Pelosi calls for articles of impeachment against Trump: 'No choice but to act'

  
Via:  Vic Eldred  •  4 months ago  •  208 comments

By:   Brooke Singman and Gregg Re

Pelosi calls for articles of impeachment against Trump: 'No choice but to act'
"Today I am asking our chairman to proceed with articles of impeachment," Pelosi stated during her brief address, referring to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


House Speaker   Nancy Pelosi  announced Thursday that Democrats will proceed with articles of   impeachment  against President Trump, declaring that the president's conduct "leaves us no choice but to act."

The announcement comes after a   heated House Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday   featuring four law professors -- most of them Democrat-invited witnesses who presented arguments for impeachment. Pelosi claimed the facts are now "uncontested" that Trump "abused his power for his own personal political benefit at the expense of our national security" by allegedly using aid as leverage to seek an investigation of the Bidens from Ukraine.

"Today I am asking our chairman to proceed with articles of impeachment," Pelosi stated during her brief address, referring to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

"The president's actions have seriously violated the Constitution," she said. "His wrongdoing strikes at the very heart of our Constitution."

The White House swiftly hit back, with Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham tweeting the Democrats "should be ashamed."

Trump "has done nothing but lead our country - resulting in a booming economy, more jobs & a stronger military, to name just a few of his major accomplishments. 🇺🇸 We look forward to a fair trial in the Senate," she tweeted.

The three professors called upon by the Democratic majority on Wednesday expressed an urgency to impeach the president.

"If we cannot impeach a president who abuses his office for personal advantage, we no longer live in a democracy—we live in a monarchy, or we live under a dictatorship," Harvard Law professor Noah Feldman said.

But the GOP’s witness, Jonathan Turley of George Washington University, warned Democrats not to rush into impeachment, explaining that a stronger foundation was needed to take such a drastic step.

Turley even accused lawmakers of doing “precisely” what they’re condemning Trump for doing. “It’s your abuse of power,” he warned the House should they move to impeach.

Turley conceded that it was possible Trump had set up an illicit and impeachable quid pro quo -- but he asserted there was simply no evidence in the record to prove the claim.

At the heart of the case is the allegation that Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate the Bidens for political gain, while using U.S. aid as leverage. The records demonstrate that Trump sought that investigation, but Trump maintains there was no quid pro quo for aid and witnesses have not directly linked him to one.

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., cited another reason why Democrats should not move forward with impeachment right now -- the House’s failure to pass vital bills amid the impeachment fight.

“Franky, we’d love to govern with you,” he said to Democratic colleagues on Wednesday. “We’d love to pass USMCA, we’d love to put out a helping hand to our seniors and lower prescription drug prices. It’s the will of the people you ignore when you continue down this terrible road of impeachment.”


Article is Locked


 

Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Vic Eldred
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    4 months ago

The die is finally cast.......Pelosi will most likely let members vote on individual acts of impeachment as an out for moderate members. My hunch is the articles will be more about the Mueller Report than the President's phone call with the Ukrainian President.

She keeps her Speakership for now. House members will return home later and they will get an earful from their constituents, but the move will have been made. As all here know - I predict that dems will lose the House in November along with everything else. Pelosi claims that she is sad that this has happened, but we all know how giddy these hate filled ideologues have been about outing this President since 2016!


Rules of civility are in effect

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    4 months ago

Trump committed an impeachable offense by asking a foreign government to help him in his re-election efforts, and yes that is what his demand that Ukraine investigate Joe Biden was. 

That is the base line to this whole thing. It would be dereliction of duty for the House not to impeach him once the whistleblower allegations unfolded and proved true. 

The supposed argument against impeachment is that it will fail to remove him. While that may be true, it's not a reason to fail to impeach.  If they don't impeach Trump he will undoubtedly say that they tried to impeach him in the House but couldnt because he was innocent, as ridiculous as that claim may be. 

The bottom line is trump tried to cheat, as he said he would (he said he would like information about his opponents from foreign sources) , and he got caught.  Thats all it is, and lets go forward with it. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1    4 months ago
Trump committed an impeachable offense

Still a matter of opinion, but one that you and others have held since the day he was elected.


That is the base line to this whole thing.

Then we shouldn't see anything from the Mueller Report in the Articles of Impeachment, right?


The supposed argument against impeachment is that it will fail to remove him.

That has never been my argument. Mine has always been the flimsy charges made against a President who has been subjected to fraudulent investigations.


If they don't impeach Trump he will undoubtedly say that they tried to impeach him in the House but couldnt because he was innocent, as ridiculous as that claim may be. 

Projection! That is what the left does. Comey let Hillary go, thus she was innocent.


The bottom line is trump tried to cheat

No, his opponents within government have done that.





 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    4 months ago
That has never been my argument. Mine has always been the flimsy charges made against a President who has been subjected to fraudulent investigations.

There have been no fraudulent investigations.  Your problem is that you believe everything you see or hear from right wing media. 

You have been telling everyone for months that the IG report, and then Barr/Durham was going to prove there was a conspiracy against Trump.  By reports we are getting, all this is failing to come true. The IG report is not going to substantially allege misconduct by the FBI, and just yesterday a story came out saying that DURHAM concluded that Joseph Mifsud was not a US intelligence asset used by the CIA to instigate the FBI's Russia investigation.  Mifsud's supposed role was a linchpin in the right wing conspiracy theories about the Russia probe . All your conspiracies are blowing up in your face Vic. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.3  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.2    4 months ago
There have been no fraudulent investigations.

Then tell us how we had a counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign?  What triggered that?

Then tell us how we had a Special Counsel investigation of Russia/Trump?  What triggered that?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.1.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1    4 months ago

So you agree FDR, Kennedy, LBJ etc should have been removed from office for abusing their powers to benefit themselves politically right?

 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.5  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    4 months ago

The special counsel investigation was triggered by the firing of FBI Director James Comey.  The counterintelligence investigation was triggered by all the connections between Trump associates and Russians, I presume. 

If he was innocent, why object to an investigation? 

I get a kick out of people who get up on their hind legs about an investigation of someone who 

a) consistently lied about his interest in Russia (he was pursuing a hotel/condo development in Moscow at the same time he was telling Americans he had no business interest in Russia

b) publicly asked Russia to steal his election opponents emails.  (which they tried to do just hours after he asked). 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.6  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.5    4 months ago
The special counsel investigation was triggered by the firing of FBI Director James Comey.

Trump had every right to fire him. It dosen't stop an investigation. Democrats had been calling for Comey's resignation.


a) consistently lied about his interest in Russia (he was pursuing a hotel/condo development in Moscow at the same time he was telling Americans he had no business interest in Russia

Actually he told the truth - He did not conspire with Russia. It was the media lied to us for 3 years.


b) publicly asked Russia to steal his election opponents emails. 

Another media lie: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing, I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press”

He never asked Russia to steal anything!


He was guilty of one thing - He won the 2016 election!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.7  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.6    4 months ago
He never asked Russia to steal anything!

Vic, they tried to hack her system hours after Trump made the ask. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.8  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.5    4 months ago

I get a kick out of people who get up on their hind legs about an investigation of someone who.

So why all the outcry against Biden, Hunter, and the Obama administration being investigated?

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
1.1.9  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    4 months ago

Still a matter of opinion

If we are talking about us here, the Fex Ex driver, or the barista at Starbucks, then yes.  But three constitutional scholars have confirmed it.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
1.1.10  Nerm_L  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1    4 months ago
Trump committed an impeachable offense by asking a foreign government to help him in his re-election efforts, and yes that is what his demand that Ukraine investigate Joe Biden was.  That is the base line to this whole thing. It would be dereliction of duty for the House not to impeach him once the whistleblower allegations unfolded and proved true. 

