Jump to content

chocolat steve

Board Sponsors
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by chocolat steve

  1. The sad thing is I really think Trump didn't realize what he was doing is impeachable. Maybe improper to some extent but not illegal. This does not exonerate him but from what we know from those who work in the administration he does things ad hoc and either won't listen to advice or advice is not volunteered out of fear. This testimony and whole situation would have made most President's own party vote against him....till now. Nixon was far more popular in the Republican party after winning 2 landslides and Republicans saw a future dominated by the Republicans in the White House. So, voting against Nixon was not only personally killing your own election but also killing the party to some extent but the evidence was so damning most had no choice. I noted this before. there were still senators willing to vote no on conviction when Goldwater and other senior Senators went to tell Nixon he didn't have the votes. That is shocking. And I would love to know who those Senators were.
  2. Hillary wasnt' bad looking in college when they met. How a woman ages is a crapshoot. I would have been attracted to her, smart, open minded and decent looking. As for Bill, I don't think his wife knew he had the affair with Monica Lewinsky at the time, so I can see why he lied. I stated this a few times, that I think the Dems should have cited precedence for Bill's perjury. He lied in a private lawsuit not acting as President but as a private citizen. There are 2 prior precedents of a president and VP breaking the law in a private matter while in office and not being impeached. Burr as a sitting VP for murder in the duel with Hamilton. NJ wanted him for murder and Nixon who evaded taxes while in office. Tax evasion was successfully argued by the Republicans to be stricken from impeachment because he was evading taxes as a private citizen and not acting as President. The Clinton deposition was a BS matter anyway. It was about actions while he was governor of Arkansas. Had nothing to do with anything before the Congress but the Republicans were desperate to find anything. They opened up that can of worms and now its come back to bite them in the ass, so Trump's taxes, etc, which I agree would be off limits normally is now fair game. Anything is fair game. And that's what you get when you go beyond the scope of things. I've said this before. Some day we are going to get a far left version of Trump and the Republicans can't say anything if Dems defend his illegal actions. You must look at precedents when you conduct your office. The court system is filled with crazy precedents because judges acted out of bigotry, religion or some other bullshit.
  3. Hillary is bitter. There is nothing...I repeat nothing more cruel than a bitter old American woman.
  4. Trump's best chance of not getting impeached are the Dems themselves. Inept is being kind. That said, as it stands Trump will not be convicted. He is worried about having his legacy marred by an impeachment. It didnt really hurt Bill Clinton so far. In fact its remembered as being without merit from a vindictive Republican party The atmosphere is much different this time. Impeachment will harden his hard core, dare I say "sycophantic" support. But that's it. If the Dems conducted an intelligent investigation and it's not like they lack Congressional talent to do it but they wont use them. If Senators Kamala Harris or Virginia's Kane were in the House conducting it would be game over. They are very sharp with prosecutorial backgrounds. The quandary in the Senate is that Trump wouldnt have the votes if it was an anonymous vote. He is far more feared than loved. It's a testament to Trump's power that there he still has the votes because had the same scenario happened to any other modern President it would be a done deal.
  5. I didn't like Hillary. She was not a good candidate, although I think she was the most experienced and 'job ready' of all the candidates of both parties. That said, she has mistaken a badly run campaign for interference into the election. There was interference but not enough to overcome a good campaign. What I kept wondering the whole presidential campaign was why she didn't hire any of Obama's people like Axelrod who had unprecedented polling techniques. I know why actually. She wanted to distance herself form Obama and when it was too late, she got him and others to campaign for her. She needs to come to grips with that like Gore did in '00. Even though she is of no threat whatsoever to Republicans and conservatives, their hatred of her up to and including pursuing a completely benign threat is one of the many reasons I don't like the GOP.
  6. AOC will never, ever, ever be indicted on campaign fraud. Ever. Why? Two reasons, first, there is nothing there and what ever 'there' is there, is part of EVERY campaign and I'm willing to bet anyone a modest contribution to their favorite charity that this so called campaign fraud won't ever, ever come to fruition, despite the GOP and establishment Dems both motivated to derail her.
