President Donald Trump - Formal Impeachment Inquiry Announced

Quin_Dub

notobtuse wrote: »

Things were so bad they pretty much had not way to go but up under Obama. And I'd argue they have gotten better faster if not for the policies Obama enacted.

And when will the left finally retire that old unpersuasive argument… It’s really Obama’s good economy, not Trumps? It’s absurd not to give Trump credit for the current state of the economy and jobs market. The moment Trump took office the financial markets soared and haven’t looked back, despite a few minor corrections. The economic optimism that fueled growth, wages and jobs were a direct result from policies that Obama and the Democrats opposed… lower taxes and regulatory reform. And no one can predict how long the positive trends will last or not, or whether it might be undermined by other policies.

OK - So that potentially covers Trump vs. Obama.

Why has he under-performed vs. Reagan,Clinton ,GHWB and even Carter??

Also - It hasn't "Soared" as I said, on a percentage basis it has grown more slowly that every other President in 40 years.

Yes - He's hit all time highs , but that was from levels that were already close to previous highs.

It's easy to get to the top of the Mountain when you got dropped off a few feet from the summit by Helicopter.

A bit like Trumps whole business career really...

Stacksofwacks

Winning_Stroke wrote: »

I'm pretty certain President Trump is going to win in November. I can't believe the Democrats have narrowed their options to such a poor bunch. I think they'll probably settle on a Biden/Harris ticket, and that's bloody shocking to me.

I think Bernie Sanders beats Trump hands down. With Biden its going to be tough as Trump has a lot more mud he can sling at him.

notobtuse

Quin_Dub wrote: »

OK - So that potentially covers Trump vs. Obama.

Why has he under-performed vs. Reagan,Clinton ,GHWB and even Carter??

Also - It hasn't "Soared" as I said, on a percentage basis it has grown more slowly that every other President in 40 years.

Yes - He's hit all time highs , but that was from levels that were already close to previous highs.

It's easy to get to the top of the Mountain when you got dropped off a few feet from the summit by Helicopter.

A bit like Trumps whole business career really...

The reality is under Trump more than 7 million jobs have been added to the economy, unemployment rate has reached its lowest level in half a century, and it’s the first time on record there are more job openings than unemployed Americans. American workers of all backgrounds are thriving under President Trump. Yes, the stock market is not the economy but more Americans are invested in it than ever before and the booming economy is putting more money in Americans’ pockets. A recent CNN poll found that 76% believed that the economy was very or somewhat good which is an almost 10 point improvement from last year.

I know it’s impossible for some to give Trump credit for anything good, but here’s the reality everyone should be looking at… Democrats are promising a green new deal, a wealth tax, their never-ending increased taxes on the rich, stricter regulations, guaranteed wages, healthcare for all, and open borders. If you were honest you’d know these policies would absolutely devastate the economy, the stock market, and the jobs market. I guess when all you can offer the voters is candy coated pain and misery, the only position you can take is to drum up hate towards Trump... and thankfully they have their media handmaidens to do their bidding, eh?

notobtuse

Stacksofwacks wrote: »

I think Bernie Sanders beats Trump hands down. With Biden its going to be tough as Trump has a lot more mud he can sling at him.

Even the DNC will never allow Sanders to become president. Look at what they did to him in 2016 and what their scribes at CNN did to him in the last debate as he's starting to gain momentum from the uneducated to reality crowd.

Stacksofwacks

notobtuse wrote: »

Even the DNC will never allow Sanders to become president. Look at what they did to him in 2016 and what their scribes at CNN did to him in the last debate as he's starting to gain momentum from the uneducated to reality crowd.

Yeah I don't see it happening either but were he to run he would be the Democrats best chance of winning. But the DNC would rather see Trump re-elected than have Sanders, which says alot

notobtuse

If we get to dueling witnesses the impeachment trial might drag on for up to two months. Who will campaign for Biden and Warren during that time? I'm thinking it will kill them to have to just sit there and simply listen as jurors and not be able to grandstand.

woohoo!!!

notobtuse wrote: »

The reality is under Trump more than 7 million jobs have been added to the economy, unemployment rate has reached its lowest level in half a century, and it’s the first time on record there are more job openings than unemployed Americans. American workers of all backgrounds are thriving under President Trump. Yes, the stock market is not the economy but more Americans are invested in it than ever before and the booming economy is putting more money in Americans’ pockets. A recent CNN poll found that 76% believed that the economy was very or somewhat good which is an almost 10 point improvement from last year.

