If you try to impeach Trump, the American people will not stand for it

[RealDave]

Far from it. Democrats typically support programs that attack the root cause of poverty, lack of job skills, poor home environment for children, drug and alcohol treatment programs, low wages, and creation of jobs for the poor all of which are vigorously opposed by conservatives.

Oh really? Then why did Democrats have a Welcome Mat on or borders during DumBama's eight years? Those immigrants took jobs away from Americans, particularly lower skilled jobs that our poor people could do. A root cause of poverty is single-parent homes, and Democrats strongly supported that in the 70's and 80's to buy votes of women libbers. Drug and alcohol programs? Do you know who leads the charge for the legalization of marijuana?

Most conservatives support programs that give the poor a good kick in ass, take away food stamps to starve them, close down government housing to put them on the streets, cut off financial support so they can't buy necessities. This reasoning is based on the erroneous believe that most people on government assistance are just lazy, ignoring the fact that most of the money goes to the elderly, sick and disabled, and single parent families.

Yeah, we did something like that in the 90's called Welfare Reform. And guess what? Nobody was out on the streets. Nobody did without necessities. In fact, the program was quite successful until it got watered down.

Yes, we need to cut down on government housing. When HUD people are getting homes in the suburbs instead of in the city where they belong, we are giving HUD way too much money. You want me to get up and go to work everyday to support you? Fine with me, but I'll support you over there--not next door to me. That's what I'm against.

The welfare reform of the 90's primarily limited the time one could be on welfare, and provided block grants to the states which has resulted in a lot more state money going into welfare. It did not cut into housing subsidies, medicaid, or food stamps. It was a minor cut compared to what Trump is proposing. However, what Trump has proposed is not going to make it through congress. Several Republicans members of congress have said it will be dead on arrive. In regard to Trump's budget, McConnell said, it looks like congress is going have to write the budget this year.

During the Obama administration, the number illegal immigrants in the US fell by more that a million. Obama deported more people than any president in history.

For the Republicans that don't want to make cuts, they will be held accountable at election time. Voters are already pissed that they didn't cut Planned Parenthood and other things we wanted. The RNC is walking a very fragile line, and they'd better wake up to the reality their voters are not happy with them.

So tell me. How does a anti-big government, anti-regulation person favor the federal government using regulation to attack a US organization for providing legal services just because you don't like what they do or to whom they donate.

I am serious here.

You claim to be anti government interference & then want the government to attack a legally operating organization because you don't like abortions.

This is proof what a hypocrite you are.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

......................................................

 

[RealDave]

Earlier you asked, "How so?" Now I will tell you.

You, yourself, sets a bad example by talking about things you know nothing about. You don't know how I voted; you don't know my party affiliation; yet you deliberately speak as if you do.

I did not vote for Hillary and I am not a Democrat. And if there was no evidence against Trump, I would be the first one to say so. But whether you will admit it or not, Trump to, has a history.

A history of what? Do you believe everything limelight holders tell the media?

And don't tell me you're not a liberal. The good thing about people like you who are liberal is that you are too ashamed to admit it. The best part about this whole scam is how disappointed you all will be in several months when the investigation turns up nothing, and then we will be treated to all your conspiracy stories. Then we will dig up the hundreds of Russian collusion threads on this thing and rub your noses in it.

Funny chit. Remember a couple of months ago it was Trump saying that he & his campaign had no Russian contact.

Now, it is you dipsticks not giving a shit about how Trump & his team have lied multiple times about Russian contacts as you ruin in circles screaming " OMG OMG No Collusion!!! No Collusion!!!>

So why did they lie about Russia contacts?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

So why did they lie about Russia contacts?

They go to lying by Default ?

 

[Faun]

Earlier you asked, "How so?" Now I will tell you.

You, yourself, sets a bad example by talking about things you know nothing about. You don't know how I voted; you don't know my party affiliation; yet you deliberately speak as if you do.

I did not vote for Hillary and I am not a Democrat. And if there was no evidence against Trump, I would be the first one to say so. But whether you will admit it or not, Trump to, has a history.

A history of what? Do you believe everything limelight holders tell the media?

