Radical left wing paper WSJ calls on Trump to resign

[TitanTiger 20,509]

10 hours ago, CleCoTiger said:

You may not understand this, but a president can be impeached after their term of office. There are consequences to impeachment other than being removed.

Yeah, at this point the primary reason to impeach him is to strip him of his ability to run for public office ever again.

[DKW 86 7,438]

3 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Yeah, at this point the primary reason to impeach him is to strip him of his ability to run for public office ever again.

Just saw that NPR and myself agree on Trump. But what do the opinions sane, studied people mean to those eaten alive with TDS?

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/verify/can-trump-run-again-if-he-is-removed-from-office-by-the-25th-amendment-or-through-impeachment-fact-check-capitol-riots-latest/65-92a201e3-0e0e-4767-9dfc-b8b4516afb56

WASHINGTON — QUESTION: 

If President Donald Trump is removed by the 25th Amendment or an impeachment hearing, would he be able to run again in 2024?

ANSWER:

If removed by 25th Amendment: Yes, He can run again. When removed through the 25th Amendment, a president is not disqualified from running yet again. 

If removed by an impeachment conviction: It depends. When impeaching someone, Congress does have the constitutional authority to disqualify that person from future office. However, there have been occasions when Congress has decided not to disqualify someone from future office. 

If the president were to be impeached and convicted, his ability to run in 2024 would depend on whether Congress decided to disqualify him or not. 

https://www.npr.org/2021/01/08/954936268/with-12-days-left-removing-trump-from-office-is-unlikely-if-not-impossible

ANALYSIS

With 12 Days Left, Removing Trump From Office Is Unlikely, If Not Impossible

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Flipboard
• Email

January 8, 20212:47 PM ET

DOMENICO MONTANARO

Twitter

 

President Trump arrives on the South Lawn of the White House last month.

Al Drago/Getty Images

Updated at 3:16 p.m. ET

In an apparent attempt to quell a political storm building around him, including calls for his resignation or removal, President Trump finally acknowledged he had lost the presidential election.

In a video released Thursday night, the president said his focus now was on an "orderly and seamless transition of power." The move came just a day after he incited mob violence at the U.S. Capitol that resulted in the deaths of five people.

That focus didn't last very long, however.

On Friday morning, came another tweet with signature Trump indignation. He asserted that the "patriots" who voted for him "will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!"

 

That was followed up with another tweet confirming he would not be attending President-elect Joe Biden's inauguration.

 

Genuine steps in a peaceful transfer of American power include humility, concession and shows of unity, like, yes, attending an inauguration. It's something foreign leaders have marveled at with envy as something that makes America great.

Instead for Trump, it's the same as it ever was. The same defiance, the same grievance, the same victimization mentality that has fueled his right-wing, anti-establishment political power. It's all just the latest chapter in an erratic and volatile presidency that ends in 12 days.

Upon hearing that Trump won't attend, Biden matter-of-factly on Friday afternoon called the decision "one of the few things he and I have ever agreed on." He said Vice President Pence is "welcome to come. We'd be honored to have him there."

Trump's grudging acceptance that he won't continue to be president after Jan. 20 has done little to quell the determination of scores of lawmakers — a growing number of Republicans included — to make the president pay a price.

Their options are limited, however, particularly by a timeline that makes removing him from office difficult, if not impossible. There are two legal options to remove a president — the 25th Amendment and impeachment. And there are now calls for administration officials and members of the military not to follow presidential orders.

 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls for Trump's removal from office on Thursday.

Samuel Corum/Getty Images

The 25th Amendment

Section 4 of the 25th Amendment allows for the removal of a president who "is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office."

 

It seems unlikely to be invoked, however, because it would require the vice president, a majority of the president's Cabinet and two-thirds of Congress to vote to remove the president from office.

INSURRECTION AT THE CAPITOL: LIVE UPDATES

What The 25th Amendment Says About Removing A Sitting President

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer are calling on Pence to invoke it, and it has apparently been talked about among some Cabinet members.

But Pence appears to have little appetite for going forward with that. Pelosi and Schumer said Thursday they tried to call Pence to discuss it but were left on hold for 25 minutes before being told the vice president wouldn't be speaking with them.

Impeachment, take two

A second Trump impeachment, on the other hand, appears to be growing more likely by the hour.