I know it’s impossible for some to give Trump credit for anything good, but here’s the reality everyone should be looking at… Democrats are promising a green new deal, a wealth tax, their never-ending increased taxes on the rich, stricter regulations, guaranteed wages, healthcare for all, and open borders. If you were honest you’d know these policies would absolutely devastate the economy, the stock market, and the jobs market. I guess when all you can offer the voters is candy coated pain and misery, the only position you can take is to drum up hate towards Trump... and thankfully they have their media handmaidens to do their bidding, eh?

I get that folk are invested in hating on everything that Trump has done or does, but there's simply no denying that the US is booming like never before and that cannot be denied. It's actually a testament to Trumps fragile ego, propensity to insult and taking short cuts that means he's not an absolute shoe in for the next election.

Boggles

notobtuse wrote: »

If we get to dueling witnesses the impeachment trial might drag on for up to two months. Who will campaign for Biden and Warren during that time? I'm thinking it will kill them to have to just sit there and simply listen as jurors and not be able to grandstand.

Why would Biden have to sit there for months?

Anyway he has pulled ahead in another Iowa poll.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/20/joe-biden-iowa-poll-101192

Stacksofwacks

woohoo!!! wrote: »

I get that folk are invested in hating on everything that Trump has done or does, but there's simply no denying that the US is booming like never before and that cannot be denied. It's actually a testament to Trumps fragile ego, propensity to insult and taking short cuts that means he's not an absolute shoe in for the next election.

If the economy is doing well then the incumbent government/president normally gets re-elected(its the economy stupid) But these things go up and down, just cos Trump is taking all the credit doesn't mean he is the one primarily responsible. US is one of the biggest economies in the world, and this was even before the Trump era

woohoo!!!

Stacksofwacks wrote: »

If the economy is doing well then the incumbent government/president normally gets re-elected(its the economy stupid) But these things go up and down, just cos Trump is taking all the credit doesn't mean he is the one primarily responsible. US is one of the biggest economies in the world, and this was even before the Trump era

Like with any government or administration, they take the credit when things going well, and most importantly, the electorate tend to agree.

notobtuse

Boggles wrote: »

Why would Biden have to sit there for months?

Anyway he has pulled ahead in another Iowa poll.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/20/joe-biden-iowa-poll-101192

Oops, good catch. I meant Sanders instead of Biden. The GOP won't call Joe Biden as a witness. His incoherence and inability to actually answer a question would only bring on sympathy.

Quin_Dub

notobtuse wrote: »

The reality is under Trump more than 7 million jobs have been added to the economy, unemployment rate has reached its lowest level in half a century, and it’s the first time on record there are more job openings than unemployed Americans. American workers of all backgrounds are thriving under President Trump. Yes, the stock market is not the economy but more Americans are invested in it than ever before and the booming economy is putting more money in Americans’ pockets. A recent CNN poll found that 76% believed that the economy was very or somewhat good which is an almost 10 point improvement from last year.

I know it’s impossible for some to give Trump credit for anything good, but here’s the reality everyone should be looking at… Democrats are promising a green new deal, a wealth tax, their never-ending increased taxes on the rich, stricter regulations, guaranteed wages, healthcare for all, and open borders. If you were honest you’d know these policies would absolutely devastate the economy, the stock market, and the jobs market. I guess when all you can offer the voters is candy coated pain and misery, the only position you can take is to drum up hate towards Trump... and thankfully they have their media handmaidens to do their bidding, eh?

Ok - None of that in any way makes anything I have said untrue.

Has Trump added more jobs to the Economy ? Yes , just less than any other President.

Has Trump increased the overall value of the Stock Market ? Yes , just less than any other President.

Given that all of the previous Democrat Presidents (accounting for 16 of the last 30 years) have done a measurably better job of the Economy than Trump thus far I don't buy into the "They'll ruin the Economy" argument.

In fact , a GOP President has been in the White house for virtually every major economic crash in the last 40 years.

Black Friday? , Dot Com Bust? , 2008? All under GOP leadership.

Trump likes to claim that everything he touches is the "Biggest" , the "Best" or "Historic" etc.

The reality is that they are none of those things - The Economy is doing reasonably well (although as I said lots and lots of evidence that the impacts of the decimation of the tax base as a result of his tax cuts will cause a collapse sooner rather than later).

