Fogdog
Well-Known Member
We are in damage control and hanging in there until we cross this threshold: https://howlonguntiltrumpleaves.com/
The "D" day pool, best guess as to when Trump is out
- Thread starter DIY-HP-LED
- Start date
Budley Doright
Well-Known Member
I would probably declare war if the guy down the road said he was delivering fluffy compost and dropped off a fluffy load of diapers
. I don’t have any use for plastic so I said compost btw lol. The actual statement is stuff Trump suggested, while musing about their fallen angle like power. I’m in awe at all that is going on in today’s world .
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
I agree with this
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyst: Trump's White House departure will be ugly if he loses
Retired Army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters talks to CNN's Anderson Cooper about the future of the United States if President Donald Trump loses in 2020.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyst: Trump's White House departure will be ugly if he loses
Herb & Suds
Well-Known Member
Your day has come ...GOOD LUCK
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Here is why I think the democrats should impeach Trump after extensive investigations and hearings, though closer to the election. Make the republican senators own him if the don't convict him in an impeachment trial, put them and the mountain of evidence against Trump on the record and before the American people, take it right up to the labor day weekend of 2020. Trump is only gonna get crazier as the investigations continue and the election approaches, especially if he's losing. Refusing all subpoenas is gonna accelerate the court order processes and of the SCOTUS expediting their involvement with it and precipitating a real constitutional crises. This will increase the heat on the GOP senate quite a bit if Trump refuses to recognize the SCOTUS decision and that might not be too long in coming if Trump keeps this up.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Republican senators are paying a political price
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/25/hows-that-working-out-you-republican-senators/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0953574d5547
By Jennifer Rubin
Opinion writer
April 25 at 1:00 PM
The latest Politico-Morning Consult poll suggests that GOP senators, especially those vulnerable in 2020, who are bent on accommodating President Trump and his noxious nominees, policy stances and behavior are paying a political price.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who has always pitched herself as a pro-choice moderate, has nosedived in the polls since voting to pass Trump’s tax plan and to confirm Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh. From a 67 percent/27 percent favorable/unfavorable rating in the first quarter of 2017, she has sunk to 52 percent/39 percent. She’s 25 net points underwater with Democrats. She might (or might not) have staved off a primary challenge, but she’s setting herself up for her first competitive Senate race since 1996, with an army of pro-choice voters looking to knock her out of the Senate. For a pro-life moderate in a purplish-blue state, sticking by Trump has not worked to her advantage.
As NARAL Pro-Choice America president Ilyse Hogue tells me, Collins’s "slide in popularity is a problem of her own making.” She says, “Instead of [using] the Kavanaugh moment to cap a career of commitment to women, she chose to cover for a corrupt president, a breach of the trust of voters who won’t forget in 2020.”
Then there is Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), who won in 2014 by presenting himself as an advocate for women (e.g. stressing access to over-the-counter contraception). In 2017, he started with a 49/30 favorable margin. Now he is at 35/35. If a favorable rating below 50 percent is warning sign for an incumbent, Gardner already has a three-alarm fire on his hands. Provided Democrats run a minimally successful presidential race, he’s very likely political toast. As FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver puts it, “Ideologically-speaking, Gardner has occupied the middle lane of his party, which is good for a Republican running in a state that leans blue. But in the Senate, Gardner has voted in line with President Trump’s position more often than Colorado’s 2016 presidential result would suggest. This could be a problem for him in 2020, considering Gardner’s narrow victory in 2014 and that the Democratic nominee for president has won Colorado three times in a row.” Maybe it would have been better to have put more distance between himself and Trump.
Go down the list of 2020 GOP incumbents on the ballot, and you see a similar pattern. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) has slid from a 39/30 approval/disapproval split to 34/33; Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) tumbled from 44/47 to 36/50; and Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) fell from 47/37 to 40/37. These politicians’ Trump sycophancy could well cost them their seats.
Even more striking is that all these Republicans will oppose any effort to impeach Trump (leaving them with a President Pence) and will doggedly support him for reelection, when they instead could have any other Republican — one whose tax plan was not a bust, who didn’t engage in obstructionist behavior and continue to lie about it, who isn’t slavishly devoted to tyrants and who evidences again and again that he is unfit for the job. No, instead of any other Republican, they want to run with Trump at the top of the ticket. Go figure.