"The sentiment of the caucus is heading in that direction," House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn of South Carolina said Friday afternoon on MSNBC.

The House of Representatives could move quickly to file articles of impeachment, vote on them and send them to the Senate. The Senate would then have to take them up immediately. Impeachment takes precedence over any other business.

The problem is: The Senate is adjourned until Jan. 19, and Biden's inauguration is the next day.

So removing Trump from office isn't going to happen through impeachment given that timeline. It would also delay confirmation of Biden's Cabinet. That might be less of a priority right now than holding Trump to some account, but it would leave Biden without secretaries of defense, homeland security or state, for example, as he takes office.

Biden sidestepped the issue Friday afternoon, saying that impeachment is "a decision for the Congress to make" and that he's focused on three issues — the coronavirus, vaccine distribution and the economy. He said the "quickest" way to get Trump out of office is for him and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris to be sworn in and get to work.

The House may well go through with impeaching Trump for the reason of trying to stop Trump from holding political office again.

The Constitution, under Article I, Section 3, Clause 7, says that "judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States."

But to disqualify him, there would need to be a separate vote and it would be up to the Senate to consider it.

"Procedurally, they have the articles of impeachment, the Senate would convict and then after they convict, someone would make a motion to also disqualify and then they would take up that," said Brian Kalt, author of Unable, The Law, Politics, and Limits of Section 4 of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. "So it's totally at the discretion of the Senate whether to consider it, and then once they consider it, it's just up to that simple majority whether they do it."

But with the Senate out until Jan. 19, there's a constitutional question of whether impeachment can go through after a president's term is up.

And there's also a question of whether the penalty barring him from office would even stick.

"It disqualifies you from office under the United States, and the Constitution elsewhere distinguishes that from Congress," Kalt said, adding, "Officers are generally appointed positions, and possibly the president, too, although there's some debate on that, since he's elected."

So could Trump run again even if a disqualification provision passes the Senate?

"He could try," Kalt said. "There are people who have argued that. I think, though, as a practical matter, if they're going to get two-thirds in the Senate against him [for impeachment], it would be a sign that just as a practical matter, he's lost enough Republican support, that he'd be facing an uphill battle getting the nomination anyway. So that would help. But he could fight it out. I mean, he's shown a willingness to do that."

While there is support from some Republicans, it's not clear there would be enough to support Trump's removal.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said he reached out Friday to Biden "to lower the temperature."

"Impeaching the President with just 12 days left will only divide our country more," McCarthy tweeted.

That came despite McCarthy joining objections to Biden's certification Wednesday, both before and after the mob stormed the Capitol.

Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who has been one of Trump's most loyal foot soldiers but did not side with objections to the 2020 election, warned of "damage that would be done" from impeachment and that it would not be successful.

Not following presidential orders

Some are also encouraging another extraordinary step: not following a presidential order.

"This morning, I spoke to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley to discuss available precautions for preventing an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or accessing the launch codes and ordering a nuclear strike," Pelosi said in a press release Friday. "The situation of this unhinged President could not be more dangerous, and we must do everything that we can to protect the American people from his unbalanced assault on our country and our democracy."

That's not without precedent.

"You may recall back during the impeachment period with Richard Nixon, Secretary of Defense Jim Schlesinger put out the word — do not follow any order that involves using nuclear weapons until you check with me or Secretary [Henry] Kissinger," William Cohen, defense secretary under President Bill Clinton, told PBS NewsHour this week before the events at the Capitol. "And I would expect the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, who is not in the chain of command, I would expect the acting secretary of defense to do something quite similar to that."

Cohen, who was one of 10 living former defense secretaries to sign onto a letter urging the president to facilitate a peaceful transfer of power, asserted that members of the military only have to follow orders that are legal, ethical and constitutional.

But not following a command, he said, "requires those in the chain of command to make an assessment: Is this done for legitimate reasons? Is this something that's done for purely political opportunity? They could then refuse to carry out that order."

But that could only last for so long.

"It could slow things down," Kalt said, "but a determined president, as long as he has his powers, can eventually get what he wants."

Because of the timeline and the politics of the Republican Party, any real accountability for Trump could come after he leaves office — whether that's through legal action related to the president's incitement of the violence, legal investigations in New York or simply through damage to his brand and business empire.

 

[I_M4_AU 7,930]

3 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Yeah, at this point the primary reason to impeach him is to strip him of his ability to run for public office ever again.

