╌>

TWO OUT OF THREE AMERICANS BELIEVE DONALD TRUMP IS A CRIMINAL

  

Category:  Op/Ed

By:  john-russell  •  5 years ago  •  143 comments

TWO OUT OF THREE AMERICANS BELIEVE DONALD TRUMP IS A CRIMINAL

Qunnipiac poll says two thirds of Americans believe Trump committed crimes prior to becoming president.

This begs the question, how or why is he still in office?

I read something yesterday to the effect of that Trump's existence and behavior in the highest office has served to break down norms and standards that we as Americans have always accepted as a given. That is his most destructive and poisonous legacy.

We have allowed this putrid human being to sink our nation to his level .

Who knows if we will ever get back the country we used to have before this fool came on the political scene in 2011.

related

https://www.axios.com/poll-trump-crimes-michael-cohen-c42613c3-8ff0-4d4d-b9e3-a2bdfc805e5e.html


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  author  JohnRussell    5 years ago
64% of American voters believe President Trump committed crimes before he became president, while just 24% believe he did not, according to Quinnipiac poll released Tuesday .

Details: Voters are more divided on the question of whether or not Trump committed crimes during his presidency, with 45% responding yes and 43% no. Of those surveyed, 50% said they believe Michael Cohen — who detailed alleged crimes committed by Trump during his testimony last week — more than they believe the president. As he enters the third year of his presidency, 65% of Americans say Trump is not honest, including 25% of Republicans — "his worst grade ever on that character trait," according to Quinnipiac.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1    5 years ago

I don't believe it, I KNOW IT.

Donald Rump is a lifelong gangster, criminal, thug, mobster who is now head of his own crime family.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @1.2    5 years ago

Who in hell is Donald Rump?

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
1.2.2  Ender  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.1    5 years ago

I would say, someone that makes as much sense as Donald Duck but has a big fat ass.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2  JBB    5 years ago

Those remaining one in three Americans are those who support criminal Trumpism...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  JBB @2    5 years ago

One HAS TO wonder about the integrity or intelligence of those who might vote for him in Nov 2020.  If everyone who thinks he is a criminal refuses to vote for him in 21 months, he will max out at 36%. 

Somehow we have to regain our national self-respect and integrity prior to the  presidential election.

Or would we rather see the headline

"70% Of Voters Think Trump Is A Criminal , Re-elected Him Anyway. "

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to    5 years ago

Wally, I hate to break it to you, but when someone testifies before Congress that you committed a wide array of crimes , it is highly unlikely that you are innocent. Even if the witness is himself a convicted liar.

LONG BEFORE Trump ran for president it was known that he ran a corrupt business organization. He avoided trouble because white collar crime is usually overlooked in America. Then he had to run for office, get elected, and embarrass the country every day , and his behavior has caught the attention of the feds. Couldn't happen to a more deserving guy.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
2.1.3  bbl-1  replied to    5 years ago

The Trump's actual approval rating is 286%.  This president is revered and adored by every living American and the vast majority of Americans that are in the class of the decedent. 

This too.  You asserted that if anyone is subpoenaed they should take The Fifth Amendment.  Absolutely not---every subpoenaed witness against the Trump should take The Second Amendment.  It is more fitting, more resolute and proves the character of their loyalty to the one chosen by gawd.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.1.5  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    5 years ago

John, I hate to break it to you, but when a know liar, who will say anything to get a better deal from heir Mueller, testifies in front of Congress w/o offering one shred of evidence to back any he says- only the Dems and their sheeple will actually believe him.

As for the Feds, hopefully heir Mueller will have to answer for his abuse of power, and over reach, after his report is given. Of course Establishment POS like him and Comey that transition easily jobs no matter which party controls the WH rarely ever answer for anything.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.6  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1.5    5 years ago

I have a question for you Ronin. When Donald Trump says he is innocent , is he believable?

I ask you this question for two basic reasons. One Trump is a known liar. Not just a liar , a pathological and constant liar. Two, he is a known fraud and cheat. He essentially admitted guilt of fraud when he paid victims of the Trump University fraud 25 million dollars. He is also a known tax cheat, The New York Times essentially proved this with a massive story about it last year.

In other words , there is no reason to disbelieve Cohen. 

The defense that Trump didnt do what he is accused of BECAUSE Cohen has lied before doesnt even come close to cutting it.

If Trump is not charged or convicted of a crime it will be because of technicalities, not because he hasnt done anything wrong.

 
 
 
CM
Freshman Silent
2.1.7  CM  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    5 years ago

LONG BEFORE Trump ran for president it was known that he ran a corrupt business organization.

We have know about him for 40 years in New York..

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
2.1.8  Dulay  replied to    5 years ago
If subpoenaed, they should show up and take the Fifth.

The irony is that y'all insist that the goal it to GET Trump. If THAT is true, the immunity deals will flow and they will still have to testify about Trump.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
2.1.9  Jack_TX  replied to  CM @2.1.7    5 years ago
We have know about him for 40 years in New York.

Not just New York.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
2.1.10  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.6    5 years ago
In other words , there is no reason to disbelieve Cohen. 

There is every reason to disbelieve Cohen.  That doesn't mean Trump is trustworthy, BTW.

The idea that a liar is not lying just because you want those particular lies to be true is infantile.  Stop it.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
2.1.11  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Jack_TX @2.1.10    5 years ago
There is every reason to disbelieve Cohen

doesn't that one word there, what's it called, ahh, that 'every' word there that modifies that there subject word, reason, doesn't that word usually mean to not have exceptions  ?

.

Because i can't afford to buy it.

Cohens' statements were under strict scrutiny by ALL .This includes Mueller, The Southern section there, court of New York, the entire Congress and all of their researchers and such, as well as the entire world that may have witnessed hearing.

.

He could have opened himself up to more time sentenced, if he was caught in an indisputable lie by those overseeing and watching him,  that might have had some skin in this game.

