Process for impeaching trump started?

[Tatetopa]

3 hours ago, and then said:

I blame Trump for not going after HRC immediately.  I never thought of him as being naive but it's either that or he's listening to and trusting the wrong people.  He should have Rosenstein appoint ANOTHER special counsel to investigate all of HRC's issues as well as all deals her Foundation was part of with Russians.  He can ORDER this to be done and Rosenstein can acquiesce or look for another gig.  What's the worst that happens?  The press comes after him?  

The best time for that has passed.  Now Hillary is a has-been.  You may find it satisfies your sense of justice, and I don't say she doesn't deserve it, but it has a lot less bearing on the fate of the  country now.  She is not in a position to influence peace or war, prosperity or recession.  Hillary has little power anymore to make my life better or worse.  Well that is wrong, she does still have connections and maybe can manipulate situations.

From what they say Trump trusts his family and close friends most.  They are giving him advice.  My opinion is that he is smart about his own business, but naive about running a government.  He was sole authority in what was basically a family business.  He had the power to hire and fire.  He did not have to put up with disagreement.  He could walk away from deals that were too tough or going sour.  As president of the United States, he has to face what comes.  This country has to face what comes, bitter or sweet and so does he.   He should be listening to Rex Tillerson.  He was a CEO of a major corporation and had to deal with adversity, bad press, and  losing sometimes.  He should be listening to Jim Mattis, he cares about this country.

 

 

[Farmer77]

5 hours ago, and then said:

The idea that this hack could openly hire 15 HRC and Obama supporters, donors and bundlers and pay them and himself whatever they ask is outrageous.

IDK as I've said before as a sports fan you realize one day that you care about the team way more than the actual athletes do, I dont think that any of these people are going to risk their legal careers or their reputations on a witch hunt. 

5 hours ago, and then said:

There was a leak today from one of them that the investigation has been expanded to include EVERY business deal that T or his associates EVER had with Russians.  Some going back to 2008.  Who seriously believes that Trump would have planned 9 years ago for his run for the presidency?  

I think this is something that Trump supporters are missing due to their high esteem of the man, and thats that Trump might very well be the victim in this situation. 9 years isnt really a long time when you think about the efforts that go into alphabet agencies' mining a good asset. 

5 hours ago, and then said:

should have Rosenstein appoint ANOTHER special counsel to investigate all of HRC's issues as well as all deals her Foundation was part of with Russians.  He can ORDER this to be done and Rosenstein can acquiesce or look for another gig.  What's the worst that happens?  The press comes after him?  

I wish he would , however he and Hillary are friends, he admires the woman and has been unabashed in showing that admiration verbally and financially.  Which kind of brings us back to my first point - the caring part. 

Edited July 21, 2017 by Farmer77

[Farmer77]

More signs that impeachment could be a possibility as the republicans begin to distance themselves from Trump:

GOP, Dems agree on sweeping sanctions bill -- including provision Trump opposed 

The White House had objected to a key section of the bill that would mandate a congressional review if Trump attempted to ease or end the sanctions against Moscow. But lawmakers from both parties opted to keep the sanctions review due to wariness over the relationship between Trump and Putin.

[RoofGardener]

Umm... not really Farmer77. I believe Congress repeatedly blocked Obama's legislative agenda, but that didn't imply that impeachment was on the horizon. As I dimly understand it, impeachment relates to specific perceived "crimes" against Congress or the US Constitution.. sort of. Merely being unpopular amongst sections of the House is NOT a foreshadow of impeachment, no matter how much the left-wing media would wish otherwise. 

[Farmer77]

16 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Umm... not really Farmer77. I believe Congress repeatedly blocked Obama's legislative agenda, but that didn't imply that impeachment was on the horizon. As I dimly understand it, impeachment relates to specific perceived "crimes" against Congress or the US Constitution.. sort of. Merely being unpopular amongst sections of the House is NOT a foreshadow of impeachment, no matter how much the left-wing media would wish otherwise. 

I think you're missing my point. If impeachment talks get serious there would have to be 18 republicans who defected and voted to impeach along with the dems. All I was saying is that this is another sign that the GOP in the house and senate are willing to go against Trump. 

[ExpandMyMind]

On 2017-7-21 at 0:47 AM, and then said:

The idea that this hack could openly hire 15 HRC and Obama supporters, donors and bundlers and pay them and himself whatever they ask is outrageous. 

As far as I'm aware, only a few have been shown to donate to Obama's campaign. But this means very little and doesn't even come close to a conflict of interest. Even Trump himself has donated to a Hillary campaign.

Conflicts become even more ridiculous when you consider that Meuller is a self professed Republican and it has been agreed upon almost unanimously by both Reps and Dems that he has great character, is very fair and impartial and is the best man for the job. The only reason there is a problem with the man now is because he seems to be bearing fruit.

How is he a hack?

