Page 191 sur 327 PremièrePremière ... 91141181189190191192193201241291 ... DernièreDernière
Affichage des résultats 3 801 à 3 820 sur 6532

Discussion: Donald John Trump is now president: what does it mean for you?

  1. #3801
    12000 RPM

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    February 2014
    Localisation
    Longueuil
    Car:
    Ford Mustang GT
    Messages
    1 238
    Likes (Given)
    825
    Likes (Received)
    502
    Citation Envoyé par kahos Voir le message
    IDK. Am I the president of a Banana republic or the "leader of the free world"?

    Did I take any Oaths, like this one?


    Is it my job to uphold the constitution? You know, the system that effectively lays out the framework and scope of government?

    Do I get to disagree with the constitution I pledged to uphold if it doesn't suit my purposes anymore?

    I guess I'd need to consider these factors.
    Them just words homey.... you know ever politichien twist it to their benefits. Man, if think there are really any HONEST politicians, straight as an arrow, then you will believe i have a 2 foot dick
    Citation Envoyé par HeavyMetal Voir le message

    Pis, c'est quoi ton trip de switcher du français pour l'anglais tout à coup? Un powertrip?


  2. #3802
    Avatar de Spaceman Spiff
    Forum God

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    September 2007
    Localisation
    Cayman Islands
    Car:
    Lada turbo
    Messages
    13 523
    Likes (Given)
    907
    Likes (Received)
    10749
    Citation Envoyé par vladjet2000 Voir le message
    my question is.. who owns that site? how do we know that they are neutral to all this?
    If I start a site called "theonlycorrectsiteever.com", does that automatically make it what I claim it is?
    Nice gaslighting.

  3. #3803
    Avatar de Stirl_ae86
    Legacy Member

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    March 2002
    Localisation
    Alberta
    Car:
    No vehicle .
    A.K.A:
    Stirl_89mr2
    Messages
    13 789
    Likes (Given)
    6500
    Likes (Received)
    7389
    Citation Envoyé par kahos Voir le message
    IDK. Am I the president of a Banana republic or the "leader of the free world"?

    Did I take any Oaths, like this one?


    Is it my job to uphold the constitution? You know, the system that effectively lays out the framework and scope of government?

    Do I get to disagree with the constitution I pledged to uphold if it doesn't suit my purposes anymore?

    I guess I'd need to consider these factors.
    You still don't seem to get that this impeachment inquiry is BS and the way it's being handled by the Dems is sickening. You think Schiff is following his oath? How about Pelosi? You expect Trump to bend over for these losers?
    Fix the cause of the issue, don't cater to the result

  4. #3804
    Senior Member

    Status
    Online
    Date d'inscription
    August 2004
    Localisation
    Québec
    Car:
    KTM pleiades
    Messages
    8 440
    Likes (Given)
    1159
    Likes (Received)
    1821
    Citation Envoyé par Stirl_ae86 Voir le message
    You still don't seem to get that this impeachment inquiry is BS and the way it's being handled by the Dems is sickening. You think Schiff is following his oath? How about Pelosi? You expect Trump to bend over for these losers?
    While the rest of the western world has enjoyed the endless entertainment that American politics have become, I for one would be grateful if he would step down and go play golf full time.

    I think we could all use a break from twitter diplomacy, endless scandals and invoking "executive privilege" to avoid disclosing tax documents all previous presidents in recent history would willingly release.

    I can't think of any decent jobs his endless antics would NOT have gotten him fired from. He's had a good run, he lasted longer than I thought he would.

    GG. Blame the dems, then exit stage left Donald...

  5. #3805
    Avatar de jeeps005
    Pink slips only

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    April 2011
    Localisation
    Montreal
    Car:
    Toyota
    Messages
    2 100
    Likes (Given)
    2233
    Likes (Received)
    841
    Just get rid of him cause you can't tolerate him? He's not gonna step down cause of people's feelings. Just unfollow him. Huge bombshell coming October 18th, i think they have the smoking gun. They say they found sweeping and systematic interference in the 2016 elections.

  6. #3806
    Senior Member

    Status
    Online
    Date d'inscription
    August 2004
    Localisation
    Québec
    Car:
    KTM pleiades
    Messages
    8 440
    Likes (Given)
    1159
    Likes (Received)
    1821
    Citation Envoyé par jeeps005 Voir le message
    Just get rid of him cause you can't tolerate him? He's not gonna step down cause of people's feelings. Just unfollow him. Huge bombshell coming October 18th, i think they have the smoking gun. They say they found sweeping and systematic interference in the 2016 elections.
    He's the genius that fucked us over with "National security tariffs" while trying to be BFF with Kim Jung Un at the same time. Crimea was Obama's fault? Even the onion couldn't come up with such nonsense. The kurds may not have helped in Normandy, but we were there...

