When will Trump be impeached?

At the moment Russia still has the edge militarily.

lol

California alone has more than double the wealth of all of Russia.

USA > Russia

In Mother Russia...guns fire YOU!

Not that I'm defending it but those soldiers and tanks combined with the suppression of the event through the state controlled media played out surprisingly well for the regime. It's incredible the number of 20 something Chinese students who have no knowledge what so ever of these events. Obliviously those that do are reluctant to expand on them at great length.
Perhaps Ptolemy could provide his views on the events to show us his hand.

No denying that. Most of the Chinese nationals who do actually know about it (and care) have long since fled the country. Back when I was in Uni, I had a TA who had protested there, and would frequently discuss it. Pretty interesting stuff. Ptolemy wouldn't be able to provide any info as, like you say, China has managed to erase the memory of it in its citizens pretty thoroughly. 

Still, that picture is a pretty powerful one: most people (outside of China) will immediately recognize it an have some idea of the events it symbolizes. It's due to images and stories like this one that keeps the world wary of Chinese expansionism, and may be the reason why nobody really trusts it.

Washington is back to threatening, provoking and antagonizing Russia again. At the same time, they are building up forces in Ukraine right on Russias border. They are also putting the finishing touches to a missile "shield" system encircling Russia that could also act as a Launchpad for missiles into Russia with their targets only 5 minutes away.

Well yes. Setting up anti-missile batteries seems like the appropriate response to this, doesn't it?

Trump has now declared that Russia must give up Crimea and said that he will spend extra billions on updating his arsenal to achieve military superiority.

Actually, according to the RT (a source you haven't claimed to be 'fake news', right?) Trump only stated that he "expects the Russian government to de-escalate violence in the Ukraine and return Crimea... and at the same time, he fully expects to – and wants to – get along with Russia."

The billions he plans to spend on military dick-waving isn't aimed at Russia in particular.

At the moment Russia still has the edge militarily.

Aurata you know I'm with you on the whole anti-Russian hysteria and the fact that the U.S. is just as dirty and has been antagonizing, so I hope you'll listen when I say this-

The U.S. is at least one order of magnitude stronger than Russia militarily. Russia is probably the closest, but it's not THAT close.

Desert Storm was a rude shock to the USSR and really alerted them to the qualitative difference and more importantly, the logistical, electronic, and command difference in capability. Sure Russia has improved somewhat since then, but not as much as the U.S. has.

Yeah whatever. The peaceful transition of power which is NOT happening, is indefensible.

Trump has tanks. Revolutionaries want to take the government from the rightful elected president? Come get some.

Yes, good idea. Because Tiananmen Square worked out so very well for the Chinese.

Not that I'm defending it but those soldiers and tanks combined with the suppression of the event through the state controlled media played out surprisingly well for the regime. It's incredible the number of 20 something Chinese students who have no knowledge what so ever of these events. Obliviously those that do are reluctant to expand on them at great length.

+1 There were no lasting negative consequences for the regime. The protests would not have been so strong had the Chinese economy not been struggling with high inflation.  To a lot of the protestors, "democracy" was the solution because they saw democratic nations such as the USA and much of Europe doing well. They were not committed to a democractic society. We have not seen protests on that scale since because we haven't seen comparable economic struggles in China since 1989.

The Gate of Heavenly Peace was an interesting documentary about the protests. A professor mentioned what he saw when students took a vote on a proposed action. Some students wanted those who opposed the motion thrown out of the lecture hall.

Sorry snowflakes but I am 43 years old, left leaning and I voted for Donald Trump, which marks the first time I voted for a republican.  I blame your college professors for making you so intolerant and incapable of understanding that not everyone shares the same political opinions you do.  Might want to venture outside the echo chamber kids.   Kisses darlings! :) 

This coming from the guy who expects "Asia will rally around China".

Yes, that's pretty much a certainty.

Back on the topic of out of control liberals. It does seem like some sort of catastrophic event needs to happen, to teach these people a lesson. They are living in a dream world.

You shouldn't group people together into monoliths like "liberals" or "libs".

It removes all the nuance and complexity from conversations and it also makes you look like you suffer from aggressively low intelligence.

Sorry snowflakes but I am 43 years old, left leaning and I voted for Donald Trump, which marks the first time I voted for a republican.  I blame your college professors for making you so intolerant and incapable of understanding that not everyone shares the same political opinions you do.  Might want to venture outside the echo chamber kids.   Kisses darlings! :)

Get outside of your echo chambers! Be like me and recite trendy talking points word for word as though they were original thoughts while also using a catchy buzzword to describe everyone who doesn't think the way I do, all while utterly oblivious to the painful, cringe-worthy irony of everything I just said.

IMPEACHED!!! I personally can't wait. At least Mike Pence can form an intelligent sentence and understands basic government functioning.