  7. 😆 https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-reportedly-trying-sue-msnbc-134600094.html
  8. https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/deaths-of-despair-why-this-group-of-americans-has-higher-mortality-rates-130633528.html
  9. AOC is just a freshman congressperson just starting out and its rare for a whole party to go after a person like that. Novice politician, young, just starting out. A face out of many. Why? Fear. They see what her (and others like her) potential are. This is both parties. Establishment Dems fear her and others like her. She is one of several who were David to Goliaths in winning campaigns no one gave them a chance. The GOP sees the same. People are looking for unimpeachable character and she and others have got that because they can make a claim no others can: they can't be bought and that will resonate with everyone. The American people are cynical about politics now. AOC is a populist as well and the GOP knows this will be very appealable to their core supporters. What we are smelling with the vitriolic attacks on her (and others) is fear. Fear of loss of power. Both parties are looking at anything to derail her. She uses her salad fork for the main course and she'll get censured for it right now.
  10. Hillary has crossed the line with regards to comments about Tulsi. She has never really recovered from the '16 campaign. I think she has never gotten closure on how she lost the most winnable election. She needs to talk to Gore.
  11. What makes AOC especially attractive to young voters and true progressives is she isn't bought off. She doesn't take lobby/big money. We can debate her politics but her politics are her ideas. 99% of everyone else's are based on who contributed to their campaign. This includes Trump (Robert Mercer).
  12. He should have been censured frankly.
  13. Sorry Cav, I don't debate if 1+1 equals 2 or 3. It's insulting frankly to discuss something that is a metaphysical fact. Speculation? Sure, if its based on some facts or logical conclusions but I'm not debating a fact. And its a fact the President what Trump told the Ukraine leader and his pushing for his own property to be the site of the G7. Both are clearly impeachable. Fact. It's up to the Dems if they wish to do their constitutional duty and investigate it. With all due respect, I'll ignore posts to the contrary. As for either side, not clapping. Have you read my post? Both don't clap for everything. Everyone must stand and only 1 party has interrupted the State of the Union and disrespected the office by yelling "Liar!" during it. That's also a fact. Again, with all due respect, your video did nothing to refute what I said...twice. As for ideological ideals, those are fair game.
  14. Not true Cav, BOTH sides don't applaud the president of the opposite party in State of the Union addresses. They all stand up as is protocol but they don't applaud everything. That's normal. The Republicans disrespected the office. Flat out and the worse part of it, they cosigned the disrespect.
  15. The real shame is why weren't (more/any) Republicans outraged at the idea? As I said, the one thing about Trump's presidency is that it has exposed a lot of people. The same can be said of the Obama presidency as well. A number of elected Republicans went beyond the line with violating respect for the office while he was in there. For example, a Congessman yelling 'liar' during the state of the union address. Other things, not reported widely if at all, such as not accepting the President's phone call. Pointing their finger and yelling at the President. Never done before or since Obama.