Correct.  That is the base line Democrats have put forward.  But that line isn't consistent with Trump's past behavior.  Joe Biden has already provided the political dirt with his boast about threatening to withhold foreign aide to force out Viktor Shokin. 

Consistent with past behavior, Trump would use Biden's boast as a wedge just as he did with the birther wedge.  The quid pro quo that Democrats are alleging is consistent with Democratic behavior; Joe Biden is the example.  Using government resources to investigate political rivals and influence elections is something a Hillary Clinton would do.  It's very status quo behavior.

Since when has Trump become a status quo politician?  Yep, there's a lot of charges that can be made against Trump.  But alleging that Trump has behaved like a deadwood Democrat doesn't pass the smell test.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.11  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.7    4 months ago

Do you know how truly childish that sounds?   That Vladimir Putin would refrain from doing something unless President Trump publicly said "I hope you find them."  John, we are all adults here. Russia dosen't act on what American politicians say. They act whether anyone likes it or not out of self interest. Let me ask you if you are aware that they tried to hack the GOP server as well?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.12  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1.9    4 months ago
But three constitutional scholars have confirmed it.

Three anti-Trump leftists gave us their opinion, which would be just the opposite if it were a democratic president. Then they would be telling us what technicality made the case different. Their performance yesterday was all too obvious to everyone (except for progressives who were elated by the BS)

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
1.1.13  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.12    4 months ago

jrSmiley_99_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.14  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1.13    4 months ago

Noah Feldman gave a standout performance. I can just see him in one of Charles Dickens novels.

Noah-Feldman.jpg

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.1.15  Fireryone  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    4 months ago
That has never been my argument. Mine has always been the flimsy charges made against a President who has been subjected to fraudulent investigations.

I guarantee that if this had been a Democratic POTUS that did what trump has done, every republican would be demanding impeachment from day 1, and it would have happened already.  

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.1.16  Fireryone  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.12    4 months ago

Three anti-Trump leftists gave us their opinion, which would be just the opposite if it were a democratic president. Then they would be telling us what technicality made the case different. Their performance yesterday was all too obvious to everyone (except for progressives who were elated by the BS)

Had this been a Dem, I would be every bit as disgusted.  Its a shame how the Right has put party over country. 

 
 
 
Ender
1.1.17  Ender  replied to  Fireryone @1.1.16    4 months ago

It is a shame that they put trump over party over country.

The rubes don't even realize the harm they are going to end up doing, even to themselves.

They are trying to normalize and defend his behavior, take that back, enable his behavior, that can and probably will be mimicked by a predecessor that might not align with their views.

I dare any one of them to question any president after this with what they are letting him get away with.

Of course in their hypocritical stance, only they are allowed to do such things.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.18  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Fireryone @1.1.15    4 months ago

I'm sure this sort of thing happened under many administrations. It would have been deemed inappropriate but nobody would make an issue of a president asking a foreign leader to do something such as what was done here. The difference is Trump must be smeared/removed!

As for whistleblowers, we know what Obama used to do with them:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/16/whistleblowers-double-standard-obama-david-petraeus-chelsea-manning

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.19  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Fireryone @1.1.16    4 months ago
Had this been a Dem, I would be every bit as disgusted.

I doubt that very much.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.20  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.18    4 months ago
'I'm sure this sort of thing happened under many administrations.'
PROVE IT

'It would have been deemed inappropriate but nobody would make an issue of a president asking a foreign leader to do something such as what was done here.'

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.21  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.20    4 months ago

How could it be proven if nobody thought it worthy of mention

 
 
 
r.t..b...
1.1.22  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.18    4 months ago
It would have been deemed inappropriate 

Diplomacy is a cutthroat business, where national interests should be at the forefront of delicate negotiations. Traditionally, those interests relate to an administrations stated platform and are thus self-serving in adhering to and fulfilling those goals. The undertakings in Ukraine under this administration, however, were never intended to promote a stated national interest but were purely personal in their intent and execution. It rises to an abuse of power by any unjaundiced examination and worthy of the investigations currently underway.

Any attempt to influence an election is an attempt to undermine our entire system of governance. Inappropriate does not begin to describe the deleterious nature of his actions and the long-term ramifications should he not be held accountable.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.23  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  r.t..b... @1.1.22    4 months ago

That call did involve personal interests like turning the tables on those who launched a fraudulent investigation of the President. Remember what Biden did to get a Ukrainian prosecutor fired passes Schiff's definition of "bribery."  So ya, there was a lot of personal interest in that phone call, however I disagree totally on the narrative that it was to interfere in a future election. It was all about the 2016 election, the Dossier and what was done to Manafort.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.24  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.7    4 months ago

They tried to hack into a computer in FBI possession that was in all likelihood, turned off?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
1.1.25  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.23    4 months ago
I disagree totally on the narrative that it was to interfere in a future election

Then we will agree to disagree.

An indiscretion into 2016 acts is worthy of investigation, but that should not preempt investigation of acts that may effect the 2020 election. Let us learn from the past lest we condone the behavior in purely partisan interests, to no ones benefit in the present and to no ones interest in the future.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.26  Jack_TX  replied to  Fireryone @1.1.15    4 months ago
I guarantee that if this had been a Democratic POTUS that did what trump has done, every republican would be demanding impeachment from day 1, and it would have happened already. 

They would have demanded impeachment.  "The call" didn't happen until this past summer, so I'm not so sure about timing.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.27  Jack_TX  replied to  Fireryone @1.1.16    4 months ago
Had this been a Dem, I would be every bit as disgusted. 

For me, it would depend on the Dem.  I think my tolerance for bad behavior is moderately inversely correlated with how much the person in question is actively screwing up my life.

Its a shame how the Right has put party over country. 

But I don't think I'd be this disgusted.  Frankly...of all the things Trump has done and said, this may not make the top 10 list of most disgusting.  

 
 
 
Sunshine
1.2  Sunshine  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    4 months ago
..Pelosi will most likely let members vote on individual acts of impeachment as an out for moderate members.

She has to let it die in the Senate to save face.  But, as you say, some Dems will pay the price for it in November.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.3  Greg Jones  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    4 months ago

We all know how this is going to end, and it will pretty much destroy what's left of the Democrat party.

Pelosi had no choice but to give in to the far left fringe of liberals, and it will be fun to watch the electoral fall out.

Dems very likely to lose the House and Trump assured of a second term.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3    4 months ago

I see no reason to believe anything you say. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.3.2  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.1    4 months ago
What you think is irrelevant and the least of my concerns. It appears you fail to accept reality and remain a slow learner.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.3  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.1    4 months ago

He's admitted before on my seed the only reason he is here is to piss off liberals.

Perrie told him to cut the shit or get booted.  

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.3.4  Greg Jones  replied to  Tessylo @1.3.3    4 months ago

I'm still here, and if people get pissed at my comments, it's on them.

My superior knowledge and intelligence seem to trigger certain people, otherwise

they would simply not respond and ignore what I say.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.3.5  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3.4    4 months ago
I'm still here, and if people get pissed at my comments, it's on them.

If necessary we'll have an intervention. They've been enraged since 2016.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.6  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3.4    4 months ago

No one gets pissed at your comments.  I saw them for exactly what they were.  So did Perrie.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.3.7  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3.2    4 months ago

Greg, people are judged by what they say,  and for all practical purposes what you say on this forum is nothing. 

As far as I can see you are WAY down on the list of contributors to this group. 

 
 
 
MUVA
1.3.8  MUVA  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3.4    4 months ago

I like keep on keeping on.

 
 
 
Fireryone
1.3.9  Fireryone  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3.4    4 months ago
My superior knowledge and intelligence seem to trigger certain people, otherwise

Hahaha, that is hilarious.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.3.10  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3.4    4 months ago
What facts or knowledge have you ever provided?
Your responses are basically, nanny nanny boo boo
I'm just here to piss off liberals/progressives/democrats
And agree in goosestep, I mean lockstep, with all the tRump supporters.  

