By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - At what point are Impeachment proceedings going to be started with Trump?

There won't be one. And I certainly wouldn't want Pence as our President either. Both are complete and utter shit, but at least Donald Trump hasn't openly supported "conversion therapy." Christ.



Around the Network
Ouroboros24 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

For three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime.
https://corrupt.af  Click link, scroll down, click any given article for full details.
Among them, you find there are lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office...not that the West Korean government has the integrity to do so.

 

Those are some of the random headlines they list as impeachment crimes. 

I don't know what website you found yourself on, but the one I gave a link for has no list of "impeachment crimes".
There are however three hundred (and counting!) independent reports of separate acts of corruption.  Among them you will find there are lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office...not that the West Korean government has any integrity to do so.



SuaveSocialist said:
Ouroboros24 said:

 

Those are some of the random headlines they list as impeachment crimes. 

I don't know what website you found yourself on, but the one I gave a link for has no list of "impeachment crimes".
There are however three hundred (and counting!) independent reports of separate acts of corruption.  Among them you will find there are lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office...not that the West Korean government has any integrity to do so.

And I quote, "For three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime."

So we agree, there is no reason for impeachment.  Got those headlines from the link you gave. 



Ouroboros24 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

I don't know what website you found yourself on, but the one I gave a link for has no list of "impeachment crimes".
There are however three hundred (and counting!) independent reports of separate acts of corruption.  Among them you will find there are lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office...not that the West Korean government has any integrity to do so.

And I quote, "For three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime."

So we agree, there is no reason for impeachment. 

Except for "three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime."
Got that from the quote you put in.  
You will note that "reason for impeachment" is different from "iist of impeachment crimes".
In conclusion: no, we do not agree.  There are "lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office...not that the West Korean government has any integrity to do so".



Probably when he actually does something that justifies impeachment.

The closest thing so far is the bombing of syria imo.



Around the Network
SuaveSocialist said:
Ouroboros24 said:

And I quote, "For three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime."

So we agree, there is no reason for impeachment. 

Except for "three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime."
Got that from the quote you put in.  
You will note that "reason for impeachment" is different from "iist of impeachment crimes".
In conclusion: no, we do not agree.  There are "lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office...not that the West Korean government has any integrity to do so".

Let's get this straight. 

So Sticky asks: "For commiting what...exactly?"

You answer with: "For three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime.
https://corrupt.af  Click link, scroll down, click any given article for full details.
Among them, you find there are lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office...not that the West Korean government has the integrity to do so."

The "For three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime." is a direct answer for the "For committing what...exactly?" question that was asked. Which, is a form of asking: what grounds for impeachment.  Then you go and insert link.  Then I go, "smoke without fire."  Yeah, there is a difference between "reasons for impeachment, and list of impeachment crimes.  Sorry for thinking you'd understand what I meant.  But when you go and answer a question that says, "For commiting what...exactly," that directly asks the op about impeachment grounds that Donald's committed, it would direct most into thinking you were giving out reasons for impeachment. 

In that case, sorry for the misunderstanding. 



As far as I heard impeachments need confirmation from the house and senate so I pretty much gave up on hoping for it.
Republicans have shown that they will throw away all of their pride and convictions as long as they can say they "won".



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Ouroboros24 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

Except for "three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime."
Got that from the quote you put in.  
You will note that "reason for impeachment" is different from "iist of impeachment crimes".
In conclusion: no, we do not agree.  There are "lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office...not that the West Korean government has any integrity to do so".

Let's get this straight. 

So Sticky asks: "For commiting what...exactly?"

You answer with: "For three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime.
https://corrupt.af  Click link, scroll down, click any given article for full details.
Among them, you find there are lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office...not that the West Korean government has the integrity to do so."

The "For three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime." is a direct answer for the "For committing what...exactly?" question that was asked. Which, is a form of asking: what grounds for impeachment.  Then you go and insert link.  Then I go, "smoke without fire."  Yeah, there is a difference between "reasons for impeachment, and list of impeachment crimes.  Sorry for thinking you'd understand what I meant.  But when you go and answer a question that says, "For commiting what...exactly," that directly asks the op about impeachment grounds that Donald's committed, it would direct most into thinking you were giving out reasons for impeachment. 

In that case, sorry for the misunderstanding. 

Bolded, because you've missed it--or ignored it--several times already.
Among them, you find there are lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office



long live trump!



SuaveSocialist said:
Ouroboros24 said:

Let's get this straight. 

So Sticky asks: "For commiting what...exactly?"

You answer with: "For three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime.
https://corrupt.af  Click link, scroll down, click any given article for full details.
Among them, you find there are lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office...not that the West Korean government has the integrity to do so."

The "For three hundred (and counting!) separate acts of corruption within his regime." is a direct answer for the "For committing what...exactly?" question that was asked. Which, is a form of asking: what grounds for impeachment.  Then you go and insert link.  Then I go, "smoke without fire."  Yeah, there is a difference between "reasons for impeachment, and list of impeachment crimes.  Sorry for thinking you'd understand what I meant.  But when you go and answer a question that says, "For commiting what...exactly," that directly asks the op about impeachment grounds that Donald's committed, it would direct most into thinking you were giving out reasons for impeachment. 

In that case, sorry for the misunderstanding. 

Bolded, because you've missed it--or ignored it--several times already.
Among them, you find there are lots of reasons to remove Beloved Leader from office

Definition of impeach

  1. transitive verb
  2. 1a :  to bring an accusation againstb :  to charge with a crime or misdemeanor; specifically :  to charge (a public official) before a competent tribunal with misconduct in officec :  to remove from office especially for misconduct

  3. 2 :  to cast doubt on; especially :  to challenge the credibility or validity of impeach the testimony of a witness

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/impeach

Close enough, don't you think?