And don't tell me you're not a liberal. The good thing about people like you who are liberal is that you are too ashamed to admit it. The best part about this whole scam is how disappointed you all will be in several months when the investigation turns up nothing, and then we will be treated to all your conspiracy stories. Then we will dig up the hundreds of Russian collusion threads on this thing and rub your noses in it.

You know you're nuts, right? He says he's Liberal.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Earlier you asked, "How so?" Now I will tell you.

You, yourself, sets a bad example by talking about things you know nothing about. You don't know how I voted; you don't know my party affiliation; yet you deliberately speak as if you do.

I did not vote for Hillary and I am not a Democrat. And if there was no evidence against Trump, I would be the first one to say so. But whether you will admit it or not, Trump to, has a history.

A history of what? Do you believe everything limelight holders tell the media?

And don't tell me you're not a liberal. The good thing about people like you who are liberal is that you are too ashamed to admit it. The best part about this whole scam is how disappointed you all will be in several months when the investigation turns up nothing, and then we will be treated to all your conspiracy stories. Then we will dig up the hundreds of Russian collusion threads on this thing and rub your noses in it.

Funny chit. Remember a couple of months ago it was Trump saying that he & his campaign had no Russian contact.

Now, it is you dipsticks not giving a shit about how Trump & his team have lied multiple times about Russian contacts as you ruin in circles screaming " OMG OMG No Collusion!!! No Collusion!!!>

So why did they lie about Russia contacts?

It was in response to politics and policy, not just being in the same room or shaking hands with some Russian dignitary at a party.

This may come as a shock to you on the left, but there is no law saying you can't speak to a member of any other country in the world. There is no law that an American can't do legitimate business with Russia; not that Trump has.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Rambunctious]

So you admit to being a bunch of uninformed duped morons. Good to know

No ass, we have memories and can clearly remember this democrat obstruction tactic. The dems don't except the vote of the people. When they lose and they have been losing a lot they pretend they won. We've seen this all before, the liberal media lying telling half truth stories, fake news, unnamed sources, innuendo, all in the attempt to take down an elected republican. You are either too young or too fucking gullible to recognize when you are being played by a bunch of overpaid under worked talking heads on TV. You should turn the news off until you are adult enough to weed out the BS. Until then go find a corner to cry in snowflake.

 

[RealDave]

Earlier you asked, "How so?" Now I will tell you.

You, yourself, sets a bad example by talking about things you know nothing about. You don't know how I voted; you don't know my party affiliation; yet you deliberately speak as if you do.

I did not vote for Hillary and I am not a Democrat. And if there was no evidence against Trump, I would be the first one to say so. But whether you will admit it or not, Trump to, has a history.

A history of what? Do you believe everything limelight holders tell the media?

And don't tell me you're not a liberal. The good thing about people like you who are liberal is that you are too ashamed to admit it. The best part about this whole scam is how disappointed you all will be in several months when the investigation turns up nothing, and then we will be treated to all your conspiracy stories. Then we will dig up the hundreds of Russian collusion threads on this thing and rub your noses in it.

Funny chit. Remember a couple of months ago it was Trump saying that he & his campaign had no Russian contact.

Now, it is you dipsticks not giving a shit about how Trump & his team have lied multiple times about Russian contacts as you ruin in circles screaming " OMG OMG No Collusion!!! No Collusion!!!>

So why did they lie about Russia contacts?

It was in response to politics and policy, not just being in the same room or shaking hands with some Russian dignitary at a party.

This may come as a shock to you on the left, but there is no law saying you can't speak to a member of any other country in the world. There is no law that an American can't do legitimate business with Russia; not that Trump has.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Why lie about it. Why leave these meeting off of required documentation. Why hire Flynn & Manafort who had known Russian ties?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Far from it. Democrats typically support programs that attack the root cause of poverty, lack of job skills, poor home environment for children, drug and alcohol treatment programs, low wages, and creation of jobs for the poor all of which are vigorously opposed by conservatives.

Oh really? Then why did Democrats have a Welcome Mat on or borders during DumBama's eight years? Those immigrants took jobs away from Americans, particularly lower skilled jobs that our poor people could do. A root cause of poverty is single-parent homes, and Democrats strongly supported that in the 70's and 80's to buy votes of women libbers. Drug and alcohol programs? Do you know who leads the charge for the legalization of marijuana?

