What I Think About Current Politics

I have pretty high hopes for Dan Crenshaw in the future. I do like Sasse too but I don't much care for Romney or Kaicsh personalities.

 

Ok, guilty, and should be impeached and removed from office as Clinton should have been. Because he was found guilty.

What is your point?

 

We don't have any apples to apples comparisons here because the Full House had available to them, a very lengthy report in which Leon Jarworski and Archibald Cox, and later Ken Starr had already provided a blueprint for potential charges, had done a preliminary investigation, had boxes of evidence, and done full interviews with all the witnesses. Those are circumstances where the members of the full house actually know where the basic facts of the investigation had led the special counsel/prosecutors. They weren't flying as blind.

Now why not let the committee do its job, come up with those interviews, and those boxes of evidence write up that very lengthy report and then come back and whine about how unfair everything is.

 

I wish the Democrats would run a moderate because working Americans will never vote for a Democratic Socials/communist. Most of the Dems running belonged to the Communist Party of America. This was easy to verify prior to the 2008 election when the group took down the list of members names.

 

i think ive said on here before that if theyd run a Democrat whod just enforce existing border security theyd win easily. Instead their candidates have been saying stuff like decriminalize border crossings.

 

So you've given up on the Mueller Report have you?

 

Those that don't like the Socialist Democrats running for President or Trump, would like a Moderate or Centrist to vote for.

As long as we have the two Party system, that likely will not happen. Maybe Bloomberg? But he is not running.

That is why Trump will be reelected. He is the closest thing to a Moderate. And both for Socialism.

 

I will re-refer you to the post I wrote that you quoted so you can respond to or rebut it. You wanted to compare prior Presidential impeachments as though they were apple to apple precedents.

"We don't have any apples to apples comparisons here because the Full House had available to them, a very lengthy report in which Leon Jarworski and Archibald Cox, and later Ken Starr had already provided a blueprint for potential charges, had done a preliminary investigation, had boxes of evidence, and done full interviews with all the witnesses. Those are circumstances where the members of the full house actually know where the basic facts of the investigation had led the special counsel/prosecutors. They weren't flying as blind.

Now why not let the committee do its job, come up with those interviews, and those boxes of evidence write up that very lengthy report and then come back and whine about how unfair everything is."

Now you can respond to what I wrote, or you can concede my argument is valid or I guess you can try to dodge, weave or distract again.

 

What a crock.

Republicans on the various committees have the right to examine the witnesses and it goes on the record.

When the trial goes to the Senate you'll get every opportunity to delve further.

Newsflash..Obama is not being impeached and is not President

 

The point was that you've had your giant damn investigation. The fact that there was nothing there does not give Congress carte blanche to spend the rest of it's tenure micromanaging foreign policy no matter how much they disagree with the admins policies.

 

The fact you gave a **** what race he is tells me everything I need to know about you.

 

And when the police and prosecutors make a show of holding a named person under investigation, while releasing only innuendo, it's unethical, criminal, or both.

 

"Now why not let the committee do its job, come up with those interviews, and those boxes of evidence write up that very lengthy report and then come back and whine about how unfair everything is."

Personally, I don't have the power to let Congress do anything.

I wish that they would do their job. Instead, they are abusing their power of office by conducting this sham. We're all paying their salaries while they perform their political show trial. Why the hell are we accepting this? The DNC should reimburse The Treasury for all of the salaries paid for this political activity.

 

Because the legislative branch would have then asserted itself and made the changes somewhat permanent.

With Trump simply using an executive action to undo the corrupt Obama's policy changes, the next leftist president will be able to simply undo Trump's undoing of Obama's pen and a phone nonsense. As well as whatever else unconstitutional nonsense such a leftist president will come up with...

 

Even granting this dubious premise, you're not making any sense. Why the hell should the President wait around for that when he can cut an EO immediately and then propose legislation to the same effect on the same day?

You seem to be under the impression he'll somehow need Trump's example to follow, when he already has Obama's.

 

If your hero keeps on trying to use foreign govts as his personal spy ring to dig up dirt on his political enemies, he's going to keep getting himself in trouble for it. Congress is supposed to be the check on Presidential abuse whether he is weaponizes the FBI, the CIA, the IRS or tries to bribe or coerce foreign despots into being his agents.

 

Police get to decide what to tell media about their investigations and so do prosecutors unless there is some judicial pretrial gag order imposed on both parties. While these are closed door hearings in the committee itself, nobody is gagging Lindsey Graham, or Giuliani, or Donald, or McCarthy, or any other toadie sitting in the administration, the House or the Senate.

Leaks happen from both sides,on any controversial issue in Washington with lots of media interest. You can't seriously claim Dems or Pubs are not equally likely to leak. Hell Trump himself has leaked information favorable to himself a time or two or 500..

 

But one political party in Congress or political operatives with in the FBI or CIA aren't supposed to be conducting a witch hunt 24/7 looking for an impeachable offense.

The obstructionism has also crossed the line as being rebellion.

So far with all of the obstructionism and investigations and distractions for the Trump administration, he's accomplished more than expected.

History will look at Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) as being a medieval disease or as a biblical disease as comparable to leprosy.

 

Talk to your hero who keeps trying to turn foreign govts into his personal spy ring to dig up dirt on political opponents. As long as he keeps coercing or bribing foreign govts to help him smear his rivals, the house will keep on pressuring and investigating.

 

I'm willing to give Obama a pass. I just want for it to be clear to everyone how corrupt his administration was. I want it to be so clear tbat no one can deny it.

 

I said 'innuendo'.

Senator Schiff is poisoning the jury pool (the American people) with his lies. That should be proof enough of the sham.

 

I have no heroes; least of all is Clapper.

 

Sorry Obama isn't my hero nor for that matter is Trump.

 

Because issuing the EO let the Republican cowards in congress off the hook.

With full control of both houses of congress, Trump could have told congress he wasn't going to take the corrupt Obama's path in issuing an EO, but rather would depend on them to pass legislation to undo Obama's actions.

This would have been longer lasting, and would have forced timid Republicans to buy into Trump's agenda.

Don't get me wrong; Trump undoing Obama's legacy is, indeed, the most important issue. I simply think he lost an opportunity.

True, and great point. But memories are short, and the Democratic Party operatives who pose as mainstream media journalists will do their best to make low information voters forget that Obama was the creator of such actions.

 

What was corrupt about Trump voiding a corrupt EO from Obama?