    What exactly makes him so compelling to you guys? The cool t-shirts? The hats? The alternate reality he lives in? The one where facts and stats are just like your opinion, man?

    He must have been so bummed out when he found out on Fox news that 51% of americans want him out. That's a wee bit off from the "25%" figures he had made up earlier today.

    How is having a mythomaniac old man as head of our closest neighbor helpful? Most experts have advised him to just pretend the impeachment wasn't a big deal and to focus on doing his job. Instead he's throwing tantrums and playing the victim card. I've got little patience for 70 y.o crybabies.

  7. #3807
    12000 RPM

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    February 2014
    Localisation
    Longueuil
    Car:
    Ford Mustang GT
    Messages
    1 238
    Likes (Given)
    825
    Likes (Received)
    502
    Citation Envoyé par kahos Voir le message
    He's the genius that fucked us over with "National security tariffs" while trying to be BFF with Kim Jung Un at the same time. Crimea was Obama's fault? Even the onion couldn't come up with such nonsense. The kurds may not have helped in Normandy, but we were there...

    What exactly makes him so compelling to you guys? The cool t-shirts? The hats? The alternate reality he lives in? The one where facts and stats are just like your opinion, man?

    He must have been so bummed out when he found out on Fox news that 51% of americans want him out. That's a wee bit off from the "25%" figures he had made up earlier today.

    How is having a mythomaniac old man as head of our closest neighbor helpful? Most experts have advised him to just pretend the impeachment wasn't a big deal and to focus on doing his job. Instead he's throwing tantrums and playing the victim card. I've got little patience for 70 y.o crybabies.
    -'National security tariffs' fucked us over. Really? steel and aluminum and dairy stuff? That's it? I guess that's how China became the 'Worlds Factory', they slowly suck the blood out of a country without you realizing it. Then they use all the resources they accumulated to fuck you over with, like building a huge arsenal.
    -For the rocket man, u never heard of ' Keep your friends close, your enemies closer'? Will it work? who knows. All the other tactics didn't work.
    -How a bout a 79 cry baby?
    pelosi.jpg
    Citation Envoyé par HeavyMetal Voir le message

    Pis, c'est quoi ton trip de switcher du français pour l'anglais tout à coup? Un powertrip?

  8. #3808
    Avatar de Larkee
    Senior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    August 2003
    Localisation
    Acton Vale
    Car:
    No vehicle Boosted
    A.K.A:
    MrFondu
    Messages
    5 714
    Likes (Given)
    814
    Likes (Received)
    1499
    Citation Envoyé par NoTop5.0 Voir le message
    -'National security tariffs' fucked us over. Really? steel and aluminum and dairy stuff? That's it? I guess that's how China became the 'Worlds Factory', they slowly suck the blood out of a country without you realizing it. Then they use all the resources they accumulated to fuck you over with, like building a huge arsenal.
    -For the rocket man, u never heard of ' Keep your friends close, your enemies closer'? Will it work? who knows. All the other tactics didn't work.
    -How a bout a 79 cry baby?
    pelosi.jpg
    To be fair, the aluminium and steel tarifs have been removed. The dairy deal was limited to 3,25 % of the market and that was part of the so called new NAFTA which is still not ratified with little hope to ever be so. And Kim Jung is still testing missiles like Trump doesn't even exist.

    I'm still waiting for Hilary to be in Jail and also, DJT was screaming that trade deals were easy. Zero deal from Trump are in effect to this day. None.

  9. #3809
    12000 RPM

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    February 2014
    Localisation
    Longueuil
    Car:
    Ford Mustang GT
    Messages
    1 238
    Likes (Given)
    825
    Likes (Received)
    502
    Citation Envoyé par Larkee Voir le message
    To be fair, the aluminium and steel tarifs have been removed. The dairy deal was limited to 3,25 % of the market and that was part of the so called new NAFTA which is still not ratified with little hope to ever be so. And Kim Jung is still testing missiles like Trump doesn't even exist.

    I'm still waiting for Hilary to be in Jail and also, DJT was screaming that trade deals were easy. Zero deal from Trump are in effect to this day. None.
    Yes, I know the steel tarrifs has been removed. But crying about that is like a detective going after a street dealer. There is a bigger fish to catch. I watched ' The Wire'
    Citation Envoyé par HeavyMetal Voir le message

    Pis, c'est quoi ton trip de switcher du français pour l'anglais tout à coup? Un powertrip?

