Was Donald Trump Impeached?

MilesAway

Bongalong
johnsmith said:
DreamRyderX said:
What's your fascination with CHILD RAPE Greggy???..
only a moron wouldn't have a problem with a president alleged to have raped a 13 yr old.

Nothing surprises me with trumpards anymore.
..,said the smear campaign from the globalists, as if clockwork!
:jump
 

greggerypeccary

Active member
DreamRyderX said:
DonDeeHippy said:
Seth wants to debate, ryder is a troll. Big difference. :purple

What's your fascination with CHILD RAPE Greggy???.....Alleged Rape of 13 year old girls........your ultra-repetitive posts focusing on that subject.....both here & especially in Ozpolitic......One has to wonder.......could it be that you're nurturing your own latent child rape fantasy?..........seriously........one has to wonder why child rape seems to obsessively dominate your posting with unhealthy frequency???
So asking him an obvious question, based on the content of his posts, & making a general statement based on 3+ years of observation regarding the obsessively similar content of his posts, e.g. 'child rape', is somehow inappropriate on a forum....contrived as some sort of an attack on a member, where somehow you all seem to find in necessary to defend that member, rather than letting him respond himself to the elementary question I put forward, as if you all never questioned in silence about the subject of his posts, at one time or another, yourselves?

IMHO, I asked the question(s) that needed to be asked.


If that offends you, than so be it.....I wont ask again.....the subject of why he is possibly fascinated with the subject of child rape, that forces him to repeat those statements ad nauseam......but I won't ask again if it makes you all uncomfortable.

I'll leave it up to you all to imagine the possible reasons/motives for his need(s) to repetitively post on that particular subject.

BTW...JFYI.....this is only the second time I've posted this/these questions (quoted above).....once here, & once in ozpolitic.


..
Donald Trump is an alleged child rapist.

The court case didn't go ahead because the girl who said she was raped received death threats.

Trump supporters don't care though.

That says it all.
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
Sadly
this comes down to what and who you choose to believe.

These days outright lies are held as fact. Also, facts are held to be outright lies.

These deliberations should not be up to the vox populi..
These matters require rigour, not rabble-raising.
 

greggerypeccary

Active member
pinkeye said:
Sadly
this comes down to what and who you choose to believe.

These days outright lies are held as fact. Also, facts are held to be outright lies.

These deliberations should not be up to the vox populi..
These matters require rigour, not rabble-raising.
Trump supporters choose to believe a proven pathological liar and self-confessed sexual predator over the dozens of women and children who have accused him of sexual assault and rape.

What does that tell you about them?
 

jovialmo

Administrator
Staff member
SethBullock said:
Aussie said:
Sure, Democrats voted to impeach.....but there were two valid reasons for which there was compelling evidence. Trump abused his position and he obstructed Congress.

It is so easy (as Trump and his supporters are doing) to pass this off as partisan crap, but at the bottom of it all is one thing.......the conduct of Trump.
And yet, they wouldn't have impeached if Trump was a Democrat. Hell, 4 Democrats didn't even vote YES on impeachment on one article, and 3 didn't vote YES on the other.

A Republican and a Democrat come back from a walk in the park. One of them says they saw a duck in the pond. One of them says it was a goose. Both of them are willing to swear on a stack of Bibles that they are right. Both will stake their sacred honor on what it was.

Who do you believe?

On another day, a Republican and a Democrat come back from a walk in the park. Both of them say they saw a duck in the pond. They are both willing to swear on a stack of Bibles and stake their sacred honor on the fact that it was a duck.

Now who do you believe?

When a President does something bad enough to warrant removal from office by impeachment, we'll know it, and support for it will be bipartisan. This was the case with Nixon.
A nice parable, Seth. But as I said before and why I have stayed out of the debate mostly: it is all dirty and partisan politics.

You will nevertheless vote for the douchebag again next year. I could not do that. In 2013 I did not cast a vote. There is compulsory voting here so I got a letter from the electoral commission saying I was fined $20. I paid the $20 (would not have heard from the commission if I did not but I abstained on principle and that meant I paid the $20. Must have given the commission a big surprise. I abstained because I could not abide either abbott (conservative) or Rudd the Labor Leader and backstabber of one of the best PMs we have had since John Curtin in WWII.
 