U do realize you do not know as much as say for instance, Mueller, as to the actual truth about what  Trump and Cohen, may have colluded on, in private.

There is a small mounting mountain of evidence that could possibly support or dispute almost 'EVERY' thing Cohen testified to , so , in short, there is NOT EVERY reason to disbelieve Cohen

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
2.1.12  Jack_TX  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2.1.11    5 years ago
U do realize you do not know as much as say for instance, Mueller, as to the actual truth about what  Trump and Cohen, may have colluded on, in private.

And you surely realize that you do not know as much as Mueller, either.  He has all the evidence.  His report will be definitive. 

Believing Cohen outright is idiotic.  Believing Trump outright is idiotic.  When you want truth, go to people with all the information and with a long history of honesty.  That describes neither Trump nor Cohen.

The idea that a liar is not lying just because you want those particular lies to be true is infantile.  Stop it.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
2.1.13  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Jack_TX @2.1.12    5 years ago
That describes neither Trump nor Cohen. The idea that a liar is not lying just because you want those particular lies to be true is infantile.  Stop it.

It describes Mueller.

Sorry, i got the Go sign, i will not "Stop it".

Are you saying there were NO consequences to Cohen, had he LIED on that stand at that hearing  ?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
2.1.14  Jack_TX  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2.1.13    5 years ago
It describes Mueller.

My point exactly.

Are you saying there were NO consequences to Cohen, had he LIED on that stand at that hearing  ?

Well....look closely.  Did I say that?  Did I say anything like that?

I simply said there is no reason to believe him.  You don't know when liars are lying and when they're not.  Pretending that a known liar is suddenly telling the truth simply because you like what he's saying is moronic.  

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
2.1.15  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Jack_TX @2.1.14    5 years ago
Did I say anything like that?

it would depend on every definition of

yours, for the word "every"    time in my eyes.

.

"There is every reason to disbelieve Cohen"

C'mon man, knowing one might wind up with a longer prison sentence, has been known on occasion, to be a DAMN FINE incentive, to NOT LIE!

Yea,

that little thing like time spent increase, in going to prison for even longer than currently sentenced, just might cause one to think about "every" day longer, having to be spent in Prison, for lying further ,

is sometimes on rare occasions, used by Governments to incentivise people to be truthful.

i do

NOT find labeling ones who have given you logical evidence as to why Cohen might possibly be not going to LIE further, as he is ALREADY GOING AWAY FOR IT.

Stating that, by my logic and reason for feeling Cohens' testimony could prove to be true, as Mueller already knows a hell of a lot about what is actually true, how do you feel indirect insults hurled my way, bolster your argument...?

You  know, that "infantile" "Stop it" " moronic" little slights that i find so amusing, as i'm not the poster who doesn't comprehend what it is, implied and inferred, as to what it is your words and context manipulate into a meaning, that can be perceived, by ones own unique perceptional abilities, as i like taking disability out on ones who can't seem to concede a point, already taken from them, but you can deny away, as it will not deter one a tad determined to get to the truth.

I am independent, and not just of thought and reason. Cause even as you may be critical on my way of thinking, it does not remove my ability. Disability is how and why i take MANY sides of an argument presented, attempt to remove bias, and always try to keep an open mind while weighing the different arguments presented as i always try to be open to new and changing evidence, process it, and come to my Own Conclusions , as to what is most likely, imoh so humble opine, the truth...

and

THATS A FACT JACK

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
2.1.16  Jack_TX  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2.1.15    5 years ago
There is every reason to disbelieve Cohen"

Having difficulty with figures of speech, I see.

No, it is not meant as a literal "every". 

C'mon man, knowing one might wind up with a longer prison sentence, has been known on occasion, to be a DAMN FINE incentive, to NOT LIE!

You do not know what he has been promised or by whom.  You do not know what he has done or what protection he may require.  You also don't know what he may have said that is not true but cannot be disproven.

We do know he has declared himself a dishonest person.  Believing a dishonest person is folly.  I'm not sure how this fundamental idea escapes so many people.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
3  Tacos!    5 years ago

Nothing about what those crimes might be though. That's some significant hysteria.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @3    5 years ago

Among other things, New York is investigating him for insurance fraud.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
3.1.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    5 years ago

Let people know if they find anything he can be convicted on...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.1.1    5 years ago

You would vote for someone that 2/3 of America thinks is a criminal. Good to know.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
3.1.3  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    5 years ago
New York is investigating him for insurance fraud

It seems improbable that when people responded to this poll, they were thinking of that particular case. I think it's more likely that they just hear negative crap about him everyday from the Democratic-leaning media and uncritically accept it all as true.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
3.1.4  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    5 years ago

I did not say that. I just want to see concrete proof instead of hearsay.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Guide
3.1.5  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Tacos! @3.1.3    5 years ago

And the confirmed reports of.....Trump University Scams..... Access Hollywood tapes...… Stiffing contractors...… Confirmed Bankruptcies….  Taking the statements of the leaders of Russia, N. Korea, and Saudi Arabia over our multiple National Security agencies...… and cheating on his wives..... Doesn't move you to reject Trump?

I'm pretty sure that Trump wouldn't be seen so negatively by the media, if he and his administration didn't give them so much material to work with. 

 
 
 
lib50
Professor Silent
3.1.7  lib50  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.1.4    5 years ago

Proof?  Like a birth certificate?  Like this?  Maybe this also belongs on the seed about the media where the right is whining about coverage.

I think now some of the truth is probably sinking in about Trump being the naked emperor.  His lies, and those echo lies from the gop have finally caught up.  By the way, if whoever went apeshit over that birth cert should be screaming from the rafters for Trump's tax returns.  If he had nothing to hide, he'd be putting them out on twitter.  What are they trying to hide?  Its only a wonder it took so long for so many Americans to wake up.