Most conservatives support programs that give the poor a good kick in ass, take away food stamps to starve them, close down government housing to put them on the streets, cut off financial support so they can't buy necessities. This reasoning is based on the erroneous believe that most people on government assistance are just lazy, ignoring the fact that most of the money goes to the elderly, sick and disabled, and single parent families.

Yeah, we did something like that in the 90's called Welfare Reform. And guess what? Nobody was out on the streets. Nobody did without necessities. In fact, the program was quite successful until it got watered down.

Yes, we need to cut down on government housing. When HUD people are getting homes in the suburbs instead of in the city where they belong, we are giving HUD way too much money. You want me to get up and go to work everyday to support you? Fine with me, but I'll support you over there--not next door to me. That's what I'm against.

The welfare reform of the 90's primarily limited the time one could be on welfare, and provided block grants to the states which has resulted in a lot more state money going into welfare. It did not cut into housing subsidies, medicaid, or food stamps. It was a minor cut compared to what Trump is proposing. However, what Trump has proposed is not going to make it through congress. Several Republicans members of congress have said it will be dead on arrive. In regard to Trump's budget, McConnell said, it looks like congress is going have to write the budget this year.

During the Obama administration, the number illegal immigrants in the US fell by more that a million. Obama deported more people than any president in history.

For the Republicans that don't want to make cuts, they will be held accountable at election time. Voters are already pissed that they didn't cut Planned Parenthood and other things we wanted. The RNC is walking a very fragile line, and they'd better wake up to the reality their voters are not happy with them.

So tell me. How does a anti-big government, anti-regulation person favor the federal government using regulation to attack a US organization for providing legal services just because you don't like what they do or to whom they donate.

I am serious here.

You claim to be anti government interference & then want the government to attack a legally operating organization because you don't like abortions.

This is proof what a hypocrite you are.

Taking away federal support of a private institutions is not hypocrisy. They should have never been funded by taxpayers in the first place.

You don't know what hypocrisy is. Let me give you an example: hypocrisy is when you demand funding of an organization founded by a hard line racist, and then claim you are for the minorities.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[RealDave]

So you admit to being a bunch of uninformed duped morons. Good to know

No ass, we have memories and can clearly remember this democrat obstruction tactic. The dems don't except the vote of the people. When they lose and they have been losing a lot they pretend they won. We've seen this all before, the liberal media lying telling half truth stories, fake news, unnamed sources, innuendo, all in the attempt to take down an elected republican. You are either too young or too fucking gullible to recognize when you are being played by a bunch of overpaid under worked talking heads on TV. You should turn the news off until you are adult enough to weed out the BS. Until then go find a corner to cry in snowflake.

Bullfucking crap. Which party is out to make voting easier & encourage the vote & which party is trying to make it more difficult.

I've beern around a long time, sheepdip, long enough to know which news sources to trust & which are bullshit.

I have news for you, Breitbart, Limbaugh, & Fox are not reliable sources.

 

[LeftofLeft]

If you try to impeach Trump, the American people will not stand for it

That's probably true in my case. I imagine I won't stand for it --- I'll sit back with a beer and some munchies, cheering on my team like a spor

Clearly there's some confusion as to the definition of "majority".

To be fair, there was a majority of the electorate that turned out to vote. Barely. 45% said "fuck it, there's nothing worth voting for" and stayed home. That leaves 55% of the electorate that did vote, which is abysmal for a nation that purports to have championed this process, however it is more than half.

Of that 55%, 54% voted for somebody who does not paint him/herself orange.

That leaves Rump with 46% of the 55%, which boils down to 25% of the electorate.

Now tell the class what color the sky is on a planet where 25% constitutes a "majority".

The majority that elected him as President.

Once AGAIN --- there is no "majority" in the figure of 25%. Nor is there any "majority" in 46%.

Cannot be done.

I see the world of Fake News has branched out to Fake Math. Ah, the opaque bubble of self-delusion....

He beat Hillary. The only way to do that is to have a majority of active voters voting for him.

You STILL haven't seen the numbers?

What do you do, go 24/7?

He got the majority in every state he won the electoral votes. Popular vote doesn't count in this country.