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
HBS Guy said:
SethBullock said:
Aussie said:
Sure, Democrats voted to impeach.....but there were two valid reasons for which there was compelling evidence. Trump abused his position and he obstructed Congress.

It is so easy (as Trump and his supporters are doing) to pass this off as partisan crap, but at the bottom of it all is one thing.......the conduct of Trump.
And yet, they wouldn't have impeached if Trump was a Democrat. Hell, 4 Democrats didn't even vote YES on impeachment on one article, and 3 didn't vote YES on the other.

A Republican and a Democrat come back from a walk in the park. One of them says they saw a duck in the pond. One of them says it was a goose. Both of them are willing to swear on a stack of Bibles that they are right. Both will stake their sacred honor on what it was.

Who do you believe?

On another day, a Republican and a Democrat come back from a walk in the park. Both of them say they saw a duck in the pond. They are both willing to swear on a stack of Bibles and stake their sacred honor on the fact that it was a duck.

Now who do you believe?

When a President does something bad enough to warrant removal from office by impeachment, we'll know it, and support for it will be bipartisan. This was the case with Nixon.
A nice parable, Seth. But as I said before and why I have stayed out of the debate mostly: it is all dirty and partisan politics.

You will nevertheless vote for the douchebag again next year. I could not do that. In 2013 I did not cast a vote. There is compulsory voting here so I got a letter from the electoral commission saying I was fined $20. I paid the $20 (would not have heard from the commission if I did not but I abstained on principle and that meant I paid the $20. Must have given the commission a big surprise. I abstained because I could not abide either abbott (conservative) or Rudd the Labor Leader and backstabber of one of the best PMs we have had since John Curtin in WWII.
I didn't know you had compulsory voting in Australia. Well, learn something new every day. And a fine for not voting, no less.

There is no compulsory voting in the U.S., but if you can't stand any candidate, you can write one in. Can you do that?
 

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
greggerypeccary said:
SethBullock said:
There is no compulsory voting in the U.S., but if you can't stand any candidate, you can write one in. Can you do that?
No.

That would make the vote invalid.
That seems so weird to me, but I am completely accustomed to seeing that write-in box at the bottom of the list of candidates for any office on my ballot. That's just normal here.
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
SethBullock said:
That seems so weird to me, but I am completely accustomed to seeing that write-in box at the bottom of the list of candidates for any office on my ballot. That's just normal here.
so 1000 different voters can nominate 1000 different candidates ?... the end result is in effect an invalid vote so the same as here. It just that your system makes you feel because because it fools you into believing you have a say.

I honestly think the USA needs compulsory voting. As it stands, voting only appeals to the extremes, the disaffected and the fringes. Only 55% of Americans voted last time around. How can anyone claim to have any sort of mandate to enforce their policies when in effect the winner only gets about 25% of the vote?
 

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
johnsmith said:
SethBullock said:
That seems so weird to me, but I am completely accustomed to seeing that write-in box at the bottom of the list of candidates for any office on my ballot. That's just normal here.
so 1000 different voters can nominate 1000 different candidates ?... the end result is in effect an invalid vote so the same as here. It just that your system makes you feel because because it fools you into believing you have a say.

I honestly think the USA needs compulsory voting. As it stands, voting only appeals to the extremes, the disaffected and the fringes. Only 55% of Americans voted last time around. How can anyone claim to have any sort of mandate to enforce their policies when in effect the winner only gets about 25% of the vote?
Yes, if you don't care for the slate of candidates that qualified to get on the ballot, you can write in whoever you want.

As to your question, I think that if you choose not to vote, you have NO right to complain about the outcome or how the outcome affects you personally or the country.

I've heard people say they didn't vote because they didn't like either candidate. Or they say they voted for some tiny, minor third party that didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning as a "protest vote".

I don't believe in doing that. Sorry. If I don't like the top two candidates, I will vote for the lesser of evils instead of just throwing away my vote. But that's just me. Many people disagree.