The Democrats have tried to remove this guy since day 1.  What would have happened if they just gave him enough rope to hang himself from the start?  With respect to impeachment this time; If the Democrats just let it alone you will find out who on the Republican side would support him in 4 years.  I doubt he would make it out of the primaries if he ran, furthermore, if he ran as an independent he would draw a lot of right wing votes and almost guarantee a Democrat victory in 4 years, no matter who runs on that side of the aisle.

[aubiefifty 16,863]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

Just saw that NPR and myself agree on Trump. But what do the opinions sane, studied people mean to those eaten alive with TDS?

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/verify/can-trump-run-again-if-he-is-removed-from-office-by-the-25th-amendment-or-through-impeachment-fact-check-capitol-riots-latest/65-92a201e3-0e0e-4767-9dfc-b8b4516afb56

WASHINGTON — QUESTION: 

If President Donald Trump is removed by the 25th Amendment or an impeachment hearing, would he be able to run again in 2024?

ANSWER:

If removed by 25th Amendment: Yes, He can run again. When removed through the 25th Amendment, a president is not disqualified from running yet again. 

If removed by an impeachment conviction: It depends. When impeaching someone, Congress does have the constitutional authority to disqualify that person from future office. However, there have been occasions when Congress has decided not to disqualify someone from future office. 

If the president were to be impeached and convicted, his ability to run in 2024 would depend on whether Congress decided to disqualify him or not. 

https://www.npr.org/2021/01/08/954936268/with-12-days-left-removing-trump-from-office-is-unlikely-if-not-impossible

ANALYSIS

With 12 Days Left, Removing Trump From Office Is Unlikely, If Not Impossible

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Flipboard
• Email

January 8, 20212:47 PM ET

DOMENICO MONTANARO

Twitter

 

President Trump arrives on the South Lawn of the White House last month.

Al Drago/Getty Images

Updated at 3:16 p.m. ET

In an apparent attempt to quell a political storm building around him, including calls for his resignation or removal, President Trump finally acknowledged he had lost the presidential election.

In a video released Thursday night, the president said his focus now was on an "orderly and seamless transition of power." The move came just a day after he incited mob violence at the U.S. Capitol that resulted in the deaths of five people.

That focus didn't last very long, however.

On Friday morning, came another tweet with signature Trump indignation. He asserted that the "patriots" who voted for him "will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!"

 

That was followed up with another tweet confirming he would not be attending President-elect Joe Biden's inauguration.

 

Genuine steps in a peaceful transfer of American power include humility, concession and shows of unity, like, yes, attending an inauguration. It's something foreign leaders have marveled at with envy as something that makes America great.

Instead for Trump, it's the same as it ever was. The same defiance, the same grievance, the same victimization mentality that has fueled his right-wing, anti-establishment political power. It's all just the latest chapter in an erratic and volatile presidency that ends in 12 days.

Upon hearing that Trump won't attend, Biden matter-of-factly on Friday afternoon called the decision "one of the few things he and I have ever agreed on." He said Vice President Pence is "welcome to come. We'd be honored to have him there."

Trump's grudging acceptance that he won't continue to be president after Jan. 20 has done little to quell the determination of scores of lawmakers — a growing number of Republicans included — to make the president pay a price.

Their options are limited, however, particularly by a timeline that makes removing him from office difficult, if not impossible. There are two legal options to remove a president — the 25th Amendment and impeachment. And there are now calls for administration officials and members of the military not to follow presidential orders.

 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls for Trump's removal from office on Thursday.

Samuel Corum/Getty Images

The 25th Amendment

Section 4 of the 25th Amendment allows for the removal of a president who "is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office."

 

It seems unlikely to be invoked, however, because it would require the vice president, a majority of the president's Cabinet and two-thirds of Congress to vote to remove the president from office.

INSURRECTION AT THE CAPITOL: LIVE UPDATES

What The 25th Amendment Says About Removing A Sitting President

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer are calling on Pence to invoke it, and it has apparently been talked about among some Cabinet members.

But Pence appears to have little appetite for going forward with that. Pelosi and Schumer said Thursday they tried to call Pence to discuss it but were left on hold for 25 minutes before being told the vice president wouldn't be speaking with them.

Impeachment, take two

A second Trump impeachment, on the other hand, appears to be growing more likely by the hour.