  16. The one 'good' thing about this period of time it has exposed a lot of Republicans. Lindsay Graham has done irreparable harm to his name and legacy. So has a number of people. Just like in the Bush administration, certain people such as Karl Rove, Dick Cheney will not be remembered kindly and with tacit respect when they pass. Bush surprisingly has molded a grandfatherly, not intelligent but lovable figure. He's reshaped his public view. Either by design or by accident. Obama has secured his legacy as a better President than he actually was by having the fortune of having his presidency sandwiched between what will be seen as 2 of the worse presidents in U.S. history. I was very underwhelmed with the ideology of Obama's term in office but (and this will bring the ire of Cav and others) but he is probably no worse than top 2 of all Presidents in the last 50 years. I have a very high standard and I must qualify it by saying that I don't think much of just about any president in the modern era. I think we have to go back to Truman to find a truly great President. Ike perhaps. That said, the only President one can make a case for as a better President is Reagan and I think far less of his actual accomplishments than most. I'm using their overall presidency, domestic and foreign, the era, and the context of what they had to deal with as president. I'm at pains to find a better president than Obama and say 'best' not in how good I think Obama was but in comparison to his predecessors as well as Trump. And again, I say this as a person who thinks Obama greatly underperformed from what was promised. But he accomplished a lot in very difficult circumstances. He inherited an economy that was hair close to a depression and navigated our way out of it. To be fair, he never fixed the economy but had propped up artificially via the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department. But it kept us out of a full blown depression. He 'kicked the can down the road' with regards to the debt, and other matters. Internationally, he had huge wins, killing of bin Laden, opening up Cuba. These are massive and he doesn't get the credit for them but hopefully historians will remember him for it. He did this with one hand tied behind his back. McConnell and the Republicans in Congress did something that was completely unprecedented and each of us can determine why but they publicly and privately told the President they would not work with him on anything and work openly to obstruct everything. All previous presidents with one exception (Andrew Johnson in 1865, sorry , I love history) no matter how contentious it was with the opposition party, even FDR, at least were able to talk about programs they agreed on mutually. The Republicans wouldn't even discuss things they agreed on. I'd love to hear which presidents overall in the last 50 years or so were better overall.
  17. Cav, we are deflecting. The current discussion is about Trump. But just to briefly address it. Again, if the Republicans haven't or were unable to impeach him, then address that with the Republicans. If Obama has done so many impeachable acts as you seem to suggest, it reflects on the competency of the Republicans. He has done a myriad of impeachable acts. Getting back to Trump, the mere act of pushing for his own business to be involved for government use is of itself impeachable. It's a clear violation. Even if he said he would donate the staff and property free of charge. The law is not about profit but co-mingling his business with the office. It's a clear cut violation, no wiggle room for debate. And just in case its brought up that his weekend trips home, that is his private time. Non (White House) business related time. The secret service are exonerated from this. Events beyond his control (emergencies where he has to receive a call from a foreign dignitary, etc.) are exonerated. It's reasonable because being President is virtually a 24 hour job. Camp David is a mixed use location for example. It can be used as private time or white house use but its stated prior to use. These are accepted and clear. The use of his private property for a G7 meeting is clearly impeachable. Not open for discussion. I'd feel silly still debating that metaphysical fact. For my money, the Democratic leadership is incompetent, weak, and corrupt. They have sold out Democratic ideals for money.The Republicans even moreso. They are blatantly hypocritical. Especially the Christian right which I don't regard as Christians at all. I mean that as the son of a baptist Deacon. They are modern day Pharisees to give you one analogy. The country is in a mess and all Americans as a collective are totally responsible for voting in and supporting people who work against not only the benefit of the masses but have the future of the country as a viable Republic. The America we see in 10 or 20 years will be unrecognizable I believe.
  18. 1. Cav, "He said he wasn't making a profit". Really? First, we are taking his word for it. Second, it's not true. Third, just suggesting a business he owns alone is impeachable. The fact we are even questioning this is scary. 2. Never heard of Farkas and its likely because this is a bullshit story. I know this. The Republicans would have impeached Obama for using his salad fork for his main course. I know Obama is pristine because a. He's a constitutional professor and b. there is no way on God's green earth the Republicans wouldn't take an opportunity to impeach him while he was in office as well as charges after he's he's left. Finally, not sure why Obama is brought into this. So what? I've been on record saying I think he has done impeachable acts. And I've been on record supporting his candidacy twice. I place the rule of law above party or person. Unlike the Trump supporters in Congress and the White House. 3. We can put it rest the Electoral College is outdated due to lack of evidence to support its current use. 4. Germany buying energy from Russia constitutes what? Really? EVERYONE does business with Russia. We do, as do scores of countries. I fail to see the point of pointing out a pipeline pre Crimea annexation. We and others do business with China as well. So what? We and others do business with all manner of countries. I'm at a loss to see how that disproves my statement Trump has alienated our allies. He has. We are alone floating on ice in the diplomatic sea. We have given our allies on the security council every reason not to support us over any important vote.