In 2016 there were several Republican candidates I didn't especially like. Jeb Bush was at the top of that list. Ultimately, Trump was nominated by the Republicans. But if any other Republican had been nominated, including ones I didn't like, I would have voted for them as the lesser of evils, for truly, Hillary Clinton was perhaps the most corrupt and incompetent candidate who has ever been nominated by a major party in our history. I wouldn't have thrown away my vote on some minor third party, and I wouldn't have just not voted. But again, that's just me.
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
well anyway, it seems he was impeached, so now you wait for the process to continue,...
time to look ahead, not recriminate about the past.

I say that because here in Australia umm we have politicians laying blame on their predecessors , continuously, to great annoyance on MY part at least. You cannot ask a question of a 'Coalition' Cabinet member .. without being ignored and then talked over. all the time whilst droning on about Labor. :WTF

As for TRUMP.?

I guess I tuned him out sometime ago
I occasionally see snapshot footage of him
and can only respond
with a chuckle of horrified amusement.
 

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
pinkeye said:
well anyway, it seems he was impeached, so now you wait for the process to continue,...
time to look ahead, not recriminate about the past.

I say that because here in Australia umm we have politicians laying blame on their predecessors , continuously, to great annoyance on MY part at least. You cannot ask a question of a 'Coalition' Cabinet member .. without being ignored and then talked over. all the time whilst droning on about Labor. :WTF

As for TRUMP.?

I guess I tuned him out sometime ago
I occasionally see snapshot footage of him
and can only respond
with a chuckle of horrified amusement.
Same thing happens here, Pinkeye. I remember that for 8 years of his presidency, Obama supporters blamed the bad economy on Bush. Republicans blamed it on Obama. Now that Trump is in office, the Democrats credit the good economy to Obama, and Republicans give the credit to Trump. That's politics, for ya ... :roll

As for your "horrified amusement", in 2016 I thought Hillary would win the election easily. I was shocked when Trump won. Thinking of the next four years ahead of us, I remember saying, "This is going to be interesting." So at least I was right about that.
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
SethBullock said:
Now that Trump is in office, the Democrats credit the good economy to Obama, and Republicans give the credit to Trump. That's politics, for ya .
follow the trends. Obama inherited a falling economy and turned it around significantly. The upward trend you are seeing with thrump is a continuation of obama's trend. It can take years for the results of policy decisions to be seen in the economy. If trump leaves office and the trend is still heading up, then he can claim some credit for being able to continue the trend. If however the trend turns before he leaves, it can only be as a result of thrumps policies.

Otherwise you are right, politics dictates that one side blames the other no matter what happens.
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
SethBullock said:
pinkeye said:
well anyway, it seems he was impeached, so now you wait for the process to continue,...
time to look ahead, not recriminate about the past.

I say that because here in Australia umm we have politicians laying blame on their predecessors , continuously, to great annoyance on MY part at least. You cannot ask a question of a 'Coalition' Cabinet member .. without being ignored and then talked over. all the time whilst droning on about Labor. :WTF

As for TRUMP.?

I guess I tuned him out sometime ago
I occasionally see snapshot footage of him
and can only respond
with a chuckle of horrified amusement.
Same thing happens here, Pinkeye. I remember that for 8 years of his presidency, Obama supporters blamed the bad economy on Bush. Republicans blamed it on Obama. Now that Trump is in office, the Democrats credit the good economy to Obama, and Republicans give the credit to Trump. That's politics, for ya ... :roll

As for your "horrified amusement", in 2016 I thought Hillary would win the election easily. I was shocked when Trump won. Thinking of the next four years ahead of us, I remember saying, "This is going to be interesting." So at least I was right about that.
ah yes.. you'll are the recipients of someone's Chinese Curse. As it seems are WE.

May you live in interesting times

:bgrin
 

greggerypeccary

Active member
so 1000 different voters can nominate 1000 different candidates ?... the end result is in effect an invalid vote so the same as here. It just that your system makes you feel because because it fools you into believing you have a say.

I honestly think the USA needs compulsory voting. As it stands, voting only appeals to the extremes, the disaffected and the fringes. Only 55% of Americans voted last time around. How can anyone claim to have any sort of mandate to enforce their policies when in effect the winner only gets about 25% of the vote?
And on top of that, the winner didn't even receive the most amount of votes from the general voting public.

74,000,000 people said they did not want Trump as President, and only 63,000,000 said they did.

Absolutely crazy when the winner can be someone who lost by 11,000,000 votes.
 
Top