  10. #3810
    Avatar de Stirl_ae86
    Legacy Member

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    March 2002
    Localisation
    Alberta
    Car:
    No vehicle .
    A.K.A:
    Stirl_89mr2
    Messages
    13 789
    Likes (Given)
    6500
    Likes (Received)
    7389
    Conveniently planned "protests" to follow the Oct. 18th IG report release.



    With all this plus our election here it's going to be an interesting few weeks.
    Fix the cause of the issue, don't cater to the result

  11. #3811
    Avatar de DannyITR
    Administrator

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    January 2002
    Localisation
    Montreal
    Car:
    Acura Integra Type R
    Messages
    13 731
    Likes (Given)
    1159
    Likes (Received)
    2667
    Citation Envoyé par Grim Voir le message

    Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker of the House, cannot officially call a formal impeachment proceeding without the House voting on it as per Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution. What is going on with the House is a circus and makes a joke of the U.S. Constitution. This is an undeniable legal fact.


    Rudy is to appear before the Senate soon (Refer to Post #4005). The Senate is about to stop this circus and expose the swamp.

    Why would Rudy (or anyone guilty by association) want to willingly and happily testify before the Senate? That move says it all.

    There is nothing in the US constitution that says a formal vote to open impeachment proceedings is required. The decision rests solely with the Speaker of the House.

    I'm unable to tell if you're just trolling with this nonsense. Is this real?
    MontrealRacing.com official twitter account: @MontrealRacing
    DannyITR personal Twitter: @DannyITR

    www.montrealracing.com
    www.redliners.ca

  12. #3812
    Avatar de Stirl_ae86
    Legacy Member

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    March 2002
    Localisation
    Alberta
    Car:
    No vehicle .
    A.K.A:
    Stirl_89mr2
    Messages
    13 789
    Likes (Given)
    6500
    Likes (Received)
    7389


    People are being played like a fiddle. Sad..
    Fix the cause of the issue, don't cater to the result

  13. #3813
    Legacy Member

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    August 2003
    Localisation
    Beloeil
    Car:
    No vehicle N/A
    Messages
    26 212
    Likes (Given)
    790
    Likes (Received)
    1993
    Citation Envoyé par Grim Voir le message
    Formal vote = formal impeachment proceedings.

    We agree that the speaker can open impeachment proceedings. They are not formal impeachment proceedings until the House votes. If the impeachment proceedings are not formal, the Republicans cannot subpoena witnesses. Basically, due process is not respected. It's a kangaroo court.


    Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
    A formal vote is the final step the house of representative takes before it hands off impeachment proceedings to the senate to be tried. The investigation comes first. So you want them to hold a vote before anything is investigated? Wouldn't that even more of a kangaroo court?

  14. #3814
    Legacy Member

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    August 2003
    Localisation
    Beloeil
    Car:
    No vehicle N/A
    Messages
    26 212
    Likes (Given)
    790
    Likes (Received)
    1993
    Citation Envoyé par Grim Voir le message
    How can you investigate if only one side has the right to subpoena? That is what happens in Communist courts.

    15 days and still no vote.

    Clearly, the Dems don't want to vote because they fear subpoenas. Furthermore, if Trump gets impeach. This all moves to the Senate for removal of office. This time the Republicans will be able to subpoena Obama, Clinton, all of them.

    That is what Dems are trying to avoid at all costs. All they want is for the American People to believe these are serious impeachment proceedings.
    Hey that's the way the process is structured and house committees are controlled. Don't complain now that you don't like it when it's been this way literally for centuries.

    It took almost 2 months before the beginning of procedures for the Nixon impeachment and the vote and this is after the very damning revelations from the tapes or lack of.
    It also took similarly nearly 2 months before the beginning and the successful impeachment vote of Bill Clinton and this after Ken Starr had already completed a very complete independent investigation.

    And you're back to fitting your conspiracy theories whichever way you like around what's actually going on in the real world.

  15. #3815
    Legacy Member

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    August 2003
    Localisation
    Beloeil
    Car:
    No vehicle N/A
    Messages
    26 212
    Likes (Given)
    790
    Likes (Received)
    1993
    Citation Envoyé par Grim Voir le message
    You are confused man.

    I will let CNN explain it to you:

    The lengthy letter all but dares House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to hold a formal vote opening an impeachment inquiry into Trump, though it does not explicitly call on her to do so.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/08/p...ent/index.html







    How can this be a formal impeachment inquiry if the House of Representatives never voted on it?