But the reality is that Trump has had less impact on the economy than all but G.W. Bush in the last 40+ years. That is absolute fact.

notobtuse

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Ok - None of that in any way makes anything I have said untrue.

Has Trump added more jobs to the Economy ? Yes , just less than any other President.

Has Trump increased the overall value of the Stock Market ? Yes , just less than any other President.

Given that all of the previous Democrat Presidents (accounting for 16 of the last 30 years) have done a measurably better job of the Economy than Trump thus far I don't buy into the "They'll ruin the Economy" argument.

In fact , a GOP President has been in the White house for virtually every major economic crash in the last 40 years.

Black Friday? , Dot Com Bust? , 2008? All under GOP leadership.

Trump likes to claim that everything he touches is the "Biggest" , the "Best" or "Historic" etc.

The reality is that they are none of those things - The Economy is doing reasonably well (although as I said lots and lots of evidence that the impacts of the decimation of the tax base as a result of his tax cuts will cause a collapse sooner rather than later).

But the reality is that Trump has had less impact on the economy than all but G.W. Bush in the last 40+ years. That is absolute fact.

Are you comparing the effects of 8 years of presidents to 3 years of Trump? And don’t you find it remarkable that Trump has been able to accomplish so much in such a short period of time with an impeachment push going on since he took office and with scoundrels in the FBI, CIA and DOJ doing almost everything in their power to get him out of office since the day he was elected? Granted, I blame Trump for some of that. He should have fired each and every Obama appointee on day one. I guess Obama had Trump and everyone else fooled that he was a good guy.

I lived through the Carter years… interest rates up to 20%, oil crisis, decimation of the military, Iran mess. Is it no wonder he lost his bid for reelection by so very much to Reagan.

And I’m sure Democrats hope the economy will collapse between now and November. Such patriots they are. Only chance they have of winning the election, I figure.

notobtuse

The Democrats shoddy and hasty impeachment of Trump has made no sense to me... Especially because the Senate will never get 2/3 votes to remove him from office.

But I’ve been reading about two different strategies by the Democrats for doing it, and it somewhat makes sense.

First... Is it about asking for a whole bunch of witnesses in the Senate trial so the impeachment trial lasts for several months and pulls their less electable senators of Sanders and Warren away from the campaign trail, giving Biden an advantage to win the primary?

The other idea deals with the health issues of SCOTUS justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She’s battling cancer and rumors are she might want to get out. So if she retires while the trial is going on the democrats can say an impeached president (who is going through the Senate trial portion) shouldn’t be allowed to nominate a successor... and extend the Senate trial as long as possible? Then with a short window until election argue to the people it would be too close to the election for Trump to make a selection, with the potential of him losing?

Maybe the DNC isn’t as stupid as they seem in the Trump impeachment matter.

ebbsy

Stacksofwacks wrote: »

I think Bernie Sanders beats Trump hands down. With Biden its going to be tough as Trump has a lot more mud he can sling at him.

No chance.

It would be the most entertaining contest though.

Boggles

notobtuse wrote: »

First... Is it about asking for a whole bunch of witnesses in the Senate trial so the impeachment trial lasts for several months and pulls their less electable senators of Sanders and Warren away from the campaign trail, giving Biden an advantage to win the primary?

Biden pulls ahead in new Iowa poll

notobtuse wrote: »

The other idea deals with the health issues of SCOTUS justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She’s battling cancer and rumors are she might want to get out. So if she retires while the trial is going on the democrats can say an impeached president (who is going through the Senate trial portion) shouldn’t be allowed to nominate a successor... and extend the Senate trial as long as possible? Then with a short window until election argue to the people it would be too close to the election for Trump to make a selection, with the potential of him losing?

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she’s ‘cancer-free’ after a flurry of health concerns

Conspiracy theories aside and back to actual fact.

Trump got himself impeached because of his own actions, The leaders of the Democratic Party actively pushed against impeachment until the evidence was so overwhelming they was no compelling reason not to move forward with impeachment.

But I will ask you this question again.

Are you happy going forward to have Democratic presidents enlist the help of foreign governments to help them personally against political rivals in elections?

Winning_Stroke

Boggles wrote: »

Trump got himself impeached because of his own actions, The leaders of the Democratic Party actively pushed against impeachment until the evidence was so overwhelming they was no compelling reason not to move forward with impeachment.

Ah here, no-one's buying that one! :pac: Sure he was in office a wet hour and the Washington Post et al were leading with stories of "The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun".