 
 
 
pat wilson
1.4  pat wilson  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    4 months ago
I predict that dems will lose the House in November along with everything else.

Based on past results your prediction is going nowhere, lol.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.4.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  pat wilson @1.4    4 months ago
Based on past results your prediction is going nowhere, lol.

Lol, Your memory is obviously short.... It was I who predicted what dems would pull on Justice Kavanaugh

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.4.2  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.4.1    4 months ago

'It was I who predicted what dems would pull on Justice Kavanaugh'

PROVE IT

 
 
 
pat wilson
1.4.3  pat wilson  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.4.1    4 months ago

Maybe you did but one out of five is a poor batting average.

 
 
 
cjcold
1.5  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    4 months ago

Seems on many seeds I can't respond. Do you fear me? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.5.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  cjcold @1.5    4 months ago
Seems on many seeds I can't respond.

Who's fault is that?


Do you fear me? 

You really need to get over yourself

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2  JohnRussell    4 months ago
I predict that dems will lose the House in November along with everything else.

There is absolutely no basis to believe this. To the contrary, most elections since the beginning of 2017 show a shift away from Trump and his chosen candidates in contested races. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2    4 months ago
There is absolutely no basis to believe this.

63 Million Americans voted for Trump. They will all come out to vote after this smearing stunt. You got that asterisk you desperately wanted next to the President's name but you will pay for it. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    4 months ago

Contested races since 2017 have shown a shift away from Trump and Trump backed candidates. The reason for this is simple, people have observed him in office for the past 34 months. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    4 months ago
Contested races since 2017 have shown a shift away from Trump and Trump backed candidates.

Why don't you be specific?

Governor's races are all about local politics. For example: Former Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin was extremely unpopular, yet Trump was able to make that race close.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.3  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.2    4 months ago

Btw we could use more hearings, more outrage, more Pelosi and please bring back that angry Stanford lady too.

The voters need to see more of them!

 
 
 
Greg Jones
2.1.4  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    4 months ago

Show us those facts and figures, John.

 
 
 
cjcold
2.1.5  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    4 months ago

So even after all of his chronic lies you still defend him? what does that say about you?

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
2.1.6  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  cjcold @2.1.5    4 months ago
So even after all of his chronic lies you still defend him?

They've been backed into a corner by Trump and can do nothing but defend him now. They doubled down too many times, their entire party is riding on the success of Donald Trump, which, if you know anything about the other companies that have relied on Trump for success, is not a gamble most of us would take.

But now they are feeling the effects of the "sunk cost fallacy".

“The sunk cost effect is the general tendency for people to continue an endeavor, or continue consuming or pursuing an option, if they’ve invested time or money or some resource in it,” says Christopher Olivola, an assistant professor of marketing at Carnegie Mellon’s Tepper School of Business and the author of a new paper on the topic published in the journal Psychological Science . “That effect becomes a fallacy if it’s pushing you to do things that are making you unhappy or worse off.”

https://time.com/5347133/sunk-cost-fallacy-decisions/

 
 
 
Fireryone
2.1.7  Fireryone  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    4 months ago
63 Million Americans voted for Trump.

Not even 25% of the country. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
2.1.8  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Fireryone @2.1.7    4 months ago

And Mrs..Clinton was sooooooo stellar with 66 million and her barely 20%. You do realize that all 330+ million Americans can't vote amirite?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.9  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Fireryone @2.1.7    4 months ago

Are we now measuring his voters against everyone in the country - even those too young to vote, those who don't, etc?  That sounds awfully devious.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.10  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  cjcold @2.1.5    4 months ago
what does that say about you?

It says I'm heads & shoulders better that a hate-filled progressive!

 
 
 
lib50
2.1.11  lib50  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.10    4 months ago

The party of Putin sure has its talking points down.   Projection, projection, projection.  And evidently pleased the USA is now a laughingstock of the world.  Of course, because it benefits......PUTIN.  Again. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.12  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @2.1.11    4 months ago
The party of Putin sure has its talking points down.

Had no idea you are an expert on Russian politics.

nd evidently pleased the USA is now a laughingstock of the world.  Of course, because it benefits......PUTIN.  Again. 

That is projecting!

Do all nutjobs feel that way?

 
 
 
lib50
2.1.13  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.12    4 months ago

Talking to yourself?  Or Trump?  Here is something just for you.  And maybe we'd all be crying if we weren't laughing at the damage Trump has done to our national security.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/12/05/biden-campaigns-world-laughing-donald-trump-video-wins-viral-moment

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/07/18/what-happens-when-the-world-figures-out-trump-isnt-competent-macron-europe/

First, when you don’t understand the world very well, and when your team lacks skilled officials to compensate for presidential ignorance, you’re going to make big policy mistakes. Trump’s biggest doozy thus far was dropping the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a decision that undermined the U.S. position in Asia, opened the door toward greater Chinese influence, and won’t benefit the U.S. economy in the slightest. Similar ignorance-fueled errors include walking away from the Paris climate accord (which makes Americans look like a bunch of science-denying, head-in-the-sand ignoramuses) and failing to appreciate that China wasn’t — repeat, wasn’t — going to solve the North Korea problem for us. Not to mention his team’s inability to spell and confusion over which countries they are talking about.

Second, once other countries conclude that U.S. officials are dunderheads, they aren’t going to pay much attention to the advice, guidance, or requests that Washington makes. When people think you know what you’re doing, they will listen carefully to what you have to say and will be more inclined to follow your lead. But if they think you’re an idiot, or they aren’t convinced you can actually deliver whatever you are promising, they may nod politely as you express your views but follow their own instincts instead.

We are already seeing signs of this. Having played to Trump’s vulnerable ego brilliantly during his visit to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia is now blithely ignoring U.S. efforts to resolve the simmering dispute between the Gulf states and Qatar. True to form, Israel doesn’t care what Trump thinks about the Israeli-Palestinian dispute or the situation in Syria either. To be sure, these two countries have a long history of ignoring U.S. advice and interests, but their indifference to Washington’s views seems to have reached new heights. And now South Korea has announced it will begin talks with North Korea, despite the Trump administration’s belief that the time was not right.
 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.14  Tessylo  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.12    4 months ago
'Do all nutjobs feel that way?'

Why don't you tell us?

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @2.1.13    4 months ago
Talking to yourself?  Or Trump? 

Strange questions to be asking of someone who directed a post to you. See, if I wanted to say it to Trump, I would have. That is how these kinds of things work.

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.14    4 months ago
'Do all nutjobs feel that way? Why don't you tell us?

I do feel qualified to after reading some of your posts.

But you don't read anyways, remember, so why waste time writing it and then having to explain it 20 times?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.17  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  lib50 @2.1.11    4 months ago
The party of Putin sure has its talking points down. 

And the party that always made excuses for Stalin, Mao and Castro suddenly expects us to believe they are patriots. 

 
 
 
lib50
2.1.18  lib50  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.17    4 months ago

Another one of Kushner and Trump's favorite nationals committed murder today.  But Trump says nicer things about the king than he does of suffering Americans.  

If republicans don't like the Russian connection, then disconnect.  Otherwise you are all just promoting Russian interests over US interests.  Your ability to see it is irrelevant, its happening in real time and it can be seen by everyone.

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.19  MUVA  replied to  lib50 @2.1.18    4 months ago

Ridiculous every word.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
2.1.20  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  lib50 @2.1.18    4 months ago
But Trump says nicer things about the king than he does of suffering Americans.  

Bull fucking shit. Some things never change...........................

 
 
 
Sunshine
3  Sunshine    4 months ago

The Democrats are in so deep with this nonsense that she had no choice.  Dems and the media are just treading water now.

