titled “A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution.” This memo ultimately decided the 1973 memo’s reasoning remains true, and “that subsequent developments in the law validate both the analytical framework applied and the conclusions reached at that time.”

The Supreme Court has addressed matters surrounding the indictment of a president since 1973: United States v. Nixon determined that a president’s desire for confidentiality does not outweigh a criminal subpoena for information, Nixon v. Fitzgerald determined a president cannot be tried for civil damages arising from official conduct, and Clinton v. Jones determined certain civil proceedings unrelated to the presidential office can be taken up against a sitting president.

If you actually watched Mueller's press conference, you'd know this - he explains it. But instead you just pulled up alexjones.com so you could look up your own opinion and reaction to the goings on.

tr;dr

[Wrathbringer]

tr;dr

Tic; iadr.

[Methais]

Tic; iadr.

I'm not sure what the 2nd part means, but this is correct.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I also didn't read?

[Methais]

I also didn't read?

https://media.giphy.com/media/dWEk3w1Uo97qw/giphy.gif

Are you sure it’s not I A DOCTOR???

[Gelston]

https://media.giphy.com/media/dWEk3w1Uo97qw/giphy.gif

Are you sure it’s not I A DOCTOR???

No, it is I ate diarrhea (and resharted it.)

[Methais]

No, it is I ate diarrhea (and resharted it.)


https://youtu.be/n-YUwNlb-tY

[sellstuff1]

The victims of Trump's Tariff wars: American Taxpayers

https://www.tennessean.com/story/opinion/2019/05/31/donald-trump-tariffs-china-american-consumers-pay/1289245001/

President Trump’s US-China trade war is having a devastating effect on soybean exports from the Midwest farm belt. Exports are down 97% from 2017. Yet, Trump falsely gloats that the China tariffs 25% increase will force China to pay $100 billion to the U.S. Treasury.

To appease his red state voters, he has spent billions of taxpayers’ money to bail out the ailing farm sector.

Midwest Republican-voters are not the only the only Americans damaged by the trade-war. China has targeted red state America to bear the brunt of Trump’s ill-conceived trade war.

Tennessee whiskey exports, which had been growing steadily, dropped 32% for the 4th quarter 2018 compared to 2017. Middle Tennessee State University reports that Tennessee exports are down $500 million for the 4th quarter. That $500 million will not ripple across Tennessee creating jobs and economic stimulus.

[Parkbandit]

There you go again dispensing unwanted advice no one asked you for.

When you, PB the raging fuckwit, tells me to do anything, "rethink" something, don't post, to post more, or anything, I'm well within my rights to tell you to fuck off, let alone mind your own business. You don't like it? Find something else to do.

I'm laughing my ass off at how riled up everyone is getting over such a mild rebuke.

Your opinions, advice, comments, and suggestions are like piles of shit people should avoid on a sidewalk. You've brought more toxicity to this community than anyone so don't act all hurt an innocent about anything ever, douchebag.

"Mind your own business" on a public message board isn't a rebuke at all... it's just something really stupid to post by someone who is the champion of stupid here.

Carry on, mindless one.

[Methais]

The victims of Trump's Tariff wars: American Taxpayers

https://www.tennessean.com/story/opinion/2019/05/31/donald-trump-tariffs-china-american-consumers-pay/1289245001/

President Trump’s US-China trade war is having a devastating effect on soybean exports from the Midwest farm belt. Exports are down 97% from 2017. Yet, Trump falsely gloats that the China tariffs 25% increase will force China to pay $100 billion to the U.S. Treasury.

To appease his red state voters, he has spent billions of taxpayers’ money to bail out the ailing farm sector.

Midwest Republican-voters are not the only the only Americans damaged by the trade-war. China has targeted red state America to bear the brunt of Trump’s ill-conceived trade war.

Tennessee whiskey exports, which had been growing steadily, dropped 32% for the 4th quarter 2018 compared to 2017. Middle Tennessee State University reports that Tennessee exports are down $500 million for the 4th quarter. That $500 million will not ripple across Tennessee creating jobs and economic stimulus.

https://media.giphy.com/media/Y54pQRGD2r4Hu/giphy.gif

[Wrathbringer]

I also didn't read?

Ding ding ding this is correct!

[Fortybox]

You've brought more toxicity to this community than anyone so don't act all hurt an innocent about anything ever, douchebag.

Actually, these boards are very boring unless you and other members of the stupid squad start posting.

time4fun decided to shart in on GSIV yesterday and all of LNET went into argument again. If she started posting here again the board would be back in uproar.

[Gelston]

Has Trump been impeached yet?