Liberals have proven time and again that their agenda trumps the will of the American People. This should be no surprise.

 

[RealDave]

Far from it. Democrats typically support programs that attack the root cause of poverty, lack of job skills, poor home environment for children, drug and alcohol treatment programs, low wages, and creation of jobs for the poor all of which are vigorously opposed by conservatives.

Oh really? Then why did Democrats have a Welcome Mat on or borders during DumBama's eight years? Those immigrants took jobs away from Americans, particularly lower skilled jobs that our poor people could do. A root cause of poverty is single-parent homes, and Democrats strongly supported that in the 70's and 80's to buy votes of women libbers. Drug and alcohol programs? Do you know who leads the charge for the legalization of marijuana?

Most conservatives support programs that give the poor a good kick in ass, take away food stamps to starve them, close down government housing to put them on the streets, cut off financial support so they can't buy necessities. This reasoning is based on the erroneous believe that most people on government assistance are just lazy, ignoring the fact that most of the money goes to the elderly, sick and disabled, and single parent families.

Yeah, we did something like that in the 90's called Welfare Reform. And guess what? Nobody was out on the streets. Nobody did without necessities. In fact, the program was quite successful until it got watered down.

Yes, we need to cut down on government housing. When HUD people are getting homes in the suburbs instead of in the city where they belong, we are giving HUD way too much money. You want me to get up and go to work everyday to support you? Fine with me, but I'll support you over there--not next door to me. That's what I'm against.

The welfare reform of the 90's primarily limited the time one could be on welfare, and provided block grants to the states which has resulted in a lot more state money going into welfare. It did not cut into housing subsidies, medicaid, or food stamps. It was a minor cut compared to what Trump is proposing. However, what Trump has proposed is not going to make it through congress. Several Republicans members of congress have said it will be dead on arrive. In regard to Trump's budget, McConnell said, it looks like congress is going have to write the budget this year.

During the Obama administration, the number illegal immigrants in the US fell by more that a million. Obama deported more people than any president in history.

For the Republicans that don't want to make cuts, they will be held accountable at election time. Voters are already pissed that they didn't cut Planned Parenthood and other things we wanted. The RNC is walking a very fragile line, and they'd better wake up to the reality their voters are not happy with them.

So tell me. How does a anti-big government, anti-regulation person favor the federal government using regulation to attack a US organization for providing legal services just because you don't like what they do or to whom they donate.

I am serious here.

You claim to be anti government interference & then want the government to attack a legally operating organization because you don't like abortions.

This is proof what a hypocrite you are.

Taking away federal support of a private institutions is not hypocrisy. They should have never been funded by taxpayers in the first place.

You don't know what hypocrisy is. Let me give you an example: hypocrisy is when you demand funding of an organization founded by a hard line racist, and then claim you are for the minorities.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

They were getting the same support as other organizations in their scope of services. Why aren't your buddies "defunding" all of them?

You really need to quit lying about Margaret Sanger. She was not a eugenist, not a racist. Back then, many famous people believed in those ideas.

Planned Parenthood is about giving women choices. The choice to use birth control.

Meanwhile you have a fit about access to birth control as you whine about abortions.

Planned Parenthood ia a legally operating company. Where is government given the right to punish such an organization because it does not agree with its moral aspects & to whom they donate.

 

[oreo]

Actually I don't see the Republicans having the votes to even bring a motion to impeach to the floor. There are enough deep red states that will vote them out and put a Brand new Republican in their place in a heartbeat. The dimshits are just trying to slow the process and hide the fact that they are committing treason daily.

Keep dreaming--this investigation as of last Thursday has turned into a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION. A special prosecutor has been appointed, Robert Mueller--and from what former CIA director Brennen stated today, it's not looking good for Trump and company. It would surprise me if Trump made it into his second year. This is moving at the speed of light compared to Watergate.
Lindsey Graham: Russia probe 'now a criminal investigation'

"Washington (CNN)Former CIA Director John Brennan told House Russia investigators Tuesday that Russia "brazenly interfered" in US elections, including actively contacting members of the President Donald Trump's campaign -- but he stopped shy of dubbing it "collusion."