The smear campaign continues at the expense of the taxpayers.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Sunshine @3    4 months ago

What is the smear? Let's see if you can explain it. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    4 months ago
Let's see if you can explain it. 

Let's see if I can predict how this goes. Someone cites a smear and you say it's not a smear, it's true. Right?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.1    4 months ago

I asked her to explain what the smear is.  I'd rather hear her try and do it, but you are free to do so as well. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1.3  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    4 months ago

I'm just laying out what your well known position is.

To impeach this President for whatever the reasons are going to be is a smear. The fact that not even you know what the Articles of impeachment will be kind of makes the case that this process is nothing more than smearing the President going into the 2020 election. A REAL CASE OF ELECTION INTERFERENCE!


 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.3    4 months ago

Again, the truth is not a smear.  

'A REAL CASE OF ELECTION INTERFERENCE!'

jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1.5  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.4    4 months ago

All impeachment, all the time in Speaker Pelosi’s House.

jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.6  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.3    4 months ago
To impeach this President for whatever the reasons are going to be is a smear.

LOL. Is that really all you have? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1.7  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.6    4 months ago

In other words you didn't expect that one and have no answer for it?

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.6    4 months ago
'LOL. Is that really all you have? '
Apparently

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.9  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.7    4 months ago

No, I'm stunned that you are offering such a piece of nothingness as an argument. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1.10  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.9    4 months ago

Ya, your stunned AND stumped!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.11  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.10    4 months ago

I asked Sunshine and then you to tell us what the "smear" against Trump is. It's a simple question. I make my comments 90% of the time off the top of my head. If you ask me what Trump did wrong I can write a few paragraphs about it without looking at Google once.

Surely you or Sunshine or someone can tell us how Trump is being "smeared" over the Ukrainian situation. 

 
 
 
Ender
3.1.12  Ender  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.11    4 months ago

Have to look up the next talking point. The next tweet for instruction.

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.13  Tessylo  replied to  Ender @3.1.12    4 months ago

Nah he'll supposedly prove his bogus point and lock the seed so no one can debunk him.  

 
 
 
lib50
3.1.14  lib50  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.13    4 months ago

Probably getting more propaganda during the vodka breaks.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1.15  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.11    4 months ago
If you ask me what Trump did wrong I can write a few paragraphs about it without looking at Google once.

I could do the same with Obama. We know what you want and the rest of us have put a stop to it.

 
 
 
JBB
4  JBB    4 months ago

Trump left Congress with no choice but impeachment! 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @4    4 months ago

It's so sad isn't it?  The suddenly solemn, suddenly "patriotic" progressives carrying out their duties/sar.

You don't know how bad it looks.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1    4 months ago

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path because it divides the country.” .....Nancy Pelosi


EK-dTbVWwAANEk3?format=jpg&name=small

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.1.2  Greg Jones  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.1    4 months ago

Certainly not bi-partisan and the meager "evidence" is neither compelling nor overwhelming.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1.3  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Greg Jones @4.1.2    4 months ago

Yup, but when the squad is threatening her role as Speaker, she had to do what she had to do!

 
 
 
Fireryone
4.1.4  Fireryone  replied to  Greg Jones @4.1.2    4 months ago
Certainly not bi-partisan and the meager "evidence" is neither compelling nor overwhelming.

The transcript is the evidence and it's damning.

 
 
 
lady in black
4.1.5  lady in black  replied to  Fireryone @4.1.4    4 months ago

trump-supporters-make-america-great-trum

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.2  Greg Jones  replied to  JBB @4    4 months ago

You mean the Democrat controlled House that is grasping at straws to find an issue that will gain bi-partisan support for impeachment.

You must realize that this travesty of attempted sedition will be DOA in the Senate, after thoroughly embarrassing the dopey Democrats.

 
 
 
The People's Fish
4.2.1  The People's Fish  replied to  Greg Jones @4.2    4 months ago

Are they unaware their expert scholars fell apart on national television as crotch hat wearing, TDS infected lunatics?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.2.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  The People's Fish @4.2.1    4 months ago

It was clear yesterday that d emocrats all but ignored Turley and focused instead on getting from their witnesses exactly what they wanted to hear. 

Meanwhile the expression on Jonathan Turley's face spoke volumes

BBXLl7r.img?h=416&w=799&m=6&q=60&u=t&o=f

“Impeachments require a certain period of saturation and maturation,” Turley told lawmakers. “That is, the public has to catch up… If you rush this impeachment, you’re going to leave half the country behind. And certainly, that’s not what … the Framers wanted.” “You have to give the time to build a record. This isn’t an impulse buy item. You’re trying to remove a duly elected president of the United States. And that takes time. It takes work.”

 
 
 
The People's Fish
4.2.3  The People's Fish  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.2.2    4 months ago

Expect traffic delays after the 2020 election due to the mental illness displays.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.2.4  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  The People's Fish @4.2.3    4 months ago

Truly a Freudian delight!

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.2.5  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.2.2    4 months ago
'Meanwhile the expression on Jonathan Turley's face spoke volumes'

That he's constipated?

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5  The People's Fish    4 months ago

You have to wonder what is going on in the mind of the moonbat. Nancy takes the mic, the president hits a higher approval rating than Barrack Obama? Truly amazing.

All signs point to Independents running from the Democrat party on this impeachment organized by Schiff. 

They simply know they are toast in 2020 and want to appeal to the lunatic left base in their wacky districts. Game Over!

 
 
 
Greg Jones
5.1  Greg Jones  replied to  The People's Fish @5    4 months ago

I predict that the majority of  ordinary working people and a surprising number of blacks and Hispanics will turn their backs on the Dems, the party of destruction.

 
 
 
gooseisgone
5.2  gooseisgone  replied to  The People's Fish @5    4 months ago

Did Nancy get abducted.......I think I just saw a hostage video.

 
 
 
MUVA
5.2.1  MUVA  replied to  gooseisgone @5.2    4 months ago

I hope nobody pays the ransom.

 
 
 
Kathleen
6  Kathleen    4 months ago

The Democrats should be worrying about who is going to be their candidate running for President. Instead, they are acting like a crazy mob out to get Trump. This does not look bad on Trump, this looks bad on them. 

Btw, that woman that made that tasteless joke about Trumps son did not help them either.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1  Tessylo  replied to  Kathleen @6    4 months ago

This does not look bad on the Democrats at all.  

This looks very bad on the 'president' and his supporters.  

 
 
 
Greg Jones
6.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Tessylo @6.1    4 months ago

Wishful and magical thinking, reality is hard to stare in the face.it appears.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Kathleen @6    4 months ago

Pamela Karlan's comments about Baron Trump ended being one of the most memorable takeaways from the hearing. Democrats should be concerned about it.

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.2.1  Kathleen  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.2    4 months ago

You just don’t bring in the children. Her credibility went right down the tubes with the meanness of that comment.  Yes, they should.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.2.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Kathleen @6.2.1    4 months ago

That's the way most descent human beings feel about it. Not so the progressives. If you listen to that tape you can hear the questioner, Rep Sheila Jackson Lee, chuckling over it. Hard to believe isn't it?

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.2.3  Kathleen  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.2.2    4 months ago

Then they need to stop complaining about Trumps behavior and look at their own. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.2.4  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Kathleen @6.2.3    4 months ago

Amen. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.5  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.2    4 months ago

“While the president can name his son Barron, he can’t make him a baron,” Karlan said.

That is in no way an insult to Barron.  

It's simply a remark.

It's not an invasion of privacy.

It's a nothing burger.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.2.6  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.5    4 months ago

I think you proved my point. Progressives are ok with it.


GAETZ SAYS ENOUGH: “When you invoke the President’s son’s name, that does not lend credibility to your argument. It makes you look mean. It makes you look like you’re attacking someone’s family...”