 
 
 
lib50
Professor Silent
3.1.9  lib50  replied to    5 years ago

You may want to rethink that part about it being democrats.  Did you hear the latest from Trump's former lawyer Ty Cobb?  Whoa!  Sure, he didn't say Trump was guilty, but that will come out in investigations.  But this is NOT a witch hunt.  It has already exceeded everything the gop found with Benghazi.  And remember how long that went on even after reports of nothing there there. 

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Guide
3.1.10  FLYNAVY1  replied to    5 years ago

So Wally...…. You are okay then with a person occupying the oval office where......

…..we have confirmation of.....Trump University Scams..... Access Hollywood tapes...… Stiffing contractors...… Confirmed Bankruptcies….  Taking the statements of the leaders of Russia, N. Korea, and Saudi Arabia over our multiple National Security agencies...… and cheating on his wives.....

These aren't lies Wally.... These are all CONFIRMED actions and activities by Trump....... and you still think he belongs in the White House...?

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
3.1.12  Tacos!  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @3.1.5    5 years ago
Bunchastuff . . . Doesn't move you to reject Trump?

Sure, it might. But that stuff isn't criminal. We were talking, specifically, about crimes.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Guide
3.1.13  FLYNAVY1  replied to    5 years ago

I asked the question, I guess I got your honest answer....

So this pretty much confirms that the rule of law nor minimal moral standards are pretty meaningless to those that share your views.

Thanks for sharing... Regards.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Guide
3.1.14  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Tacos! @3.1.12    5 years ago

I'll agree activities that end up in court such as the Trump U. scam, and the more than 60 lawsuits for non-payment of contractors don't constitute crimes, but breech of contract, but can I ask if you would feel differently if you were one of those contractors or enrollees?   

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
3.1.15  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    5 years ago

Hillary won the the popular vote, and Trump won the Electoral College- proving that the majority of Americans will vote any POS so long as they have the coveted D or R behind their names.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.1.17  JBB  replied to    5 years ago

Incorrect...

If impeached by the House Trump will be tried by the Senate...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.18  Tessylo  replied to    5 years ago
Rump tossed any kind of moral standards out the window, most corrupt turd in American history.
 
 
 
lib50
Professor Silent
3.1.19  lib50  replied to  Ronin2 @3.1.15    5 years ago

Its why I have NEVER been either R or D.  They have to prove themselves before they get my vote.  The blind party loyalty is pretty obvious when you aren't part of it.  But I can't abide by a party that is as dishonest and disloyal to the country, and the R's have been going down a dark path Newt Gingrich helped pave.  Then came the teabags.  And McConnells total obstruction of Obama.  I don't forget.  The lack of standards from the gop is disgusting and unAmerican.  When you are fine with Putin running your agenda, that's a problem.

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Guide
3.1.20  Nowhere Man  replied to  lib50 @3.1.19    5 years ago
The blind party loyalty is pretty obvious when you aren't part of it.

The rest of your comment is a pretty good demonstration of your own blind party loyalty....

The lack of standards from the gop is disgusting and unAmerican.  When you are fine with Putin running your agenda, that's a problem.

Still waiting for.....

They have to prove themselves before they get my vote.

The haven't proven a thing yet, yet they have your vote, I would argue they had your vote long before they thought they had to prove anything... In fact I think that is still the case today.... Liberals don't have to prove anything, simple heresay claims are enough....

Plenty of very public history to prove the truth of this..... (just look at the media)

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
3.1.22  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JBB @3.1.17    5 years ago

That still does not guarantee removal from office.

 
 
 
CM
Freshman Silent
3.1.23  CM  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    5 years ago

Among other things, New York is investigating him for insurance fraud.

I bet he regrets running for President..

 
 
 
lady in black
Professor Quiet
3.1.24  lady in black  replied to  CM @3.1.23    5 years ago

All his skeletons are coming out of the closet.  

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
3.1.25  igknorantzrulz  replied to  lady in black @3.1.24    5 years ago

no bones about it

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
3.1.26  Dulay  replied to    5 years ago
That figure is a complete fabrication. Just thinking so doesn't make it so.
Show the people the evidence.

From the poll:

35. Do you think that President Trump committed any crimes before he was president, or don't you think so?

Yes/Committed crime 64%

No 24% 
 
DK/NA 13%

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
3.1.27  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @3.1.12    5 years ago
We were talking, specifically, about crimes.

Like conspiring to violate campaign finance laws?

 
 
 
lib50
Professor Silent
3.1.28  lib50  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.1.20    5 years ago

[Deleted]  Or are you deliberately being obtuse?  Read the comment and try again. 

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Guide
3.1.29  Nowhere Man  replied to  lib50 @3.1.28    5 years ago

Oh I read it.... I've yet to see you criticize any Democrat yet..... (but I've seen a lot of excusing them)

the R's have been going down a dark path Newt Gingrich helped pave.

And the D's have been traveling the same path the Clinton's paved.

This I agree with 100%  Gingrich thru Pelosi have all been rather obtuse..... just as obtuse as Clinton thru Obama (playing exactly like the democrats do and yes that includes GWB)

The whole damned government has become psychophantic in my opinion.... And when they get back to responding to the people and our needs maybe then they can garner some respect back..... But until then, supporting either side is being just as psychophantic as they are....

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
3.1.30  igknorantzrulz  replied to  lib50 @3.1.28    5 years ago
Can you read?  Is comprehension your problem?  Or are you deliberately being obtuse? 

i'd have to go with the one formerly known as the latter, that some refuse to climb.

Maybe we should let Tex discuss with how his similar going Nowhere Man, argument, with Nowhere Man., is likely going Nowhere, but just getting there sooner, point.

Though they both are fun to play with  .

