When will Trump be impeached?

He's just Ptrolling.

HA! You finally got a funny in. 

I can't stop laughing, went back and watched Trump's most brilliant moments. He tells Poindexter to sit down, then "QUIET, QUIET, QUIET CHILDREN!". Hehe, so fun and fresh. Libs just show they have no sense of humor, such fragile scared little people. Sad. 

https://youtu.be/jL3yF9wYR3U?t=1h4m40s

Trump is in big trouble. He is at war with the deep state, and his support from congressional Republicans is paper thin. Due to his clear violations of the emoluments clause, and of course possible ties to the interests of a foreign power, he is eligible for impeachment any time congress decides to pull the plug

If the deep state and congress want to overturn the democratic will of the people then someone should be at war them surely?

You guys throw democracy out the window the moment it produces a result you don't like.

He's just Ptrolling.

HA! You finally got a funny in. 

I can't stop laughing, went back and watched Trump's most brilliant moments. He tells Poindexter to sit down, then "QUIET, QUIET, QUIET CHILDREN!". Hehe, so fun and fresh. Libs just show they have no sense of humor, such fragile scared little people. Sad. 

https://youtu.be/jL3yF9wYR3U?t=1h4m40s

Should have just mocked another disabled person. He kills at those sort of impressions.

Trump may be sly, but overly intelligent? Just look at his off-script speeches. Sixth grade grammar.
 

Why cant he find qualified members to fill his cabinet, (not the ones awaiting confirmation)?

 http://www.cbsnews.com/news/robert-harward-turns-down-national-security-adviser-job/

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/15/us/politics/andrew-puzder-withdrew-labor-secretary.html

I would bet the farm there will always be an opening in his administration.

Here is another liberal elitist propaganda piece outlining Trump's disarray:
http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21717066-furore-over-americas-national-security-adviser-axing-michael-flynn-reveals-deep

Mr Trump has so far nominated 35 people to fill some 700 senior positions that require Senate confirmation. On February 15th one of them, Andrew Puzder, his chosen labour secretary, withdrew his nomination after it became clear he would struggle to get confirmed. This poor progress is making it even harder for Mr Mattis and his cabinet colleagues, including Rex Tillerson, the secretary of state, to push back against the turmoil emanating from the White House.

Oh, how the elitist media likes to forget, cherry-pick and/or rewrite history in order to push their dogma.  Below is a little history, but first remember that at the beginning of Obama’s term in 2009 the Democrats held 57 seats in the Senate. 

1.  In December 2008, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson was nominated to be Commerce Secretary.  Nomination withdrawn.  Richardson was the subject of a high-profile probe and ongoing grand jury investigation into whether he traded New Mexico government contracts for campaign contributions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Richardson

2.  In 2009, Obama nominated Republican Senator Judd Gregg to be the Commerce Secretary.  Gregg withdrew himself because of conflicts with Obama policies he would have to implement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judd_Gregg

3.  In 2009, Tom Daschle was nominated to be the Health and Human Services Secretary.  Nomination withdrawn.  Tax problems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Daschle

4.  In 2009, Nancy Killefer was nominated to be the Chief Performance Officer. Killefer withdrew her nomination as CPO on February 3, 2009. Tax problems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Killefer

5.  What about Obama wanting to nominate Charles Freeman to be the National Intelligence Council Chairman in 2009.  Freeman sent a letter asking that he not be nominated after it was revealed Freeman had served for four years on the board of the China National Offshore Oil Corporation, a company owned by the Chinese government.   There were other issues involving Saudi Arabia.  Freeman charged that he had been the victim of a concerted campaign by what he called "the Israel lobby.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_W._Freeman,_Jr

6.  There are really good graphs at the next link that compare Presidents and how long it took each President to fill their cabinet positions.  Actually, the entire article is worth reading if you want a better understanding of the statistics regarding Presidential nomination and Senate confirmation. Guess which President took longer than W. Bush, Clinton and H.W. Bush to fill their cabinet positions?  Again, remember that the Democrats held 57 Senate seats in 2009.

I bet that in 2009 the elitist media must have been screaming and ranting about Obama’s incompetence because it took Obama so much longer than the three previous Presidents to fill his cabinet.  OMG, I’m using a Washington Post link!  Maybe the elitists will believe this information…..

  https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/how-long-confirmations-will-take/

7.  Obama also stated that he should not be judged by his first hundred days: "The first hundred days is going to be important, but it’s probably going to be the first thousand days that makes the difference.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_100_days_of_Barack_Obama%27s_presidency

I think that for me this impeachment thread has pretty much played out. Enjoyed the discussion.  I’ll close with these comments.

Many of US supported Trump for President not because we thought that he was a great person, but because we believed that a political hand grenade needed to be thrown into Washington D.C.    And, Trump was this political hand grenade. 

The reaction by the elitists since the election has caused everyone I know who supported Trump to dig-in more with their support. He is governing the way we expected and wanted.  It is the elitists and the establishments that don’t like the way he is governing because they are losing their control.   Furthermore, they are reinforcing our belief that something sweeping needed to be done.

