Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

The Impeachment Thread

No Excuses

By No Excuses
in The Tailgate

Impeachment  

198 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Donald Trump be impeached for obstruction of justice?


Recommended Posts

NoCalMike

NoCalMike

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Larry said:


Got it. What she was really saying is that now, the next time a Dem President has an R Congress, they might abuse their investigatory power on a made up scandal to perform four years of searching for anything that might be of political advantage. Because of what the Dems did. 

 

The....next time?  We were all alive during Bill Clinton's presidency, yeah?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
China

China

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

Why do we have so many people with ****ty character in this country? People who don't believe or value anything beyond what they can use to feed their appetites.

 

Why is it that so few people have any interest in being ethical leaders and pillars of universal positive values?

 

Why are people so weak and accepting of terrible character and why aren't we making fun of nihilists for how short-sighted and incredibly dumb they must be, how terrible at life they must be, to derive no meaning from it?

 

I mean, how ****ing weak and stupid do you have to be at life to choose making the world worse for everyone so you can rule over your diarrhea vision for humanity, rather than working hard to find your place in a world while making it better for everyone?

 

I'm tired of these weak, dull, disconnected, failures of humanity. Especially these weak ass, cowardly ****ing men who wouldn't last a second in the jungle of real life without their privilege to leverage and their dunning kruger bumpkins to prey on.

 

**** you and your lives without meaning.

 

Pathetic mother****ers.

 

I think you answered your own question.  It's hard.

 

 

We've come along way from We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mistertim

mistertim

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Larry said:


Got it. What she was really saying is that now, the next time a Dem President has an R Congress, they might abuse their investigatory power on a made up scandal to perform four years of searching for anything that might be of political advantage. Because of what the Dems did. 

 

But now they've set the new standard of "If a White House doesn't like an investigation they can refuse to cooperate in any way, even if it's an impeachment inquiry, and even with Congressional subpoenas" so that could get interesting if there is a Dem president and a Republican House or Senate tried some rando investigations into whatever "scandal" they could find and the White House said "Nope. Not cooperating. Don't complain, you set the precedent. GTFO."

 

On one hand it would serve them right. But on the other that's still a goddamn dangerous precedent and I wouldn't want it to continue in general. 

 

12 minutes ago, Mooka said:

Is there anything more nauseating then hearing a politician in 2020 talk about partisanship?

 

Hearing Lindsey Graham talk about......anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fresh8686

Fresh8686

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, China said:

 

I think you answered your own question.  It's hard.

 

We've come along way from We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard.

 

 

 

Having character is like lifting weights, at first those 45lb dumbbells feel heavy as ****, but after you keep practicing with them you get fitter and it becomes easier to lift and you can go after heavier and heavier intensities.

 

There are different thresholds to character, like different weights and we all live in a country that seriously lacks in character based fitness. We are the equivalent of being too weak to even make it in the aerobics room at the planet fitness of character. ****ing people can't even handle the little pink dumbells weight of character, caring, and responsibility. 

 

Like a person can be insulin sensitive or unhealthy and insulin resistive/diabetic, a person can be meaning sensitive or meaning resistant. We have in this country a bunch of people who think it is cool to be a meaning diabetic. People are actually electing others into leadership positions because they are meaning diabetics. How ****ed up and unhealthy is that? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mistertim

mistertim

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

 

Having character is like lifting weights, at first those 45lb dumbbells feel heavy as ****, but after you keep practicing with them you get fitter and it becomes easier to lift and you can go after heavier and heavier intensities.

 

There are different thresholds to character, like different weights and we all live in a country that seriously lacks in character based fitness. We are the equivalent of being too weak to even make it in the aerobics room at the planet fitness of character. ****ing people can't even handle the little pink dumbells weight of character, caring, and responsibility. 

 

Like a person can be insulin sensitive or unhealthy and insulin resistive/diabetic, a person can be meaning sensitive or meaning resistant. We have in this country a bunch of people who think it is cool to be a meaning diabetic. People are actually electing others into leadership positions because they are meaning diabetics. How ****ed up and unhealthy is that? 

