What's new
By:

The official "let's impeach Trump" thread

colton said:
This is totally normal.
Click to expand...

Zombie said:
Trumpism is a cult.
Click to expand...

I suppose every president will have followers that relate to the president in a manner akin to a cult of personality. I think none more so then Trump. And when I see Rick Perry's reverential comments on an actual "prophetic" role for Trump, it reminds me of this film the Cult of Trump released last year:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/03/the-trump-prophecy-film-god-election-mark-taylor
 
Red said:
I suppose every president will have followers that relate to the president in a manner akin to a cult of personality. I think none more so then Trump. And when I see Rick Perry's reverential comments on an actual "prophetic" role for Trump, it reminds me of this film the Cult of Trump released last year:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/03/the-trump-prophecy-film-god-election-mark-taylor
Click to expand...

To be fair, Obama has significant number of cult-like followers. His is based more on charisma instead of lies and propaganda.
 
I also think an endgame might be to discourage this and future presidents from believing that they are above the law. I don't think it will work with this one, though, as he has fully embraced a victim role and this only feeds it.

Sent from my moto z3 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
A perfect summary of many of the things I and others have brought up in this thread, written by Walter Shaub, former director of the Office of Government Ethics. I'm still shocked that many people think this is all ok.


Senate Republicans are setting a dangerous precedent that threatens the republic itself. I'm not naive enough to think they would hold Democratic presidents to the low standard they've applied to Trump, but all future presidents will be able to point to Trump to justify:

a. Soliciting foreign attacks on our elections;

b. Using federal appropriations or other resources to pressure foreign governments to help them win reelection;

c. Implementing an across-the-board refusal to comply with any congressional oversight at all;

d. Firing the heads of the government's top law enforcement agencies for allowing investigations of the president;

e. Retaliating against whistleblowers and witnesses who testify before Congress;

f. Investigating investigators who investigate the president;

g. Attempting to retaliate against American companies perceived as insufficiently supportive of the president;

h. Attempting to award the president's own company federal contracts;

i. Using personal devices, servers or applications for official communications;

j. Communicating secretly with foreign leaders, with foreign governments knowing things about White House communications that our own government doesn't know;

k. Abandoning steadfast allies abruptly without prior warning to Congress to cede territory to Russian influence;

l. Destroying or concealing records containing politically damaging information;

m. Employing white nationalists and expressing empathy for white nationalists after an armed rally in which one of them murdered a counter protester and another shot a gun into a crowd;

n. Disseminating Russian disinformation;

o. Covering for the murder of a journalist working for an American news outlet by a foreign government that is a major customer of the president's private business;

p. Violating human rights and international law at our border;

q. Operating a supposed charity that was forced to shut down over its unlawful activities;

r. Lying incessantly to the American people;

s. Relentlessly attacking the free press;

t. Spending 1/4 of days in office visiting his own golf courses and 1/3 of them visiting his private businesses;

u. Violating the Emoluments Clauses of the U.S. Constitution;

w. Misusing the security clearance process to benefit his children and target perceived enemies;

x. Drawing down on government efforts to combat domestic terrorism in order to appease a segment of his base;

y. Refusing to aggressively investigate and build defenses against interference in our election by Russia, after the country helped him win an election;

z. Engaging in a documented campaign of obstruction of a Special Counsel's investigation.

aa. Lying about a hush money payoff and omitting his debt to his attorney for that payoff from his financial disclosure report (which is a crime if done knowingly and willfully);

bb. Coordinating with his attorney in connection with activities that got the attorney convicted of criminal campaign finance violations;

cc. Interfering in career personnel actions, which are required by law to be conducted free of political influence;

dd. Refusing to fire a repeat Hatch Act offender after receiving a recommendation of termination from the president's own Senate-confirmed appointee based on dozens of violations;

ee. Calling members of Congress names and accusing them of treason for conducting oversight;

ff. Attacking states and private citizens frequently and in terms that demean the presidency (see Johnson impeachment);

gg. Using the presidency to tout his private businesses and effectively encouraging a party, candidates, businesses and others to patronize his business;

hh. Causing the federal government to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars at his businesses and costing the American taxpayers well over $100 million on boondoggle trips to visit his properties;

ii. Hosting foreign leaders at his private businesses;

jj. Calling on the Justice Department to investigate political rivals;

kk. Using the presidency to endorse private businesses and the books of various authors as a reward for supporting the president;

ll. Engaging in nepotism based on a flawed OLC opinion;

mm. Possible misuse of appropriated funds by reallocating them in ways that may be illegal;

nn. Repeatedly criticizing American allies, supporting authoritarian leaders around the world, and undermining NATO; and

oo. etc.

