Jim pays attention, he just is not a sheep and also doesn't worship the likes of CNN,MSNBC and all the other biased supposed news sources

maybe i’m not. i have no problem
impeaching him if he committed an impeachable offense. i would
just hope that determination isn’t made by people who are foaming at the mouth with hatred of him.

trump is a unique character in this role, and not in a a good way. the democrats could resist, and do so with dignity. they are not. they are humiliating themselves.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Correct Sir

that was pretty good...

does he mean for firing comey? under comey, the fbi became the private investigative firm of the dnc.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The other party disagreeing is not obstruction, they are allowed to do that in this country. Elections have consequences.
Nothing new here except calling the president a MF, though who knows what Nixon's "expletive deleted" was.
Here is one and there is a list of people who called for Obamas impeachment for various reasons, feel free to hunt them down or Google them up.
At a 2013 town hall meeting with constituents, two years after Obama had released his long-form birth certificate to the public, Congressman Blake Farenthold said that Obama should be impeached due to conspiracy theories relating to Obama's birth certificate. Farenthold said that he thinks that "the House is already out of the barn on this, on the whole birth certificate issue."
According to a July 2014 YouGov poll, 35% of Americans believed President Obama should be impeached, including 68% of Republicans.
Wonder if there is a Poll for that on Trump
Though there is a poll that says:
Fifty-two percent of Americans don’t trust most, or indeed any, polls, according to a … poll :hee:

pete i agree that disagreeing isn’t nevessarily obstruction. but opposing a wall that you previously supported, sure looks like pure obstruction.

nothing new? that idiot socialist from queens, alexandria cortez, isn’t new? the new congresswomen from MN who called jews “evil’, and who nancy pelosi put in the foreign affairs committee, isn’t new? democrats sitting during the SOTU when Trump brags about low black unemployment isn’t new? i don’t remember this lunacy before. calling a wall immiral and racist isn’t new? walls are racist? itnoring that the economy is roaring, isn’t new? boy when the economy improved under obama, that good news was everywhere.

yes elections have consequences. remember that if ginsberg retires.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If he directed Cohen to lie to Congress and there is proof (beyond Cohen's statement). It is game over. Forget any of the other potential collusion, inauguration or host of other potential funny business. Both sides should see that.

Read this and see if you can tell me what the Trump administration wants to do with a wall, notice that he asked for 1.6 Billion not 5+
https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/693488.pdf

I budget and plan construction projects everyday, that is not the way to do it cost effectively.
As far as AOC goes, while I don't agree with her viewpoints, she makes Trump look like an amateur at social media and hopefully will get more young people to vote. They likely won't all agree with her either, but perhaps the Republicans should think about how to attract them. They are not doing well with that demographic now and it will grow as all the Republicans get grayer and grayer.
I believe she called Israel evil and America's view of Israel and Palestine is a false tale, look beyond the propaganda that you are fed on that. There are more sides to that story than we are told.
Better look at Obama's SOTU and see who was sitting and when
The wall and racists is political spin on both sides.
When the economy improved under Obama, Republicans were blatting about the deficit, now with Trump the economy is still improving and Republicans as usual are growing the deficit with few complaints.
Whatever happened to infrastructure, anyways?

if he directed cohen to lie, i agree that’s proof. but that came out yesterday, and people have been screaming for impeachment for two years. he beat them, and he made them look unbelievably stupid along the way, so they hate him. they hated w bush for the same reason, and he was a good guy.

part of me hopes he gets impeached, i like pence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

One (hating him) does not preclude the need to act if he broke the law. Nor should it stop someone who doesn't hate him from acting.

Here’s the rub, the reporting wasn’t really about Cohen’s statement. The big deal is Mueller appearently has internal Trump Org emails and texts that are the source of the story. Cohen’s confirmation is just more on the pile.

If the story is true Trump is done. Getting 20 republican senators to cross the aisle won’t be a problem.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

But her emails!!!!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i agree. i’m talking about the comparisons to hitler, the freaking out that he’s attacking our liberties, he’s a dictator, blah blah blah.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

here’s the thing. i have said he deserves to be held accountable for his actions. who are the liberals here, who said the same about hilary? none.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That’s because we knew it was a joke. ;)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I agree, but until we see it 'in writing', it remains mostly based on Cohen's comments right now. It seems to be well sourced right now. I don't think anyone in Congress will act before it is laid bare in front of them.

Hillary’s actions are in no way equal to Trump’s. Not to mention her record of public service versus his self service.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

so when comey said she acted very irresponsibly, and when people here said how serious it was ( and. it right wing nuts but neutral people
like john and tdf), and the demonstrable
lies she told ( never anything classified), that was all “a joke”. gotcha!

how about when she said she came under sniper fire, when video showed it was a peaceful ceremony? how would you describe that?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

didn’t say they were equal. but they weren’t something to ignore and defend, yet that’s precisely what you did, because you like her.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Maybe that was her "Vietnam"

When Barr was questioned on whether he would share the report, it was clear he was going to prepare a summary and his interpretation of the report and while that is a bit concerning in light of his memo; I think even he would be forced to put those cards in front of congress. I sincerely hope we are in fact getting close to the report coming so we can all be put out of our misery.

you can’t just say it was a terrible thing for her to do?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I’ve said many times the email thing was unwise but I don’t see how she used it for any gain. You just can’t get over it. But. But. But.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't care about her, she's gone
She lied

I don’t even see how you can say she lied. Out of tens of thousands of email I think there were three that carried a paragraph stamp? I wouldn’t catch that. The others had info classified retroactively like NYT reports on drones that should have never even been classified.

Lying assumes you know you’re not telling the truth.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I was speaking of her claim that she was shot at, I'll stay out of the email/server argument.
Remember how many lawyer jokes there are, just three, the rest are true stories.

"I’ve said many times the email thing was unwise"

Don't be so rough on her.

"I don’t see how she used it for any gain" No one ever said she gained by it. You guys have an amazing consistent habit, when backed into a corner, of offering a gotcha! answer to a question that nobody has ever asked.

"You just can’t get over it"

I'm LONG over it, I put it completely out of my mind on election night. Nebe brought it up, not me. Again, you're having some difficulty with reality here.

"]I don’t even see how you can say she lied"

She said she handed over all the emails (except the thousands she didn't), she said she never put anything that was ever classified on there (except for those that were). You can't see it, because at the mention of her name, all the blood gushes out of your brain and heads south.

"Out of tens of thousands of email I think there were three that carried a paragraph stamp? I wouldn’t catch that."

If you can't catch the difference between an email announcing cake for someone'e retirement party, and an email with a list of names of American undercover agents, maybe you shouldn't be Sec State.

That's not what Spence says.

How about coming under sniper fire?