Pages: 1 ... 192 193 [194] 195 196   Go Down

Author Topic: Impeaching Donald Trump  (Read 55033 times)

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16727
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3860 on: February 05, 2020, 08:27:30 am »

... Trump is Trump and him snubbing a handshake...

It surely looks that way from the photograph Pelosi posted. However, if you watch the video of the "incident," it leaves room for a different explanation. He was giving copies of his speech to the VP and her. The VP didn't extend his hand after receiving his copy, which sets the stage for not expecting Pelosi to extend her. From the video, it is clear that Trump was already turning around when she extended her hand, leaving the possibility that he simply did not see her. Poor peripheral vision?

I am not claiming that he didn't do it intentionally, just that there is a possibility he didn't see it.

Having said that, he is not a stranger to jerkish, non-gentlemanly behavior, I remember him visiting the White House after the election, with Obama and Michelle waiting outside, shoulder to (non-naked) shoulder, when Trump exited his side of the limousine, didn't hold the door for Melania, didn't wait for her to join him in approaching the Obamas, but continue walking toward the entrance, leaving poor Melania several steps behind. Just plain piggish.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8480
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3861 on: February 05, 2020, 08:59:19 am »

Alan, I am deeply hurt... you don’t read even my posts anymore!? I posted that on the previous page.... with quotes  ;)
Sorry about that.  I probably read it independently in the paper before reading your thread comment about it and posted it.  All the credit is yours.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2020, 09:02:55 am by Alan Klein »
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8480
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3862 on: February 05, 2020, 09:09:22 am »

I agree. It was not a classy act. Différence entre un homme et une femme. I don't think a man would react that way, but no doubt, she'll say that he drove her to do it.
Did she do it because of the handshake snub, was it a reaction to the actual speech or did she plan it already before the event? 
Being an outsider, I wonder if the official handshake before the commencement of the speech is a standard procedure or is it something like a friendly and polite pat.

Pelosi said "It was the courteous thing to do considering the alternatives, It was such a dirty speech."
In a statement she doubled down, calling it a "manifesto of mistruths".
Personally, I didn't think that the address was an exemplary literary piece. To put it mildly, it was quite irritating self-gratulatory speech.
I think it's a metaphor for what Democrats are doing in the election.  They don't have ideas for America, or counter-arguments to his policies.  They just attack Trump personally.  The temper tantrum has been going on for 3 1/2 years.  All the name calling and demeaning vituperation that extends to his supporters as well.  But few intellectual arguments against his policies.  Ripping up his speech is thusly a symbol of all they've got. 

It won;t win the election. 

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8480
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3863 on: February 05, 2020, 09:11:02 am »

Maybe she did it because having lost the impeachment, that's all she has left.  He really got to her. 

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8480
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3864 on: February 05, 2020, 09:15:51 am »

Slobodan, give up hope all ye who enter therein.

That little bubble is so tightly sealed that not even the warmth of noon sunshine gets in to disturb the cobwebs with a delicate little ripple of motion. As for the absorption of anything an inch to either side of the catechism... the perfect, unquestioning disciple, in other words.

You'd be better off interacting with the menu of a Fuji or a Sony.

;-)

Apparently you don't have the guts to address your comments to me directly.

PeterAit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3461
    • Peter Aitken Photographs
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3865 on: February 05, 2020, 09:18:15 am »

You've gotta give Trump credit for one thing -- consistent falsehoods. In this speech, here's his score for nine of his major brags:

True: 2
Misleading/partly true: 2
False: 5

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/state-union-fact-check-what-s-true-what-s-false-n1130311
Logged
Peter

"I don't mind people being rich. I mind people being poor."

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8480
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3866 on: February 05, 2020, 09:22:33 am »

Never get in a fight with a pig.  You'll both get dirty, but the pig enjoys it! 

This pretty much sums up how Trump deals with his adversaries.  Trump is Trump and him snubbing a handshake from the lady who is trying to remove him from office through impeachment, although puerile, is part of his brand.  People expect it and when he does it, it does not move anyone. 

However, Pelosi lowering herself and ripping up the speech, showing he true self, looks real bad for her.  In the last 6 or 7 months, Trump has goaded Pelosi into destroying her respectable reputation.  He has done this with everyone too. 

Add to that, this only gins up enthusiasm amongst his supporters, and, judging by the posts here, does nothing to help out Pelosi or the Dems. 

Maybe she should get on the Trump re-election pay roll. 

PS, I have to agree with my liberal friends here, Trump is no great orator, or even a mediocre orator.  For someone who can captivate giant audiences at his rallies, he gives one boring as hell speech. 
I think she went ahead with the impeachment because of his insults.  It's how Florida Senator Rubio lost the Republican nomination in 2016 when he tried to respond similarly to Trump's insults of him by insulting back.  It didn't work because Rubio isn't like that.  Rubio failed and everyone wrote him off.  He wasn't true to himself. 