Reasons to impeach can be found here, plus any new ones that may will arise in the near future.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/318045-the-house-can-start-impeachment-against-trump-now
Sweetheart, a democrat citing TheHill as their source is like a republican citing Fox news for theirs.  The mainstream media is the democratic party and too many of us are being admonish for thinking for ourselves.   

Poll: 4 in 10 support impeaching Trump

Autoplay: On | Off
Much of the public is eager for the impeachment of President Trump. A poll last week found that 40 percent of Americans already “support” impeaching him, and the same survey — by highly regarded Public Policy Polling — found that another 12 percent are “not sure.”

From the outset of his presidency, Trump has been violating the U.S. Constitution in a way that we have not seen before and should not tolerate. It’s time for members of Congress to get the impeachment process underway.

The Constitution states that to start impeachment proceedings, a document or “resolution calling for a committee investigation of charges against the officer in question” must be introduced in the House of Representatives. Such a move would have been appropriate from the moment that Trump became president.
As documented in depth on the ImpeachDonaldTrumpNow.org website — where more than 600,000 people have already signed a petition for impeachment — the president continues to violate two “emoluments” clauses in the Constitution. One prohibits any gifts or benefits from foreign governments, and the other prohibits the same from the U.S. government or any U.S. state.

To uphold the bedrock principle that no one should be above the supreme law of the land, a resolute member of the House must now take the lead in introducing a resolution to get impeachment rolling. That process is necessarily difficult — and essential.

Former White House counsel John Dean, who served President Nixon from 1970 to 1973, told The Atlantic magazine: “I don’t think Richard Nixon even comes close to the level of corruption we already know about Trump.”

Since that interview with Dean three weeks ago, we’ve been learning more about Trump’s unconstitutional corruption as president. The case that Trump is in flagrant violation of the Constitution gained added strength over the weekend when The Associated Press reported: “New documents confirm that President Donald Trump retains a direct tie to his business interests through a revocable trust now being overseen by one of his adult sons and a longtime executive of the Trump Organization.”

What’s more, AP reported, “Trump is the sole beneficiary of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, which is tied to his Social Security number as the taxpayer identification number, according to documents published online by the investigative nonprofit ProPublica. And Trump can revoke the trust, which was amended three days before his inauguration, at any time.”

Members of Congress should initiate an impeachment process because of two clear provisions in the Constitution.

The Foreign Emoluments Clause says: “[N]o Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under [the United States], shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

And the Constitution’s Domestic Emoluments Clause (also known as the Presidential Compensation Clause), which cannot be waived by Congress, says: “The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.”

In addition, a House committee’s impeachment probe should also investigate whether President Trump is violating the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act of 2012 (STOCK Act). One of the few federal ethics statutes that specifically include the president, the STOCK Act — among other provisions — prohibits the president from (1) using nonpublic information for private profit, and from (2) intentionally influencing an employment decision or practice of a private entity solely on the basis of partisan political affiliation.

A crucial test for democracy is whether people in high places can violate the law with impunity. For democracy in the United States, the biggest danger is unchecked presidential ability to violate the Constitution.

In a speech on the House floor last Thursday that spelled out some of Trump’s extreme conflicts-of-interest, Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI) closed with a cogent reference to the fact that Congress can “even explore the power of impeachment.”

Let the exploration begin.

Norman Solomon is co-founder of the activist group RootsAction.org, which has nearly 1 million supporters online. He was a Bernie Sanders delegate from California to the Democratic National Convention, where he was the leader and coordinator of the Bernie Delegates Network. RootsAction and Free Speech For People are sponsoring the grassroots impeachment campaign at ImpeachDonaldTrumpNow.org."

https://www.impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org/

And then there is the actual man running the show:

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/02/06/trump-not-fully-briefed-order-elevating-bannon-security-council

President Donald Trump reportedly did not realize he was promoting chief strategist Steve Bannon to the National Security Council (NSC) Principals Committee when he signed the executive order dropping intelligence and defense officials from the top government panel and elevating the former Breitbart News chair in their place.

The New York Times reported over the weekend that Trump had not been fully briefed on his own executive order, which became "a greater source of frustration to the president" than the protests and legal actions over his travel ban blocking immigrants from seven majority-Muslim countries.

Reporters Glenn Thrush and Maggie Haberman depicted an administration that's just barely keeping a lid on its internal crises, turf wars, and lack of preparation—and a scheming chief strategist that's successfully taken advantage of it all.

They wrote:

[White House chief of staff Reince] Priebus told Mr. Trump and Mr. Bannon that the administration needs to rethink its policy and communications operation in the wake of embarrassing revelations that key details of the orders were withheld from agencies, White House staff, and Republican congressional leaders like Speaker Paul D. Ryan.