  19. ...and choosing his own property as the venue for the next G7 meeting is flat out thumbing your nose at the constitution. That is so impeachable our friend Cav would agree.
  20. But it doesn't Cav. California and New York are huge states with regional differences already. Orange County in California gave us Nixon and as always been red within the state. California has had pretty much half Republican governors in the last 50 years for a reason. Upstate New York is red. There is a reason they have had a fair share of Republicans such as Rockerfeller and others. States that big are like mini countries. You make a false point that both as an example are monolithic. Furthermore, because its winner take all, it affects voter turnout. Your point is simply not the case.
  21. I did a little bit of youtubing myself to see if there were other reasons to get rid of the Electoral College
  22. I will say this. I am not faulting Trump for trying to 'stand up' to China and for trying to get a more equitable partnership from allies. The fact is his efforts has resulted in alienating allies. We are sorely in need of our allies these days. Its great to try and rectify the trade imbalance with China. But the fact remains what he's tried has failed so far. We have spent more giving welfare to farmers than Obama spent bailing out the banks. To be fair, Obama and Bush haven't come up with the right methods either, but to call Trump's efforts a success is completely opposite of reality.
  23. Regarding the electoral college. That video has some false points. So, majority rules in EVERY other election, your mayor, your county elections, state wide elections for Governor, the Congress, the Supreme Court decisions but NOT for President? WTF? That's asinine logic. How can the President 'terrorize' the nation if the Congress can override any veto? The Congress controls the purse strings. Only the Congress can declare war? The Congress can impeach and remove the President. The winner takes all IS terrorizing the people in the electoral college. A simple 51 percent majority that is used in the argument to keep the Electoral College is the same 51% that gets Electoral votes? The 51% argument contradicts itself. Third, by using a popular vote, the candidates will be forced to campaign in more states. 40 of the 50 states more or less are already decided electorally. The so called swing states get all the attention and their issues are addressed at the detriment of the majority of the people (same in the primaries). How do you have a national election where candidates rarely campaign in the countries 2 biggest states (California and New York)? That's asinine. It's crazy. In a popular vote, instead of losing all of California , Trump would have gotten 4.5 of the 13 million votes instead of losing all 13 million voters. His 4.5 million voters have no say whatsoever. Finally, lets look at the history of the Electoral College. It was enacted for a few reasons, none of them worthy. The country was largely populated by illiterate, landless European immigrants at the time, and the framers only wanted people with "skin in the game" voting so only white, land owners, and still they didn't trust them and had the electoral college enacted because they didn't even trust them. Secondly, slavery. The electoral college unfairly favored slave states because slaves were counted as 3/5's of a vote but could not vote. The reason we have so Presidents from slave states, specifically Virginia is solely because it had the biggest population of slaves and freed people of the slave holding states. The electoral college skewed all the elections. The Electoral College is purely outdated. There is NO valid argument to maintain it today. There really wasn't one back then but today even more so.
  24. You do realize, 3 of the 5 countries/organizations named are allies? And 1 of the 'enemies' that has annexed part of a country Trump has pushed to be exonerated by letting them back into the G8? And openly praised them. How is that standing up to them? While at the same time alienating allies? Finally, how has 'standing up to China' been successful by any measure? I'd love to know the success? America has suffered economically by how he has stood up to China. All the Presidents have stood up to China in some form or manner. That is not accurate to say they haven't. We may disagree in how a President has done it but the fact is all Presidents have taken a stance against China and has treated them as non ally.
  25. I don't know about the constitutionality of it but I disagree with having to submit your tax return. Just like I'm sure you agree with states that were trying to force submission of birth certificates as a precursor to them invalidating Obama's. Lets be consistent about bullshit from all sides.
  • Create New...