And just an aside, Trump is in no way acting like an innocent man here. He's scared, big time. If he uses the Sessions leak to try to get rid of Meuller then this will be the wake up call Republican politicians need. It'll without a doubt be the end to him, as it was Nixon. But at this point, with all his looking into whether or not he can pardon anyone - including himself - I think he'll just be happy with avoiding prison, **** the Presidency.

Edited July 23, 2017 by ExpandMyMind

[+and-then]

10 hours ago, ExpandMyMind said:

How is he a hack?

A man interested in a fair hearing of all the evidence would not be loading his team of attorneys exclusively with people who were supporters of the opposition party.  It doesn't pass the smell test to a person interested in being honest.  Were the tables turned you can be sure that the Dems and their supporters would be screaming about prosecutorial bias.  You know it.

[Tatetopa]

You might want to check other sources, I read this on CNN.  Its been in the news for a while that Rex Tillerson is unhappy with White House meddling in the State Department. Today friends are saying he may quit before the end of the year.    I fear something similar may happen to Mattis.  President Trump seems to dislike independent, capable leaders.  Perhaps his ego is threatened or he just wants to call all of the shots.  If they leave and he replaces them with loyal but incompetent people, we are headed for a rough ride.

[Farmer77]

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

You might want to check other sources, I read this on CNN.  Its been in the news for a while that Rex Tillerson is unhappy with White House meddling in the State Department. Today friends are saying he may quit before the end of the year.    I fear something similar may happen to Mattis.  President Trump seems to dislike independent, capable leaders.  Perhaps his ego is threatened or he just wants to call all of the shots.  If they leave and he replaces them with loyal but incompetent people, we are headed for a rough ride.

On that note:

Trump’s 'Axis of Adults' Is Breaking Apart

If you thought grownups like Mattis, McMaster and Tillerson were secretly running the administration, think again.

Edited July 24, 2017 by Farmer77

[RavenHawk]

On 7/20/2017 at 10:19 AM, Einsteinium said:

Except for that it IS a dumb idea, it would not work, it would be another 'bridge to nowhere'

So how would it not work?

 

and when the US finally collapses it would stand for decades as a reminder of the decisions that led to the collapse of the greatest nation on earth.

Interesting concept.  How would the wall be a symbol of our collapse?  I would think that no wall would be the symbol of that?  No wall would be the symbol of stupidity.

 

We have gotten by for hundreds of years without such a wall, illegal immigration is way down already,

What has worked for a hundred years does not mean it is an automatic for working in the future.  We have new threats that we haven’t had before.  Modern day means of transportation makes crossing the border survivable, etc.

 

and it would become a symbol of fear and isolationism.

Or it would be a symbol of doing the right (smart) thing and nothing to do with isolationism.  Isolationism would be not dealing with other nations, not closing the border.

 

A giant waste of money.

It really depends on how it is used.

 

Illegals would still come here and cartel guys would be able to charge them to smuggle them across the border (which the wall would not stop).

They would try.  Far fewer would make it.  The cartels charge them now anyway.  And that’s the point, to make it not worth the effort.

 

We should instead be working with Mexico to grow their economy, create more opportunities down there so their people are not so desperate to come here

That is their job.  That is the job of a nation.  To create opportunities for their own people.  The best way we can help is to close the border.  Not create opportunities here.

 

as well as enforce already existing laws and punish those who hire illegals.

This is part of the Wall (the defense of the wall).

 

We should end the war on drugs and remove the source of income that gives the Cartel's their power. The Cartel's exist because of the huge demand for drugs over here and the illegality of those drugs over here. They fulfill the demand, as Milton Friedman says, "See, if you look at the drug war from a purely economic point of view, the role of the government is to protect the drug cartel. That’s literally true."

If true then that means that the government is getting some kind of kickback.  If so, then we do need to drain the swamp.  We need to do one of two things as far as the cartels go.  We either escalate the war and play it to win, doing whatever it takes.  Or we go into the cartel business ourselves, make our own product, and undercut the cartels.  Beat them at their own game.  Don’t let it turn into a “Clear and Present Danger”.  Either way, we rob them of their life blood.

 

The problem of criminal illegal immigration on our southern border is directly tied to the war on drugs.

Your term “criminal illegal immigration” is misguided.  Illegals are committing a crime by being here illegally.  Immigration is a legal act.  Putting them together is conflating the issue.  It’s a euphemism so that it hides what is really going on.

 

It’s not the only thing.  Illegal immigration en masse brings its own crime, poverty, and disease.  Uncontrolled disease is perhaps more of a threat than the cartels.  Then you have the negative effect on the economy illegals are.  And the draining of a nation’s wealth going out.  Last but not least are those that enter for other nefarious reasons.

[Farmer77]

14 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

f true then that means that the government is getting some kind of kickback.  If so, then we do need to drain the swamp. 

The kickback comes in the form of profits for the prison industrial complex and law enforcement unions. Both of which love Sessions and Trump, yes I agree its time to drain the swamp.