 

 

But that only applies if you actually believe fitness matters and that lifting weights is a good thing. Trump doesn't care about fitness (in a metaphorical or literal sense). He's a narcissistic sociopath who has no concept of integrity or character as long as he gets what he wants. They're simply irrelevant to him and he has no understanding of why they would ever be necessary as long as you "win". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoCalMike

NoCalMike

Posted
Posted

Once Trump is acquitted, it will be interesting to see if the Senate GOP goes along with even a censure.  Trump's insistence that he did "nothing wrong" is going to run up against any attempt to have a permanent mark on his record that says otherwise.  At least with impeachment I am sure he will argue it was "corrupt Dems" but if the censure was able to get bi-partisan support, Trump would be none too happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fresh8686

Fresh8686

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

But that only applies if you actually believe fitness matters and that lifting weights is a good thing. Trump doesn't care about fitness (in a metaphorical or literal sense). He's a narcissistic sociopath who has no concept of integrity or character as long as he gets what he wants. They're simply irrelevant to him and he has no understanding of why they would ever be necessary as long as you "win". 

 

I feel you and I know what you mean, but what I wrote always applies for everyone, it is as much a part of life as Newtons Law's of motion. They are inescapable realities of outcome, because they describe what happens when a balanced level of health and fitness is maintained (or not) in character as accurately as what happens with our physical body.

 

Does Trump really look like he's winning? He's winning in the frame of he's destroying what we want to protect and care for, but he's not winning at life to the point of being able to enjoy deep, fulfilling, and substantive experiences and connections. He's not winning when it comes to evolving and growing and becoming more capable, self-secure, and filled with joy.

 

Would you want his marriage? His wife can barely even stand to hold his hand in public. Would you like his friends? Does he even have friends? Would you want his followers? They're either idiotic simpletons, nihilists, or opportunists looking to parasite off his rotting corpse as long as they can, before they monkey-branch off to the next host.

 

He's so unhealthy in character his body can't even recognize or reflect what those kinds of experiences look and feel like. He's not just a mental dunning kruger, he is a character dunning kruger, in that he is too base, to realize how base and depraved he actually is, and even more how badly he is losing at life to have so weak a spirit and many of his followers have the same problem.

 

The deepest and most fulfilling thresholds to life, are walled off from people who don't have the character fitness to maintain the values and principles necessary for supporting those upper echelon level life experiences and connections. Even if you try to give it to people like that or they try to take it through money, leverage and exploitation, nature still keeps them from being able to truly internalize and experience it "in full-bloom", because nature requires at least a two-factor system for feedback. Which doesn't give emotional content past a certain point unless the internal structures within that person are of a level of development to hold and resonate that emotional charge so that the natural process of reaction, communication, and internalization/adaption occur.

 

Nature has boundaries in place that force you to either see the process through step by step and grow or take a short-cut to some degree that makes things easier in the short-term, but at the expense of missing out on in some degree the adaptations and changes that would occur within you and around you if you had done things the right way. This is an escapable fact of life, that most humans don't seem to fully grasp and appreciate. You lose very important and precious ****, with certain short-cuts and it is very, very hard to get them back. Unfortunately, we live in a world where humans don't understand that or teach that, so when people lose these things we don't even have a sophisticated understanding of what is lost and how to respond to those people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fresh8686

Fresh8686

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, illone said:

Speaking of character, the hypocrisy is mind numbing https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article239913588.html

 

I feel like our societal dialog would benefit if we clearly defined three types of hypocrites.

 

Those who genuinely believe in a standard and fail to live up to it at times, but try to change.

 

Those who vaguely agree with a standard and pay it lip service, but never really abide by it or try to improve much.

 

Those who have no interest in a standard at all and only use it as a tool mask their true intentions and damage those who are a part of the first category, by holding them to the most extreme measure of a standard. This is done in an effort to dilute or destroy the very meaning and fidelity of the given standard itself through false equivalency and a corruption of meaning and nuance through an over-reduction into simplicity.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
illone

illone

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

I feel like our societal dialog would benefit if we clearly defined three types of hypocrites.

 

 

Great!  Something new to argue with the other people about.

 

"You are a level 3 hypocrite!"

 

"No, you are"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...