Craven Republicans have avoided stepping out of line for fear of an irate tweet, a mean nickname or a GOP primary opponent. For all their moral and political irresponsibility, their dereliction of duty and their intellectual hypocrisy, have they bought themselves an easy reelection race? No. They tried trading their honor for political security and now have neither.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Republican senators are paying a political price
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/25/hows-that-working-out-you-republican-senators/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0953574d5547
By Jennifer Rubin
Opinion writer
April 25 at 1:00 PM
The latest Politico-Morning Consult poll suggests that GOP senators, especially those vulnerable in 2020, who are bent on accommodating President Trump and his noxious nominees, policy stances and behavior are paying a political price.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who has always pitched herself as a pro-choice moderate, has nosedived in the polls since voting to pass Trump’s tax plan and to confirm Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh. From a 67 percent/27 percent favorable/unfavorable rating in the first quarter of 2017, she has sunk to 52 percent/39 percent. She’s 25 net points underwater with Democrats. She might (or might not) have staved off a primary challenge, but she’s setting herself up for her first competitive Senate race since 1996, with an army of pro-choice voters looking to knock her out of the Senate. For a pro-life moderate in a purplish-blue state, sticking by Trump has not worked to her advantage.
As NARAL Pro-Choice America president Ilyse Hogue tells me, Collins’s "slide in popularity is a problem of her own making.” She says, “Instead of [using] the Kavanaugh moment to cap a career of commitment to women, she chose to cover for a corrupt president, a breach of the trust of voters who won’t forget in 2020.”
Then there is Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), who won in 2014 by presenting himself as an advocate for women (e.g. stressing access to over-the-counter contraception). In 2017, he started with a 49/30 favorable margin. Now he is at 35/35. If a favorable rating below 50 percent is warning sign for an incumbent, Gardner already has a three-alarm fire on his hands. Provided Democrats run a minimally successful presidential race, he’s very likely political toast. As FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver puts it, “Ideologically-speaking, Gardner has occupied the middle lane of his party, which is good for a Republican running in a state that leans blue. But in the Senate, Gardner has voted in line with President Trump’s position more often than Colorado’s 2016 presidential result would suggest. This could be a problem for him in 2020, considering Gardner’s narrow victory in 2014 and that the Democratic nominee for president has won Colorado three times in a row.” Maybe it would have been better to have put more distance between himself and Trump.
Go down the list of 2020 GOP incumbents on the ballot, and you see a similar pattern. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) has slid from a 39/30 approval/disapproval split to 34/33; Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) tumbled from 44/47 to 36/50; and Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) fell from 47/37 to 40/37. These politicians’ Trump sycophancy could well cost them their seats.
Even more striking is that all these Republicans will oppose any effort to impeach Trump (leaving them with a President Pence) and will doggedly support him for reelection, when they instead could have any other Republican — one whose tax plan was not a bust, who didn’t engage in obstructionist behavior and continue to lie about it, who isn’t slavishly devoted to tyrants and who evidences again and again that he is unfit for the job. No, instead of any other Republican, they want to run with Trump at the top of the ticket. Go figure.
Craven Republicans have avoided stepping out of line for fear of an irate tweet, a mean nickname or a GOP primary opponent. For all their moral and political irresponsibility, their dereliction of duty and their intellectual hypocrisy, have they bought themselves an easy reelection race? No. They tried trading their honor for political security and now have neither.
Last edited:
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
It might be stay as a guest of the house until ya squeal, I don't think Trump could get them out either.
Maybe they'll have to put a cell block in the basement of the house, make it something like a dungeon for added incentive... Instead of orange jump suits, give them canary yellow ones to wear for singing in congress!
Scroll down to:
"
Inherent contempt[edit]
Under this process, the procedure for holding a person in contempt involves only the chamber concerned. Following a contempt citation, the person cited is arrested by the Sergeant-at-Arms for the House or Senate, brought to the floor of the chamber, held to answer charges by the presiding officer, and then subjected to punishment as the chamber may dictate (usually imprisonment for punishment reasons, imprisonment for coercive effect, or release from the contempt citation).[citation needed]
Concerned with the time-consuming nature of a contempt proceeding and the inability to extend punishment further than the session of the Congress concerned (under Supreme Court rulings), Congress created a statutory process in 1857. While Congress retains its "inherent contempt" authority and may exercise it at any time, this inherent contempt process was last used by the Senate in 1934, in a Senate investigation of airlines and the U.S. Postmaster. After a one-week trial on the Senate floor (presided over by Vice President John Nance Garner, in his capacity as Senate President), William P. MacCracken, Jr., a lawyer and former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics who was charged with allowing clients to remove or rip up subpoenaed documents, was found guilty and sentenced to 10 days imprisonment.[10]
MacCracken filed a petition of habeas corpus in federal courts to overturn his arrest, but after litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress had acted constitutionally, and denied the petition in the case Jurney v. MacCracken.[11][12]
Presidential pardons appear not to apply to a civil contempt procedure such as the above, since it is not an "offense against the United States" or against "the dignity of public authority." ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contempt of Congress
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress
Contempt of Congress is the act of obstructing the work of the United States Congress or one of its committees. Historically, the bribery of a U.S. Senator or U.S. Representative was considered contempt of Congress. In modern times, contempt of Congress has generally applied to the refusal to comply with a subpoena issued by a Congressional committee or subcommittee—usually seeking to compel either testimony or the production of requested documents.
more...