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8480
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3867 on: February 05, 2020, 09:23:54 am »

You've gotta give Trump credit for one thing -- consistent falsehoods. In this speech, here's his score for nine of his major brags:

True: 2
Misleading/partly true: 2
False: 5

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/state-union-fact-check-what-s-true-what-s-false-n1130311
No one cares.  All they're going to remember is Pelosi ripping up his speech. 

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14045
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3868 on: February 05, 2020, 09:28:43 am »

You've gotta give Trump credit for one thing -- consistent falsehoods. In this speech, here's his score for nine of his major brags:

True: 2
Misleading/partly true: 2
False: 5

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/state-union-fact-check-what-s-true-what-s-false-n1130311

Ah yes. NBC. Dependably fake news.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Craig Lamson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2148
    • Craig Lamson Photo Homepage
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3869 on: February 05, 2020, 09:30:15 am »

The question isn't whether it would have been better to add "additional" to the question or not. A more accurate wording is obviously always better.

The question is whether a majority of people living in the US (and I have been told insistently by several of you here that living in the US is enough to have a much better understand of the stakes than mine) could misunderstand the context in which the question "Do you want witnesses in the impeachment trial?" is being asked by not understanding that this is about the upcoming/on-going second phase Senate hearings.

When a trial takes place in 2 phases and when the first phase is already over, when there is a brewing public debate about the need to have additional witnesses during the second phase (the Senate trials), it seems fair to think that a large majority of people taking the time to answer the survey are reasonnably well informed and will correctly interpret the question as being related to the addition of witnesses during second phase of the trial (the Senate part).

Otherwise, the question would have been phrased "was it right to have witnesses during the Congress trial?". Note the past tense here.

But would it appear that we have a different perception of common sense.  ;D

And I find it fascinating that you try this hard to be right about this question. It tells me you understand that having 75% of people unhappy about the way the Senate trials were conducted doesn't mean good things for your camp.

Cheers,
Bernard

Boy it sure is comical watching you shuck and jive to try and find a way to work your way out of the mess you created.   Perhaps it might be educational for you to research the rule of holes.

In any case the question that was asked was written for an express purpose, to garner a large number that could be used for a headline.  And it worked. It was the headline for most of the articles written in support of the poll.  Opinion polls are not really designed to gauge opinion but to rather shape it.  This one tossed out the bait and you took it hook line and sinker, without even knowing you got caught...or why.

Poll questions are carefully worded.  They are written by professionals.  The word "additional" was not omitted by mistake.  They don't write questions that require those who respond to try and figure out some obscure meaning not asked about directly in the question.  Asking about additional witnesses was not the goal.  Creating a public perception was.  In other words...FAKE NEWS.   Don't you feel just a little bit silly for being duped?
Logged
Craig Lamson Photo 

Craig Lamson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2148
    • Craig Lamson Photo Homepage
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3870 on: February 05, 2020, 09:37:18 am »

There is some conversation now that Nancy broke the law when she destroyed a Govenment document.  The copy of the speach was the official HOUSE copy.  The law calls for a 2k fine and or up to three years in prison.  How does Nancy look in orange?

18 U.S. Code 2071.
Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.
Logged
Craig Lamson Photo 

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3073
    • Pieter Kers
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3871 on: February 05, 2020, 09:43:31 am »

There is some conversation now that Nancy broke the law when she destroyed a Govenment document.  The copy of the speach was the official HOUSE copy.  The law calls for a 2k fine and or up to three years in prison.  How does Nancy look in orange?
Still less orange than Donald without an orange suit.
Logged

JoeKitchen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4026
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3872 on: February 05, 2020, 10:06:07 am »

Still less orange than Donald without an orange suit.

We can all laugh at that!
Logged
Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
“Don't bother just to be better than your contemporaries or predecessors. Try to be better than yourself.”  William Faulkner

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8480
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3873 on: February 05, 2020, 10:10:05 am »

It surely looks that way from the photograph Pelosi posted. However, if you watch the video of the "incident," it leaves room for a different explanation. He was giving copies of his speech to the VP and her. The VP didn't extend his hand after receiving his copy, which sets the stage for not expecting Pelosi to extend her. From the video, it is clear that Trump was already turning around when she extended her hand, leaving the possibility that he simply did not see her. Poor peripheral vision?

I am not claiming that he didn't do it intentionally, just that there is a possibility he didn't see it.

