This is where I thought Trump devotees would go from the beginning.

It's a good thing that Pelosi has a "heart full of love", you know, since she was raised Catholic. Pool old gal can hardly speak coherently anymore, much less run a fair or constitutional process.

Oh well, her day in the sun is over. It's Mitch's turn to show her how a fair process works.

 

So let's see his tax returns for proof. Why does he refuse to submit his financial documents? No other President has done this.

His kids don't work for free. Like Trump, they've been exploiting the office to enrich themselves to the tune of 100's of millions, plus making foreign business deals. They're making many-fold more than they would if they were paid only their wages. To Trump & his family, salaries are just chump change. I posted the links to the emoluments violations awhile back, and will re-post once I find it.

That's funny because Glenn Beck sees the two men as one and the same:

“He is Saul Alinsky,” Beck insisted of the GOP presidential front-runner on his radio broadcast. “[Trump] will isolate you and polarize you and he will take you out,” Beck said. "He will destroy you. “He is spending money with Tea Party groups and churches and news websites to own them,” the conservative pundit added. Alinsky’s "Rules for Radicals" has inspired controversy over its principles on income inequality, politics and social justice.

Trump's Long List of Racism: From 1970's to the Present
https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/donald-trump-racist-racism-history

Excerpts:

1973: The US Department of Justice — under the Nixon administration, out of all administrations — sued the Trump Management Corporation for violating the Fair Housing Act. Federal officials found evidence that Trump had refused to rent to black tenants and lied to black applicants about whether apartments were available, among other accusations. Trump said the federal government was trying to get him to rent to welfare recipients. In the aftermath, he signed an agreement in 1975 agreeing not to discriminate to renters of color without admitting to discriminating before.

1980s: Kip Brown, a former employee at Trump’s Castle, accused another one of Trump’s businesses of discrimination. “When Donald and Ivana came to the casino, the bosses would order all the black people off the floor,” Brown said. “It was the eighties, I was a teenager, but I remember it: They put us all in the back.”

1991: A book by John O’Donnell, former president of Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino in Atlantic City, quoted Trump’s criticism of a black accountant: “Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day. … I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault, because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It’s not anything they can control.” Trump at first denied the remarks, but later said in a 1997 Playboy interview that “the stuff O’Donnell wrote about me is probably true.”

Former Trump Rental Agent Describes Racist Policy



Ex-Trump Executive: He's a Racist



Also, the best way to know how racist a person is by their supporters. Racists always know what side their favorite candidate leans towards. They may be stupid about other issues...but not when it comes to what candidates feel about race.

Executive privilege makes him innocent of the accusations?

Trump has been blocking subpoenas by pressuring witnesses to not testify (except the numerous witnesses who are implicated in his crimes who don't have to be pressured not to testify), and refuses to hand over documents & records. The White House even sent letters to the witnesses who did testify, asking them to not testify. This violates witness tampering laws. Plus Trump has tried to get investigators fired, which violates obstruction of justice laws.

But he CANNOT defy the courts. However, the courts take a very long time to get a ruling to force a subpoena to be honored. It took 8 months just to get a ruling to enforce McGahn's subpoena. Schiff and Mueller both stated this is the reason why they didn't take seek a court order on the many other subpoenas they sought. It simply takes too long.

Also, you have to look at why Trump has been so resistant to submitting to the subpoenas. This can be viewed equally as guilty behavior.

 

The dems new America. Guilty until proven innocent. Good reason not to vote for dems.

 

It's pathetic that the full evidence won't even be presented for review. I guess doing so would be too "unfair" for the defendant (a defendant who won't even testify, or even let his lawyers testify).

Were Nixon & Bill Clinton's accusers "witch hunters" too?

 

If Trump is so innocent, let's hear him testify...plus all his minions we'd all love to hear testify. What are they hiding?

And of course there will be more impeachment articles, or at least the push for more. Trump is a career criminal and has a lifetime of getting away with crimes, and has skated...and he's not likely to break that habit. He's used to getting away with everything and is why he made the remark about shooting someone on 5th Ave. And this is the kind of person you admire & look up to?

But who knows. Trump is not a fan of John Roberts, and Roberts long ago stated "no President is above the law". So hopefully he'll make sure the Senate trial is conducted fairly.