Boggles

Winning_Stroke wrote: »

Ah here, no-one's buying that one! :pac: Sure he was in office a wet hour and the Washington Post et al were leading with stories of "The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun".

Link?

Anyway, The Washing Post isn't the leaders of the Democratic party.

That is pretty obvious, at least to nearly everyone I imagine.

Winning_Stroke

Boggles wrote: »

Link?

Anyway, The Washing Post isn't the leaders of the Democratic party.

That is pretty obvious, at least to nearly everyone I imagine.

I don't have a work sub/way around this so you can see for yourself
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=The+campaign+to+impeach+President+Trump+has+begun&ia=web

I was using it as an example. If you honestly think impeachment hasn't been the goal of Dems from day one, I have a bridge to sell you. Next you'll be telling us you buy their bs over this being a "somber task" :pac:

Boggles

Winning_Stroke wrote: »

If you honestly think impeachment hasn't been the goal of Dems from day one,

Impeachment is a very risky and devise thing to do.

It's why they pushed hard against it, until the evidence dictated they was no longer a viable reason not to impeach.

Can you think of one?

Trump impeached himself, he used his office for personal political gain by trying to black mail a foreign government. Hilariously using Rudy and a bunch of goons to do it. I imagine a lot of people may go to prison over it.

Like I said in normal times there would be no need for impeachment, a President blatantly caught doing that would resign.

New norm now though, alternative facts, etc.

Stateofyou

Winning_Stroke wrote: »

I don't have a work sub/way around this so you can see for yourself
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=The+campaign+to+impeach+President+Trump+has+begun&ia=web

I was using it as an example. If you honestly think impeachment hasn't been the goal of Dems from day one, I have a bridge to sell you. Next you'll be telling us you buy their bs over this being a "somber task" :pac:

And if that were the goal, are they wrong? An idiotic, tv personality, imbecile of a man who has no government or political or international experience, who cheated his way into the highest post in the land, whom even his wife and he were shocked to learn he clinched it, was never going to be a good idea. There is a lot of damage being done. He's the absolute rock-bottom of presidents, silver lining is hopefully they can only go up from here.

Outlaw Pete

LMAO @ Nadler there saying to deny witnesses is to take part in a cover up, but that's just what they did during the damn hearings!

Have these clowns any self awareness. Apparently not.

ohnonotgmail

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

LMAO @ Nadler there saying to deny witnesses is to take part in a cover up, but that's just what they did during the damn hearings!

Have these clowns any self awareness. Apparently not.

the only one denying witnesses was trump who stopped people from testifying. His lackey Moscow Mitch is trying to do the same for the trial.

Billy Mays

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

LMAO @ Nadler there saying to deny witnesses is to take part in a cover up, but that's just what they did during the damn hearings!

Have these clowns any self awareness. Apparently not.

lol

Dytalus

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

LMAO @ Nadler there saying to deny witnesses is to take part in a cover up, but that's just what they did during the damn hearings!

Have these clowns any self awareness. Apparently not.

They requested many witnesses during the hearings. The White House blocked them all.

2/10 for self awareness.

Winning_Stroke

Stateofyou wrote: »

And if that were the goal, are they wrong?

Yeah, pretty much. If you decide that someone needs to be tried, without any crime or anything in mind, anything will do and we'll work towards it, well that's not healthy. It really speaks to a deranged, zealous mind.

duploelabs

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

LMAO @ Nadler there saying to deny witnesses is to take part in a cover up, but that's just what they did during the damn hearings!

Have these clowns any self awareness. Apparently not.

Projection much?

Pathetic

notobtuse

Boggles wrote: »

Biden pulls ahead in new Iowa poll



Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she’s ‘cancer-free’ after a flurry of health concerns

Conspiracy theories aside and back to actual fact.

Trump got himself impeached because of his own actions, The leaders of the Democratic Party actively pushed against impeachment until the evidence was so overwhelming they was no compelling reason not to move forward with impeachment.

But I will ask you this question again.

Are you happy going forward to have Democratic presidents enlist the help of foreign governments to help them personally against political rivals in elections?

Yes, Notorious RGB, who is 86, claims she’s “cancer free,” yet she continues to have health issues. It’s no secret both sides of the political aisle have taken immense interest in her health.

To your question: First, the term ‘political rival’ is disingenuous. But I digress. If an elected official, regardless of political party (see, I can bold too), brags on national television how he accomplished a quid pro quo with taxpayer dollars (as did Joe Biden by bragging about getting the prosecutor fired by the end of the day who was investigating the company his son worked for otherwise he would withhold $1 billion in taxpayer funds), then it would be amiss of duties for the powers that be NOT to use resources available to see if any corruption or wrongdoing was committed.

