Big Trumper here, but its probably best if he gets impeached, even if not legal

~ Not irrelevant to Americans concerned with vote integrity .

 

That seems to have been the case, at least during the Trump administration.

 

Your analogy is only valid in simple terms without context. The only thing the two events had in common was that they were perpetrated by angry people with strong political views, some of them batshit crazy.

They've been showing a video on the news from Trump's "Stop the Steal" rally at the White House ellipse on Jan. 6. You can clearly hear people in the crowd, upon hearing Trump tell them to go to the Capitol, and telling them that they can't take back their country unless they use strength, shouting "Yes! Invade the Capitol! Storm the Capitol!" His many tweets about the election were pouring out for weeks, telling them to gather in DC on Jan. 6, constantly telling them in tweets and at that rally that the Democrats are going to destroy America if they don't take action. What sort of action do you think he meant?

Not once before Jan. 6th did he tweet or say that they were going to have a peaceful protest. His words were fight, be strong, don't be weak, and so forth. Obviously, his supporters were angry on his behalf and not inclined to be peaceful, given that to Trump fans, peaceful meant weak. Even while pushing and shoving Capitol police inside the building, they were claiming and shouting things like "Trump invited us here" and "were only listening to Trump."

There reallly is no way to spin this in a direction that makes Trump innocent. He clearly incited sedition and violence.

 

Really? Do you know that for a fact? Because according to the facts, no such tracking was done. Unlike you, I'm willing to back up that claim.

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/10/21/donald-trump-immigration-parents-children-separated/

"As those children were shuttled around the country in late 2017, their parents were swiftly detained or deported, with few records taken by the government about where they went or how to contact them."

When they started to reunite children with parents in 2019, DHS held back some of the information they did have on the parents.

https://time.com/5917728/separated-families-border-data-government/

The trauma visited upon these children will follow them all of their lives. It was a cruel policy, and the cruelty of it was the point of the policy all along.

https://www.texastribune.org/2019/1...new-family-separations-harm-migrant-children/

So, I showed you mine, but you still haven't answered my questions about your claim that the 500+ children still not reunited with their families were trafficked. How many? What percentage of the whole? What are your sources?

 

I think the next republican candidate- if not Trump, and assuming we don't come up with proof of fraud- will be a man that supports the Trump concepts and is more skilled at maintaining a diplomatic posture for those who think nothing else is more important. In the meantime, I expect Biden and company to offend a great many voters on both sides, meaning many on the left will realize they were better off with Trump's platforms and go for it with such a candidate. Mike Pompeo is already on the list, and he would fit the bill.

Can't agree with the garbage of using double impeachment to eliminate the possibility you might lose the next election, and that IS what the dems are going for here. IF a candidate is bad in the voters eyes, you don't have a problem. If you seek to limit the choices of the voters on the other side- That pretty much says you're unfit yourself.

 

Ya ya. I have already posted plenty of links stating most of the children in limbo were never claimed for one reason or the other one of the most popular was children snatched and then once served their purpose, left for we the Americans to deal with..

I'd do it all again, but I'm no longer in the mood to prove a point to people that ignore the facts and refuse to face the reality that a real parent would have never brought a child on a trek like that let alone leave their children in captivity.. There is a reason why these throw away children have no documentation, and that's because the POS's that drug them thru corrupt countries to get here were actually drug BY CRAP people and left here for us to deal with..

 

My issue was the context: the tweet came 25 minutes after people had started breaking in. Two hours passed before he told them to stop. This suggests a tacit approval of what they did, and this is further supported by his 6:01 tweet, "These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots". It wasn't until the next day that Trump read some words that condemned the actions, and even then - he later regretted saying it, because it "made him look weak". The RIGHT thing for the Chief Executive to do was to tell his supporters to cease and desist the minute he heard they were trying to break in. That was his job, and he was derelict.

Pence did not have the legal authority to do that.

This ignores the Electoral Count Act, which defines the VP's role.

