I agree. Our Constitution is flawed Sad to say, there are legitimate comparisons between Hitler & Trump--both in personality & attitudes toward how they handle power. Even sadder, to note, a large percentage of the /American voters look to Trump much as German voters of the 1930s looked toward Hitler. Let's both hope your lack of concern for these "analogies" proves accurate. I really don't want to see more agreement or things in common between them than I already do.
I agree. Trump is not only a poor loser, he's a poor winner. He's never felt comfortable with winning thru the Electoral College, & has done several things since his election to pursue questionable goals pertaining to that election or those he opposed. He also seems to have a mental fixation on Obama, & literally wants to undo or unravel any accomplishment claimed by the Obama administration. None of these characteristics are healthy. I'm not a psychologist or psychiatrist, but I'm pretty sure Trump suffers from some mental disorder, & is a security risk to this nation.
FAUXPEACHMENT TO HIDE REAL LEFTIST GUILT: Update on the Star Chamber that is the “impeachment inquiry”. Nothing that leaks out of the closed-door impeachment “inquiry” conducted by Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff may be taken at face value. Schiff is conducting an impeachment campaign by orchestrated leaks. We will not follow the leaked testimony until we can look at the full recordings or transcripts. The proceedings have been completely orchestrated by the Democratic Party to find Trump guilty. The entire thing is being Lselectively leaked to the Fake News Media completely in league with that prosecution. “Lynching” is an apt metaphor. As is "kangaroo court” or “witch hunt” and/or “Star Chamber proceeding.” Fundamental fairness to the electorate as well as to a duly-elected president demands open bipartisan public proceedings as well as the fact that the Founders were crystal clear that impeachment should never be used for narrow bitter deranged partisan reasons. Democrats and their fellows in the Fake News Media horrify the public with the secrecy and the obviously selected leaks that cannot be checked out against any facts or even against the testimony the leaks are supposed to fairly represent. The voters recognize that this is a disgusting and un-American. The Fake News Media squandered the trust that used to be placed in it. The electorate isn't fooled.
The word "hamstrung" is mine. I used it in my post. I never said or implied that Mueller used it. But Mueller did tell Congress that he was aware of the DOJ policy that no sitting President could be charged with a crime, & that policy dictated the limits of what he could or would look for during the investigation. He said from the outset of that investigation, he knew Trump was personally off limits.
Well you did say this: What is that if not implying that Mueller said it? And this means that he was "hamstrung?"
agree........Trump has psychological problems ..........and his fitness for the job is questionable. Yes.....he has proven himself to be a security risk. That is obvious now. He does not have proper leadership qualities. He is his own worst enemy. He comes across as a buffoon...........and that makes him a very poor ambassador for the nation.
I'm not even sure what that's supposed to mean. Trump is quite comfortable that our system of elections worked exactly as intended... Permit me to suggest that it might not be the worst idea you've ever had to avail yourself of one, though, hmm?
Why is being a security risk such a problem? The left didn't seem to have a problem with it when Hillary Clinton was violating the Espionage Act, so why worry about Trump being a security risk, especially when the allegation is made absent of any examples?
Since you can't prove your allegation,absent examples, this is just another attempt at deflection by another blind trumpette. Oh, and on the topic of examples, Dirty Donnie got up in public and stated that he believed Putin vs 10 US reports about Russian meddling in the election.
1. It means that Trump is the first President in American history to continue harassing his former opponents from an earlier election, after winning. In campaign speeches recently, almost three years after the election, Trump has encouraged his audience to harass Hillary by chanting, "Lock her up," over & over. America has always been a country where campaign opponents fought the fight during the campaign, then worked together or separately for the benefit of the country after one of them won. I can think of no President who continued harassing their former political opponent after winning. Trump is the first, & that's NOT a good precedent to establish. I regard it as "Un-American." It does not fit well with our healthier cultural norms. 2. The Electoral College worked, but not exactly as intended. It was designed to prevent social misfits & idiots with money, from being elected by an uninformed, emotional electorate. In that, it failed. 3. Thank you for your concerns, but I feel they'd be better utilized if focused on Trump.
Hardly. James Comey stated that Clinton broke the law. He stupidly qualified that, though, by saying there was no "intent" and, for that reason, would not recommend charges. Of course, intent isn't a necessary component of a crime. After all, the next time you go out drinking all night and get into an accident, killing a family of four, no one's going to give a rat's ass that you didn't intend to do it...
In the view of many Americans, she should be locked up. And Trump has never encouraged it. He merely enjoys it... There seems to be mounting evidence that there was corruption afoot in the 2016 election, and that Hillary Clinton was ass-deep in it. If that corruption was there, it should be investigated and prosecuted, the whines of the left notwithstanding... It worked well, in that it didn't allow the heavily populated liberal cesspools in this country dictate for the rest of the country...
Only a complete and utter fool would believe it was innocent. She erased e-mails after they were requested. She wiped hard drives. She destroyed electronic devices. Also, she was Secretary of State. She swore an oath. As someone who's sworn an oath, I know that there's no such thing as "innocently breaking the law", especially when you consider the magnitude of what she did and how she acted to cover her ass. See, Comey didn't recommend charges because there was no intent. He's biased, but he's not stupid. He didn't recommend charges because, during wartime, a violation of the Espionage Act is punishable by death...
You chose to go out drinking all night without ensuring safe transport home beforehand. That is what makes the accident and resulting fatalities a crime.
Bullshit. We haven't been at war since 1945, and Sessions and Barr have had three years to bring charges. That they haven't is most telling.
In his recent testimony before Congress, he didn't verbally state his disappointment that he was prevented from doing that, but he demonstrated a strong concern for the evidence he found implicating Trump in illegal acts that he felt un-empowered to follow up with. He seemed to want Congress to follow up where he had to leave off.
Do folks think that it is appropriate of trump to trash every one that is being interviewed for the inquiry?? Is it sensible for POTUS to degrade a decorated veteran who was concerned about what he heard..........and RIGHTLY SO. What trump was doing in that infamous call was extortion..........to put it in layman's terms .......without the political spin. It is astounding to watch POTUS and his circle behave in such an unseemly manner. For goodness sake........Some serous presidential , professional behaviour is called for. class are leaders of the free world ,,,,,,,,,,,,,and an example of how a fine democracy should work .........with class and dignity. Of course if this conduct is an ACCEPTABLE style in US leadership.............. and has the collective seal of approval then iti s a major shift ..........One that young kids will try and emulate.