I do find it concerning, that obviously intelligent individuals, choose to be, what was that not Acute little adjective you did mention,   Obtuse, i believe it was ,as not right, would be another angle that could be viewed, and construed as incongruent thoughts on plains, can cause seat belt signs to illuminate, what people don't want to see, without that annoying little ding ding ding   sound

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
3.1.31  igknorantzrulz  replied to  CM @3.1.23    5 years ago
I bet he regrets running for President..

i'd bet the whole damn world regrets it, except for a few thinking they are actually benefiting 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
3.1.32  Jack_TX  replied to  lib50 @3.1.19    5 years ago
Its why I have NEVER been either R or D

Riiiiiiight.

Good grief.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
3.1.33  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    5 years ago
You would vote for someone that 2/3 of America thinks is a criminal. Good to know.

Explain why I should care what these people think.

2/3 of America doesn't know sine from cosine, Laertes from Polonious, FICA from FINRA, Andrew Jackson from Andrew Johnson, ETF from EFT, Medicare from Medicaid, Sweden from Switzerland, or oncology from otolaryngology.  

Americans are morons.  We're famous around the world for it.  We don't know our collective ass from a hole in the ground, and now we're trying to pretend crime is decided by popularity contest?  Oh for fuck's sake.  

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
3.1.34  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.33    5 years ago
We don't know our collective ass from a hole in the ground, and now we're trying to pretend crime is decided by popularity contest?  Oh for fuck's sake.  

maybe somebody should take a poll on this subject,

but for fuck's sake, we'd better check with fuck first

 
 
 
livefreeordie
Junior Silent
3.1.35  livefreeordie  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.33    5 years ago

America votes for immoral Marxist statist Democrats proving they are pretty stupid

 
 
 
KDMichigan
Junior Participates
3.1.36  KDMichigan  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    5 years ago
You would vote for someone that 2/3 of America thinks is a criminal. Good to know.

Would you? It seems Hillary beat President Trump to it.

 
 
 
lib50
Professor Silent
3.1.37  lib50  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.32    5 years ago
Riiiiiiight. Good grief.

I was an Independent at age 18 and am now 'decline to state', have NEVER been an R or D, and have voted across party lines until republicans became assholes who make bad policies and create hate and division, and it began with Newt.    You must be talking about your partisan self if you can't imagine real independent thinking.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
3.1.38  Jack_TX  replied to  lib50 @3.1.37    5 years ago
I was an Independent at age 18

Riiiiiight.

Do show us all the posts you've made agreeing with Republicans.

Or show us two or three.  

I could tell everybody watching the soccer game I'm a neutral, but when I'm on my feet cheering for the 90th minute winner....I'm kinda not neutral anymore.  

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
3.1.39  Dulay  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.38    5 years ago

Independent doesn't mean neutral Jack. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.40  TᵢG  replied to  livefreeordie @3.1.35    5 years ago
Marxist statist

Oxymoron per Marx.

You must be referring to 'Marxists' like Stalin and Mao.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Guide
3.1.41  FLYNAVY1  replied to    5 years ago

So settling out of court on charges of fraud related to Trump-U and unpaid contractors doesn't matter in your book?

So by that thinking, Hillary was as clean as snow as she was never found guilty of anything in a court of law.     

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
3.1.42  Jack_TX  replied to  Dulay @3.1.39    5 years ago
Independent doesn't mean neutral Jack. 

What percentage of your votes in the last election were cast for Democrats?

How about the one before that?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
3.1.43  Dulay  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.42    5 years ago
What percentage of your votes in the last election were cast for Democrats? How about the one before that?

Of what relevance is my voting record to whether independence equates to neutral Jack? 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
3.1.44  Jack_TX  replied to  Dulay @3.1.43    5 years ago
Of what relevance is my voting record to whether independence equates to neutral Jack? 

When all of someone's votes go to candidates of one party, they look a bit full of shit if they then claim to be independent.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
3.1.45  Dulay  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.44    5 years ago
When all of someone's votes go to candidates of one party, they look a bit full of shit if they then claim to be independent.

That speaks to the ideology of the party, not necessarily a lack of independence of the voter. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
3.1.46  Jack_TX  replied to  Dulay @3.1.45    5 years ago
That speaks to the ideology of the party, not necessarily a lack of independence of the voter. 

Riiiiight.  Of course it does.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
4  bbl-1    5 years ago

Trump a criminal?  No.  It is doubtful he will ever have to account for anything.  "Grab em' by the puffy," proved his invulnerability.  The Omarosa proclaimed that, "You will bow and kneel."  Many christian theologians have affirmed that, 'the Trump was ordained and sent by gawd'.  Against this there is no defense.  The Trump has achieved what no other man in the history of mankind has accomplished.  It will be written that the Trump carries more weight, has more influence and will attain the stature of immortality eclipsing even that of Jesus.

The one third of Americans who stand by the Trump in the face of all adversity will be the chosen ones that ascend to the promised nirvana of milk, honey and promiscuous delights.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Guide
4.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  bbl-1 @4    5 years ago

If you ever read Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land"..... your third of Americans sound like they will form something like the  "Church of the New Revelation" (Fosterites)

History of the Organization: It was shortly after the AI War that Reverend Joesph Foster received the Holy Word. A new revelation for a new age. It looked like good old fashioned social-capitalism with a sugar coating of dust-stomping southern preaching, a pinch of stern Mormon morals, a dash of Carnie atmosphere with a firm handshake to Madison Avenue, and a plain and evident appeal to the old saw of Us and Them . To survive the coming tribulation, the good people of Ghodd had to band together and cast off the sinner and his works, also his goods and services, and form a mighty fortress against evil and oppression. That would be those with any dissenting opinion or critics.
       At the core of the deal was a two tiered plan of salvation. For the Seeker was the stern morals and holy word. For the Chosen was a near unlimited license to joy (however you defined it), as long as you stayed within the confines of the Church community. Seeker and Chosen alike were to buy only from each other, not to partake of the goods of sinners. Sinners could buy from them all they wanted to. Brand loyalty assured by Ghodd's word and power. To buy from sinners was to sin, and well, you didn't want that.
       The second feature of the Fosterites was aggression. Bad press was not only not tolerated, it was attacked with fire and clubs. From the ranks of Seekers came the Soldiers of Ghodd who were willing to do mayhem to get that golden key to the Ranks of the Chosen and the license from Ghodd for happiness.
       Lastly was that direct connection to Heaven above. Ghodd sent directives to the head of the Church, when he spoke, Ghodd spoke, and don't you doubt that son.
       Ten years after the AI war the Fosterites had beat, bought, and wheedled, their way to a major force in Earth politics. They were always looking for some small and powerless group that they could point their soldiers at, preferably one that the general public would not care about. Had events gone according to their plan, they would have had a total theocracy by the Year 2120.