None of the Republican Senators defending Trump could say with a straight face that they would tolerate a Democratic president doing the same thing. But, given this dangerous precedent, they may have no choice if they ever lose control of the Senate. Is that what they want?

And this is only what Trump did while the remote threat of Congressional oversight existed. If the Senate acquits him, he will know for certain there is nothing that could ever lead to Congress removing him from office. And what he does next will similarly set precedents.
 
Here is Navy Secretary Richard Spencer's scathing "acknowledgement of termination" letter to Trump.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...y-chief-after-seal-gallagher-case/4295123002/

".....The rule of law is what sets us apart from our adversaries. Good order and discipline is what has enabled our victory against foreign tyranny time and again, from Captain Lawrence's famous order "Don't Give up the Ship," to the discipline and determination that propelled our flag to the highest point of Iwo Jima. The Constitution, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, are the shields that set us apart, and the beacons that protect us all. Through my Title Ten Authority, I have strived to ensure our proceedings are fair, transparent and consistent, from the newest recruit to the Flag and General Officer level.

Unfortunately, it has become apparent that in this respect, I no longer share the same understanding with the Commander in Chief who appointed me, in regards to the key principle of good order and discipline. I cannot in good conscience obey an order that I believe violates the sacred oath I took in the presence of my family, my flag and my faith to support and defend the Constitution of the United States....."
 
colton said:
A perfect summary of many of the things I and others have brought up in this thread, written by Walter Shaub, former director of the Office of Government Ethics. I'm still shocked that many people think this is all ok.


Senate Republicans are setting a dangerous precedent that threatens the republic itself. I'm not naive enough to think they would hold Democratic presidents to the low standard they've applied to Trump, but all future presidents will be able to point to Trump to justify:

a. Soliciting foreign attacks on our elections;

b. Using federal appropriations or other resources to pressure foreign governments to help them win reelection;

c. Implementing an across-the-board refusal to comply with any congressional oversight at all;

d. Firing the heads of the government's top law enforcement agencies for allowing investigations of the president;

e. Retaliating against whistleblowers and witnesses who testify before Congress;

f. Investigating investigators who investigate the president;

g. Attempting to retaliate against American companies perceived as insufficiently supportive of the president;

h. Attempting to award the president's own company federal contracts;

i. Using personal devices, servers or applications for official communications;

j. Communicating secretly with foreign leaders, with foreign governments knowing things about White House communications that our own government doesn't know;

k. Abandoning steadfast allies abruptly without prior warning to Congress to cede territory to Russian influence;

l. Destroying or concealing records containing politically damaging information;

m. Employing white nationalists and expressing empathy for white nationalists after an armed rally in which one of them murdered a counter protester and another shot a gun into a crowd;

n. Disseminating Russian disinformation;

o. Covering for the murder of a journalist working for an American news outlet by a foreign government that is a major customer of the president's private business;

p. Violating human rights and international law at our border;

q. Operating a supposed charity that was forced to shut down over its unlawful activities;

r. Lying incessantly to the American people;

s. Relentlessly attacking the free press;

t. Spending 1/4 of days in office visiting his own golf courses and 1/3 of them visiting his private businesses;

u. Violating the Emoluments Clauses of the U.S. Constitution;

w. Misusing the security clearance process to benefit his children and target perceived enemies;

x. Drawing down on government efforts to combat domestic terrorism in order to appease a segment of his base;

y. Refusing to aggressively investigate and build defenses against interference in our election by Russia, after the country helped him win an election;

z. Engaging in a documented campaign of obstruction of a Special Counsel's investigation.

aa. Lying about a hush money payoff and omitting his debt to his attorney for that payoff from his financial disclosure report (which is a crime if done knowingly and willfully);

bb. Coordinating with his attorney in connection with activities that got the attorney convicted of criminal campaign finance violations;

cc. Interfering in career personnel actions, which are required by law to be conducted free of political influence;

dd. Refusing to fire a repeat Hatch Act offender after receiving a recommendation of termination from the president's own Senate-confirmed appointee based on dozens of violations;

ee. Calling members of Congress names and accusing them of treason for conducting oversight;

ff. Attacking states and private citizens frequently and in terms that demean the presidency (see Johnson impeachment);

gg. Using the presidency to tout his private businesses and effectively encouraging a party, candidates, businesses and others to patronize his business;

hh. Causing the federal government to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars at his businesses and costing the American taxpayers well over $100 million on boondoggle trips to visit his properties;

ii. Hosting foreign leaders at his private businesses;

jj. Calling on the Justice Department to investigate political rivals;

kk. Using the presidency to endorse private businesses and the books of various authors as a reward for supporting the president;

ll. Engaging in nepotism based on a flawed OLC opinion;

mm. Possible misuse of appropriated funds by reallocating them in ways that may be illegal;

nn. Repeatedly criticizing American allies, supporting authoritarian leaders around the world, and undermining NATO; and

oo. etc.