-HwtxTRD?format=jpg&name=small

Thank you Sir!

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.7  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.2.6    4 months ago

I am perfectly fine with it.  'Invoking the 'president's' son's name' - [Deleted]   

She didn't say anything inappropriate.  She didn't attack anyone.  

 
 
 
Sunshine
6.2.8  Sunshine  replied to  Kathleen @6.2.3    4 months ago
Then they need to stop complaining about Trumps behavior and look at their own. 

You got that right!  

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.2.9  Kathleen  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.2.6    4 months ago

Now if the shoe was on the other foot.... : )

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.10  JohnRussell  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.7    4 months ago

It's funny to watch all these Republicans and conservatives go on and on about trivia, who should have been wearing a pussy hat, which witness look like a prissy Brit, the fact that someone mentioned Baron Trump's name, all basically nonsense intended to distract from the simple facts that Trump has behaved traitorously. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.11  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.7    4 months ago

The bitch please remark was towards Gaetz, not anyone posting here.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.12  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.10    4 months ago

Well when that's all you got, go for it.

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
r.t..b...
6.2.13  r.t..b...  replied to  Kathleen @6.2.1    4 months ago
You just don’t bring in the children.

Agreed. The comment was totally out of bounds. That being said, the Constitutional experts' testimony in toto should not be dismissed. The demonstrable abuse of power exercised in an effort to potentially influence an election outcome is at the very least worthy of the investigations. Let the Senate be the ultimate decider as to the outcome and let the results of their inquiries and eventual vote stand the test of time. We should all be thankful the system is working as intended, partisan polemics aside. Patience is the word of the day.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.14  JohnRussell  replied to  r.t..b... @6.2.13    4 months ago

As I understand it ,  she said that being a president and not a king, Donald Trump can name his son Baron but cannot make him one. 

That hardly qualifies as some egregious insult towards the boy, although the professor should have left it out of her answer. 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
6.2.15  r.t..b...  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.14    4 months ago
the professor should have left it out of her answer. 

The bottom line. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.16  Tessylo  replied to  r.t..b... @6.2.13    4 months ago

I don't see it at all as being out of bounds.

It's a nothingburger.  

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.2.17  Kathleen  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.14    4 months ago

She is hardly a comedian. Stupid joke.

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.2.18  Kathleen  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.10    4 months ago

I am sure that some around here take every opportunity to nit pic everything that Trump said or other Republicans have said. 

 
 
 
KDMichigan
6.2.19  KDMichigan  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.2    4 months ago
Pamela Karlan's comments about Baron Trump

Just think that triggered snowflake was once on the A list for a scotus pick...

“I came in from the airport yesterday and I got off the bus from Dulles down at L’Enfant Plaza and I walked up to the hotel and as I was walking past what used to be the old post office building and is now Trump hotel," Karlan told an audience in 2017. “I had to cross the street, of course.” 

Anyone who is so partisan has no business on the Supreme Court, Democrats calling her as a expert witness...not so surprising.

She even has that bat shit crazy liberal look they sport...

256256256

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.20  JohnRussell  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.16    4 months ago
It's a nothingburger.  

More or less.  Trump says more offensive things than that every day of his life.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.21  JohnRussell  replied to  KDMichigan @6.2.19    4 months ago

So she doesnt like Trump, big deal. She has to get in line behind hundreds of millions of other people. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.22  JohnRussell  replied to  Kathleen @6.2.18    4 months ago

Donald Trump is a known liar, crook, bigot, and moron. There is no need to nitpick him, it's all out in the open. 

 
 
 
Sunshine
6.2.23  Sunshine  replied to  KDMichigan @6.2.19    4 months ago

Good grief....triggered by a Trump sign.  Who are the adults in the room?

320

 
 
 
KDMichigan
6.2.24  KDMichigan  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.21    4 months ago
big deal

The fact that you don't get the bias doesn't surprise me.

She demonstrated that she would have been unfit for SCOTUS yesterday.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.2.25  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @6.2.19    4 months ago

How about not using stereotypes? They rarely further the discussion.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.2.26  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.22    4 months ago

John,

That has nothing to do with the comment Karlan said. It was very unprofessional and didn't help the Dems case against Trump. 

But also there is plenty to consider from the other 3 who spoke. 

I find it interesting that the Rep can call this a witch hunt, when Clinton had the same thing happen to him. Millions of dollars wasted on "Whitewater", until they found a kink somewhere else.

Kind of like how we got Al Capone. 

Payback can be a bitch.

 
 
 
Sunshine
6.2.27  Sunshine  replied to  KDMichigan @6.2.24    4 months ago
She demonstrated that she would have been unfit for SCOTUS yesterday.

Certainly did.  SCOTUS is no place for the anger she spewed.  Dems probably would like that tho.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
6.2.28  KDMichigan  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.2.25    4 months ago
How about not using stereotypes?

The truth is not a stereotype.

Did I say all liberals have a bat shit crazy look?

Or are you arguing that her comment and actions about seeing a Trump sign isn't something a triggered snowflake would do?

 
 
 
KDMichigan
6.2.29  KDMichigan  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.2.26    4 months ago
Payback can be a bitch.

So it's all about paybacks for a sitting President that had nothing to do with Whitewater....How mature.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.2.30  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @6.2.28    4 months ago
She even has that bat shit crazy liberal look they sport...

It was implied:

She even has that bat shit crazy liberal look they sport...

With not one but three women's faces. That is the very definition of a stereotype.

I am just trying to get things back to discussion. 

Or are you arguing that her comment and actions about seeing a Trump sign isn't something a triggered snowflake would do?

You know everyone is a snowflake when it's their person that is being attacked. Just the word 'snowflake" is supposed to solicit a response. But to answer your question, I think she took a cheap shot. That doesn't make her a "triggered snowflake". That makes her unprofessional. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.31  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.2.26    4 months ago

I agree it was ill advised to mention a child of the politician , because it's always ill advised. 

I do disagree with those that say that there was any insult involved toward Baron.  

The conservatives are grasping at this straw simply because all the facts in this impeachment business are against them.  It is their way to try and rile up their base about tangential things like the professor mentioning Baron Trump. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.32  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.2.30    4 months ago
I am just trying to get things back to discussion. 

I asked both Vic and Sunshine (they both claimed Trump is being smeared) to tell us how Trump has been "smeared" by the accusations against him about Ukraine, and neither of them, or anyone else, has answered. 

If they think Trump has been "smeared"  I would expect they would be able to put the nature of the smear into words.  Not yet. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.2.33  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @6.2.29    4 months ago

Was it mature to go after Clinton for Whitewater endlessly for over $70 million?

Look, I agreed with you about Karlan. I thought that comment was very petty and worse brought a child into the mix. But you are not looking at the big picture here. In politics, nothing is forgotten. And just like you probably feel that Bill had it coming to him, the Dems feel that way about Donald. 

That is why I mentioned Capone. He was going down one way or another, and that is what happened with Bill, and that is what is happening with the Donald. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.34  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.22    4 months ago
'There is no need to nitpick him, it's all out in the open.'
Yes, EXACTLY.  

 
 
 
KDMichigan
6.2.35  KDMichigan  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.2.30    4 months ago
With not one but three women's faces.

And I was going to go with a video also...

 
 
 
Ender
6.2.36  Ender  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.31    4 months ago

Ironic really. Though that is mostly what the trumpers have. They attacked the Obama girls and Chelsea Clinton. They were merciless.

Now one person makes a bad joke about the trump kid and it is all out war.

Please. There is no comparison. This is the first time I have even heard his name brought up, in a long time.

I wouldn't have done it yet the people complaining about this are the same ones that turned a blind eye to all the nasty that was spewed at the three girls.

They don't have a leg to stand on.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.2.37  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @6.2.35    4 months ago

KD, 

I don't think that woman was right, but really how often does that happen, and how often does it happen the other way around?