    15 days and still waiting for that formal impeachment INQUIRY vote. Oh wait, Dems are afraid of SUBPOENAS and REAL legit investigations. The only way this kangaroo court works is if ONLY Dems get to investigate. CCP-style 'due process'.
    I'll let this Princeton professor explain it to you:

    https://www.lawfareblog.com/must-hou...chment-inquiry

    But what counts as an “official impeachment inquiry,” and what is required to move forward with one? House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy sent a letter to Pelosi asking her to “suspend” the impeachment inquiry until “transparent and equitable rules and procedures” could be put in place and a floor vote authorizing an impeachment inquiry could be taken. Pelosi responded that no vote was necessary. Now White House Counsel Pat Cipollone has written to Pelosi informing her that the administration will not cooperate with the House’s “constitutionally invalid” impeachment inquiry, in part because the House had not voted “to authorize such a dramatic constitutional step” or provided the president with “due process protections.”


    Is it constitutionally acceptable for the House speaker to initiate an impeachment “by means of nothing more than a press conference”? In short, yes.



    The constitutional text on this issue is spare. The Constitution simply says that the House has the sole power of impeachment. Ultimately, if the House wants to impeach someone, it needs to muster a simple majority in support of articles of impeachment that can be presented to the Senate. How the House gets there is entirely up to the chamber itself to determine. There is no constitutional requirement that the House take two successful votes on impeachment, one to authorize some kind of inquiry and one to ratify whatever emerges from that inquiry. An impeachment inquiry is not “invalid” because there has been no vote to formally launch it, and any eventual impeachment would not be “invalid” because the process that led to it did not feature a floor vote authorizing a specific inquiry.

  16. #3816
    Avatar de Stirl_ae86
    Legacy Member

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    March 2002
    Localisation
    Alberta
    Car:
    No vehicle .
    A.K.A:
    Stirl_89mr2
    Messages
    13 789
    Likes (Given)
    6500
    Likes (Received)
    7389
    Democrats Keep Changing The Rules Of Impeachment
    In the Trump era, norms are malleable.

    When Barack Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder ignored congressional subpoenas in an investigation into a scandal featuring a body count, White House Spokesperson Dan Pfeiffer argued that administration officials had no duty to participate in what amounted to “political theater rather than legitimate congressional oversight.”

    So does the White House get to decide what constitutes a legitimate congressional investigation? Or is it only Democrats who make this determination? Since Pfeiffer now argues that an administration that ignores congressional subpoenas is functioning “above the law”—surely an impeachable offense—I can only imagine the latter.


    Now, impeachment is political option that should be dusted off far more frequently. It’s a shame House Republicans never used this remedy during the scandal-plagued Obama years. The country, though, needs some consistent standards, or all we have is theater.

    For instance, knowing that the Republican-controlled Senate is unlikely to remove the president over his reckless call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is doing her best to maximize the political impact of a nebulous “inquiry.”

    Part of this political effort means delaying a full House vote, which would likely result in the judiciary committee laying out ground rules and procedures moving forward. This was the bipartisan process used during both Clinton and Nixon sagas.

    Now we have a new set of rules.


    Perhaps Pelosi is looking to solidify a vote total, or maybe she’s trying to protect members in swing districts, or, most likely, she’s waiting for the most politically opportune time to move forward. All of that is her prerogative. They are also political considerations, despite all the distraught coverage, not decisions predicated on protecting the integrity of process or Congress or the Constitution. Let’s face it, the notion that progressives are concerned about process is risible.

    The non-vote, however, allows the House Intelligence Committee to shower subpoenas on the White House and create the impression, through the innuendo of activity, that Trump’s call with Zelensky was not merely a high crime (highly debatable) but the tip of widespread conspiracy (less debatable).

    The non-vote allows hyper-partisans like Rep. Adam Schiff to keep testimony secret when useful, selectively sharing useful snippets of evidence with media allies who then dutifully curate all the leaks into a useful political narrative. After two years, and dozens of misleading stories fueling Russia collusion coverage, former special counsel Robert Mueller ultimately debunked Schiff’s core contention. With Ukraine, the congressman only needs to propel his production into November 2020.

    Pelosi’s delay also allows Democrats to shield the name of the intelligence whistleblower. I bet Linda Tripp wishes she had been so lucky. No, this isn’t a criminal trial, but you suspect many voters who are okay with a hypothetical impeachment would regard the act of facing an accuser a matter of fundamental fairness.


    Even if the name isn’t shared with the public, it should be shared with congressional Republicans. There’s every reason to be wary of politically motivated players in the government. House Democrats can gin-up the melodrama, suggesting the person, facing moral danger, testify from a remote location with an obscured appearance and voice like a Mafia informant. But as the Wall Street Journal editorial board points out:

    The whistleblower statute is intended to protect individuals against reprisal at work. It isn’t supposed to provide immunity from public scrutiny about claims aimed at ousting a President. We wonder if the goal here is to protect the whistleblower or prevent the American people from learning something that might cast doubt on his accusations.