None of the Republican Senators defending Trump could say with a straight face that they would tolerate a Democratic president doing the same thing. But, given this dangerous precedent, they may have no choice if they ever lose control of the Senate. Is that what they want?

And this is only what Trump did while the remote threat of Congressional oversight existed. If the Senate acquits him, he will know for certain there is nothing that could ever lead to Congress removing him from office. And what he does next will similarly set precedents.
Click to expand...


This is all so true, and, whatever the specific articles of impeachment state, whatever the charges eventually are, in other words, if Trump is acquitted, to some degree it will be saying such actions on the part of a president are not sufficient to impeach. At least this time. Which, obviously, is a precedent we should wish to avoid, not approve of. This possibility is one reason some do not wish to impeach, if such an acquittal and precedent results. Yet, to not impeach is to say Trump's behavior with respect to Ukraine is somehow acceptable, and that is not an acceptable position at all.

We should also be concerned for how Trump will behave given a second term. I would not expect him to suddenly become a great unifier, or consumed with reconciliation between the tribes. Frankly, it makes me think of something akin to "Trump unleashed", which would at least be mitigated if the Democrats can retain the House and/or take the Senate.
 
Red said:
Here is Navy Secretary Richard Spencer's scathing "acknowledgement of termination" letter to Trump.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...y-chief-after-seal-gallagher-case/4295123002/

".....The rule of law is what sets us apart from our adversaries. Good order and discipline is what has enabled our victory against foreign tyranny time and again, from Captain Lawrence's famous order "Don't Give up the Ship," to the discipline and determination that propelled our flag to the highest point of Iwo Jima. The Constitution, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, are the shields that set us apart, and the beacons that protect us all. Through my Title Ten Authority, I have strived to ensure our proceedings are fair, transparent and consistent, from the newest recruit to the Flag and General Officer level.

Unfortunately, it has become apparent that in this respect, I no longer share the same understanding with the Commander in Chief who appointed me, in regards to the key principle of good order and discipline. I cannot in good conscience obey an order that I believe violates the sacred oath I took in the presence of my family, my flag and my faith to support and defend the Constitution of the United States....."
Click to expand...

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/24/politics/pentagon-mark-esper-richard-spencer/index.html

...."Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer released a statement Sunday night saying he had spoken with Spencer and offered support.

"Secretary Spencer did the right thing and he should be proud of standing up to President Trump when he was wrong, something too many in this administration and the Republican Party are scared to do," Schumer said. "Good order, discipline, and morale among the Armed Services must transcend politics, and Secretary Spencer's commitment to these principles will not be forgotten."

Trump intervened to reverse sentences against all three service members, ignoring Pentagon leaders who had told him such a move could damage the integrity of the military judicial system, the ability of military commanders to ensure good order and discipline, and the confidence of US allies and partners who host US troops...."

(That last point should itself be an impeachable offense, if it isn't. Hell of a thing for the Commander-in-Chief to do, although there will be disagreement I suppose).
 
JazzGal said:
I also think an endgame might be to discourage this and future presidents from believing that they are above the law. I don't think it will work with this one, though, as he has fully embraced a victim role and this only feeds it.

Sent from my moto z3 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

This.
I have always believed the endgame is simply to show that law and order still matters. That we have standards for our president.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app
 
colton said:
A perfect summary of many of the things I and others have brought up in this thread, written by Walter Shaub, former director of the Office of Government Ethics. I'm still shocked that many people think this is all ok.