I have been at my friend's homes when I have seen some really nasty outbreaks going both ways because what most of this country doesn't get, NY and especially Long Island is very diverse in their opinion about Trump. 

Heck, even being an independent gets me yelled at. 

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.2.38  Kathleen  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.31    4 months ago

No, but I thought it was worth mentioning. Let this be a lesson that kids are off limits on both sides.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
6.2.39  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Kathleen @6.2.38    4 months ago
Let this be a lesson that kids are off limits on both sides

Agreed, till they are adults themselves, then they are fair game and examples of their parents upbringing.

The comment made about Barron was hardly an insult however.

Would any conservative have been as supposedly offended if it had been “While the Senator can name his son Hunter, that doesn't make him a hunter,” back when Hunter Biden was under 18? Would Democrats have been justified in raging against such a comment? Really?

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.2.40  Kathleen  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.2.39    4 months ago

It was an insult because he should not have been used in a bad joke at his expense. I am sure you feel that way only because it’s Trumps son. If it was a son of a President you were supporting, you would call it a insult.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.41  Tessylo  replied to  Kathleen @6.2.40    4 months ago

No it wasn't an insult.  

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.2.42  Kathleen  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.22    4 months ago

Shear obsession is what it is. If Trump gets elected for four more years, I suspect some will will go out of their minds. For me,  it will not bother me if he wins or if someone else that is more a moderate wins. I am not worried about a candidate that is extreme left, they won’t make it.  

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.2.43  Kathleen  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.41    4 months ago

Geeeez let it go!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.44  JohnRussell  replied to  Kathleen @6.2.42    4 months ago

I can easily demonstrate that Trump is a KNOWN liar, crook, bigot and moron.  I have done it here .  It is not just an opinion it is facts and evidence. 

Why are you supporting him? 

 
 
 
The People's Fish
6.2.45  The People's Fish  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.21    4 months ago

Most people don't care, its a small group of steaming piles of weird that leak TDS out of their panties.

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.2.46  Kathleen  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.44    4 months ago

I support some of Trumps policies. I consider myself a Republican supporter. You can’t seem to understand that. For you it’s either hate him or support him, nowhere in between.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
6.2.47  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.21    4 months ago
So she doesnt like Trump, big deal.

It kinda is a big deal if she's going to be paraded in as an "expert" on the impeachment.  The fact is that whether or not she read the evidence is completely immaterial to her.  She was always going to call for his impeachment.  That's probably been true since Nov 9, 2016.

It's a bit like consulting Matthew McConaughey as the replay official during a Texas Longhorns game.

 
 
 
WallyW
6.2.48  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.44    4 months ago

Your opinion means nothing

Electing a Democrat, any Democrat, would be disastrous for the US.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
6.2.49  Jasper2529  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.16    4 months ago
I don't see it at all as being out of bounds.

Attacking/ridiculing Trump's youngest son is OK with you? Wow. Did you feel the same when people did the same to Obama's, Clinton's, and Carter's children? I didn't. Children should always be off-limits no matter what political party their parents represent.

 
 
 
Goodtime Charlie
6.2.50  Goodtime Charlie  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.14    4 months ago
That hardly qualifies as some egregious insult towards the boy,

I agree she didn't mean as some egregious insult towards Baron. She let her TDS get in the way as it was a egregious insult towards the president.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.2.51  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  KDMichigan @6.2.19    4 months ago

It didn't take long for her hate & radicalism to ooze out. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.52  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.2.51    4 months ago

So Nancy Pelosi is a radical now? lol. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.53  Tessylo  replied to  Kathleen @6.2.42    4 months ago

'Shear obsession is what it is.'

That's sheer.

[DELETED]

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.54  Tessylo  replied to  Jasper2529 @6.2.49    4 months ago

How did she attack/ridicule Barron?  By saying his name?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.55  JohnRussell  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.54    4 months ago

The lady did not attack Barron.  She mentioned his name in connection to his father's position as president not king. 

There was no insult whatsoever to the boy. 

Nonetheless, mentioning his name was ill advised. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.56  Tessylo  replied to  Jasper2529 @6.2.49    4 months ago

Fox News Readers Bash Obama's Daughter With Racial Slurs, 'Ape,' 'Monkey'

Written by   DiversityInc Staff   on   May 3, 2016

Fox News disabled the comments section of   an article   by the Associated Press about President Barack Obama’s 17-year-old daughter, Malia Obama, after readers flooded the post with racist comments, calling her a racial slur, an “ape,” a “monkey” and accusing her of not deserving her entry to the university but getting it thanks to “Black privilege.”


The brief AP article reveals the president’s daughter’s decision to attend Harvard University, like her father, in 2017 after taking a year off from school.

Cruel, racist comments, which were screenshotted prior to being removed, immediately followed.   Addictinginfo.org   posted some shots several hours after the original article was published:

“I wonder if she applied as a muDslime..or a foreign student..or just a Ni@@er.”

“Hopefully she gets cancer/aids or one of those colored diseases.”

“Another academically challenged affirmative-action parasite steals a place from a qualified White or Asian student.”

Related Story: Michelle Obama: My Critics Don’t Define Me

Users also attacked other members of the Obama family, including First Lady Michelle Obama, who has been the subject of many crude comments in the past.

“I’m sure she’s being fed a stem of celery with two grain muffins for lunch as accorded by her man-thing mother, Sasquatch.”

“Probably staying out for a year so she can help her parents carry out the furniture and dinnerware when they leave the White House,” one user wrote, to which another responded, “Typical.”

A satirical op-ed that appeared in the Chicago Tribune,   “Malia Obama’s suspicious gap year,”   poked fun at the conservatives who are slamming the young woman for taking a year off between high school and college and are saying she didn’t earn her spot at the prestigious university:

“It’s a well-established fact that Malia is the first child of a president to ever get into Harvard, a clear-cut sign that the fix is in. (The news site Vox did report that, according to the book “America’s Royalty,” 22 presidential children have attended Harvard, but c’mon, are you going to trust liberal facts),” the article reads.

But the joke went over the heads of some commenters, who attacked the president’s daughter once again:

“Malia will have her Harvard transcripts buried, just like Chewbacca and the WH Muslim. As for the gap year, my guess is she will get some heavy tutoring to try to match up at Harvard. If she looks like she won’t cut it, Malia goes somewhere outside the US to hide her further. Gap year, sure. By the way, ever hear either daughter ever talk Can they” one user wrote.

“Doesn’t have the grades, can’t do the work, needs extensive tutoring to have a chance at ANY college, unless Affirmative Action and sealing her transcripts can be arranged (very likely!) Phony Birth Certificate, sealed transcripts from Harvard AND Columbia, ‘gap year’, see a pattern” questioned another.

This is not the first time the conservative media has attacked Malia Obama. Three years ago, when she was just 14, Fox News host Andrea Tantaros called into question the young woman’s sex life after Obama stated he supported providing Plan B to girls as young as 15.

“Are they gonna put her on birth control” Tantaros questioned. “Because he’s very concerned with contraceptives and pharmaceuticals that are going in the mouths of everybody else’s 15-year-old daughter.”

The Obama family is not the first family in the White House to face harsh words from the public (with  Rush Limbaugh  previously calling Chelsea Clinton a dog when she was just 12 years old and describing Amy Carter as “the most unattractive presidential daughter in the history of this country”). However, the Obamas have faced an unprecedented slew of racism thrown their way in addition to simply a mean-spirited media.

After Thanksgiving in 2014, Elizabeth Lauten, a former communications director for State Rep. Stephen Lee Fincher (Tenn.),  bashed  Malia Obama and younger sister Sasha Obama, who were 16 and 13 at the time, for their outfits and facial expressions at the annual turkey pardoning.