Trump ran against the Republican establishment, the Democratic establishment and the Washington D.C. bureaucratic establishment.  He beat the Republican establishment in the primaries; he beat the Democratic establishment in the November election; and he is now starting on the bureaucratic establishment.  The Republican and Democratic establishments are still trying to fight him, and the bureaucratic establishment is currently flexing their muscles (e.g. Flynn…..).  The bureaucrats like things the way they are with high salaries, regular pay raises, guaranteed pensions, great health care coverage, and no accountability.

Again, if you don’t really understand or accept why Trump won the election, you will never understand or accept why it would be suicidal for the Republican House to impeach him.  Furthermore, on why he can win a second term - if he wants one.

If you want Trump out of office before 2020 start thinking diet; as his diet will probably get him long before impeachment….

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-s-electoral-college-win-was-not-biggest-reagan-n722016

The retard can't even get simple facts straight! Claims to have had the biggest ever electoral collage win, then says it was the biggest republican win, and then talks about how much of a great win it was. Must be embarrassing to be a republican right now!

The retard can't even get simple facts straight!

Must be embarrassing to be a republican right now!

Hehe, this is why he keeps killing it. Libs look for the crossed "T" and dotted "I", while missing the meaning of the sentence.

Everyone is seeing this play out on the public stage...except libs.

The retard can't even get simple facts straight!

Must be embarrassing to be a republican right now!

Hehe, this is why he keeps killing it. Libs look for the crossed "T" and dotted "I", while missing the meaning of the sentence.

Everyone 46.4% of the US population are seeing this play out on the public stage...except libs.

Fixed it for you!

^ I think that is a math error, cause you subtracted "libs" twice.

Trump is in big trouble. He is at war with the deep state,

Former NSA official tweets out Trump will “die in jail” in ongoing war with deep state intelligence community

Trump has clearly angered the intelligence community, elements of which are going all-in to discredit him, delegitimize him, hamper his agenda and stop him from implementing any real reforms to business as usual, which the very co-opted and compromised Hillary Clinton would have adopted had she won in November.

The tension really ramped up following an appearance by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on MSNBC, in which he told host Rachel Maddow it was “really dumb” of the president to anger the intelligence community, because “they have six ways from Sunday of getting back at you” (I doubt Schumer would have been so tolerant of the IC if it had taken similar action to delegitimize Barack Obama).

But this kind of blatant, over-the-top disrespect for the president of the United States, coming from careerist intelligence and foreign policy bureaucrats, is unprecedented in the modern era. There were plenty of errors made by the Obama administration – but apparently most of the careerists agreed with Obama’s foreign policy, perhaps because he didn’t fight the intel establishment.

On Wednesday, in the aftermath of the resignation of Trump’s national security advisor, Michael Flynn – thought to be the first of many Trump national security team casualties to come – former NSA analyst and Naval War College professor John Schindler was asked by a follower, “What do you think is going on inside NatSec right now after Trump’s ‘intelligence’ tweet this morning?”

Schindler, who also writes regularly for the New York Observer online – which is owned by Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law – responded:

Now we go nuclear. IC war going to new levels. Just got an EM fm senior IC friend, it began: “He will die in jail.”
http://talknetwork.com/2017-02-16-former-nsa-official-tweets-out-trump-will-die-in-jail-in-ongoing-war-with-deep-state-intelligence-community.html

Senior Republican adviser says something is ‘deeply wrong’ with Donald Trump

Comments follow what adviser described as ‘the most bizarre press conference in history’

   

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-republican-adviser-something-deeply-wrong-quote-a7585511.html

Senior Republican adviser says something is ‘deeply wrong’ with Donald Trump

Actually I see something deeply wrong with what America has become. And so does anyone with a brain.

And the reckless irrational hatred of liberals who want to make war on a nuclear-armed country (Russia) just because they can't get over losing an election? its like... half the country is utterly childish.



Crosstalk on Flynn: Palace coup

Senior Republican adviser...

Comments follow what adviser described as ‘the most bizarre press conference in history’

Haha. Just shows another government drone who does not understand why Trump won, he's out of touch with the people. Republicans have been clueless for decades.

^ I think that is a math error, cause you subtracted "libs" twice.

http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/president

Trump 46.4%
Clinton 48.5%

So, 46.4% of "everyone" believe any of the BS that comes out of Trump's mouth.

^ I think that is a math error, cause you subtracted "libs" twice.

http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/president

Trump 46.4%
Clinton 48.5%

So, 46.4% of "everyone" believe any of the BS that comes out of Trump's mouth.

Wait, so why did Hillary concede?

Are you disputing the results of the popular vote?

Well I suppose we end up with the government we deserve.
Pretty surprising numbers (for me at least) showing support for Trumpernickel.
http://thehill.com/home-news/administration/320487-poll-americans-overwhelmingly-oppose-sanctuary-cities

"An overwhelming majority of Americans believe that cities that arrest illegal immigrants for crimes should be required to turn them over to federal authorities.