You know the Democrats are scared to death to have Hunter Biden testify in the impeachment trial. If Hunter Biden was questioned about his dealings in Ukraine, and if his father had knowledge of the dealings (as Hunter has said he discussed his job with dad), and if it comes out anything shady was committed in testimony it would prove that President Trump was justified in suggesting the Biden’s deserved scrutiny. Jerry Nadler, one of the Democrats impeachment managers has suggested on “Meet The Nation” that having no impeachment witnesses is preferable to Hunter Biden testifying.

mcmoustache

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

LMAO @ Nadler there saying to deny witnesses is to take part in a cover up, but that's just what they did during the damn hearings!

Have these clowns any self awareness. Apparently not.

Who were the witnesses to Trump's alleged bribery of Zelinskyy that got denied by the House?

Quin_Dub

notobtuse wrote: »

Yes, Notorious RGB, who is 86, claims she’s “cancer free,” yet she continues to have health issues. It’s no secret both sides of the political aisle have taken immense interest in her health.

To your question: First, the term ‘political rival’ is disingenuous. But I digress. If an elected official, regardless of political party (see, I can bold too), brags on national television how he accomplished a quid pro quo with taxpayer dollars (as did Joe Biden by bragging about getting the prosecutor fired by the end of the day who was investigating the company his son worked for otherwise he would withhold $1 billion in taxpayer funds), then it would be amiss of duties for the powers that be NOT to use resources available to see if any corruption or wrongdoing was committed.

You know the Democrats are scared to death to have Hunter Biden testify in the impeachment trial. If Hunter Biden was questioned about his dealings in Ukraine, and if his father had knowledge of the dealings (as Hunter has said he discussed his job with dad), and if it comes out anything shady was committed in testimony it would prove that President Trump was justified in suggesting the Biden’s deserved scrutiny. Jerry Nadler, one of the Democrats impeachment managers has suggested on “Meet The Nation” that having no impeachment witnesses is preferable to Hunter Biden testifying.

Except he wasn't investigating them at the time, not did he have any plans to - That angle has been debunked repeatedly.

It wasn't because Shokin was investigating a natural gas company tied to Biden's son; it was because Shokin wasn't pursuing corruption among the country's politicians, according to a Ukrainian official and four former American officials who specialized in Ukraine and Europe.

Shokin's inaction prompted international calls for his ouster and ultimately resulted in his removal by Ukraine's parliament.

Or if you prefer , this one from the Financial times

Democrats accuse Mr Trump of putting pressure on Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president, to investigate Mr Biden and his son Hunter, who served as a board member of a prominent Ukrainian gas company for several years, to benefit the president’s own re-election campaign in 2020. Mr Trump and his allies, including Rudy Giuliani, his personal lawyer, have retorted that the request was entirely legitimate, arguing that Mr Biden had forced Mr Shokin’s removal by withholding a $1bn loan guarantee, to protect his son from an anti-graft investigation. 

EU diplomats working on Ukraine at the time have, however, told the FT that they were looking for ways to persuade Kiev to remove Mr Shokin well before Mr Biden entered the picture. The push for Mr Shokin’s removal was part of an international effort to bolster Ukraine’s institutions following Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the armed conflict in the eastern part of the country. 

“All of us were really pushing [former Ukrainian president Petro] Poroshenko that he needs to do something, because the prosecutor was not following any of the corruption issues. He was really bad news,” said an EU diplomat involved in the discussions. “It was Biden who finally came in [and triggered it]. Biden was the most vocal, as the US usually is. But we were all literally complaining about the prosecutor.” 

Mr Shokin had been appointed prosecutor-general of Ukraine in February 2015, but the discussions in Washington and EU capitals about pushing for his removal started as early as April after he failed to follow through on a burst of expected early anti-corruption moves, one former US Treasury official said. Mr Biden entered the fray in December 2015, placing Mr Shokin’s removal at the top of his agenda on a visit to Kiev. “I know how the idea to have Shokin fired came up, and it wasn't Biden. His direct involvement came late in the game,” the former US Treasury official said. 

Even once Mr Biden did take up the issue, former Obama administration officials said he did not mention his son’s business or the Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. “I had never heard of the company”, the former official said. “I didn’t even realise there was a nexus — it never came up.”