[~Rocktar~]

The victims of Trump's Tariff wars: American Taxpayers

https://www.tennessean.com/story/opinion/2019/05/31/donald-trump-tariffs-china-american-consumers-pay/1289245001/

President Trump’s US-China trade war is having a devastating effect on soybean exports from the Midwest farm belt. Exports are down 97% from 2017. Yet, Trump falsely gloats that the China tariffs 25% increase will force China to pay $100 billion to the U.S. Treasury.

To appease his red state voters, he has spent billions of taxpayers’ money to bail out the ailing farm sector.

Midwest Republican-voters are not the only the only Americans damaged by the trade-war. China has targeted red state America to bear the brunt of Trump’s ill-conceived trade war.

Tennessee whiskey exports, which had been growing steadily, dropped 32% for the 4th quarter 2018 compared to 2017. Middle Tennessee State University reports that Tennessee exports are down $500 million for the 4th quarter. That $500 million will not ripple across Tennessee creating jobs and economic stimulus.

ANNNDDDDDD Mexico wants to negotiate. Imagine that, make a promise (not a threat), show that you will indeed take the actions you say you will and then amazingly negotiation seems like a good idea instead of the previous administration's policy of capitulation until the competitor took mercy.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/01/politics/mexico-president-trump-tariff-threat/index.html

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mexico-dispatches-team-to-dc-negotiate-tariff-solution-as-trump-demands-illegal-immigration-remedy

[Methais]

Actually, these boards are very boring unless you and other members of the stupid squad start posting.

time4fun decided to shart in on GSIV yesterday and all of LNET went into argument again. If she started posting here again the board would be back in uproar.

It's because she's so not toxic at all. It's just a coincidence that every time she shows up anywhere, toxic waste is suddenly everywhere.

It's a good thing we have people like Clarence Boddicker to help out.

https://media.giphy.com/media/YjADHW7bgsJMI/giphy.gif

[Methais]

Has Trump been impeached yet?

Yes. Hillary is president now and time4fun is her VP.

[Taernath]

Actually, these boards are very boring unless you and other members of the stupid squad start posting.

time4fun decided to shart in on GSIV yesterday and all of LNET went into argument again. If she started posting here again the board would be back in uproar.

I guess our GM hypothesis was false.

[Gelston]

I guess our GM hypothesis was false.

GMs can use and chat in lich. Just not with their GM account. Most prefer not to chat on there though.

Although yeah, she isn't a GM.

[Methais]

I guess our GM hypothesis was false.

https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/59731191.jpg

[Neveragain]

This thread needed a bump.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi5YYZ9eocU

Sadly the "liberals" like Back, refuse to listen to real liberals, like Jimmy Dore.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I love the guy at 2:00ish... "why the gay colors?"

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

OMG, BACK! 13:25... YOU WILL LOVE IT.

[Tgo01]

I don't know why Jimmy Dore seems halfway normal when not on "The Young Turks", but whenever he's on "The Young Turks" he acts like the most far left nut bug out there.

I can actually stand listening to his show, I don't always agree with him, but he doesn't appear to have come down wit a severe case of TDS. But on TYT he totally changes, like he's the biggest TDS patient. I guess if you appear on TYT you have to toe the line or else they don't invite you back.

[Neveragain]

I don't know why Jimmy Dore seems halfway normal when not on "The Young Turks", but whenever he's on "The Young Turks" he acts like the most far left nut bug out there.

I can actually stand listening to his show, I don't always agree with him, but he doesn't appear to have come down wit a severe case of TDS. But on TYT he totally changes, like he's the biggest TDS patient. I guess if you appear on TYT you have to toe the line or else they don't invite you back.

I'll watch him mainly because he at least acknowledges that the MSM are war peddlers and that Russiagate is the modern day red scare. He's no doubt a liberal but in the true sense of the matter. As for TYT, I have watched that show maybe twice when they first started out, I just can't stand the lying cunt (Armenian genocide) on TYT.

[Tgo01]

I'll watch him mainly because he at least acknowledges that the MSM are war peddlers and that Russiagate is the modern day red scare. He's no doubt a liberal but in the true sense of the matter. As for TYT, I have watched that show maybe twice when they first started out, I just can't stand the lying cunt (Armenian genocide) on TYT.

Yeah Jimmy Dore is tolerable when not on TYT. I originally heard of him from TYT and he was one of the worst ones on there, I was surprised when I watched one of this videos on his own channel and he seemed rather normal. I guess when you name your business after a group of people who tried to commit genocide they don't have much room for dissenting opinions.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjNgm7TgsgA

best take on Trump winning ever.

[Back]

Impeachment incoming. Watch the Trump admin ramp up the threat from Iran in an attempt to distract everyone and try to win a second term.

[RichardCranium]

Distract everyone from what, exactly?

[Gelston]

Impeachment incoming. Watch the Trump admin ramp up the threat from Iran in an attempt to distract everyone and try to win a second term.

They've tried to impeach him already. Defeated heavily every time. What exactly has he done now that'll change that?