Senate Republicans are setting a dangerous precedent that threatens the republic itself. I'm not naive enough to think they would hold Democratic presidents to the low standard they've applied to Trump, but all future presidents will be able to point to Trump to justify:

a. Soliciting foreign attacks on our elections;

b. Using federal appropriations or other resources to pressure foreign governments to help them win reelection;

c. Implementing an across-the-board refusal to comply with any congressional oversight at all;

d. Firing the heads of the government's top law enforcement agencies for allowing investigations of the president;

e. Retaliating against whistleblowers and witnesses who testify before Congress;

f. Investigating investigators who investigate the president;

g. Attempting to retaliate against American companies perceived as insufficiently supportive of the president;

h. Attempting to award the president's own company federal contracts;

i. Using personal devices, servers or applications for official communications;

j. Communicating secretly with foreign leaders, with foreign governments knowing things about White House communications that our own government doesn't know;

k. Abandoning steadfast allies abruptly without prior warning to Congress to cede territory to Russian influence;

l. Destroying or concealing records containing politically damaging information;

m. Employing white nationalists and expressing empathy for white nationalists after an armed rally in which one of them murdered a counter protester and another shot a gun into a crowd;

n. Disseminating Russian disinformation;

o. Covering for the murder of a journalist working for an American news outlet by a foreign government that is a major customer of the president's private business;

p. Violating human rights and international law at our border;

q. Operating a supposed charity that was forced to shut down over its unlawful activities;

r. Lying incessantly to the American people;

s. Relentlessly attacking the free press;

t. Spending 1/4 of days in office visiting his own golf courses and 1/3 of them visiting his private businesses;

u. Violating the Emoluments Clauses of the U.S. Constitution;

w. Misusing the security clearance process to benefit his children and target perceived enemies;

x. Drawing down on government efforts to combat domestic terrorism in order to appease a segment of his base;

y. Refusing to aggressively investigate and build defenses against interference in our election by Russia, after the country helped him win an election;

z. Engaging in a documented campaign of obstruction of a Special Counsel's investigation.

aa. Lying about a hush money payoff and omitting his debt to his attorney for that payoff from his financial disclosure report (which is a crime if done knowingly and willfully);

bb. Coordinating with his attorney in connection with activities that got the attorney convicted of criminal campaign finance violations;

cc. Interfering in career personnel actions, which are required by law to be conducted free of political influence;

dd. Refusing to fire a repeat Hatch Act offender after receiving a recommendation of termination from the president's own Senate-confirmed appointee based on dozens of violations;

ee. Calling members of Congress names and accusing them of treason for conducting oversight;

ff. Attacking states and private citizens frequently and in terms that demean the presidency (see Johnson impeachment);

gg. Using the presidency to tout his private businesses and effectively encouraging a party, candidates, businesses and others to patronize his business;

hh. Causing the federal government to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars at his businesses and costing the American taxpayers well over $100 million on boondoggle trips to visit his properties;

ii. Hosting foreign leaders at his private businesses;

jj. Calling on the Justice Department to investigate political rivals;

kk. Using the presidency to endorse private businesses and the books of various authors as a reward for supporting the president;

ll. Engaging in nepotism based on a flawed OLC opinion;

mm. Possible misuse of appropriated funds by reallocating them in ways that may be illegal;

nn. Repeatedly criticizing American allies, supporting authoritarian leaders around the world, and undermining NATO; and

oo. etc.

None of the Republican Senators defending Trump could say with a straight face that they would tolerate a Democratic president doing the same thing. But, given this dangerous precedent, they may have no choice if they ever lose control of the Senate. Is that what they want?

And this is only what Trump did while the remote threat of Congressional oversight existed. If the Senate acquits him, he will know for certain there is nothing that could ever lead to Congress removing him from office. And what he does next will similarly set precedents.
Click to expand...


The president is a piece of ****. He is garbage. I mean to support such a piece of **** you would have to be a bit of a piece of **** yourself.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Last edited:
One Brow said:
The Senate refuses to convict, and Trump goes into the general election with an impeachment hanging over his head.
Click to expand...
Hopefully this will sway swing voters, but I think Trump supporters are generally the kind of people who would double down over something like this. Circle the wagons.
 
Donald Trump. The worse Commander-in-Chief in American history. Conservative Jennifer Rubin nails it again:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/25/worst-commander-chief-ever/

President Trump has repeatedly dishonored the military. He sent troops to the southern border before the 2018 midterms in a xenophobic stunt designed to win votes. He seized funds for military construction to build his useless wall, which will never be built. He humiliated our forces by announcing an impulsive retreat from Syria, betraying our allies and allowing Russians to seize and occupy our former facilities. Then came the case of Navy SEAL Edward Gallagher.

Joseph Kristol and Stephen Petraeus wrote for The Post:

On Thursday, the president showed fresh contempt for the professional judgment of military officers, tweeting “The Navy will NOT be taking away Warfighter and Navy Seal Eddie Gallagher’s Trident Pin.” The Navy had intended to oust Gallagher from the SEALs for, among other things, his conviction at court-martial for posing in a photograph with the corpse of a 17-year-old captive Islamic State fighter.

