Imagine

[volprof]

I think we can nitpick Profs original post for a while, but even with several of those statements being debatable, there are still far too many that are true, and many of you who disagree (other than louder) have no answer and have resorted to taking jabs and patting each other's backs rather than saying anything worth a damn.

Thanks!

But to clarify, the only debatable statements I made were the two in which I clarified with "reportedly" and the one in which I included "considering." The rest is not debatable, and all are still facts.

 

[volprof]

didn't the investigation start under Obama? looking into the hacks and how it was all related?

FBI investigations are ongoing, yes, since Obama.

I'm talking about the nitty-gritty, "let's take this seriously as a country now" investigations that can only come with Congressional support and oversight.

 

[volprof]

I didn't read the original post because of who wrote it. I know that most of it will be nonsensical ravings of a lunatic mind. Sorry.

Out of sight; out of mind: the faux-conservative's approach to the Donald Trump presidency.

But, as I understand, your 401k is looking very good these days.

Congratulations.

 

[LouderVol]

I think we can nitpick Profs original post for a while, but even with several of those statements being debatable, there are still far too many that are true, and many of you who disagree (other than louder) have no answer and have resorted to taking jabs and patting each other's backs rather than saying anything worth a damn.

the dude has messed up, will continue to mess up, I still believe he will be the worst president we have ever had. I have been saying that since the beginning. but so far I have seen zero proof of any wrong doing. the only thing that has come out about these connections to the Russians has been that it wasn't illegal. hardly time to fire up the impeachment papers.

 

[LouderVol]

FBI investigations are ongoing, yes, since Obama.

I'm talking about the nitty-gritty, "let's take this seriously as a country now" investigations that can only come with Congressional support and oversight.

the FBI isn't serious and doesn't have oversight?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/12/us/politics/mcconnell-supports-inquiry-of-russian-hacking-during-election.html?_r=0

and going back to late 2016 here is Congressional support for the investigation.

anything else you want?

 

[volprof]

the dude has messed up, will continue to mess up, I still believe he will be the worst president we have ever had. I have been saying that since the beginning. but so far I have seen zero proof of any wrong doing. the only thing that has come out about these connections to the Russians has been that it wasn't illegal. hardly time to fire up the impeachment papers.

He's already in violation of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. Came into the office as such and has only continued to violate it.

Of course he's already in impeachment territory.

As one conservative intellectual I follow says, though, impeachment isn't this objective thing like we tend to think. It's completely arbitrary, predicated solely upon the biases and beliefs of a particular congress and absolutely nothing else.

 

[Persian Vol]

the dude has messed up, will continue to mess up, I still believe he will be the worst president we have ever had. I have been saying that since the beginning. but so far I have seen zero proof of any wrong doing. the only thing that has come out about these connections to the Russians has been that it wasn't illegal. hardly time to fire up the impeachment papers.

I suppose it depends on your interpretation of "wrongdoing".

 

[LouderVol]

He's already in violation of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. Came into the office as such and has only continued to violate it.

Of course he's already in impeachment territory.

As one conservative intellectual I follow says, though, impeachment isn't this objective thing like we tend to think. It's completely arbitrary, predicated solely upon the biases and beliefs of a particular congress and absolutely nothing else.

(assuming you are talking about China granting him a trademark)

and too bad that all started ticking before the election

China grants Trump a trademark he's been seeking for a decade - Feb. 17, 2017

China's trademark review board announced in September it had invalidated a rival claim for the Trump trademark, clearing the way for Trump to move in. In November, soon after the election, it awarded the trademark to the Trump Organization. The trademark was officially registered this week after a three-month notice period for objections expired.

did anyone really think trump was going to win in September? I remember this forum thinking they were just hoping it was a close loss to Hilary.

 

[volprof]

the FBI isn't serious and doesn't have oversight?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/12/us/politics/mcconnell-supports-inquiry-of-russian-hacking-during-election.html?_r=0

and going back to late 2016 here is Congressional support for the investigation.

anything else you want?

Yes, the FBI has "oversight."

I'm saying it's not on the level of a congressionally-sanctioned investigation. Otherwise, whatever the FBI finds is more likely to just be pushed under the table, because it will not be public (or as public). A congressional investigation has more public accountability.

Yes, the Senate is getting on board and initiating the process. But the House is still largely concerned with just investigating either Russian interference (at best) or the leaks regarding Flynn and the Trump WH (at worst).

 

[1972 Grad]

Out of sight; out of mind: the faux-conservative's approach to the Donald Trump presidency.

But, as I understand, your 401k is looking very good these days.

Congratulations.

It isn't a 401K, but thanks. It will turn to crap at some point, but it's the best game in town, long term.

 

[volprof]

(assuming you are talking about China granting him a trademark)

and too bad that all started ticking before the election

China grants Trump a trademark he's been seeking for a decade - Feb. 17, 2017



did anyone really think trump was going to win in September? I remember this forum thinking they were just hoping it was a close loss to Hilary.

Yes, I did. Said so since his "Midnight in America" RNC speech.

But that's beside the point.

His violation of the Emoluments Clause goes beyond China. He hasn't properly divested, if at all.