    It’s fair to wonder. Whistleblowing is an important tool of good government. Yet not all whistleblowers are chaste do-gooders. We know that this one met with Schiff’s office for guidance before filing his report (although we still don’t know how helpful the congressman was) and that Schiff lied about that meeting. The whistleblower also reportedly had “some type of professional relationship” with a 2020 Democratic Party candidate that could, potentially, benefit from an impeachment.

    None of these factors mean the whistleblower’s contentions should be summarily dismissed, but they’re all pertinent. What if, for instance, we learn that the whistleblower worked for Joe Biden? Most media have decreed that any questions about the Biden’s family extraordinarily fortuitous foreign business dealings are nothing but conspiracies, even though those charges are at the center of the phone call that is the current impetus for impeachment. Seems pertinent.

    It also seems likely we are going to find all this out. At some point, Pelosi will have to turn the key. Considering the potential backlash for inaction, it seems unthinkable at this point that she won’t. And Trump, like Pelosi, will be making his own political considerations.


    Because though it might be a great surprise to those covering the impeachment story, history didn’t begin in 2016, and the executive and legislative branches have always been at war. Simply because Democrats keep changing the rules doesn’t mean Republicans have to play along.


    https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/09...f-impeachment/
    Fix the cause of the issue, don't cater to the result

  17. #3817
    Legacy Member

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    June 2003
    Localisation
    Montreal
    Car:
    BMW Bus Metro Walk
    Messages
    975
    Likes (Given)
    5
    Likes (Received)
    20
    Citation Envoyé par kahos Voir le message
    The one where facts and stats are just like your opinion, man?
    kahos: "Trump colluded with Russia!"
    guy: "The Mueller report said no collusion".
    kahos: "Collusion is not a crime, conspiracy is a crime! It was a trap, Mueller was tasked to find collusion, not conspiracy, meaning he couldn't do it job properly."
    Mueller: "We did base our investigation on conspiracy. And we did not find any conspiracy".
    kahos: "You're wrong! Not finding conspiracy doesn't mean conspiracy does not exist! Trump Jr met with Russian lawyer for dirts!"
    Trump Jr: "But there was no exchange of any dirts".
    Russian lawyer: "There was no dirt exchanged".
    Everyone in the room: "There was no dirts exchanged".
    kahos: "Even if there was no dirts exchanged during the meeting, it doesn't mean dirts weren't echanged before or after the meeting!".


  18. Likes Stirl_ae86 Liked this post
  19. #3818
    Legacy Member

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    June 2003
    Localisation
    Montreal
    Car:
    BMW Bus Metro Walk
    Messages
    975
    Likes (Given)
    5
    Likes (Received)
    20

  20. Likes jeeps005, Stirl_ae86 Liked this post
  21. #3819
    Avatar de Ronin
    Forum God

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    February 2002
    Localisation
    Montreal
    Car:
    Hyundai Genesis 2.0GT
    Messages
    16 544
    Likes (Given)
    4406
    Likes (Received)
    4061
    Is Trump a pharmaceutical drug and coke addict?

    0psi .· ` ' / ·. 30psi


    Citation Envoyé par Umberto Eco
    « Les réseaux sociaux ont donné le droit de parole à des légions d’imbéciles qui, avant, ne parlaient qu’au bar, après un verre de vin et ne causaient aucun tort à la collectivité. On les faisait taire tout de suite alors qu’aujourd’hui ils ont le même droit de parole qu’un prix Nobel. C’est l’invasion des imbéciles »…


    Best Internet Security and content management/control on Firefox
    http://noscript.net/

  22. #3820
    Legacy Member

    Status
    Offline
    Date d'inscription
    August 2003
    Localisation
    Beloeil
    Car:
    No vehicle N/A
    Messages
    26 212
    Likes (Given)
    790
    Likes (Received)
    1993
    Citation Envoyé par Ronin Voir le message
    Is Trump a pharmaceutical drug and coke addict?
    Wouldn't be surprised nor shocked, aren't like the majority of people over 60 on some ludicrous cocktail of drugs in the US? JFK also had his doctor feel good.

Page 191 sur 327 PremièrePremière ... 91141181189190191192193201241291 ... DernièreDernière

Règles de messages

  • Vous ne pouvez pas créer de nouvelles discussions
  • Vous ne pouvez pas envoyer des réponses
  • Vous ne pouvez pas envoyer des pièces jointes
  • Vous ne pouvez pas modifier vos messages
  •