Trump seems to think that condoning war crimes (as he did during the campaign) and freeing those who violate the code of conduct for our armed forces make him a tough guy, one of the boys and a hero to the military. The opposite is true. (“The U.S. military is given a unique charge: the right to kill on behalf of the state. Exercising that right, though, must be done in a manner consistent with the nation’s ideals,” Kristol and Petraeus write. “With only rare exceptions, members of the well-trained and professional U.S. military execute their missions with honor. For the few who don’t, the armed services must be allowed to hold them accountable.”)
 
Red said:
Donald Trump. The worse Commander-in-Chief in American history. Conservative Jennifer Rubin nails it again:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/25/worst-commander-chief-ever/

President Trump has repeatedly dishonored the military. He sent troops to the southern border before the 2018 midterms in a xenophobic stunt designed to win votes. He seized funds for military construction to build his useless wall, which will never be built. He humiliated our forces by announcing an impulsive retreat from Syria, betraying our allies and allowing Russians to seize and occupy our former facilities. Then came the case of Navy SEAL Edward Gallagher.

Joseph Kristol and Stephen Petraeus wrote for The Post:

On Thursday, the president showed fresh contempt for the professional judgment of military officers, tweeting “The Navy will NOT be taking away Warfighter and Navy Seal Eddie Gallagher’s Trident Pin.” The Navy had intended to oust Gallagher from the SEALs for, among other things, his conviction at court-martial for posing in a photograph with the corpse of a 17-year-old captive Islamic State fighter.

Trump seems to think that condoning war crimes (as he did during the campaign) and freeing those who violate the code of conduct for our armed forces make him a tough guy, one of the boys and a hero to the military. The opposite is true. (“The U.S. military is given a unique charge: the right to kill on behalf of the state. Exercising that right, though, must be done in a manner consistent with the nation’s ideals,” Kristol and Petraeus write. “With only rare exceptions, members of the well-trained and professional U.S. military execute their missions with honor. For the few who don’t, the armed services must be allowed to hold them accountable.”)
Click to expand...
Didn't he also steal money from a charity for veterans or something and had to pay back 2.3 million dollars or something? I don't remember the details but I vaguely remember something about that?
He does so much dishonorable **** that it's hard to keep track.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
fishonjazz said:
Didn't he also steal money from a charity for veterans or something and had to pay back 2.3 million dollars or something? I don't remember the details but I vaguely remember something about that?
He does so much dishonorable **** that it's hard to keep track.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

Plenty of **** to bitch about... this one's a mixed bag.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-fine-stealing-veterans/

Trump was ordered to pay $2 million to a list of agreed-upon charities as damages for the waste incurred by the fact that his political campaign orchestrated and benefited from distributing around $2.8 million in donations to veterans groups. (That $2 million in damages was separate from the roughly $1.7 million the Trump Foundation had already agreed to distribute to various charities, as part of the resolution dissolving the Foundation.)

Neither Trump, nor his children, nor his charity, were found to have “stolen” or kept the funds, and so none “admitted” to such actions (as Rashid falsely claimed in his tweets). The New York Supreme Court explicitly acknowledged that all the funds raised from the January 2016 Iowa event did ultimately end up with veterans groups.

The irony in those claims was that it was, in fact, the manner in which the Trump Foundation and Trump campaign colluded in distributing the donations to veterans charities that landed the president in hot water, not his having “stolen” the donations.
Click to expand...

Unless there's another instance I'm unaware of.
 
My neighbor in Florida asked me if I was a Trumper. I said I couldn't support a guy with 25 sexual misconduct allegations against him. It was a 3 minute conversation. He can't get over it and keeps texting me. :) I haven't even responded except for our original conversation on his driveway. Trumpers are a special breed.


Screenshot_20191125-122010_Message%2B.jpeg

Sent from my SM-G930V using JazzFanz mobile app
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20191125-121940_Message%2B.jpeg
    Screenshot_20191125-121940_Message%2B.jpeg
    96.4 KB · Views: 4
Last edited:
silesian said:
To be fair, Obama has significant number of cult-like followers. His is based more on charisma instead of lies and propaganda.
Click to expand...
Any politician with strong support is going to have this to some degree. But like you said, Trump is unique in the sense that he and those in his circle reinforce the cult like mindset to their followers with a variety of tactics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top