[~Rocktar~]

Impeachment incoming. Watch the Trump admin ramp up the threat from Iran in an attempt to distract everyone and try to win a second term.

Do you want to assure a Trump 2020 victory because this is how you assure a Trump 2020 victory. Not that any of the clown circus of giveaway hucksters has a prayer at all anyway, this is just more nails in the coffin of Democrats races in 2020.

[Methais]

Impeachment incoming. Watch the Trump admin ramp up the threat from Iran in an attempt to distract everyone and try to win a second term.

Did drunk Tuesday get moved to Sunday?

A few things:

- Impeachment won’t happen

- Even if it did, good luck with that without the Senate

- You’re stupid

- Go to a fucking AA meeting already

[Neveragain]

Impeachment incoming. Watch the Trump admin ramp up the threat from Iran in an attempt to distract everyone and try to win a second term.

So far, Trump is destroying the democrats in the corn kernel poll. If it means anything, Trump won the same poll against Clinton in 2016.

Interestingly enough, within the democrat pool Biden is leading with 33%. I'm unclear as to if this has changed since Biden strong armed a teenage girl at the fair.

Impeachment proceedings will only strengthen Trumps support, Trump would allow those proceedings to go undistracted.

[Parkbandit]

Impeachment incoming. Watch the Trump admin ramp up the threat from Iran in an attempt to distract everyone and try to win a second term.

OMG THE MUELLER REPORT WILL END THIS PRESIDENCY!!!

You're a joke.. and the only one not to know this.

[Parkbandit]

Did drunk Tuesday get moved to Sunday?

- Go to a fucking AA meeting already

Don't listen to him Backlash. You can find all the answers you seek at the bottom of that Appletini bottle.

[Gelston]

Don't listen to him Backlash. You can find all the answers you seek at the bottom of that Appletini bottle.

He probably drinks white claw like all the other retarded white women.

[Methais]

He probably drinks white claw like all the other retarded white women.

He probably drinks Zima.

[Gelston]

He probably drinks Zima.

white claw is the new zima

[Methais]

white claw is the new zima

White claw is a racist drink, so Back probably does drink the fuck out of it.

[Gelston]

I'm still waiting for Back to say what new thing came out that Trump needs to be impeached for.

[Methais]

I'm still waiting for Back to say what new thing came out that Trump needs to be impeached for.

He's still waiting for MSNBC to make up something new.

[Back]

I'm still waiting for Back to say what new thing came out that Trump needs to be impeached for.

Nothing new. Its all in the report and repeated in Mueller's testimony. Congress has the authority and the evidence. All thats needed now is the will.

[Gelston]

Nothing new. Its all in the report and repeated in Mueller's testimony. Congress has the authority and the evidence. All thats needed now is the will.

So, you think they are going to impeach Trump now, using the exact same shit they had before that was shot down by both Democrats and Republicans?

[Methais]

Nothing new. Its all in the report and repeated in Mueller's testimony. Congress has the authority and the evidence. All thats needed now is the will.

Now I know you're trolling. :lol:

[Alfster]

Nadlers already stated they've started a formal impeachment inquiry with a timeline of end of the year for a full vote...

[Gelston]

Nadlers already stated they've started a formal impeachment inquiry with a timeline of end of the year for a full vote...

And I hope they go to a vote soon and seal the 2020 election.

[Alfster]

I'm fairly certain he's just saying that to give them more authority over everything they've attempted to subpoena.

[Parkbandit]

I'm fairly certain he's just saying that to give them more authority over everything they've attempted to subpoena.

So.. you're saying there was no collusion and no obstructing justice.. but they want to have the authority to just keep looking until they find something to pin on President Trump?

[Alfster]

It looks like the specific committee here is looking at financial transactions so likely unrelated and instead focusing on the inauguration funds.

Who really knows tho. Don't believe I commented on my thoughts, but as you should already know I don't support impeachment over the Russian issues.

Clinton, Bush, and Obama all had oversight committee investigating them, so oversight is a good thing.

[Back]

There are 10 points of obstruction laid out in the report that Congress will now investigate.

[Candor]

So.. you're saying there was no collusion and no obstructing justice.. but they want to have the authority to just keep looking until they find something to pin on President Trump?

Isn't that the entire Democratic strategy?

[Wrathbringer]

Isn't that the entire Democratic strategy?

Cut a fart, candork.

[Wrathbringer]

There are 10 points of obstruction laid out in the report that Congress will now investigate.

OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG GUYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111 IT'S FINALLY HAPPENING!!!!!!!!111111123456 TRUMP IS GOING TO JAIL AND HILLARY WILL BE PRESIDENT BECAUSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION!!!!!!!!1 FOR REALLY REALLY REALLY REAL THIS TIME THOUGH!!!!!!!!!111