"I saw interaction that in my mind raised questions of whether it was collusion," Brennan told Rep. Trey Gowdy, saying that he supported the FBI digging further. "It was necessary to pull threads."
Ex-CIA chief John Brennan: Russians contacted Trump campaign - CNNPolitics.com

Plus what we know already:

Analysis | 5 times Donald Trump’s team denied contact with Russia

More Trump advisers disclose meeting with Russia's ambassador - CNNPolitics.com
Comey says FBI began investigation into Russia meddling in July

In this FOX News 8 minute video--Shep Smith explains that Trump surrogates where not only on the phone with the Russian Ambassador but with Russian intellience agents, including the very day that Russian were hacking into DNC databases.


Trump aides were in constant touch with senior Russian officials during campaign - CNNPolitics.com

John McCain wants to know why the Republican platform changed to "we will not arm Ukranians against pro Russian Seperatists" was put into the Republican platform during the convention in July. Link above--More Trump adviser admit meeting with the Russian ambassader at the RNC convention.


Adam Schiff cochair of the House intelligence committee had this to say.


Jeff Sessions: Also accused of lying under oath to congress that he had not met with any Russians during the campaign season. Some think he misunderstood the question, but he did fill out a questionaire prior to the hearing and checked a box NO that he had no contact with any Russians. Then he refused to go back to congress to clairify. Sessions was forced to recuse himself from the Russian investigation.
Jeff Sessions spoke twice with Russian envoy during presidential campaign: Department of Justice
Sessions recuses himself from Russia investigations - CNNPolitics.com

Michael Flynn: Lied to the FBI--which is a felony. Did not disclose he was acting as a foreign agent--being a paid lobbyist for Turkey--at 500K--and also being paid by Russian T.V. Grand Jury subpeonas went out on Flynn last week.
Flynn reportedly lied to FBI about sanctions talk with Russian envoy
Flynn was paid to lobby for Turkey while attending Trump intel briefings: report
Michael Flynn targeted by grand jury subpoenas, sources confirm

Trump fires FBI director James Comey.
Trump fires FBI director James Comey - CNNPolitics.com

Then admits Obstruction of Justice in this video.


Trump meets with Russians in the Oval office. He lets Russian media in, while blocking American media, and during the process leaks highly sensitive classified information to the Russians.
Trump reportedly revealed highly classified information to the Russians last week that the US hasn't even 'shared with our own allies'
Trump revealed highly classified information to Russian foreign minister and ambassador

Then gets enraged because the Russians tweeted out this picture.
White House furious after being trolled with Russia Oval Office photos - CNNPolitics.com

5/17/2017 The CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION started.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/3459ddc7-c010-335d-9619-24f7dfe893b8/ss_lindsey-graham:-russia-probe.html

So Republicans have two options.
1. Remove Trump from office asap or
2. Burn the entire party down in 2018-2020 & beyond.

If Republicans can do 8 investigations into Benghazi, it's not too hard to imagine what Democrats will do with Treason, Obstruction & Lies when they take over in 2018. You'll also get a great education as to what that Emoluments clause in the Constitution is all about.
The Emoluments Clause: Its text, meaning, and application to Donald J. Trump | Brookings Institution

Over the next coming months--you're going to hear these names mentioned a lot. Jerad Kushner (Trump's son in law)--Paul Manafort--Carter Page--Michael Flynn--Roger Stone and whomever else was involved in this.

Collusion with a Foreign adversary to interfere into an American election is TREASON.

You poor baby snowflake...how butt hurt you must still be
Trump voters are still behind Trump because we don't believe the left wing media BS and bullshit polls. Sorry it ain't working...

So you admit to being a bunch of uninformed duped morons. Good to know.

You've been brainwashed for 2 decades to believe that the only media you can watch or read is from the right wing--the so-called "truth tellers."

FOX News and all the other right wing talk show hosts that have filled you with 3 or more daily hours of right wing hyperbole, half truths and enough conspiracy theories to fill the capitial building from floor to ceiling.

They are ALL in full panic spin mode right now--because it is they that sold Trump to you. FOX News might as well be called the Trump media networks. They gave Trump an unprecedented 2 billion in free news coverage during the primaries while ignoring all other GOP candidates. Their viewership has collapsed. They OWN Trump now and they know it.
But WHY is CNN crushing Fox News in the ratings?