“Try showing a little class,” Lauten wrote. “Rise to the occasion. Dress like you deserve respect, not a spot at the bar.”

The family has also been compared — negatively — to White House families before them.  Mad World News  posted an article about the girls around Thanksgiving 2014 as well.

“I don’t think you would have ever seen the Bush daughters in dresses that short,” the article wrote. “Class is completely absent from this White House.”

Malia Obama has faced backlash from the media since her father first took office. At just  11 years old , she was called “a typical street whore” and “ghetto street trash” after wearing a shirt with a peace sign on it.

So what were some of you all saying again about how conservatives/republicans never attack the children of the President

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.2.57  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.52    4 months ago

Pelosi?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.2.58  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.54    4 months ago

Are you really going to try and defend it?  Shame on you!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.2.59  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.55    4 months ago
There was no insult whatsoever to the boy. 

A child's name should never have been brought up. A decent human being would know that. Progressives are not decent human beings. 

You know why she did that. They want to hurt Trump in the worst way. They wish for his death. I place progressives below drug addicts and you know there isn't much lower than that.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2.60  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.2.59    4 months ago

You sound a tad hysterical there. 

She said Trump is not a king, therefore he cannot make his son a baron in anything other than his name. 

Hardly a scurrilous attack on the boy. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.61  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.2.58    4 months ago

Of course I defend it.  There was no insult or attack.  A nothingburger to distract from the 'president's' MANY IMPEACHABLE OFFENSES.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.2.62  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.61    4 months ago
Of course I defend it.

Of course.  I always knew you would.

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.2.63  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.60    4 months ago
You sound a tad hysterical there. 
She said Trump is not a king, therefore he cannot make his son a baron in anything other than his name. 
Hardly a scurrilous attack on the boy. 

Most adults already know that Trump isn't a king. Just ask 100 people and you can see it for yourself. The hysterical ones are the ones stupid enough, gullible enough to believe any such crap.

Her saying that was uncalled for and unnecessary. Trump isn't an astronaut, did she need to say he isn't one?

The woman showed her bias.

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.2.65  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.5    4 months ago
“While the president can name his son Barron, he can’t make him a baron,” Karlan said.

Just another example of someone on the left saying crap that makes no sense. Of COURSE Trump can't make his son a baron. When and where did Trump claim otherwise? Trump also can't make his son an astronaut, is it necessary to tell folks on the left that tidbit?

The woman clearly showed her bias. And idiots applaud her for it.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.66  Tessylo  replied to  Texan1211 @6.2.65    4 months ago

Just another example of someone on the 'right' saying crap that makes no sense.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.67  Tessylo  replied to  Kathleen @6.2.43    4 months ago

As soon as you do.  [deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.2.68  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.66    4 months ago
Just another example of someone on the 'right' saying crap that makes no sense. 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you, and besides, don't you always proudly proclaim you don't read?

 
 
 
Jasper2529
6.2.69  Jasper2529  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.56    4 months ago
So what were some of you all saying again about how conservatives/republicans never attack the children of the President

Stop lumping me into a group. You obviously didn't understand my comment 6.2.49 ...

Did you feel the same when people did the same to Obama's, Clinton's, and Carter's children? I didn't. Children should always be off-limits no matter what political party their parents represent.
 
 
 
Ender
6.2.70  Ender  replied to  Ronin2 @6.2.64    4 months ago

Oh please. No where near the same no matter how many bias links you put up.

The only thing you have come up with is two has been actors and people on twitter making fun of trump for not spending fathers day with his kid.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.71  Tessylo  replied to  Ender @6.2.70    4 months ago

'Oh please. No where near the same no matter how many bias links you put up.

The only thing you have come up with is two has been actors and people on twitter making fun of trump for not spending fathers day with his kid.'

Really, I don't know why they waste our time.  

When the insults against democrat children are legion and beneath contempt.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.72  Tessylo  replied to  Jasper2529 @6.2.69    4 months ago
I don't pay much attention to you other than to counteract your nonsense.  

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
6.3  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Kathleen @6    4 months ago
This does not look bad on Trump, this looks bad on them

That's exactly what Republicans are hoping they can convince the less well read crowd. They want to muddy the waters and claim all of this is a Democrat overreach so that people don't focus on the actual facts of the case which to anyone with any civics education can see is absolutely damning. Three of the four constitutional law professors said this was clearly impeachable conduct and a clear attempt by the President to use the power of his office for personal political gain. The fourth professor didn't disagree that if Trump did what it appears he did it would be impeachable, he just felt we must wait for the "key witnesses" to testify before taking such a serious step as impeachment and felt Democrats were rushing things due to the election time line.

So 3 out of 4 constitutional law professors believe what has already been proven is enough for impeachment, and the fourth was just holding out for more fact witnesses who have been blocked by the white house from testifying. I've no doubt if this were a Democrat President Republicans would be shouting up and down the street about how guilty the Democrat President must be since he's refusing to allow his staff to testify. Sadly, the hypocrisy of some on the right knows no bounds so they will never be able to objectively weigh the facts of a case, they already picked their side long before seeing any evidence. That's why watching all the evidence is so boring for them, they simply don't give a fuck anymore and don't care if their President breaks the law, they already tacitly agreed that they'd even ignore Trump shooting someone in the street.

So yes, it won't look bad to those who don't know or care about the constitution or the law, but for the rest of us this hearing has been unbelievably damning of this inept lawless President.

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.3.1  Kathleen  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.3    4 months ago

I think the Democrats picked their side too.

 
 
 
Snuffy
6.3.2  Snuffy  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.3    4 months ago

As an independent I believe that  you can switch the Democrat and Republican titles in your notes and the sides would continue to scream and shout. Washington has devolved so badly into a political party swamp that some from both parties had picked their sides long before seeing any evidence.

Also as an independent I have tried to keep up with all the evidence but I'm sure I've missed some. But for the evidence and testimony that I have seen, I don't see the overwhelming evidence yet. I've seen way too much opinion from talking heads trying to tell me what the evidence says but what they say doesn't match up to what the little evidence that has been made public says. I just don't see where the evidence is a slam dunk.

Considering there have been parts of the Democratic party that have been calling for impeachment since before Trump even took the oath, I'm having difficulty in accepting that impeachment is really the correct path.

 
 
 
Sunshine
6.3.3  Sunshine  replied to  Snuffy @6.3.2    4 months ago
Considering there have been parts of the Democratic party that have been calling for impeachment since before Trump even took the oath, I'm having difficulty in accepting that impeachment is really the correct path.

The Mueller investigation was a big disappointment for the Dems.  Since then, it is just been a lot of kicking and screaming.

Very expensive temper tantrum for us.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.3.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Sunshine @6.3.3    4 months ago

Sunshine, you said in a comment to me that Trump is being "smeared" by the investigation into his Ukranian actions. 

I will ask you again to spell out for us what that "smear" is. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.3.5  Tessylo  replied to  Sunshine @6.3.3    4 months ago

'Very expensive temper tantrum for us.'

The Mueller investigation paid for itself with Manaforts' seized assets.

What about the endless investigations into Hillary's e-mails at the taxpayers' expense?

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.3.6  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @6.3.4    4 months ago
'Sunshine, you said in a comment to me that Trump is being "smeared" by the investigation into his Ukranian actions.' 

'I will ask you again to spell out for us what that "smear" is.'

tenor.gif?itemid=13729968

 
 
 
Goodtime Charlie
6.3.7  Goodtime Charlie  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.3    4 months ago
Three of the four constitutional law professors said this was clearly impeachable conduct and a clear attempt by the President to use the power of his office for personal political gain.