"The sentiment of the caucus is heading in that direction," House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn of South Carolina said Friday afternoon on MSNBC.

The House of Representatives could move quickly to file articles of impeachment, vote on them and send them to the Senate. The Senate would then have to take them up immediately. Impeachment takes precedence over any other business.

The problem is: The Senate is adjourned until Jan. 19, and Biden's inauguration is the next day.

So removing Trump from office isn't going to happen through impeachment given that timeline. It would also delay confirmation of Biden's Cabinet. That might be less of a priority right now than holding Trump to some account, but it would leave Biden without secretaries of defense, homeland security or state, for example, as he takes office.

Biden sidestepped the issue Friday afternoon, saying that impeachment is "a decision for the Congress to make" and that he's focused on three issues — the coronavirus, vaccine distribution and the economy. He said the "quickest" way to get Trump out of office is for him and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris to be sworn in and get to work.

The House may well go through with impeaching Trump for the reason of trying to stop Trump from holding political office again.

The Constitution, under Article I, Section 3, Clause 7, says that "judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States."

But to disqualify him, there would need to be a separate vote and it would be up to the Senate to consider it.

"Procedurally, they have the articles of impeachment, the Senate would convict and then after they convict, someone would make a motion to also disqualify and then they would take up that," said Brian Kalt, author of Unable, The Law, Politics, and Limits of Section 4 of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. "So it's totally at the discretion of the Senate whether to consider it, and then once they consider it, it's just up to that simple majority whether they do it."

But with the Senate out until Jan. 19, there's a constitutional question of whether impeachment can go through after a president's term is up.

And there's also a question of whether the penalty barring him from office would even stick.

"It disqualifies you from office under the United States, and the Constitution elsewhere distinguishes that from Congress," Kalt said, adding, "Officers are generally appointed positions, and possibly the president, too, although there's some debate on that, since he's elected."

So could Trump run again even if a disqualification provision passes the Senate?

"He could try," Kalt said. "There are people who have argued that. I think, though, as a practical matter, if they're going to get two-thirds in the Senate against him [for impeachment], it would be a sign that just as a practical matter, he's lost enough Republican support, that he'd be facing an uphill battle getting the nomination anyway. So that would help. But he could fight it out. I mean, he's shown a willingness to do that."

While there is support from some Republicans, it's not clear there would be enough to support Trump's removal.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said he reached out Friday to Biden "to lower the temperature."

"Impeaching the President with just 12 days left will only divide our country more," McCarthy tweeted.

That came despite McCarthy joining objections to Biden's certification Wednesday, both before and after the mob stormed the Capitol.

Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who has been one of Trump's most loyal foot soldiers but did not side with objections to the 2020 election, warned of "damage that would be done" from impeachment and that it would not be successful.

Not following presidential orders

Some are also encouraging another extraordinary step: not following a presidential order.

"This morning, I spoke to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley to discuss available precautions for preventing an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or accessing the launch codes and ordering a nuclear strike," Pelosi said in a press release Friday. "The situation of this unhinged President could not be more dangerous, and we must do everything that we can to protect the American people from his unbalanced assault on our country and our democracy."

That's not without precedent.

"You may recall back during the impeachment period with Richard Nixon, Secretary of Defense Jim Schlesinger put out the word — do not follow any order that involves using nuclear weapons until you check with me or Secretary [Henry] Kissinger," William Cohen, defense secretary under President Bill Clinton, told PBS NewsHour this week before the events at the Capitol. "And I would expect the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, who is not in the chain of command, I would expect the acting secretary of defense to do something quite similar to that."

Cohen, who was one of 10 living former defense secretaries to sign onto a letter urging the president to facilitate a peaceful transfer of power, asserted that members of the military only have to follow orders that are legal, ethical and constitutional.

But not following a command, he said, "requires those in the chain of command to make an assessment: Is this done for legitimate reasons? Is this something that's done for purely political opportunity? They could then refuse to carry out that order."

But that could only last for so long.

"It could slow things down," Kalt said, "but a determined president, as long as he has his powers, can eventually get what he wants."

Because of the timeline and the politics of the Republican Party, any real accountability for Trump could come after he leaves office — whether that's through legal action related to the president's incitement of the violence, legal investigations in New York or simply through damage to his brand and business empire.