I strongly disagree that it's a show trial. You MIGHT have a point with regard to whether or not Trump's actions could warrant a criminal prosecution, but that's entirely due to the technicalities of the law. Trump had been riling up his base for two months with the false claim that he'd won the election, as well as the false claim that something could be done about it on Jan 6. He had courted conspiracy theorists and the "Proud Boys" for quite some time, and winked at violent acts performed by his supporters. This makes him morally responsible, even if legal technicalities might preclude criminal prosecution. However, it's perfectly appropriate to hold him to a broader standard than the technical standard of the law, because of his oath of office, the Chief Executive's inherent responsibilities, and the power his words hold over people.

It would be interesting to know if Trump was made aware of the possibility of violence prior to Jan 6. The Capitol Police acknowledged being aware, so how could Trump NOT be aware? If we learn he was aware, that's the final nail in his coffin.

 

Trump's concepts include embracing, or at least accepting, various conspiracy theories. This creates a dilemma: if the Republican candidate follows suit, he will continue to alienate Republicans who think critically. If the candidate disparages such things, he'll be rejecting a significant portion of Trump's base.

 

‘Argument Of Convenience’: Experts Dismiss GOP’s New Claim That Trump’s Impeachment Is Unconstitutional

"Republicans senators are beginning to coalesce around a new talking point: impeaching former President Donald Trump is now unconstitutional because he has left office.

“I think it’s obvious that the post-presidential impeachment has never occurred in the history of the country for a reason: that it’s unconstitutional, that it sets a bad precedent for the presidency and it continues to divide the nation,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told reporters Friday.

Constitutional scholars of all stripes are dismissing that argument.

“I don’t buy that argument as anything other than an argument of convenience (e.g., looking for an excuse to avoid what should be easy and seemed politically hard),” Justin Levitt, a constitutional law professor at Loyola Law School, told TPM in an email."
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-impeachment-unconstitutional-republicans

 

People often use the term "conspiracy theory" as a way to mock someone- and while there are many crazy ones, there are most certainly many valid ones. A prime objective of most people trying to pull off something that is unscrupulous is to avoid it's discovery- and be able to take any suspicions and discard them as..... imagination, AKA, conspiracy theories. Fact is- some are, some are not, but the person who fails to question the obvious when there are indications of malice- is a sucker. You would find very few people who are skilled investigators that believe in coincidence. When "coincidences" conveniently come in a sequence resulting in benefits to a specific end, the people insisting there is no conspiracy are either the conspirators, or fools.

Conspiracies are certainly a normal tool in politics, business and personal affairs; it simply is people working together for a goal they do not want to be obvious to others, usually because it would be illegal, unacceptable, criminal, or just won't fly if honestly presented, etc. For example our illustrious MSM "journalists" of today seem to all come up with the identical words of a new point of slander towards Trump on the same day; seen that happen consistently. Did they spontaneously come up with the same malicious phrases at the same time? What are the odds of that happening over and over?
Or- were they talking with each other, deciding what subject to rant on that evening, and what ugly label to use so frequently it would stick. Also known as- conspiring.

When the objective is to control an election, there are other words that apply to.

 

CNN calls this article news? Pathetic!

 

Wikipedia has a good definition of "conspiracy theory":
A conspiracy theory is an explanation for an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy by sinister and powerful groups, often political in motivation,[2][3] when other explanations are more probable.[4][5] The term has a negative connotation, implying that the appeal to a conspiracy is based on prejudice or insufficient evidence.

The Wikipedia article constrasts this use of the term with a more mundane criminal conspiracy:
A conspiracy theory is not simply a conspiracy, which refers to any covert plan involving two or more people.[42] In contrast, the term "conspiracy theory" refers to hypothesized conspiracies that have specific characteristics. For example, conspiracist beliefs invariably oppose the mainstream consensus among those people who are qualified to evaluate their accuracy, such as scientists or historians.[43] Conspiracy theorists see themselves as having privileged access to socially persecuted knowledge or a stigmatized mode of thought that separates them from the masses who believe the official account.[42] Michael Barkun describes a conspiracy theory as a "template imposed upon the world to give the appearance of order to events"

I was using the term in the first sense, the sense that entails irrational belief. Trump has expressed belief in, or support for, a variety of conspiracy theories. A notable example is his retweeting of a post that claims Osama bin Laden's death was staged.