Full article here:

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
4.1.1  bbl-1  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @4.1    5 years ago

Must admit there were shades of s/ in my #4.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  bbl-1 @4.1.1    5 years ago

You're good at the sarcasm.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5  Jack_TX    5 years ago

Over half of Americans believe a house can be inhabited by evil spirits.  

One third of Millenials think GWB is responsible for more deaths than Stalin.

Popular opinion does not make something so.....especially American popular opinion.

There is an investigation ongoing.  Let it conclude.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
7  Hal A. Lujah    5 years ago

Two out of three Americans believe ________

Trump supporter:   who cares?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8  author  JohnRussell    5 years ago

Trump’s Pervasive Criminal Nature is Being Exposed

Former Trump Organization vice president Michael Cohen is on Capitol Hill again on Wednesday, testifying for a second time in a closed session of the House Intelligence Committee. It’s not clear precisely what they’ll be discussing, but committee chairman Adam Schiff spoke to the media after Cohen’s first appearance and made clear that they’re focused on documents.

“We are in communication with, obviously, Mr. Cohen and his counsel about further document requests following our interview today that we’ll be able to discuss at our next session,” Schiff said after Cohen had finished for the day. “We also went through documents in our possession, dozens of documents in our possession with Mr. Cohen, but we have additional document requests that we will be in discussion with him about.”

Of course, the documents are supposed to help explain criminal conspiracies involving the president of the United States. It’s beginning to look like the case against Donald Trump is going to be a demonstration of truly pervasive criminality.

In October 2018, the New York Times published overwhelming evidence that Trump has been a world class tax-cheat . David Fahrenthold of the Washington Post has already won a Pulitzer Prize for his exposure of Trump’s fraudulent charities and charitable giving. House Financial Services Committee chairwoman Maxine Waters is going to be investigating the Donald J. Trump Foundation, but it has already been shut down by the then-New York attorney general who said her investigation found “a shocking pattern of illegality involving the Trump Foundation — including unlawful coordination with the Trump presidential campaign, repeated and willful self-dealing, and much more.”

After Michael Cohen said in his public testimony before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that Trump has engaged in insurance fraud, the New York Department of Financial Services issued subpoenas to the Trump Organization’s insurance brokerage firm. Two weeks ago, the Department of Justice’s Southern District of New York “served a very broad subpoena on the Trump inaugural committee.”

Then there is the emoluments issue:

Prosecutors for the state of Maryland and the District of Columbia have subpoenaed a company owned by Donald Trump , seeking information about the president’s possible violations of the emoluments clause of the Constitution. According to The Times of London , Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh and D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine demanded the financial filings of DJT Holdings LLC—which owns the president’s Scotland resorts, as well as Trump International Hotel in Washington—as part of an investigation into whether profits from Trump’s D.C. hotel are “flowing to the president through his affiliated entities.”

Add to all of this that Michael Cohen has already pled guilty to having committed hush-money crimes under Trump’s direction, leaving the president an unindicted co-conspirator. We also have an enormous amount of criminal behavior to look at before we even begin to look at the Mueller report.

With House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler having issued 81 Russia-related subpoenas on Monday, some are arguing that the Democrats don’t have enough focus. That’s certainly the argument that law professor Jonathan Turley made in The Hill on Wednesday. Turley makes some good points in his piece, but I think what he’s missing is that the best case against Trump’s continued presence on the Oval Office is the one that simply overwhelms all doubters. First, you demonstrate that the man is manifestly a criminal. Then, once the public is convinced of this, the specific rationales for removing him almost don’t matter.

In the grand scheme of things, the Mueller report could be almost an afterthought.
 
 
 
livefreeordie
Junior Silent
8.1  livefreeordie  replied to  JohnRussell @8    5 years ago

If God forbid the Democrats seize control of the White House and move forward with their totalitarian vision, free citizens will have no recourse but to follow the advice of both Alexander Hamilton and John F Kennedy

Alexander Hamilton Federalist 28

If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.

JFK Nation of Minutemen

January 29, 1961

“In my own native state of Massachusetts, the battle for American freedom was begun by the thousands of farmers and tradesmen who made up the Minute Men -- citizens who were ready to defend their liberty at a moment's notice. Today we need a nation of minute men; citizens who are not only prepared to take up arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as a basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom. The cause of liberty, the cause of America, cannot succeed with any lesser effort.”

 
 
 
lib50
Professor Silent
8.1.1  lib50  replied to  livefreeordie @8.1    5 years ago

Takes a lot of nerve to call winning an election SEIZING if democrats win.  When twice republicans have lost popular vote and been placed despite losing a large popular vote the last election.  That and a lot of voter suppression and ELECTION FRAUD.  Also have republicans who have lost go and try to make sure the incoming democrat loses his power to make changes, something the courts are fortunately striking down.  Sounds like you are almost calling for a civil war, are you pushing that Russian narrative picked up by Trump so if he loses the groundwork is laid for something nefarious?  I sure hope not. 