 

you know dkw that many righties as well as trump wanted to stop funding for npr because they called out a lot of trumps bull. they wanted npr shutdown becaue they do not like what npr said which i have never seen them lie about anything. and yet you still love to bang on the libs and would appear you might not like trump but you are ok with their followers.

[I_M4_AU 7,930]

5 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

you know dkw that many righties as well as trump wanted to stop funding for npr because they called out a lot of trumps bull. they wanted npr shutdown becaue they do not like what npr said which i have never seen them lie about anything. and yet you still love to bang on the libs and would appear you might not like trump but you are ok with their followers.

DKW brings both sides of issues.  He is more left than most *righties*, but to me he is more balanced than a lot of *libs* on the board. JMO.

[DKW 86 7,438]

20 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

you know dkw that many righties as well as trump wanted to stop funding for npr because they called out a lot of trumps bull. they wanted npr shutdown becaue they do not like what npr said which i have never seen them lie about anything. and yet you still love to bang on the libs and would appear you might not like trump but you are ok with their followers.

Brother, If I screw up my words, I apologize. I simply dont think any group of people is ALL EVIL. I try to reflect that by exposing contradictions. Unfortunately we have so many here that cannot allow that to be true. Int heir hearts, they seem to love only one side and that is it. They never grow past that. They stagnate there and Intellectually Die there. 

[DKW 86 7,438]

13 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

DKW brings both sides of issues.  He is more left than most *righties*, but to me he is more balanced than a lot of *libs* on the board. JMO.

Thank you. I am a flawed dude that sometimes screws up my words and my illustrations. But I just reject that simple minded thinking that Americans fall into like "Orange Man Bad." He was indeed bad, but not all bad. No one is all bad. If nothing else he oversaw Operation Warp Speed.

It is a both sides thing. If you listen to the crazies anywhere, then you will get the immature "They All Suck" thinking forced down your throat.  
Relax, Chill, Open your mind, and listen to them.You might find out that you agree more with them than you disagree. 

[I_M4_AU 7,930]

13 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

I am a flawed dude that sometimes screws up my words and my illustrations.

I hear ya, I have the same problem.

[aubiefifty 16,863]

26 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Brother, If I screw up my words, I apologize. I simply dont think any group of people is ALL EVIL. I try to reflect that by exposing contradictions. Unfortunately we have so many here that cannot allow that to be true. Int heir hearts, they seem to love only one side and that is it. They never grow past that. They stagnate there and Intellectually Die there. 

if a dem was as big a mess insulting vets etc i would be on them like a rat on a cheeto. that is the truth.

[aubiefifty 16,863]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

The Democrats have tried to remove this guy since day 1.  What would have happened if they just gave him enough rope to hang himself from the start?  With respect to impeachment this time; If the Democrats just let it alone you will find out who on the Republican side would support him in 4 years.  I doubt he would make it out of the primaries if he ran, furthermore, if he ran as an independent he would draw a lot of right wing votes and almost guarantee a Democrat victory in 4 years, no matter who runs on that side of the aisle.

i knew what trump was before he was elected and i had an idea he would push the law past it's limits and i have been proven right. many on the right would love nothing better than to see this country destroyed. i still think some on the right sold out our country and would love nothing better than see it destroyed. as far as the law goes i am tired of those with money owning the justice system and getting away with stuff. there have been two capitals taken over recently enough and it is time to make an example of those guilty. period. and ol ted and the other idiot need some special love as well. what happens the next time we come across someone like trump? this is some serious stuff and severe punishments need to be handed down before this crap gets out of hand. what about those ranchers taking over that place in washington or oregon? it started then and is steadily getting worse. examples need to be made for the good of the country. five people were killed. what about the dude with malitov coctails in his truck? what about those with zip ties for cuffing people? what happens if those people actually got a hold of some dems for hostage? what then? some of you folks demand law and order when it comes to blacks and want to give trump a pass after all he has done? give me a break.

[I_M4_AU 7,930]

8 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

many on the right would love nothing better than to see this country destroyed.

This is a false statement, depending on what you think *destroyed* means.  It has been said, many times from BLM leaders, that we need to tear the establishment down and replace it.  In my thinking, that would destroy the country.

 

11 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

this is some serious stuff and severe punishments need to be handed down before this crap gets out of hand.

