Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues The Trump Administration The Impeachment of Donald trump

Conservatives: Any day now. (Along with Hillary, Obama, Rice, Holder... )

As your comment I put in italics shows you are biased. Your claims about Pres. Trump demonstrate that bias. As you said the impeachment proceedings are political. Since they are all of the claims about Trump must be viewed for what they are, political attacks on him. Political attacks from very partisan sources. As in all political attacks what is left out of the complaint can be and often is just as important, perhaps even more so, than the actual complaint. But the people here will not try to get both sides because as you have shown U jest Shurly the use of a conservative source is automatically rejected.

It does not show anything, I flatly stated I am biased against President Donald (...) Trump and I told you why, almost 40 years of hearing about him and his antics.

To have reached my conclusion about your source, I must have read it, don't ya think? Now, if you can source a non-biased conservative site as I have, Law Schools are generally conservative. I will gladly read that site also, and may include it in my daily reading list. If it meets the criteria, it will join Lawfare an unbiased Conservative site generally focused on "... that nebulous zone in which actions taken or contemplated to protect the nation interact with the nation’s laws and legal institutions."

And I will not only listen to all Democratic debates, but will also listen to all Republican debates as I did in 2016, if the RNC is courageous enough to hold them. However, I don't think the RNC has the cojones to hold debates, it might show President Donald (...) Trump to be the Emperor with no cloths.

I recommend Lawfare to you as a daily read.

You're a better man than me, Gunga Din.

You must be glued to your opinions, so I'll try to inform you using the facts.


Let's examine your comments

The Trump supporter belief Democrats can not accept the election of 2016 is bogus. It is fake. It was made up by Mr Trump to convince YOU and people like YOU, Democrats are out to get him because he won.

The reality is the people who criticize Mr Trump do so for a couple of reasons. Mr Trump as a "human" is a reprehensible, amoral slug. Apparently you are ok with a sexual predator ( as long as he is a "star"). Apparently you think the unethical business practices of Mr Trump is ok. That he has not been convicted in a court of law is irrelevant. The evidence of the charges is credible and massive.

The other reason is people do not believe his behavior as president is acceptable for the office. Mr Trump is a bigot. But apparently you believe bigotry should be a part of the presidency. Mr Trump continues to defy all standards of propriety and ethics regarding his businesses and those of his children. Apparently you have no problem with a president (and I guess anyone who holds elective office) to enrich themselves while in office. And yet you talk about being anti-corruption. Mr Trump routinely lies about the inconsequential as well as state business.

I never had a problem with him winning the election, but I do have a problem with his actions once he occupied the WH.

My take on Mr Trump personally. For many years I had heard of him, and only because he had to inject his persona on the front pages, and concluded he was simply another egotisical rich guy without real portfolio. I have no problem with that as I just don't mingle with fakes. However when he became the current occupant of the WH his actions struck my recollections of personality disorders. So I checked.

Here is the checklist from DSM-5


Of course lay people should not be making diagnostic claims, but certainly a lay person can see what is obvious. Mr Trump possesses all the criteria. Of course for supporters such as yourself you may deny he possesses any of the criteria, if so then I would have to question your objectivity and/or your integrity.

At this point I feel a certain empathy with his disorder. Certainly the level of constant pressure to maintain the delusions has to wear on him.

And despite all of that he has sexually harassed women. At least 25 women have come forward with accusations and we have the Axios video of Mr Trump admitting he sexually harasses women because he is a "star". All facts. Is it necessary to go to court? Not after he admitted he does sexually harass women.

Trump business practices, all of which he admits, borders on the unethical. Businesses go into bankruptcy where he re-negotiates loans to make money on a bankrupt business. That is his business model ... build for failure to make money. I sure that is something you teach fellow conservatives. Or how about Trump U. A scam from the gitgo, settled lawsuit out of court so YOU wouldn't be able to see the sausage. or Trump Foundation. Another scam. I hope you did not send money. All facts.

I won't go into his bigotry since you reject the notion bigotry exists for Republicans.

Administration corruption. It has been rampant. Scott Pruitt, Gen Flynn, Manafort, Sec Price, Gates, Cohen, Sec Zinke, and Stone. Those were the highlights not including sexual harassment etc. Not included are the Trump family business overseas deals making millions of dollars for the family, while Mr Trump is in office. Should I go on with ALL the family dealings while in office? All facts.

Is he a crime boss? Well he is still owner of his businesses despite the fact he said he separated himself from them. No one has ever seen the paperwork. He has the military staying at his hotels in Ireland. He has foreign governments and businessmen staying at Trump Hotel in Washington. If Pres Obama had done any of this you would have been first to say ... corruption. Further we now have a summary of a call in which he clearly withholds military aid unless he gets an investigation. A standard quid pro quo for which many federal prosecutors have tried and won.


So Mr Trump is directly involved in illegal activities. As head of the executive branch he is the boss. His underlings, Giuliani et al, and Sec Pompeo, Amb Sondland, AG Barr, and who knows who else are all a part of a conspiracy. Conclusion, Mr Trump is a crime boss.

Your response is of course he has not been convicted of any crime. So I have to ask, does he have to be convicted if he freely admits to committing a crime?

About acting presidential, do you not remember all the Republicans who told reporters Mr trump will pivot and become presidential. I am still waiting as is every objective person in America, including many Trump supporters .... but obviously not you. Of course he is the great disrupter. Maybe that is how he thinks a president acts?


Or maybe Mr Trump is just clueless.

There’s just those pesky little facts about all the things Trump has said and done. Thar‘s shore a lot that done bears investigatin’.

Let me point out how nonsensical your comment is.

You completely misunderstand what is meant by political.

There is no legal redress available. If the Founders had allowed for the president to be criminally prosecuted Mr Trump would have been (providing the DoJ is not colluding with Mr Trump to protect him) indicted by DoJ and tried in a federal court. Since that is not the case, the only remedy is the one of the House filing charges and the Senate trying the case i.e. a political process.


So we must define


Can you describe how the whistleblower complaint is a personal attack? Of course it is not personal. It is a detailed list of actions taken by Mr Trump which he has admitted to taken and having said. Again a question, if someone in government files a complaint, wouldn't that be a partisan complaint because surely that person has political leanings? So every complaint would be partisan ... including yours. Does that mean no one can file a complaint because it may injure your partisan sensibilities?

Being a partisan does not alter the facts, and ... being a partisan did not force Mr Trump to make the call and lay down the offer Zelensky could not refuse.

Yes I do reject conservative sources automatically for justifiable reason. Very high percent of time conservative sources misrepresent facts and definitely conclusions. As an example John Solomon has just been hired by Fox News. He was a right wing writer who typically fictionalized the facts, misrepresented the facts, and based most conclusions on insinuations and innuendo. That is my assessment since I have read a number of his articles. And that is just one case and I assure you there are many more as I have read right wing "news" sites extensively.

So if I have to choose between a conservative source and a liberal source, I would choose liberal as they get the facts right far more often and do not rely on insinuation and innuendo.

Hatrack might be interested in the definition of partisan:

Just because some people think Trump is a lying, cheating, corrupt scoundrel doesn’t mean they are partisan - they might just be intelligent and not taken in by the con.

You really don't have to be a partisan to hate Donald Trump.
But to defend him takes a partisan of the most dedicated variety.

The orange man-baby won't allow RNC primaries and RNC have acquiesced to him cancelling many states primaries already. Orange man-baby is too skert and afraid of challengers stepping-in on his grifting.