 
 
 
livefreeordie
Junior Silent
8.1.2  livefreeordie  replied to  lib50 @8.1.1    5 years ago

The popular vote for President isn’t in the Constitution, so I could care less about popular vote.

the Stalinist Democrats have been openly advocating a coup to remove both Pence and Trump so they can seize power and complete their Stalinist Revolution 

if they do so there will be a second civil war as we fight to preserve liberty.  It is our inherent right.

"Whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience." -- John Locke, 1690

As noted in the Declaration of Independence

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, ...

...But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
8.1.3  igknorantzrulz  replied to  livefreeordie @8.1.2    5 years ago
I could care less about popular vote.

looks like your not gonna be prom Queen this year then...

Civil War, huh   "what's so civil, about war, anyway"

.

As noted in the Declaration of Independence

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, ...

...But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

How do you feel about Women ?

Which side of the WAR, should they be on ?

Because our Founding Fathers wrote this a spell back, back when women and non-Whites couldn't even vote.

Now we can vote on every comment, but i won't comment on that.

.

yea, grab your rifle and pitchfork after the Treasonous Traitors occupying our White house are formally evicted.

You'll see how that goes, rather quickly.

didn't you just claim if Democrats win the next Presidential Election, They will "seize" the White House ?

Cause, don't have a seizure, but i'm fairly certain Trump & Comp will be evicted before 2020, as i have the vision, and if 

u think, the people of this nation that don't, can rise up and defeat 

THE FUKEN US ARMED FORCES...

"farewell and adieu my fair Spanish lady, farewell and adieu my ladies of Spain"  

cause you'll either be dead, in jail, or in the hospital 

.

Good Luck though, and don't forget to tell all your friends

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @8.1.1    5 years ago
When twice republicans have lost popular vote and been placed despite losing a large popular vote the last election.

"Placed" like every President in your entire lifetime? THAT kind of "placed"?

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
8.1.5  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Texan1211 @8.1.4    5 years ago
"Placed"

you know Tex, unlike Win or Show.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  igknorantzrulz @8.1.5    5 years ago
you know Tex, unlike Win or Show.

You could just read up on how Presidents are really elected instead of all the popular vote bs.

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Participates
8.1.7  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  igknorantzrulz @8.1.3    5 years ago
THE FUKEN US ARMED FORCES...

Considering the majority of active military and veterans support T-Rump , what makes you so sure they would be fighting on your side against the Trump supporters???

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
8.1.8  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @8.1.7    5 years ago

thus Y this long slow investigation N eventual Xplanation for the ones who've found it convenient to ignore SO MANY LIES, THAT EVEN u can't Deny,

Ken U ???

Please elaborate on truth u seem to be hinting u might hate

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Participates
8.1.10  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  igknorantzrulz @8.1.8    5 years ago
Please elaborate on truth u seem to be hinting u might hate

There are many truths that I hate:

All of these don't even begin to make the tip of the iceberg of things I hate about politics, politicians, and government.

 
 
 
Old Hermit
Sophomore Silent
8.1.11  Old Hermit  replied to    5 years ago
As you should know by now, popular vote doesn't matter and means nothing.

Oh stop the self felation.

The fact that only five times in our Nations history has the LOSER of the popular vote become President means our current President is an aberration of our system.

The only reason we still have the EC, (that holdover from our slave days), is BECAUSE the people almost always get the President they voted for so they never deemed it a problem urgent enough to get rid of until the last few decades.

In modern times, of course, we have one party that will falsely clam, "Nothing to See Here", and fight to keep the EC in place, since they can't seem to win the peoples support but with the EC's help they still have an outside chance of getting an incompetent buffoon of their choice into office.

OF COURSE some yahoo's will bogusly try to spin Trumps popular vote loss and claim that it's, "no big deal that the voters didn't get the President of their choice", that though the country soundly rejected him and his policies it's normal that he still became President because of a EC win vs Popular Vote win, despite how rare, (and repugnant), such a travesty of an outcome has historically been.

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
9  charger 383    5 years ago

I believe at two out of three politicians are criminals 

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Participates
9.1  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  charger 383 @9    5 years ago
I believe at two out of three politicians are criminals

I think you missed one. jrSmiley_87_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Participates
10  Citizen Kane-473667    5 years ago

Yep he's a criminal. So are every one of us here. Enjoy your dinner.

Guess what? I bet EVERY person here has knowingly committed a felony at some point or another in their lifetime. Have you lied when the cop who stopped you for speeding asked if you knew how fast you were going?  FELONY! Ever claimed a little bit more on your tax deductions than you should have?  FELONY! Ever lied to get out of jury duty? FELONY! Failed to report a tip to the IRS?  FELONY!  Someone give you a gift that you didn't report to the IRS? FELONY! 

Now here is a kicker--are you on the internet? FELONY ! You just broke a 1986 law Computer Fraud and Abuse (Title 18 U.S. Code §1030). Oh and how many of you have ever been suspended or booted from a website for violating their ToS?  FELONY!!!

Now show me just ONE person who hasn't broken a law.

  I'll wait.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
10.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @10    5 years ago

[deleted]

You just admitted that the president is a felon and said that is fine with you.

Please, don't pass your wisdom on to anyone else. We have enough problems already.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @10.1    5 years ago
Removed for context (sandy)

That is a sweeping generalization.

You just admitted that the president is a felon and said that is fine with you.

Please do tell what felony Trump has been convicted of.

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Participates
10.1.2  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  JohnRussell @10.1    5 years ago

I may not like the man as a person, but I do like the fact that he is indeed trying to deliver on his major campaign promises; many of which not only do I support, but so has every major Party player across the board. Does this mean that I am a T-Rump supporter?  Technically speaking--No. Not in any way, shape, or form. I wasn't an Obama supporter either, but I did support his attempts at stemming illegal immigration. I also supported his idea of free/low cost education  for college. I also supported his initial idea of Universal Care.  I still support ALL of them for that matter. Don't seem to recall you ever assuming that I supported Obama during his 8 years in office.

You just admitted that the president is a felon and said that is fine with you.