Maybe they'll have to put a cell block in the basement of the house, make it something like a dungeon for added incentive... Instead of orange jump suits, give them canary yellow ones to wear for singing in congress!
Scroll down to:
"
Inherent contempt[edit]
Under this process, the procedure for holding a person in contempt involves only the chamber concerned. Following a contempt citation, the person cited is arrested by the Sergeant-at-Arms for the House or Senate, brought to the floor of the chamber, held to answer charges by the presiding officer, and then subjected to punishment as the chamber may dictate (usually imprisonment for punishment reasons, imprisonment for coercive effect, or release from the contempt citation).[citation needed]
Concerned with the time-consuming nature of a contempt proceeding and the inability to extend punishment further than the session of the Congress concerned (under Supreme Court rulings), Congress created a statutory process in 1857. While Congress retains its "inherent contempt" authority and may exercise it at any time, this inherent contempt process was last used by the Senate in 1934, in a Senate investigation of airlines and the U.S. Postmaster. After a one-week trial on the Senate floor (presided over by Vice President John Nance Garner, in his capacity as Senate President), William P. MacCracken, Jr., a lawyer and former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics who was charged with allowing clients to remove or rip up subpoenaed documents, was found guilty and sentenced to 10 days imprisonment.[10]
MacCracken filed a petition of habeas corpus in federal courts to overturn his arrest, but after litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress had acted constitutionally, and denied the petition in the case Jurney v. MacCracken.[11][12]
Presidential pardons appear not to apply to a civil contempt procedure such as the above, since it is not an "offense against the United States" or against "the dignity of public authority." ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contempt of Congress
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress
Contempt of Congress is the act of obstructing the work of the United States Congress or one of its committees. Historically, the bribery of a U.S. Senator or U.S. Representative was considered contempt of Congress. In modern times, contempt of Congress has generally applied to the refusal to comply with a subpoena issued by a Congressional committee or subcommittee—usually seeking to compel either testimony or the production of requested documents.
more...
Last edited:
pabloesqobar
Well-Known Member
lol.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Dem Rep: Rod Rosenstein Proves Trump Corrupts DOJ | The Beat With Ari Melber | MSNBC
A new Washington Post report cites multiple sources alleging Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein tried to save his job as Mueller’s boss by telling Trump he could “land the plane” and by assuring the President he was on the same team. House Democrat, David Cicilline tells Ari Melber that the conduct alleged “raises a lot of questions” about Rosenstein’s conduct, including what he might have said to “convince the President he was on” the same team.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
see, the thing about impeachment is that the republicans still hold the senate, and more than likely will not vote to impeach trump...and if impeachment fails, that empowers trump even more...it would probably be better to wait for him to not be elected in 2020, and let the legal system ravage his orange ass...there has to be a knee high pile of sealed indictments for him and practically everyone whose ever worked for him, just waiting on him to get out of office, when he isn't protected by stupid traditions, and can't pardon anyone....
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
I see congress might be looking to "rent" jail space, I would have preferred a dungeon in the basement of the capital building...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connolly threatens to jail Trump officials who won't comply with subpoenas
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/25/politics/gerry-connolly-subpoenas-white-house-cnntv/index.html
Washington (CNN)A Democratic lawmaker on Thursday ratcheted up warnings to the Trump administration amid a growing standoff over subpoenas and oversight requests the White House says it will resist.
Rep. Gerry Connolly threatened jail time for White House officials who are declining to comply with congressional committees' efforts to conduct oversight of President Donald Trump's administration. It's the latest salvo in the escalating battle between the White House and congressional Democrats, who have scaled up their oversight requests following the conclusion of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.
Connolly, who sits on the Oversight Committee, told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room," "We're going to resist, and if a subpoena is issued and you're told you must testify, we will back that up."
Trump at war with Democrats: 'We're fighting all the subpoenas'
Trump at war with Democrats: 'We're fighting all the subpoenas'
RELATED: Trump at war with Democrats: 'We're fighting all the subpoenas'
"And we will use any and all power in our command to make sure it's backed up -- whether that's a contempt citation, whether that's going to court and getting that citation enforced, whether it's fines, whether it's possible incarceration," the Virginia Democrat added. "We will go to the max to enforce the constitutional role of the legislative branch of government."
more...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connolly threatens to jail Trump officials who won't comply with subpoenas
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/25/politics/gerry-connolly-subpoenas-white-house-cnntv/index.html
Washington (CNN)A Democratic lawmaker on Thursday ratcheted up warnings to the Trump administration amid a growing standoff over subpoenas and oversight requests the White House says it will resist.