They're all Democrats, so what else are they going to say? 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
6.3.8  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.3    4 months ago
So 3 out of 4 constitutional law professors believe what has already been proven is enough for impeachment,

let me give ya a hint:

  • 3 highly partisan lunatic professors get zero credibility from anyone other than the lunatic left.

  personally, I can't wait for this to reach the senate.

enjoy the show, 

cheers :)

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
6.3.9  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Goodtime Charlie @6.3.7    4 months ago
They're all Democrats, so what else are they going to say? 

So I guess from now on we can't trust a single thing a Republican or Democrat says. If you can't take the word of a constitutional professors as to the law because they also happen to be registered with one party or another, then we're all fucked and none of this matters and we may as well get civil war two started.

We are all Americans, it's just only some of us who actually act like it and can put country over party. Those folk are definitely not the pieces of ignorant partisan filth supporting this vile liar in chief.

 
 
 
MUVA
6.3.10  MUVA  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.3.9    4 months ago

No just these three bozo's come on man I looked the meaning of  hack and all three of their pictures appeared. 

 
 
 
lib50
6.3.11  lib50  replied to  JohnRussell @6.3.4    4 months ago
I will ask you again to spell out for us what that "smear" is. 

You never get a specific answer, my theory is anytime Trump gets called out for his lies or corrupt activities they think its a smear.  Go back and check.  The guy who lies and smears everybody, literally (except Putin) gets his and his supporters panties in a wad every time it gets brought up. Then comes the whining and projecting.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
7  Nerm_L    4 months ago

Nancy Pelosi lost control of the Democratic caucus shortly after Labor Day.  Pelosi is just a figurehead trying to keep her butt polished, fine leather upholstery.  Trump's political attacks on the Squad shifted the politics of the Congressional Democrats to the left.  Pelosi trying to restrain that leftward shift opened the door for a power grab by ambitious deadwood in the party.  Democrats will use Democratic politics against each other.  Nancy Pelosi is Speaker in name only; she no longer leads.  House Democrats are now just making up stuff as they go since there isn't leadership that can formulate and control an agenda.

What amazes me is that Democrats are going to hand the political narrative to Trump at the beginning of the primary season.  House Democrats won't be able to control the politics of a Senate trial.  Trump's political behavior has not followed the status quo political playbook.  Democrats following the model of politics-as-usual are likely going to be blindsided.  In case Democrats have not been paying attention, the news reporting focused on fact checking, unflattering stories, and scathingly critical opinion has not been moving Trump's approval according to status quo expectations.  The impeachment hearings have only been another news day in a three year media frenzy.  Democratic outrage has become nothing more than another part of the status quo.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Nerm_L @7    4 months ago
In case Democrats have not been paying attention, the news reporting focused on fact checking, unflattering stories, and scathingly critical opinion has not been moving Trump's approval according to status quo expectations. 

Excellent point. They haven't noticed. They've been in their impeachment frenzy. As I said before - they will pay for this in November!

 
 
 
Nerm_L
7.1.1  Nerm_L  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1    4 months ago
Excellent point. They haven't noticed. They've been in their impeachment frenzy. As I said before - they will pay for this in November!

The country has entered a phase of transition.  Trump is not a cause; Trump is a result.  Republicans attempting to defend the status quo will fare no better than Democrats.  Republican deadwood isn't a viable alternative to Democratic deadwood.  In the end, it matters little which party gains control of elected government because neither are prepared to listen to voters.  That has created a power vacuum that the technocratic bureaucracy is attempting to fill.  It's not a power grab or a coup; it's only a desperate attempt to keep the damned thing running.

For quite a while the public has felt that institutional government was on the wrong track.  Trump has thrown a wheel off the rail and sparks are flying everywhere.  But Republicans and Democrats trying to put that train back on the wrong track isn't going to prevent the wreck that is coming.  We can either pay attention and change direction with new track or we can rebuild after the wreck.  Either way, a change in direction is coming.

 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
8  seeder  Vic Eldred    4 months ago

On her way out of the door, Pelosi returned to the lectern when a reporter asked if she hated the president. "I don't hate anybody," she said. "As a Catholic, I resent your using the word 'hate' in a sentence that addresses me." She said she prays for the pres "all the time."

ELCSgrfXUAIEuBu?format=png&name=small

Anyone buying that?

A good Catholic?  

I'll bet she's been to Church about as much as I have.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @8    4 months ago

Some people call themselves practicing Catholics if they go to mass a few times a year.  Its hard to say without knowing her details. 

I bet you she is more of a Catholic than Trump is a Christian though. That is a no brainer. 

 
 
 
WallyW
8.1.1  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1    4 months ago

Trump has never claimed to be a Christian

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  WallyW @8.1.1    4 months ago

2. Trump says he's Presbyterian and previously attended services with the Reformed Church of America denomination.

Trump told   Human Events   and other news outlets that he is "a believer." In 2011, he told CBN he attended First Presbyterian Church in Jamaica Queens, which is part of the Presbyterian U.S.A. denomination. Some past articles and interviews have listed Trump as a member of the Reformed Church of America, but more recently he has said he is Presbyterian. He says he goes to church on Sunday when he can and always on Christmas, Easter, and on special occasions.

https://www.christianpost.com/news/6-interesting-facts-about-donald-trumps-christian-faith.html

 
 
 
lib50
8.1.3  lib50  replied to  WallyW @8.1.1    4 months ago

Ooops, should have checked that one out first.   

 
 
 
KDMichigan
8.1.4  KDMichigan  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1    4 months ago
I bet you she is more of a Catholic than Trump is a Christian though.

Are you implying that Nancy molests children?

 
 
 
The People's Fish
9  The People's Fish    4 months ago

The best clip from yesterday was Jerry Nadler falling asleep in the hearing he was running. You just can't script this shit.

 
 
 
MUVA
10  MUVA    4 months ago

When ever I see Nancy speak I always think poligrip for fuck sakes.

 
 
 
lib50
10.1  lib50  replied to  MUVA @10    4 months ago

Trump could use some polygrip, have you heard some of his slurring speeches where it sounds like his dentures came loose for a sec?  Meantime, I caught a glimpse of the side of his head where that pisshair combs over, he may want to try a different brand of hairspray.

 
 
 
It Is ME
10.1.1  It Is ME  replied to  lib50 @10.1    4 months ago
Trump could use some polygrip, have you heard some of his slurring speeches where it sounds like his dentures came loose for a sec?

NOPE !

I don't think anyone else has either. jrSmiley_25_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Jasper2529
10.1.2  Jasper2529  replied to  lib50 @10.1    4 months ago
Trump could use some polygrip, have you heard some of his slurring speeches where it sounds like his dentures came loose for a sec? 

Pelosi, Bernie, and Biden are the ones who need either better fitting dentures, stronger adhesives, or implants because they're the ones who noticeably slur their words. Pelosi even moves her tongue around in her mouth as she tries to get better suction while she speaks. They can afford it, because they have tax-payer funded platinum healthcare coverage as well as being multi-millionaire career politicians.

 
 
 
MUVA
10.1.3  MUVA  replied to  Jasper2529 @10.1.2    4 months ago

I know she should just get implants and get it over with.

 
 
 
It Is ME
11  It Is ME    4 months ago

"Today I am asking our chairman to proceed with articles of impeachment," Pelosi stated

She's been Praying, and had back to the podium to tell a reporter she doesn't HATE anyone, because she's catholic. jrSmiley_20_smiley_image.gif

Where are these so-called " Logical " and " atheistic " folks speaking out against Nancy For " USING" religion like she did ? jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
It Is ME
11.1  It Is ME  replied to  It Is ME @11    4 months ago

SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, NANCY !!!!!!!!!!!

Speak out you "Logical" and "Atheistic" Types jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif , like you do with anything not "Democrat" ....won't you ? jrSmiley_76_smiley_image.gif

STILL FUCKING  ..................… WAITING ...... you .... hypocrits !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! jrSmiley_100_smiley_image.jpgjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

shona1


50 visitors