I also showed where damn near every person in the United States old enough to wipe their own ass is committing felonies on a daily basis; and like him, they aren't felons unless and until the get convicted of one. That is also fine with me.

How about you John?  Have you committed any more felonies today; like using the internet again--even though I've already told you that doing so is a Felonious act? Here you are committing a felony right in front of everyone, in plain view, in the open, undeniable proof, thousands of times over, and you are being so self-righteous as to tell me that the President is a felon even though he too has never been convicted of one, you are a better felon (I literally see you committing the felonies--including violating this sites ToS in this comment I am replying to) and it's okay to be fine with you doing so, but not him??? A bit of a hypocritical stance isn't it??? Please: Correct Me If I'm Wrong!

Please, don't pass your wisdom on to anyone else.

Which part of the facts presented would you like to censor?

We have enough problems already.

Yes, we have many, many problems. Hypocrisy, self-righteousness, deception, and hate are some of our top problems right now when it comes to this country. Too many are allowing their emotions and personal beliefs of what is right and wrong while trampling the rights of others and the laws of the land to guide them while they cast stones in glass houses. If you can't see the board in your own eye, how can you be expected to see the mote in mine? I believe you are a good man John, A man of deep convictions. A man of good intentions. A man who really does want to do the Right Thing. These are Good Things to be. It helps though, if you apply the same standards across the board to everyone whether you like them or not because then, you are also a Fair Man...

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
11  XXJefferson51    5 years ago

Re elect the President!  Trump 2020!  He and we made America great again and now we are going to Keep America Great!  Trump/Pence 2020

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
11.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  XXJefferson51 @11    5 years ago

yea, 8000 LIES and countin

ain't

Enuff ! 

Fuk make America Great, Again when you first have ta

Make America Stupider

than it's already been made.

SAD

ignorance ruling so many

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
13  Vic Eldred    5 years ago

Qunnipiac poll says two thirds of Americans believe Trump committed crimes prior to becoming president.

This begs the question, how or why is he still in office?

Answer:  Because we don't convict people or remove President's from office based on polling. BTW if you recall the polling of candidate Trump in 2016 had it all wrong.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
13.1  Jack_TX  replied to  Vic Eldred @13    5 years ago
Because we don't convict people or remove President's from office based on polling.

I'm not sure how you don't realize that we're all still in junior high school and popular opinion is everything.  Like....seriously.....like ...OMG...

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
Sophomore Silent
13.1.1  Phoenyx13  replied to  Jack_TX @13.1    5 years ago
I'm not sure how you don't realize that we're all still in junior high school and popular opinion is everything.  Like....seriously.....like ...OMG...

are you suggesting popular opinion means absolutely nothing ? (just curious)

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
13.1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jack_TX @13.1    5 years ago

More like middle school with the nerds doing the bullying.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
13.1.3  Jack_TX  replied to  Phoenyx13 @13.1.1    5 years ago
are you suggesting popular opinion means absolutely nothing ?

With regard to criminality or impeachment, that's exactly what I'm saying.

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
Sophomore Silent
13.1.4  Phoenyx13  replied to  Jack_TX @13.1.3    5 years ago
With regard to criminality or impeachment, that's exactly what I'm saying.

i'm not sure i fully agree with the criminality part (i do agree with the impeachment part). Wasn't it criminal to marry outside of your race at one point ? i would dare say that popular opinion may have played a part in that becoming legal - would you ?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
13.1.5  Jack_TX  replied to  Phoenyx13 @13.1.4    5 years ago
i'm not sure i fully agree with the criminality part (i do agree with the impeachment part). Wasn't it criminal to marry outside of your race at one point ? i would dare say that popular opinion may have played a part in that becoming legal - would you ?

I see where you're headed, but actually, popular opinion had nothing to do with that one.  The prohibition was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. (Loving v Virginia)

There is also a distinction between criminality and legislation. 

Legislation can be influenced by popular opinion.  For example, with any luck, popular opinion will result in the full legalization of marijuana within the next few years.  Hopefully regulated about like we do whiskey.

However whether or not a person possesses marijuana (criminality), is not decided by public opinion.

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
Sophomore Silent
13.1.6  Phoenyx13  replied to  Jack_TX @13.1.5    5 years ago
I see where you're headed, but actually, popular opinion had nothing to do with that one.  The prohibition was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. (Loving v Virginia)

i'm not really "headed" anywhere lol. I am just asking questions for clarification on your viewpoint, that's all. Personally i prefer facts/evidence etc as much as possible - especially for something like impeachment (whether or not i like the President is irrelevant, i look at a larger picture)

There is also a distinction between criminality and legislation. 

Legislation can be influenced by popular opinion.  For example, with any luck, popular opinion will result in the full legalization of marijuana within the next few years.  Hopefully regulated about like we do whiskey.

However whether or not a person possesses marijuana (criminality), is not decided by public opinion.

interesting, it seems you do contradict yourself since legislation works hand in hand with criminality in the respect of - whether or not it's criminal. Yes, possessing marijuana is criminal in many states (and federal level) but not criminal in a couple states - their legislation (influenced by popular opinion among other things) has decriminalized marijuana... so then popular opinion did affect criminality indirectly - yes ?

it's an interesting discussion and something to ponder sometime - personally i have no set viewpoint on the President (i prefer the facts/evidence as much as possible). Thanks :)

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
13.1.7  Jack_TX  replied to  Phoenyx13 @13.1.6    5 years ago
i'm not really "headed" anywhere lol.

"Headed" was probably not the right word.

interesting, it seems you do contradict yourself since legislation works hand in hand with criminality in the respect of - whether or not it's criminal.

The distinction does not present a contradiction, IMO.  Judges don't write laws.

it's an interesting discussion and something to ponder sometime - personally i have no set viewpoint on the President (i prefer the facts/evidence as much as possible).

Personally,  I dislike the president.  I just don't think he's done anything impeachable.