Agree with this, except the serious stuff started earlier this year with looting and rioting in the streets (not the peaceful type) and with little or no punishment.  Police standing down, looking the other way and if arrested they were let out sometimes the same day.  The Vice President Elect even set up a fund to pay the bails of those that were arrested.  If Pence does that, I’m right with you fifty.

 

17 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

some of you folks demand law and order when it comes to blacks and want to give trump a pass after all he has done?

This is also a false statement.  What most people want is fair treatment under the law, no matter who the perpetrators are.  The people that broke into the Capital Building will be hunted down and prosecuted.  It’s so out in the open that it is the only thing that can be done for the sake of the government.  They will not be overlooked, but it will take time.

[aubiefifty 16,863]

2 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

This is a false statement, depending on what you think *destroyed* means.  It has been said, many times from BLM leaders, that we need to tear the establishment down and replace it.  In my thinking, that would destroy the country.

 

Agree with this, except the serious stuff started earlier this year with looting and rioting in the streets (not the peaceful type) and with little or no punishment.  Police standing down, looking the other way and if arrested they were let out sometimes the same day.  The Vice President Elect even set up a fund to pay the bails of those that were arrested.  If Pence does that, I’m right with you fifty.

 

This is also a false statement.  What most people want is fair treatment under the law, no matter who the perpetrators are.  The people that broke into the Capital Building will be hunted down and prosecuted.  It’s so out in the open that it is the only thing that can be done for the sake of the government.  They will not be overlooked, but it will take time.

i stand by my points. trump has used his money to screw over folks for years and years if anyone ever cares to actually look into his background. and i have seen folks on the right say the voted for trump because they wanted the old ways destroyed. less gov and less paid taxes. it was all over facebook just like the ads for " make the country great again shoot a lib today". you cannot even google and find the  t shirts now but i saw them. for sale and being worn.ted nujent was on board until someone tried to shoot up the softball tourney and kill a few senators and congressmen. then he finally backed off but it was too late. hell i was threatened on facebook enough times i had to go buy a shotgun pistol so i could maybe shoot back or protect myself. facebook toned a lot of that stuff down but it was there and i just wonder why you never saw any of it?

[homersapien 11,423]

On 1/8/2021 at 11:15 AM, Strychnine said:

 

That has been my fear through this.  Someone sinister was paying attention to how Trump effectively hijacked a political party, and developed followers so deluded that they were willing to mass and storm the Capitol on his behalf.  Six years ago, I was fairly confident that something like the Russian Revolution or Hitler's rise to power could basically never occur in the United States.  I am no longer confident of that.

https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/American-Fascists/Chris-Hedges/9780743284462

 

[homersapien 11,423]

2 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

The Democrats have tried to remove this guy since day 1.  What would have happened if they just gave him enough rope to hang himself from the start?  With respect to impeachment this time; If the Democrats just let it alone you will find out who on the Republican side would support him in 4 years.  I doubt he would make it out of the primaries if he ran, furthermore, if he ran as an independent he would draw a lot of right wing votes and almost guarantee a Democrat victory in 4 years, no matter who runs on that side of the aisle.

And they were right in trying, huh?

[homersapien 11,423]

I can't believe someone would actually use the phrase "Trump Derangement Sydrome" after the events of Nov. 6.

Biggest self-own ever!

[homersapien 11,423]

4 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

DKW brings both sides of issues.  He is more left than most *righties*, but to me he is more balanced than a lot of *libs* on the board. JMO.

He is an iconoclastic legend (in his own mind). 

Bet he responds to this with a .gif  (or two).

[DKW 86 7,438]

17 minutes ago, homersapien said:

He is an iconoclastic legend (in his own mind). 

Bet he responds to this with .gif  (or two).

You know, that is probably the first time in a year you havent responded with some braindead drive-by pop-psych bovine excrement.

kudos. I am sure most of the board quit expecting anything other than that long ago.

<insert inane repetitive winky emoji of choice here.>

[I_M4_AU 7,930]

40 minutes ago, homersapien said:

And they were right in trying, huh?

Where did I say that?  It was an *what if* type of statement.  

[homersapien 11,423]

59 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Where did I say that?  It was an *what if* type of statement.  

OK let me re-phrase my point:

You said Democrats were trying to "remove Trump from day 1" (which is hyperbolic and not exactly the truth but I take your intent).

My point is, that in hindsight, they were correct in trying to remove Trump as he was obviously unfit for office starting on day 1. Obviously, they were on to something.