 

Pompeo is a crook, and that isn't just my opinion.

https://www.citizensforethics.org/n...files-criminal-complaint-against-mike-pompeo/

"On Pompeo’s recommendation, President Trump removed State Department Inspector General Steve Linick from his post while Linick’s office was investigating Pompeo for misconduct."

"Linick had been investigating President Trump’s and Pompeo’s alleged fast-tracking of $8 billion in arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates without consulting Congress, as well as claims that Pompeo was abusing his position by making a staffer perform domestic errands and chores for him and his wife such as handling dry cleaning, walking the family dog and making restaurant reservations."

https://www.justsecurity.org/70560/...ational-criminal-courts-afghan-investigation/

"... the Trump administration, with Pompeo taking the lead, has made it personal by targeting specific members of the Court, and the Secretary of State has recently said he will escalate actions against the Court to prevent it from pursuing the criminal investigation. What has gone generally unnoticed is that Pompeo may be personally at risk for wrongdoing that the Court could uncover of CIA activities when he was the director of the agency."

Yes, I know ... who give a hoot what the International Criminal Court says about the CIA? But isn't about what the ICC is investigating, it's about Pompeo's heavy-handed response to it.

https://lawandcrime.com/awkward/off...ech-rushed-release-of-hillary-clinton-emails/

"The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is investigating U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo after the nation’s top diplomat gave a campaign-style speech during this year’s Republican National Convention (RNC) while on a government-funded diplomatic trip to Jerusalem."

Either he was too dumb to know that was illegal, or (more likely) didn't care.

Pompeo is a Koch brothers man, a dark money beneficiary. No, he isn't alone in that, so save your whataboutisms, please. He's blatantly crooked.

 

Epic fail. You still haven't answered my questions about your claim that the 500+ children still not reunited with their families were trafficked. How many? What percentage of the whole? What are your sources?
You made a claim, you provide the proof. That's how debate works.

 

Then again you haven't explained why their parents haven't claimed them either

 

another poster that may have been at the capitol january 6th 2021

 

2X impeached and voted out as an incumbent. Not a good resume. Actually, the worst.

 

How about what's constitutional? If we agree with the Democrats the Constitution no longer has standing what road are we heading down?

 

I am all for a 3rd party.
Wanted another one or more for years.

 

Or thinking that the Dossier might have been a conspiracy??

Or people telling you that if you are white, you are somehow defective..... which sounds precisely like the definition of racism we have been fighting for 60 years?

 

Funny you mention "dark money" with Biden just setting a record for being the largest beneficiary of that in history.

And calling someone a name is something anybody can do. I can sue you because I don't like the color of the ties you wear- doesn't mean a damn thing. You're buying the advance marketing of hate on Pompeo, out of fear he will be a strong candidate. I was following him long before he hit Washington. I also know Koch; I've had contracts with him personally. I know his politics. Works hard and contributes to what he believes, and I don't agree with all of it- but he is honest in his objectives and methods. Everybody who opposes your beliefs are not crooks. That's just the BS the libs and dems would like you to believe, so you fall in line like an obedient sheep.

 

Impeachment is now DOA in case anyone didn't know already.

 

You'll have to explain how you think those two issues fit the pattern of conspiracy theories. I suggest reading the article, to understand how the term is used and what's wrong with embracing such theories. To be clear, all conspiracy theories are irrational, but not all irrational beliefs are conspiracy theories.

 

If I understand "impeachment", he has been impeached. The question is whether a trial should go forward.

I understand your concern about splitting the vote in 2024, but I don't want to see impeachment used as a weapon or as a political tool any more than it already has been. I think it's a terrible precedent for the country. Terrible and disgraceful and destructive.

 

Democrats act like they will never be a minority in Congress again. They're wrong. Inevitably, they will be because the pendulum swings.

They don't seem to care that the weaponization of the impeachment process could be used against them in the future, and they will have absolutely zero standing to oppose it.

It's a stupid, short-sighted, emotionally-based, destructive path to take.