The poll shows that President Trump has broad public support in his effort to crack down on sanctuary cities.

A survey from Harvard–Harris Poll provided exclusively to The Hill found that 80 percent of voters say local authorities should have to comply with the law by reporting to federal agents the illegal immigrants they come into contact with.


As it stands, hundreds of cities across the nation — many with Democratic mayors or city councils — are refusing to do so.
Trump has signed an executive order directing Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly to find ways to starve these sanctuary cities of federal funding. A Reuters analysis found the top 10 sanctuary cities in the U.S. receive $2.27 billion in federal funding for programs ranging from public health services to early childhood education.

Kelly is expected to hire thousands of new immigration enforcement agents with broad authority to detain and deport those in the country illegally, potentially setting up a showdown between the federal government and sanctuary cities.

The Harvard–Harris Poll survey found strong support for an overhaul of the nation's immigration laws, with 77 percent saying they support comprehensive immigration reform against only 23 percent who oppose.


“While there is broad support for comprehensive immigration reform, there is overwhelming opposition to sanctuary cities,” said Harvard–Harris co-director Mark Penn. “The public wants honest immigrants treated fairly and those who commit crimes deported and that's very clear from the data.”

The finding is one of several in the survey that show Trump has support for some of the controversial immigration proposals that were a hallmark of his campaign.



A majority — 52 percent — say they support Trump’s two executive orders allowing for the construction of a southern border wall, increasing the number of immigration officers by 10,000 and finding a way to revoke federal funds for sanctuary cities.

The crackdown on sanctuary cities is the most popular feature of those actions, followed closely by the directive to increase the border patrol, which is backed by 75 percent of voters.

The wall is the most divisive element of Trump’s plan, with 53 percent opposing its construction.

Meanwhile, 53 percent of voters surveyed said they back Trump’s travel ban, which was rejected by the courts. That order temporarily suspended the United States' refugee program for 120 days, indefinitely suspended resettlement for Syrian refugees and imposed a 90-day travel and immigration ban from seven predominately Muslim nations: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya and Somalia.

Kelly has said the administration will roll out a “tighter, more streamlined version” of the executive order some time soon.

Trump's new order is expected to target the same seven countries but will not include people who already have a visa to travel to the U.S. It will also exempt green card holders who are citizens of one of the countries in question.

Fifty-six percent say they support the specific aspect of Trump’s order that pauses immigration from the seven countries on the terrorism watch list until a new vetting system is in place.

Support for that policy goes up to 60 percent when the seven nations are described as “Muslim majority countries.”

Voters are worried that the federal judge’s suspension of Trump’s order — a ruling that was upheld this month at an appeals court in San Francisco — could put the nation at risk.

A plurality — 38 percent — say the federal judge’s suspension makes the nation less safe. Thirty-six percent said the court’s ruling will have no impact, and 26 percent said it will make the country safer.

The survey also found there are deep concerns among Americans over refugees fleeing their homelands for safety in the U.S.

Forty-seven percent said allowing refugees into the country has a negative impact on the nation, compared to only 33 percent who said it has a positive effect.

When voters are told that the U.S. is slated to receive 100,000 Syrian refugees, 51 percent said that number should be lower, 34 percent said it is an appropriate number, and 15 percent said the U.S. should allow more.

“Americans support both comprehensive immigration reform and stronger vetting and reduced refugees — they want a mix of compassion, strong borders,” said Penn. “They see ISIS as the greatest threat to the country and that is spurring concerns about refugee migration.”

The online survey of 2,148 registered voters was conducted between Feb. 11 and 13. The partisan breakdown is 39 percent Democrat, 30 percent Republican, 27 percent independent and 5 percent other. The Harvard–Harris Poll survey is a collaboration of the Harvard Center for American Political Studies and The Harris Poll."

Pretty surprising numbers (for me at least) showing support for Trumpernickel.

The poll shows that President Trump has broad public support in his effort to crack down on sanctuary cities.

Everyone has known this for awhile, that's why he ran on it and won.

Americans are NOT in favor of what the liberals say is best for them. The liberal media just keep running this stuff about how Trump is a nazi hurting immigrants feelings or whatever. Uhh no, he is enforcing what the American people want. And he is massively discrediting the radical left for going against the public's wishes.

If the radicals do not follow the law they will be dealt with...the public is in favor of that.

It's pretty god damn funny that I've seen the phrase "liberal fascist" pop up more than a couple of times here...

Wait, funny or sad? I really can't tell the difference anymore.

It's pretty god damn funny that I've seen the phrase "liberal fascist" pop up more than a couple of times here...

I would like to take credit for the term. 

Been working on it awhile. The most descriptive term I came up for modern liberalism is "liberal corporate fascism". The corporate aspect is very important. I played around with "corporatist" and "progressivist" but it's hard to fit the words together and becomes cumbersome. You need something catchy like "fake news" in today's culture, so I shortened it to liberal fascism, aka "the anti-fascists are the new fascists".

Been hammering the internets with it, and now I see it showing up in conversations. Of course someone else might have launched it independently and I'm giving myself too much credit.