 

No one would even pay attention to Trump if he were not President. And he would've been ousted had it not been for his biggest ally...his true weapon in the DOJ...Cover-up General Bill Barr.

 

What’s to cover up? The false dem clown show narrative?

 

Not in this country. Where I live a man is innocent until proven guilty. The President can protect his private conversations from frivolous demands. I wouldn't give Schiff anything. He is a National Security nightmare. Trump needs to respect subpoena's issued by the courts, not political hacks.

Don't confuse societal issues with personal feelings. In the 1970's, sell a home to a black person in a white neighborhood and you will not get a white person to buy in the neighborhood. Sell a home to a white person in a black neighborhood and you won't get a black person to buy there. That is the society that Trump did business in and he did what he had to to be successful. I have not been able to verify things that Glen Beck says, so I will not comment.

Real estate has value and there's income associated with it. If he earned $1B in income on his properties but the value of his properties decreased by $1B, how much would he owe in taxes and how would the media report it? Why submit to fake news smear merchants?

 

Exactly, the articles of impeachment do not include impeachable acts so a big so what I have no need to defend myself by Trump.

 

Nixon clearly was determined to be guilty regardless of any partisan loyalty and resigned in shame.

Clinton's impeachment certainly was called a partisan "witch hunt" by the Democrats. At that time, it was the most partisan impeachment "ever"....until now...which is the first totally partisan impeachment. At least Clinton did commit some real identifiable crimes, unlike Trump.

 

What do you mean "what if". We have already had the inquiry and we have the report and there are no impeachable offenses to ignore. The House will present the impeachment case based on the evidence and testimony they developed and voted on and wrote the articles on and it will be a big so what.

 

It has long been obvious that the Socialist Democrat Party would finally converge on this one last "prosecution." God bless them....they have tried their best since the 2nd week after his inauguration. Their accusations have changed more times than can be counted on one hand. From collusion and being a traitor, to quid pro quo to bribery. They call in witnesses and don't get what they want....so they call in more. They would make good, persistent fisherman. Too bad it is almost over.

 

Can't you have patience and wait? You are in for a very big letdown. Review the videos of 2016. Do you really want to be like one of those sobbing left wing news pundits? That would be very humiliating in the least......especially since you've had so many warnings.

 

Yet you commit the very same accusation you make.

Besides, if you can, you're free to debunk Levitt's points. His biases, whatever they may/may not be, does not negate the red flags he pointed out in Epstein's "study" on only 95 people. Also, it's questionable just how much people are influenced by google. People don't read as much as they used to, and candidate choices are based more on what's aired on TV & social media. I would even venture to guess that Trump voters read less than Hillary voters. Have you ever watched Trump's nonsensical rallies that his supporters eat up? A veritable idiot's delight.

"Sufficient to have shifted between 2.6 and 10.4 million votes" to Clinton, Epstein (a psychologist) said. How convenient the number began at 2.6 million. And when scholars asked him how he derived these figures he never gave a reply.

 

"Unlike Trump"??? I hope you're pulling my leg.

Trump should resign in shame too...but he's too arrogant to do so. Nixon knew he was done and accepted the inevitable. Also, Nixon didn't have Bill Barr on his side, nor did he have the DOJ's OLC policy guideline to protect him.

Where there's smoke there's fire. Before any impeachment there is an accumulation and review of the available evidence. Clinton was impeached, like Nixon, because there was definite wrongdoing. The bigger question is whether it warrants removal from office. Don't think Trump is in a different boat. He did commit violations (dozens of them) of office...but he has protection, which his supporters exploit to absolve him of guilt.

 

The smoke you are smelling is Nancy and the Democrats' pants on fire.

 

Says a supporter of a President who's lied over 15,000 times.

 

That sounds familiar. Not original. Just familiar.

 

No interest. If you have something to argue, argue it!

 

Where I live the courts look at all available evidence before determining a person's guilt. We've already seen ample evidence (witnesses, documents, texts, emails, whistleblower, cover ups, obstruction, witness intimidation, statements by Parnas, Mulvaney, Giuliani, etc.)...but there's so much more we'd like to see that's just sitting there, blocked by the White House.