My goodness, he's still going to Mar-a-lago nearly every weekend to promote his resort and use our tax dollars, along with the political ties he gained from the presidency, to expand his financial imprint in that part of Florida.

 

[Carl Pickens]

I agree that if a liberal president was doing what Trump has done to this point, the far right would go absolutely berserk.

You mean like ramming an unwritten POS piece of legislation down America's throats?

 

[LouderVol]

Yes, I did. Said so since his "Midnight in America" RNC speech.

But that's beside the point.

His violation of the Emoluments Clause goes beyond China. He hasn't properly divested, if at all.

My goodness, he's still going to Mar-a-lago nearly every weekend to promote his resort and use our tax dollars, along with the political ties he gained from the presidency, to expand his financial imprint in that part of Florida.

pretty sure Mar a Lago is in America.......

every politician makes millions in office, it has yet to be an impeachable offense. talk about glass houses.

 

[volprof]

You mean like ramming an unwritten POS piece of legislation down America's throats?

Thanks for reminding me.

I had forgotten about the travel ban that was a complete disaster and threatened to make us less safe until the judiciary did its job.

I should have included that in my OP as well.

 

[LouderVol]

Thanks for reminding me.

I had forgotten about the travel ban that was a complete disaster and threatened to make us less safe until the judiciary did its job.

I should have included that in my OP as well.

i am against the ban, but how the frick would that make us less safe?

 

[Carl Pickens]

Thanks for reminding me.

I had forgotten about the travel ban that was a complete disaster and threatened to make us less safe until the judiciary did its job.

I should have included that in my OP as well.

That was an XO and didn't directly cost you a dime..... try again puss

 

[volprof]

pretty sure Mar a Lago is in America.......

every politician makes millions in office, it has yet to be an impeachable offense. talk about glass houses.

Not even close, once again.

Just a month in.

 

[volprof]

That was an XO and didn't directly cost you a dime..... try again puss

Oh, it didn't, did it?

So, pray tell, where's all the money to prosecute that weekend-long fiasco and now to process the endless litigation going to come from?

Out Donny's magic rectum?

 

[Carl Pickens]

Oh, it didn't, did it?

So, pray tell, where's all the money to prosecute that weekend-long fiasco and now to process the endless litigation going to come from?

Out Donny's magic rectum?

Did you see the cost of a service or product that you buy regularly go through the roof as a result of the ban? Don't be so obtuse..... I think you know what directly means

 

[LouderVol]

Oh, it didn't, did it?

So, pray tell, where's all the money to prosecute that weekend-long fiasco and now to process the endless litigation going to come from?

Out Donny's magic rectum?

so he shouldnt, and congress shouldn't, try and pass anything that might be open to litigation? we spend millions upholding the Constitution. its never been a waste of money before. the judiciary had to step up and act. checks and balances.

 

[Persian Vol]

i am against the ban, but how the frick would that make us less safe?

While I'm not sure this was what Prof was implying, I do think that our actions will hurt us long term and possibly even short term in regards to the war against Islamic terror.

What people fail to recognize is that unless you can prevent young ignorant Muslim men from joining terroristic organizations, the threat of Islamic terror will never cease. Alienating an entire religion will only continue to aid ISIS and their recruiting efforts. This "tough guy" attitude that Trump is trying to portray and implement is preoposterous. It doesn't make you more feared, just more hated. The way muslims as a whole perceive us is crucial toward our war on terror whether you acknowledge it or not.

God forbid this animosity between Christains and Muslims internationally continue to escalate similar to the way the political ideologies in this country have.

 

[DC_Vol]

My feelings on Trump are public record. I was never been a big fan. I did, however, vote for him over Hillary and don't regret it.

While there are plenty of things he needs to learn to do better, I haven't seen anything he's done to get worked up over.

I'm somewhat comforted that political wonks find him so distasteful. It's a plus in my book. He has a bias for action and is aggressively pursuing his agenda. He's the proverbial bull in the China shop.

His call outs to the media are on the money. People are just shocked he doesn't lay down like most other Republicans.

I think he'll be good for business and wouldn't be surprised to see some of the most robust economic growth we've seen in over a decade.

Plenty of things he could improve upon. Needs to ease up on the twitter imo. Also still not convinced he's a conservative, but his Supreme Court pick was a huge step in the right direction.

I'm satisfied to try someone who isn't a career politician and see where it takes us. I'm pulling for him.

 

[volger]

He's already in violation of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. Came into the office as such and has only continued to violate it.

Of course he's already in impeachment territory.

As one conservative intellectual I follow says, though, impeachment isn't this objective thing like we tend to think. It's completely arbitrary, predicated solely upon the biases and beliefs of a particular congress and absolutely nothing else.

Sorry sweetheart. She will never be your president.

 

[MT LeConte]

I thought Trump was a liberal.

Trump himself doesn't know what he is. He's mostly just a whim person. He is whatever he thinks he is at the moment.

 

[MT LeConte]

Sorry sweetheart. She will never be your president.

I'll take any of those people over Trump. I may disagree with them but I believe the world and my life savings will be safer.

Besides every one of them is sane.