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
Sophomore Silent
13.1.8  Phoenyx13  replied to  Jack_TX @13.1.7    5 years ago
The distinction does not present a contradiction, IMO.  Judges don't write laws.

of course they don't, at most they can rule on a law's constitutionality etc, but they don't write the laws and i didn't mean to suggest they did. Legislation works hand in hand with criminality and popular opinion can influence legislation which means indirectly popular opinion can affect criminality - correct ?

Personally,  I dislike the president.  I just don't think he's done anything impeachable.

meh, i like him less than previous presidents (but that's really irrelevant when talking about impeachment, at least for me) - i don't know about him doing anything impeachable so i wait for facts/evidence.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
13.1.9  Jack_TX  replied to  Phoenyx13 @13.1.8    5 years ago
meh, i like him less than previous presidents (but that's really irrelevant when talking about impeachment, at least for me) - i don't know about him doing anything impeachable so i wait for facts/evidence.

We agree on each of these points, and it's fair to note that ongoing investigations may change the landscape.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
13.2  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @13    5 years ago

Exactly.

Democrats could not beat Trump in an election, so will resort to other means to bring him down.

And to think we can remember when failing to accept the results of an election was a threat to democracy.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
13.2.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @13.2    5 years ago

Yup, they lost and justice has never been better served

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
13.3  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @13    5 years ago
Answer: Because we don't convict people or remove President's from office based on polling. BTW if you recall the polling of candidate Trump in 2016 had it all wrong.

You know that if any poll out there is unfavorable to Trump, it will be seeded here.

 
 
 
MalamuteMan
Professor Quiet
14  MalamuteMan    5 years ago
This begs the question, how or why is he still in office?

The framers of the Constitution...

a) made it deliberately difficult to remove someone from office... for good reason.

b) and... I doubt they ever imagined the American populace would ever go so far off the rails as to elect someone who is so profoundly unqualified, profoundly incompetent, and down right crazy.

Perhaps a better question is, "Why does 1/3 of the American electorate not see his incompetence and his nakedly obvious mental derangement???"

 
 
 
freepress
Freshman Silent
15  freepress    5 years ago

It should be 100% of Americans, but apparently Republicans are leaning toward becoming a territory of Russia or China. Republicans are ignoring their duties and their constituents in favor of supporting a man who is clearly in the pocket of any foreign government that will line the Trump family pockets. 

Trump is a criminal and if you look at all the criminals he openly has associated with over the years that are now admitting their own criminal acts, those who have been convicted, indicted, on their way to being indicted and those who are still being investigated, it is plain as day that Trump is one of them.

This entire bag of criminals are all associates of Trump, they were appointed by Trump, they are long time friends or attorneys of Trump and they are getting a free pass by Republicans the same way Republicans tried to avoid Nixon and Watergate, the way Republicans tried to ignore the lies from Bush and his crew until the economic collapse and endless wars based on lies.

America is better than the Trump administration and Trump and his corrupt family and the Republicans who refuse to stand up for America and the real rule of law.

Republicans have always won based on divide and conquer, lies, gerrymandering, suppressing the vote, and taking money from corporate interests. 

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
15.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  freepress @15    5 years ago

Republicans are basically as corrupt as their leader for not calling him out, and it is treasonous, that these mainly White trash pickers, picked this White Trash, to represent them, and then as proof after proof of LIE after LIE, they hypocritically turn a blind

Eye    can't see how this has come this far, as it is beyond bizarre.

Cult of personality allows them to ignore and pretend not to C

U, O N, Then To Do Nothing Again N Again ,

when is enuff for the clowns to say WHEN ?

There really is something to be concerned with about, in this country

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
15.2  Jack_TX  replied to  freepress @15    5 years ago
Republicans have always won based on

Republicans win when the Democrats run shite candidates.  Unless something dramatic happens, 2020 looks to be another of those years.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
15.2.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Jack_TX @15.2    5 years ago
Unless something dramatic happens, 2020 looks to be another of those years.

Trump ain't "dramatic" to U ?

Trump is gonna go Down, and so is the Republican Party.

As they play koi, they know their boy ain't no MAN

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
15.2.2  Jack_TX  replied to  igknorantzrulz @15.2.1    5 years ago
Trump ain't "dramatic" to U ?

Not really.  All hat and no cattle.

Trump is gonna go Down, and so is the Republican Party.

Not to the crazy left.  That's the point.  If we get a Democrat centrist with a brain who shuts down raving nutjobs like AOC and Bernie, yes...they'll win handily in 2020, and I have no problem with that.  I'm not aware of any such individual in the race yet.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
15.2.3  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Jack_TX @15.2.2    5 years ago

I'm not aware of any such individual in the race yet.

This is where Amy Klobuchar comes in handy.  If you were serious, you would have mentioned her ... like so many of her Republican colleagues have done.  

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
15.2.4  Jack_TX  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @15.2.3    5 years ago
This is where Amy Klobuchar comes in handy.

I'll check her out.  Do you think she has a chance at getting the nomination?

I was hoping for Michael Bloomberg.  I could see myself voting for Howard Schultz, (not a Democrat, I realize).  I'd settle for Beto if he admitted that Berniecare is ridiculous.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
15.2.5  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Jack_TX @15.2.4    5 years ago

It’s too early to tell, but I wouldn’t write her off. 

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
15.3  Ender  replied to  freepress @15    5 years ago
Republicans have always won based on divide and conquer, lies, gerrymandering, suppressing the vote, and taking money from corporate interests. 

Baffle them with bullshit, for some reason seems to work.

Like the last debates for the office, the people that talked policy and possible solutions or direction were shot down with lies, derogatory remarks and bumper sticker slogans.

 
 
 
luther28
Sophomore Silent
16  luther28    5 years ago

A criminal, well that remains to be seen. An utter idiot, well that is for sure and certain.

 
 

Who is online

fineline


72 visitors