So Trump's business agents & associates were lying when they said he's a racist? Trump's comments & tweets we shouldn't take seriously either? Or how about what journalists have noted...

CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta said the Washington Post report combined with statements made in 2016 and 2017 shows "the president seems to harbor racist feelings about people of color from other parts of the world."[295][296]
Following the incident in which Trump referred to several nations as "shithole countries", some media commentators moved from describing certain words and actions of Trump as manifesting racism, to calling Trump racist.[297] David Brooks, speaking on PBS NewsHour, called the president's statements "pretty clearly racist" and said, "It fits into a pattern that we have seen since the beginning of his career, maybe through his father's career, frankly. There's been a consistency, pattern of harsh judgment against black and brown people."[150] Trump has been called a racist by a number of New York Times columnists including Nicholas Kristof ("I don't see what else we can call him but a racist"),[298] Charles M. Blow ("Trump Is a Racist. Period."),[299] and David Leonhardt ("Donald Trump is a racist").[300] Additionally, John Cassidy of The New Yorker concluded, "we have a racist in the Oval Office."[301]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump

And is it so surprising? Trump takes after hid dad.

All the Evidence We Could Find About Fred Trump's Alleged Involvement with the KKK
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/...-fred-trumps-alleged-involvement-with-the-kkk

 

Acosta???? Who cares about Fred Trump. Isn't he dead?
Democrats worship Robert Byrd in the Capitol Bldg Today.

White Supremacist Steven Douglas graces the skyline of Deep Blue Chicago. Racist Democrat Richard Russell enjoys his name on the Senate Office Bldg. We're talking today's Democrats.

The patron saint of progressivism is racist Woodrow Wilson.

 

So no denial. You admit Trump is a liar.

 

I hope you're not calling Trump a progressive.

Woodrow, a racist? Perhaps. But Trump is certainly no Woodrow by any stretch. I would even vote for Woodrow (if I voted)!

 

I'm no Pollyanna who expects politically powerful people to be honest angels. It's not productive to say which President "lies more"....Clinton, (either Bush), Obama or Trump. I will say that Trump is easily the most transparent President we've had in decades. You don't have to guess what he's thinking...even when he makes people cringe. I find that to be a plus.

 

I'm assuming you understood that I was speaking metaphorically when I said "navigator/guide". There is, of course, a vast difference between one who navigates a ship and one who authoritatively directs the lives of people on multiple social levels.

To effectively navigate a ship requires a specific skill or expertise. With experience & proven skill, such a person will naturally draw the respect & trust of others who wish to safely traverse the waters...but not because it is a requirement (or law) to do so.

But the authority to direct people's lives on a grand scale should not be given to any single person, or even group of people.

If the people are micro-managing the "leader's" decisions, then there's no leader to begin with. The people have that power. Without a leader, the group's decisions becomes a cooperative effort. So yes...like I said, we don't need leaders.

Each person can offer something of value...and some can offer a special skill, talent, expertise, or experience in some field that stands out above that of the average person. The skills of such people (eg, a surgeon) will naturally be respected & trusted by the average person...but not necessarily because they are required by law to do so. As such, the skilled person becomes a sort of "leader" in their field of expertise because he can offer the people something specific that they seek or need.

On the other hand, there are no "experts" when it come to dictating the lives of others, or in making life decisions. That is, and always has been, a personal decision...even if that decision be to entrust one's life in the hands of a "leader".

A "leader" who awaits the decisions of the people would not be a leader. If people accept & embrace the fact that, as individuals, they have the right to do as they please, and are not beholden to anyone, then the need for & purpose of leadership becomes irrelevant.

If the people place their trust, faith, and respect in a leader, and they all die because they followed the dictates of said leader...whose fault is it? Is it the leader's...or his trusting followers? Though the leader will be blamed (as was Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, the Caesars, et. al.), it is the follower's who are at fault for unwisely misplacing their trust.

If the people cooperatively dictate their own path without a leadership, and they all die...whose fault is it? It is the fault of the people.

In either case, it is ultimately the people who make the decision, and who are at fault for any problems. The difference is that, without a leadership, the people don't become locked into a paradigm. Hence, the risk for failure is lessened, and the opportunity for progress is greatened.