Rep. Gerry Connolly threatened jail time for White House officials who are declining to comply with congressional committees' efforts to conduct oversight of President Donald Trump's administration. It's the latest salvo in the escalating battle between the White House and congressional Democrats, who have scaled up their oversight requests following the conclusion of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.
Connolly, who sits on the Oversight Committee, told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room," "We're going to resist, and if a subpoena is issued and you're told you must testify, we will back that up."
Trump at war with Democrats: 'We're fighting all the subpoenas'
Trump at war with Democrats: 'We're fighting all the subpoenas'
RELATED: Trump at war with Democrats: 'We're fighting all the subpoenas'
"And we will use any and all power in our command to make sure it's backed up -- whether that's a contempt citation, whether that's going to court and getting that citation enforced, whether it's fines, whether it's possible incarceration," the Virginia Democrat added. "We will go to the max to enforce the constitutional role of the legislative branch of government."
more...
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
this should be fun...trump wandering through an empty whitehouse, worrying about whose going to turn on him....tweeting from the very quiet shitter how lonely he is....
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
If he loses the election (with the GOP taking a pounding) and goes nuts enough, they might have to impeach him in a hurry between the election and the inauguration.
I figure the democrats should thoroughly investigate, jail and fine people for inherent contempt of congress to get answers. It appears that Trump is forcing the issue of impeachment by pushing the envelope, ordering non cooperation with congress is not just impeachable, it's unconstitutional. I figure the democrats will go to court because they don't mind the delay too much and if they had the SCOTUS on their side (which they would) then Trump might be in trouble. Though I imagine they could go to court over somethings and hold Trump people in jail or fine them until they squealed in other cases, congress is gonna pull all the levers to get what it wants on this one. The democrats need to "educate" the public and "bring them along" ( the reasonable ones) with dramatic public hearings and Trump freaking out reacting to them, it will be a real media circus and an education for the public. The democrats will eventually hold impeachment investigations and hearings, though the verdict might end up being for the American people to decide.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
trump could conceivably cause a civil war...because there is no fucking way in hell i or any real patriotic American would ever let him call himself president for life trump...i would shoot him in the face myself if that ever happened, and take the consequences with a perfectly clear conscience....and if i had to mow down a few dozen proud boys to get to him, bonus.
any attempt by trump to subvert the constitution is just ammunition to use against him in the next election...the idiots who are going to vote for him anyway are a lost cause, but perhaps we can scare enough apathetic liberals into voting to make a difference...
any attempt by trump to subvert the constitution is just ammunition to use against him in the next election...the idiots who are going to vote for him anyway are a lost cause, but perhaps we can scare enough apathetic liberals into voting to make a difference...
Dieseltech
Well-Known Member
the clown is gonna get re elected
Might want to start mentally preparing for that
Might want to start mentally preparing for that
Herb & Suds
Well-Known Member
Really
He is the only President to never even try to increase his support are be a leader for all Americans
He said November was a referendum on him , He got slaughtered and declared victory
So by that standard he will win by a landslide just like November ...You better prepare for that reality
How ...Russian influence?
He is the only President to never even try to increase his support are be a leader for all Americans
He said November was a referendum on him , He got slaughtered and declared victory
So by that standard he will win by a landslide just like November ...You better prepare for that reality
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
If that happens America should mentally p
If Donald gets re elected the country might want to "mentally prepare" for national suicide, because that's what it would amount to. Only a racist moron and a traitor would vote for Trump at this point, but there seems to be no shortage of suckers and fools in America...
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
i don't know...it's possible...but he is losing popularity by the day....is his core of supporters going to be enough in two years? i hope not...i hope 2 more years of his fuckery, two more years of investigations and digging up his dirt will turn enough people away from his bullshit to show that this country isn't completely populated by fucking morons...
Dieseltech
Well-Known Member
Pretty easy win for the dems IF they select someone who there not even talking about or thinking about
If they go with one of bernie biden or hilary type they will lose
If they say approach the JFK daughter (or someone outside the circle) and convince them to run they win easy
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
He didn't win the first time,registrations purged and votes changed. This time his ego will insist on a bigly victory so look for very unrealistic vote totals,banana republic style, you know,what Russia does.
Dieseltech
Well-Known Member
the NRA the catholic church just under half the country voted for him
He has decent support from the vets
I wont vote at all unless the dems put up someone better
My accounts all grown under this cream sickle that all i really care about
he will most likely win but lose popular vote
He has decent support from the vets
I wont vote at all unless the dems put up someone better
My accounts all grown under this cream sickle that all i really care about
he will most likely win but lose popular vote