Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Impeachment Thread


No Excuses

Impeachment  

198 members have voted

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



Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

What’s that?

 

People from his staff are admitting their wrongdoings, I know they are trying to gather all evidence but the Democrats need to proceed with the impeachment process quickly while public opinion favors them. 

 

trump is good at brainwashing his gullible people that whatever illegal actions he makes are just fine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cooked Crack said:

@hockeysc23

@dchogs

@PokerPacker
@Forehead

@Long n Left

@PleaseBlitz

@abdcskins

 

All you folks who voted maybe before October has your opinion changed with the current Ukrainian scandal.

My "maybe" at the time was more to do with myself needing more information to have an opinion.  There's more than enough information regarding various scandals at this point to impeach for multiple offenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, spjunkies said:

People from his staff are admitting their wrongdoings, I know they are trying to gather all evidence but the Democrats need to proceed with the impeachment process quickly while public opinion favors them.

I mean, Mitch is already telling people that any impeachment hearings in the Senate will be brief and that Trump will be absolved. Lindsey Graham told GOP senators to pledge a loyalty oath to Trump. There’s zero point in letting them put this to bed quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

I mean, Mitch is already telling people that any impeachment hearings in the Senate will be brief and that Trump will be absolved. Lindsey Graham told GOP senators to pledge a loyalty oath to Trump. There’s zero point in letting them put this to bed quickly.

 

Fair enough BUT if the Democrats can present enough evidence to keep the public on their side those people that pledged their support to trump will risk their seats. If the Democrats sit on this for too long they risk republicans twisting it and saying this is an election ploy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, spjunkies said:

 

Fair enough BUT if the Democrats can present enough evidence to keep the public on their side those people that pledged their support to trump will risk their seats. If the Democrats sit on this for too long they risk republicans twisting it and saying this is an election ploy.

You have to have to go full on Trump and say, so what if it's an election ploy?  It's a good one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, twa said:

 

judges, energy policy, immigration policy,environmental policy, deregulation and even foreign policy

 

 

So, you're in favor of interment camps, parent-child separation, child abuse, unsanitary conditions that have led to death, and an unprepared infrastructure that had no ready mechanism to put parents and children back together?

 

If you ask me Trump's immigration policy is pretty damn crappy. As for his wall, it's as good as the check he got from Mexico to pay for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, twa said:

 

but not a effective one imo :pint:

Sure seems to be effective sans the glass of Kool-Aid.   His own people are saying some pretty damning things and the poll numbers are responding.  They can't keep it up till election time but the longer it's drawn the more seems to come out, so far.

2 minutes ago, spjunkies said:

 

Is that an illustration of you drinking the republicans kool-aid?

You beat me to it, damn.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Burgold said:

So, you're in favor of interment camps, parent-child separation, child abuse, unsanitary conditions that have led to death, and an unprepared infrastructure that had no ready mechanism to put parents and children back together?

 

If you ask me Trump's immigration policy is pretty damn crappy. As for his wall, it's as good as the check he got from Mexico to pay for it.

 

Yes I believe in what Obama did for awhile if it leads to corrections in a failed immigration policy.

 

Is his wall worse than the double fence and security road voted for by the freckless Dems to get votes??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, KAOSkins said:

Sure seems to be effective sans the glass of Kool-Aid.   His own people are saying some pretty damning things and the poll numbers are responding.  They can't keep it up till election time but the longer it's drawn the more seems to come out, so far.

You beat me to it, damn.  

 

I heard the same on the Mueller investigation, but here we are still calling him POTUS.

 

Maybe I ain't the one chuggin koolaid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Obama didn't do that. What happened under Obama was that children who crossed the border without a parent or guardian were assigned to temporary housing. Trump and his team very intentionally devised and revised a policy to be as cruel and dangerous as possible. Moreover, you can tell they knew they were not continuing an Obama-era practice by they way they tried to lie about it.

 

The false parallels are always a problem, but when you have to defend a monster it provides you little other opportunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Burgold said:

So, you're in favor of interment camps, parent-child separation, child abuse, unsanitary conditions that have led to death, and an unprepared infrastructure that had no ready mechanism to put parents and children back together?

 

If you ask me Trump's immigration policy is pretty damn crappy. As for his wall, it's as good as the check he got from Mexico to pay for it.

Ok but it’s a fair trade off for appointing judges whose primary qualification is ideological, with loyalty to party & corporate interests being the primary determinant in their judgements.

 

Oh, and “environmental policy”. I mean, we all know who twa is but let’s say some random dude came on this board and said that they were a conservative & support Trump because of his environment policy... the only litmus test left to perform is to determine if that individual is stupid or full of **** or stupid & full of ****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

The ignore function is dead and all of you killed it.

 

giphy.gif

 

 

 

 

My apologies. The interment camps and cruelty demanded a response. Trump's immigration policy is monstrous. Sadly, he has wanted to do even worse, but some cooler heads have (temporarily) restrained him from ordering the National Guard to shoot children and infants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Ok but it’s a fair trade off for appointing judges whose primary qualification is ideological, with loyalty to party & corporate interests being the primary determinant in their judgements.

 

 

I'm curious if you have looked at the judicial experience of the POTUS wannabes judicial suggestions?

25 minutes ago, KAOSkins said:

If it were an election ploy it wouldn't necessarily involve impeachment, so to speak.

 

impeachment hasn't been involved other than talk, hell they won't even vote to formally start one.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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