Pocohantes calls for impeachment hearings...

[Tiberius]

 

Quote

 

Trump says he would turn to Supreme Court if Democrats move to impeach him

It was unclear how the president would legally justify such a move, since the Constitution delegates impeachment proceedings to Congress, not the courts.

 

How about having a president that understands how the constitution works? How can people support this total idiot?

 

 

[Q-baby!]

[Big Gun]

On 4/22/2019 at 11:32 AM, Joe Miner said:

 

You forgot backing infanticide, 16 year old voting, and doing away with the electoral college.

Also don't forget felons being allowed to vote and drivers licenses for illegals

[B-Man]

 

 

 

.

[row_33]

14 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

.

 

they only back punishment of crime when it's Trump for treason

 

everything else they think is a wonderful self-expression of assault and murder

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

.

[Q-baby!]

31 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

.

Then Trumptard promptly walks off the end down the stairs on his own, forgetting to remove the noose. 

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, BigMcD said:

 

When the con man's fixer calls the con man a con man, do you believe him?  Or do you instead ask yourself if you're being conned?

[Q-baby!]

11 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

When the con man's fixer calls the con man a con man, do you believe him?  Or do you instead ask yourself if you're being conned?

It’s like when a ***** calls another woman a *****. They are both whores. 

[DC Tom]

3 minutes ago, BigMcD said:

It’s like when a ***** calls another woman a *****. They are both whores. 

 

Or like when a Canadian like you calls someone else a Canadian, and you're both insufferable idiots.

[Q-baby!]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

Or like when a Canadian like you calls someone else a Canadian, and you're both insufferable idiots.

Try and keep up old dude! 

[IDBillzFan]

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

Or like when a Canadian like you calls someone else a Canadian, and you're both insufferable idiots.

 

You're the last one flicking that snot.

 

I'm begging you. Please. Ignore him with the rest of us. 

[Q-baby!]

Just now, LABillzFan said:

 

You're the last one flicking that snot.

 

I'm begging you. Please. Ignore him with the rest of us. 

Yeah! 

[DC Tom]

3 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

 

You're the last one flicking that snot.

 

I'm begging you. Please. Ignore him with the rest of us. 

 

Okay, since you're begging.  

 

He's Canadian anyway, so it's not like ignoring him is out of my way, really...

[Q-baby!]

5 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Okay, since you're begging.  

 

He's Canadian anyway, so it's not like ignoring him is out of my way, really...

Oh, Tammy! So close! 

[IDBillzFan]

10 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Okay, since you're begging.  

 

He's Canadian anyway, so it's not like ignoring him is out of my way, really...

 

Thanks. 

 

[Q-baby!]

3 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

 

Thanks. 

 

Thanks. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

On 4/22/2019 at 11:46 AM, Bob in Mich said:

 

Funny.

 

But the real question is, who will check Trump going forward if all of his previous obstructive behavior is deemed OK ?  Do you think that without further sanction, he will change his ways and stop interfering?  Are you OK with future actions that are similar to the 11 incidents described in the Meuller report?

I'm absolutely ok with the perception that the/A president had the balls to say "***** off" repeatedly, and with malice, to his enemies and to enemies of the state who set up a scheme that put him at personal and political risk.  I'm ok with future actions that are lawful in thought/word/deed that serve to protect his presidency and hamstring his enemies.  

 

I also support the declassification of material harmful to the democrats, Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe etc for both transparency and the greater good of all Americans.  

 

The answer to your question, btw, is that the opposition party will "check" the president moving forward, with a demonstrated willingness to say, do or support anything real or imagined that achieves their goal of annihilation of the man and his agenda. 

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I'm absolutely ok with the perception that the/A president had the balls to say "***** off" repeatedly, and with malice, to his enemies and to enemies of the state who set up a scheme that put him at personal and political risk.  I'm ok with future actions that are lawful in thought/word/deed that serve to protect his presidency and hamstring his enemies.  

 

I also support the declassification of material harmful to the democrats, Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe etc for both transparency and the greater good of all Americans.  

 

The answer to your question, btw, is that the opposition party will "check" the president moving forward, with a demonstrated willingness to say, do or support anything real or imagined that achieves their goal of annihilation of the man and his agenda. 

 

We are at a very interesting juncture in history, a crossroads even. 

 

For two years the public at large has been sold a phony story about Russians colluding with Trump to steal the 2016 election. This narrative was engineered by a small segment of the US Intelligence community, working on behalf of the Obama White House and the Clinton campaign. It was a flimsy premise, leaked to the media who then weaponized it in a massive, two year disinformation campaign. Millions of people, not knowing any better nor having a reason to doubt what their intelligence leaders and talking heads on TV were telling them about our "democracy being under assault", bought into this lie.

 

Millions. 

 

Now, slowly but surely, that narrative is being exposed for the con-job it always was. The Mueller report lays bare the deception of the past two years by not only smiting the Steele Dossier (the probe could not find ANY evidence to support the dossier's claims), but also the entire collusion/conspiracy hoax. The same report tries to minimize these revelations by piling on a (legally ridiculous) case for obstruction before punting on rendering a verdict. 

 

The millions of people who have been lied to, through no fault of their own, are being given an option now. A red pill or a blue pill. They can continue to follow the narrative created by Brennan, Clapper, Simpson, Steele, and Comey -- despite having incontrovertible evidence that these same people have been lying to them for the past two years about this very subject (and with Clapper and Brennan -- this is the second time they've been caught lying to the public about major events: WMD and US torture/spying on Congress), proving they've learned nothing from the past two years... or, they can take the red pill and start to question the narrative they've been given. 

 

Trump is the obstacle for many. His personality and Trumpisms rub some the wrong way, and they will never give him the benefit of the doubt. But he's ultimately irrelevant to this subject. The only thing that matters in this conversation is this simple question: 

 

Do you believe a sitting US President should be able to use, and abuse, the massive powers of our intelligence agencies and surveillance technology to spy on their political opponents or to execute a backdoor coup should their side lose in an election?

 

Because that's what really has gone on for the past two years. 

 

If you care about the republic, there can only be one answer to that question. It goes above partisanship or political parties. It's goes beyond Trump or Clinton or Obama. It's about whether or not we wish to live in a REAL democratic republic, or merely the illusion of one. 

[Magox]

On 4/19/2019 at 7:08 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Mayor Pete destroyed Beto. His campaign is dead, he just doesn't know it. 

 

Mayor Pete did destroy Beto.  Poor guy, I'm sure he thought he was the second coming of Obama.    

 

 

On 4/20/2019 at 9:23 PM, Doc Brown said:

People just don't like it when it thinks it works against them.  For instance.........

 

 

 

Everyone should know by now that he only says things that attempt to shed him in a good light.  His words are almost meaningless, which is why the thought that he attempted to obstruct justice or collude with Russians in plain sight is ridiculous.  It merely was the rantings of man who will say anything to gain public support.