Really reading hasn't killed anyone yet.

Caller to Limbaugh Show Exposes That Rush Knows He Blew It with Donald Trump
Donald Trump broke the conservative media

You know it's one thing to be stupid about something--it's quite another circumstance to insist on remaining stupid.

Go back to post # 1033 on this thread and read and watch what has been going on throughout this investigation.

 

[grainbely]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/18/us/politics/democrats-trump-impeachment.html

A few of the saner Democrats are trying to cool off the radicalized base, but apparently insanity has become the prevailing wind.

Let me tell you this. Millions of Americans voted for Donald Trump, we still support him, and if you do manage to topple him, all hell will break loose.

Simply put, we have had enough of the Democrats, the media, the academia, the bureaucrats, and the Hollywood types who have ruined our country and Trump has promised to fix it.

If you think you can depose him without a fight, you are wrong.

We will form human barricades to keep him from leaving the White House, and we will go into the streets, if necessary and show you what it means when the normally law abiding, patriotic, tax paying, hard working American people have finally had enough.

This is a warning which you should heed.

If you depose Trump, it will lead to all out civil war.

"The American people" aka somewhere less than 40% of the population of still Trump supporters as we all know he hasn't gained any. And of them, I'm betting a third are decrepit old farts who can't see the end of their arm.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Oh really? Then why did Democrats have a Welcome Mat on or borders during DumBama's eight years? Those immigrants took jobs away from Americans, particularly lower skilled jobs that our poor people could do. A root cause of poverty is single-parent homes, and Democrats strongly supported that in the 70's and 80's to buy votes of women libbers. Drug and alcohol programs? Do you know who leads the charge for the legalization of marijuana?

Yeah, we did something like that in the 90's called Welfare Reform. And guess what? Nobody was out on the streets. Nobody did without necessities. In fact, the program was quite successful until it got watered down.

Yes, we need to cut down on government housing. When HUD people are getting homes in the suburbs instead of in the city where they belong, we are giving HUD way too much money. You want me to get up and go to work everyday to support you? Fine with me, but I'll support you over there--not next door to me. That's what I'm against.

The welfare reform of the 90's primarily limited the time one could be on welfare, and provided block grants to the states which has resulted in a lot more state money going into welfare. It did not cut into housing subsidies, medicaid, or food stamps. It was a minor cut compared to what Trump is proposing. However, what Trump has proposed is not going to make it through congress. Several Republicans members of congress have said it will be dead on arrive. In regard to Trump's budget, McConnell said, it looks like congress is going have to write the budget this year.

During the Obama administration, the number illegal immigrants in the US fell by more that a million. Obama deported more people than any president in history.

For the Republicans that don't want to make cuts, they will be held accountable at election time. Voters are already pissed that they didn't cut Planned Parenthood and other things we wanted. The RNC is walking a very fragile line, and they'd better wake up to the reality their voters are not happy with them.

So tell me. How does a anti-big government, anti-regulation person favor the federal government using regulation to attack a US organization for providing legal services just because you don't like what they do or to whom they donate.

I am serious here.

You claim to be anti government interference & then want the government to attack a legally operating organization because you don't like abortions.

This is proof what a hypocrite you are.

Taking away federal support of a private institutions is not hypocrisy. They should have never been funded by taxpayers in the first place.

You don't know what hypocrisy is. Let me give you an example: hypocrisy is when you demand funding of an organization founded by a hard line racist, and then claim you are for the minorities.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

They were getting the same support as other organizations in their scope of services. Why aren't your buddies "defunding" all of them?

You really need to quit lying about Margaret Sanger. She was not a eugenist, not a racist. Back then, many famous people believed in those ideas.

Planned Parenthood is about giving women choices. The choice to use birth control.

Meanwhile you have a fit about access to birth control as you whine about abortions.

Planned Parenthood ia a legally operating company. Where is government given the right to punish such an organization because it does not agree with its moral aspects & to whom they donate.

Because many taxpayers object to it, that's why. So when those taxpayers get their representatives in, we expect them to do our bidding; we expect them to stop providing funds to PP. There is nothing wrong with that. Plus we should also cut funding for NPR and PBS.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Flopper]

Far from it. Democrats typically support programs that attack the root cause of poverty, lack of job skills, poor home environment for children, drug and alcohol treatment programs, low wages, and creation of jobs for the poor all of which are vigorously opposed by conservatives.