Having said that, he is not a stranger to jerkish, non-gentlemanly behavior, I remember him visiting the White House after the election, with Obama and Michelle waiting outside, shoulder to (non-naked) shoulder, when Trump exited his side of the limousine, didn't hold the door for Melania, didn't wait for her to join him in approaching the Obamas, but continue walking toward the entrance, leaving poor Melania several steps behind. Just plain piggish.
I agree with that.  He didn't shake the VP's hand so why would he shake her hand?  Also, he looked very nervous when he first entered the House chamber.  Talking to the entire Congress and all the American people can;t be an easy thing for a non-politician. 

But Pelosi ripping up the state of the union speech was deliberate.  But that anger towards him is all democrats have shown for 3 1/2 years.  They better come up with a better response for the election.  He maintained his cool, if boring demeanor.  He never mentioned the impeachment.  He never mentioned the Democrat screw-up in Iowa.  He even gave Democrats a few appreciative remarks for helping with some legislation. 

He's turned a new leaf for the election.  Democrats will continue to fight the old war the same way at their peril.  He's going to be magnanimous and presidential through the election.  I doubt if Democrats will pick up on it and adjust they're so set in their hateful reaction to him.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24027
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3874 on: February 05, 2020, 10:13:08 am »

It surely looks that way from the photograph Pelosi posted. However, if you watch the video of the "incident," it leaves room for a different explanation. He was giving copies of his speech to the VP and her. The VP didn't extend his hand after receiving his copy, which sets the stage for not expecting Pelosi to extend her. From the video, it is clear that Trump was already turning around when she extended her hand, leaving the possibility that he simply did not see her. Poor peripheral vision?

I am not claiming that he didn't do it intentionally, just that there is a possibility he didn't see it.

Having said that, he is not a stranger to jerkish, non-gentlemanly behavior, I remember him visiting the White House after the election, with Obama and Michelle waiting outside, shoulder to (non-naked) shoulder, when Trump exited his side of the limousine, didn't hold the door for Melania, didn't wait for her to join him in approaching the Obamas, but continue walking toward the entrance, leaving poor Melania several steps behind. Just plain piggish.

What else can you expect from a guy with his background, steeped as it is in egotism?

Guess they both got what they bargained for, I suppose.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8480
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3875 on: February 05, 2020, 10:56:14 am »

Most of the speeches by Reagan, Clinton and Obama were quite uplifting, making you feel better.
Trump's State of Union 2020 speech was not only boring and annoying, but a total waste of time. His rally performances are much more entertaining.
Trump is a doer not a speaker. His State of the Union report was a financial statement to the board of directors, asking for another four years as CEO. 

JoeKitchen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4026
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3876 on: February 05, 2020, 11:32:42 am »

I did not watch the speech, just because he is a boring speech giver.  Yet I have been reading snippets, and it was not partisan at all.  It was not a braggadocio speech.  It was not a one-side speech. 

It was genuinely a pro-America speech and many of positives that everyone on both sides could have appreciated. 

Pelosi ripping the speech up not only will get people to actually read it but destroy much of her case with independents. 
Logged
Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
“Don't bother just to be better than your contemporaries or predecessors. Try to be better than yourself.”  William Faulkner

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8480
    • Flicker photos
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3877 on: February 05, 2020, 11:39:20 am »

I did not watch the speech, just because he is a boring speech giver.  Yet I have been reading snippets, and it was not partisan at all.  It was not a braggadocio speech.  It was not a one-side speech. 

It was genuinely a pro-America speech and many of positives that everyone on both sides could have appreciated. 

Pelosi ripping the speech up not only will get people to actually read it but destroy much of her case with independents. 
I agree.  Trump's speech will appeal to independents because of the balance in his presentation.  It lacked braggadocio other than the pride of doing a good job.  No anger like Pelosi's and other Democrats who failed to acknowledge when he did things right.  Voters will be comparing his eventual competitor against a new Trump, not the old Trump.   Voters will forget his bull in the China shop approach to politics over the next few months.  They won;t buy democrat charges that he's crazy and vile.  He's smart enough to become a different guy.  I think he's planned it all along.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16727
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3878 on: February 05, 2020, 04:57:48 pm »

"Senate acquits Trump on abuse of power, obstruction of Congress charges"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senate-acquits-president-trump-impeachment-vote

Please don't cry! There is plenty of time for a few more coup attempts until November  ;)

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

P.S. Now, recall Romney!

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3613
    • advantica blog
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3879 on: February 05, 2020, 05:01:09 pm »

"Senate acquits Trump on abuse of power, obstruction of Congress charges"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senate-acquits-president-trump-impeachment-vote

Please don't cry! There is plenty of time for a few more coup attempts until November  ;)



So, why did we waste almost 200 pages on this?
Pages: 1 ... 192 193 [194] 195 196   Go Up