trump Inpeachment...............

[sdskinsfan2001]

36 pages to get back to exactly the same spot. Everyone that believes that Trump should be impeached still thinks that and everyone that believes that the house process/evidence/actual impeachment articles were no where near strong enough still thinks that.

Let's close this down and open an actual policies discussion thread. That's my $0.02.

[mooby]

Cred, you and Chico might not believe a President has the power to do whatever he wants, but I think our president disagrees with you on that.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by mooby

Cred, you and Chico might not believe a President has the power to do whatever he wants, but I think our president disagrees with you on that.

Good job accepting media spin. He gave context in one of the clips, and he was talking about firing executive branch staff. Chico pointed out several things that contradict the concept of a monarch or a dictator.

You know presidents have been called the most powerful man in the world as long as i have been alive yet that hasn't made a one of them a dictator and Trump isn't either.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by sdskinsfan2001

36 pages to get back to exactly the same spot. Everyone that believes that Trump should be impeached still thinks that and everyone that believes that the house process/evidence/actual impeachment articles were no where near strong enough still thinks that.

Let's close this down and open an actual policies discussion thread. That's my $0.02.

Immigration - I think this is something 80% of the country could agree on. With the 10% extreme left and 10% extreme right making up the rest.

Asylum claims - i think they should be made to a country that the persons origin borders. So Guatemala seekers would have to file in Mexico. I also think they should not be able to enter the US, claim asylum, given a future court date and then allowed into the US.

Dreamers - make the exiting dreamers (without a felony) permanent. Then look into a program in which future dreamers can be brought in.

Bans on specific countries - I dont like that Trump recently placed Nigeria on a ban list. I know a lot of Nigerian families and Ethiopian and they are all close tight nit families who emphasize education. Nigeria is the tech hub of Africa. I think screening needs to be done on a per person basis.

Illegals - not too comfort using that word but I think they should be able to get drivers license, kids go to public school and a parent work requirement should be in place for receiving WIC.

Medicaid for illegals is tough one for me bc I dont want people not going to the doctor for preventitive care. If someone without insurance shows up to a hospital, they get treated anyway then the hospital has to write it off. Homeless people and meth/druggies also treat hospitals like its a walk in clinic. When I had to go to a San Diego ER on sunday morning it was packed with people coming off drugs there for "complaints" but really just to get drugs to help them come down.

How do you balance a lot of non-emergency visits vs actual emergencies?

Wall - Im fine with it and I think a lot of people would be to but the way Trump goes about it is so off-putting. Let border patrol decide where to put barriers but dont make it a partisan campaign issue.

Detainers and deportation - if an illegal is convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor while already on probation for another misdemeanor .. i think the Courts should notify ICE, ICE puts a detainer and that person is deported.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by mooby

One final question before I'm done with this forever. This applies to anyone willing to speak in Trump's defense.

Do you believe the President has authority to do anything he wants?

https://apnews.com/article/0a6f2a348...5e1dc486027860

I said no in this thread before because the first set of impeachment articles were bogus politics.

Inciting riots is something that the President does not have authority to do. Count me as in favor of these articles of impeachment. ( still not the first set)

[mooby]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

https://apnews.com/article/0a6f2a348...5e1dc486027860

I said no in this thread before because the first set of impeachment articles were bogus politics.

Inciting riots is something that the President does not have authority to do. Count me as in favor of these articles of impeachment. ( still not the first set)

It might have been a riot to some of the supporters, but you can bet there were insurrections and domestic terrorists in that crowd as well that absolutely would've seized the opportunity to take captives or do worse if the chambers weren't cleared in time. Which is why I have no sympathy for those who did participate.

With that being said I will agree to disagree with you on the first impeachment, but thank you for clarifying your opinion on the second. It's a moot point anyways and I don't think it's going to go anywhere before or after he leaves office, but I respect any conservative willing to stand up to the radicals and say what he did is an impeachable offense.

[SunnySide]

Love em or hate em ... im worn out like a $5 whore on shore night

Aloha Mr. Trump

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Inciting riots is something that the President does not have authority to do.

BS. Words have consequences when you're the president.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

BS. Words have consequences when you're the president.

as usual your comprehension skills are lacking. My full statement of which you quote only half clearly states that his words were cause for impeachment and not something that anyone supports. But keep going on your tribal warfare rants. The democrats are about to eat themselves alive with the moderates being fodder for the AOC's of the party.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

as usual your comprehension skills are lacking. My full statement of which you quote only half clearly states that his words were cause for impeachment and not something that anyone supports. But keep going on your tribal warfare rants. The democrats are about to eat themselves alive with the moderates being fodder for the AOC's of the party.

I know what you full statment said and it's BS ,Today is eating you and chico alive !

[mooby]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

as usual your comprehension skills are lacking. My full statement of which you quote only half clearly states that his words were cause for impeachment and not something that anyone supports. But keep going on your tribal warfare rants. The democrats are about to eat themselves alive with the moderates being fodder for the AOC's of the party.

All this because G1 read your post wrong? Yeesh. So much for unity.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by mooby

All this because G1 read your post wrong? Yeesh. So much for unity.

I read it right

Cred............

"I said no in this thread before because the first set of impeachment articles were bogus politics.

Inciting riots is something that the President does not have authority to do. Count me as in favor of these articles of impeachment. ( still not the first set)"

This is condescending BS ,he wants you /us to know he was right on the first Impeachment but yeah he'll go along on this one. Nice of him ...............again it's BS.