Oh really? Then why did Democrats have a Welcome Mat on or borders during DumBama's eight years? Those immigrants took jobs away from Americans, particularly lower skilled jobs that our poor people could do. A root cause of poverty is single-parent homes, and Democrats strongly supported that in the 70's and 80's to buy votes of women libbers. Drug and alcohol programs? Do you know who leads the charge for the legalization of marijuana?

Most conservatives support programs that give the poor a good kick in ass, take away food stamps to starve them, close down government housing to put them on the streets, cut off financial support so they can't buy necessities. This reasoning is based on the erroneous believe that most people on government assistance are just lazy, ignoring the fact that most of the money goes to the elderly, sick and disabled, and single parent families.

Yeah, we did something like that in the 90's called Welfare Reform. And guess what? Nobody was out on the streets. Nobody did without necessities. In fact, the program was quite successful until it got watered down.

Yes, we need to cut down on government housing. When HUD people are getting homes in the suburbs instead of in the city where they belong, we are giving HUD way too much money. You want me to get up and go to work everyday to support you? Fine with me, but I'll support you over there--not next door to me. That's what I'm against.

The welfare reform of the 90's primarily limited the time one could be on welfare, and provided block grants to the states which has resulted in a lot more state money going into welfare. It did not cut into housing subsidies, medicaid, or food stamps. It was a minor cut compared to what Trump is proposing. However, what Trump has proposed is not going to make it through congress. Several Republicans members of congress have said it will be dead on arrive. In regard to Trump's budget, McConnell said, it looks like congress is going have to write the budget this year.

During the Obama administration, the number illegal immigrants in the US fell by more that a million. Obama deported more people than any president in history.

For the Republicans that don't want to make cuts, they will be held accountable at election time. Voters are already pissed that they didn't cut Planned Parenthood and other things we wanted. The RNC is walking a very fragile line, and they'd better wake up to the reality their voters are not happy with them.

Over 52 million people in the country are on some form of government assistance. That's pretty shocking but even more shocking is the number of people that would be effected if that assistance went away. That number is over twice that, brothers, sisters, parents, children, etc. When Uncle Charlie and Aunt Mary loose their housing subsidy where are they going to live? In my garage? When the no account drug addicted son in law losses his food stamps and TANF, he and his family are going to be in my living room. You don't think I would camp out on the doorsteps of my local congressmen if I thought the Trump plan had any chance of getting through congress? Don't think for a second that the people effected by Trump's plan would be just some Latinos in California. Every state, particular the Republican states in the Southeast would be hit hard which is why the Trump slashing of social welfare assistance is little more than a token jester to far right.

 

[Flopper]

Earlier you asked, "How so?" Now I will tell you.

You, yourself, sets a bad example by talking about things you know nothing about. You don't know how I voted; you don't know my party affiliation; yet you deliberately speak as if you do.

I did not vote for Hillary and I am not a Democrat. And if there was no evidence against Trump, I would be the first one to say so. But whether you will admit it or not, Trump to, has a history.

A history of what? Do you believe everything limelight holders tell the media?

And don't tell me you're not a liberal. The good thing about people like you who are liberal is that you are too ashamed to admit it. The best part about this whole scam is how disappointed you all will be in several months when the investigation turns up nothing, and then we will be treated to all your conspiracy stories. Then we will dig up the hundreds of Russian collusion threads on this thing and rub your noses in it.

Funny chit. Remember a couple of months ago it was Trump saying that he & his campaign had no Russian contact.

Now, it is you dipsticks not giving a shit about how Trump & his team have lied multiple times about Russian contacts as you ruin in circles screaming " OMG OMG No Collusion!!! No Collusion!!!>

So why did they lie about Russia contacts?

It was in response to politics and policy, not just being in the same room or shaking hands with some Russian dignitary at a party.

This may come as a shock to you on the left, but there is no law saying you can't speak to a member of any other country in the world. There is no law that an American can't do legitimate business with Russia; not that Trump has.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

But there is a law that limits you acting as an agent for a foreign government to effect the political process in the US. As long a Trump associate just says "great you got shit on Hillary", no foul. However if that Trump associates says, "how about you the release that information to the media the weekend before the election. You know Trump's position on NATO. Doing so would be beneficial to both your people and mine". He's in deep shit.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)

 

[RealDave]

The welfare reform of the 90's primarily limited the time one could be on welfare, and provided block grants to the states which has resulted in a lot more state money going into welfare. It did not cut into housing subsidies, medicaid, or food stamps. It was a minor cut compared to what Trump is proposing. However, what Trump has proposed is not going to make it through congress. Several Republicans members of congress have said it will be dead on arrive. In regard to Trump's budget, McConnell said, it looks like congress is going have to write the budget this year.

During the Obama administration, the number illegal immigrants in the US fell by more that a million. Obama deported more people than any president in history.

For the Republicans that don't want to make cuts, they will be held accountable at election time. Voters are already pissed that they didn't cut Planned Parenthood and other things we wanted. The RNC is walking a very fragile line, and they'd better wake up to the reality their voters are not happy with them.

So tell me. How does a anti-big government, anti-regulation person favor the federal government using regulation to attack a US organization for providing legal services just because you don't like what they do or to whom they donate.

I am serious here.

You claim to be anti government interference & then want the government to attack a legally operating organization because you don't like abortions.

This is proof what a hypocrite you are.

Taking away federal support of a private institutions is not hypocrisy. They should have never been funded by taxpayers in the first place.

You don't know what hypocrisy is. Let me give you an example: hypocrisy is when you demand funding of an organization founded by a hard line racist, and then claim you are for the minorities.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

They were getting the same support as other organizations in their scope of services. Why aren't your buddies "defunding" all of them?

You really need to quit lying about Margaret Sanger. She was not a eugenist, not a racist. Back then, many famous people believed in those ideas.

Planned Parenthood is about giving women choices. The choice to use birth control.

Meanwhile you have a fit about access to birth control as you whine about abortions.

Planned Parenthood ia a legally operating company. Where is government given the right to punish such an organization because it does not agree with its moral aspects & to whom they donate.

Because many taxpayers object to it, that's why. So when those taxpayers get their representatives in, we expect them to do our bidding; we expect them to stop providing funds to PP. There is nothing wrong with that. Plus we should also cut funding for NPR and PBS.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

WTF did you just say? If I get a bunch of people that object to Nestles, the government can declare that Gerber Baby Food is no longer an approved food stamp item.

I can't believe you are actually so stupid to make that post.

Cutting out PP is not the same as not funding public radio. It is choosing an organization & attacking it when that organization is perfectly legal.

You little Naxi fuck.

 

[BlindBoo]

Hillary who's server contained sensitive and classified information that a high school computer geek could have broke into

Where is the evidence that her server was ever hacked?

Naxi

Is that like a VW Bug painted yellow?

 

[Never3ndr]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/18/us/politics/democrats-trump-impeachment.html

A few of the saner Democrats are trying to cool off the radicalized base, but apparently insanity has become the prevailing wind.

Let me tell you this. Millions of Americans voted for Donald Trump, we still support him, and if you do manage to topple him, all hell will break loose.

Simply put, we have had enough of the Democrats, the media, the academia, the bureaucrats, and the Hollywood types who have ruined our country and Trump has promised to fix it.

If you think you can depose him without a fight, you are wrong.

We will form human barricades to keep him from leaving the White House, and we will go into the streets, if necessary and show you what it means when the normally law abiding, patriotic, tax paying, hard working American people have finally had enough.

This is a warning which you should heed.

If you depose Trump, it will lead to all out civil war.

No...it won't. Remember that Republicans have control of both the Senate and the House and if any move is to be made to impeach...it will have to be approved by them. As it stands right now and how they doggedly seem to defend him...it would take a large amount of public opinion and evidence to encourage them to begin this process. So, if Trump does get impeached it is going to mean most Republicans approve of this notion and people like you will, in fact, be the minority.

To be frank we are not at that stage yet. However, remember that if Trump is impeached, Mike Pence will be taking over...not some far left radical. If you were to ask me, Pence is, by far, preferrable to Trump give the levels of his gross incompetence displayed thusfar.