Mr. Priebus has also created a 10-point checklist for the release of any new initiatives that includes signoff from the communications department and the White House staff secretary, Robert Porter, according to several aides familiar with the process.

Mr. Priebus bristles at the perception that he occupies a diminished perch in the West Wing pecking order compared with previous chiefs. But for the moment, Mr. Bannon remains the president's dominant adviser, despite Mr. Trump's anger that he was not fully briefed on details of the executive order he signed giving his chief strategist a seat on the National Security Council, a greater source of frustration to the president than the fallout from the travel ban.

Trump seemingly clarified on Twitter that he calls his own shots, "largely based on an accumulation of data, and everyone knows it." He also accused the Times of writing "total fiction" about him.

The executive order promoted Bannon, a white nationalist with no foreign policy or government experience, to a regular seat at some of the most sensitive meetings at the highest levels of government, along with other NSC meetings. Meanwhile, the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—who need to be confirmed by the Senate—were directed to only attend meetings when discussions pertain to their "responsibilities and expertise."

The memo led to speculation that the right-wing power grab in the executive branch could be setting the stage for a coup d'état.

Hehehe, the conservative satirists are way funnier than the competition...

Yeah whatever. The peaceful transition of power which is NOT happening, is indefensible.

Trump has tanks. Revolutionaries want to take the government from the rightful elected president? Come get some.

Yes, good idea. Because Tiananmen Square worked out so very well for the Chinese.

Not that I'm defending it but those soldiers and tanks combined with the suppression of the event through the state controlled media played out surprisingly well for the regime. It's incredible the number of 20 something Chinese students who have no knowledge what so ever of these events. Obliviously those that do are reluctant to expand on them at great length.

+1 There were no lasting negative consequences for the regime. The protests would not have been so strong had the Chinese economy not been struggling with high inflation.  To a lot of the protestors, "democracy" was the solution because they saw democratic nations such as the USA and much of Europe doing well. They were not committed to a democractic society. We have not seen protests on that scale since because we haven't seen comparable economic struggles in China since 1989.

The Gate of Heavenly Peace was an interesting documentary about the protests. A professor mentioned what he saw when students took a vote on a proposed action. Some students wanted those who opposed the motion thrown out of the lecture hall.

Sorry snowflakes but I am 43 years old, left leaning and I voted for Donald Trump, which marks the first time I voted for a republican.  I blame your college professors for making you so intolerant and incapable of understanding that not everyone shares the same political opinions you do.  Might want to venture outside the echo chamber kids.   Kisses darlings! :)

WTF? I highlight an example of intolerance of different opinions and yet you get the completely opposite conclusion? I think you need to crawl out your own echo chamber first before lecturing others. Once you see the full picture you'll realise that making assumptions about somebody's age and education are dumb in the extreme when you can't even read their comments in full.

More greatness...

The moment someone uses the following terms it can be accepted that said poster is functionally retarded:

Snowflake
Libtard
Cuckservative
Literally Hitler
Actual Nazi

The moment someone uses the following terms it can be accepted that said poster is functionally retarded:

Snowflake
Libtard

Not one but TWO snowflake libtards took direct headshots from the stick of the Alt Knight. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOZwUfsql5M

At the moment Russia still has the edge militarily.

Aurata you know I'm with you on the whole anti-Russian hysteria and the fact that the U.S. is just as dirty and has been antagonizing, so I hope you'll listen when I say this-

The U.S. is at least one order of magnitude stronger than Russia militarily.

First up I meant in terms of nuclear capability.

Russia has 1,735 strategic warheads deployed on 521 ICBMs, SLBMs, and strategic bombers, and 2,700 non-deployed strategic and deployed and non-deployed tactical warheads, and 3,200 additional warheads are awaiting dismantlement.

The United States has 1,481 strategic nuclear warheads deployed on 741 ICBMs, SLBMs, and strategic bombers, and 2,570 non-deployed strategic warheads, and roughly 500 deployed and non-deployed tactical warheads, and approximately 2,500 warheads retired and awaiting dismantlement.
http://theduran.com/russia-vs-the-us-who-has-the-stronger-military/

So Russia is clearly superior.

Secondly, talking conventional warfare is irrelevant...because any war with Russia would quickly go nuclear.

And Russia has promised it will never again fight a conventional war on its own soil. In fact Putin has kept making these kind of statements but the idiots in Washington ignore him. That is how stupid the neo-con leadership in Washington is.


But lets entertain your idea that both sides would keep their hands off the nukes.

The scenario we would be looking at is an American invasion of Russia (because unlike the US,  Russia isn't threatening anyone). In that case, you wouldn't have a hope. Lets see..you can't even defeat a few Taliban with AK-47's, but you think you can take Russia?

They are also putting the finishing touches to a missile "shield" system encircling Russia that could also act as a Launchpad for missiles into Russia with their targets only 5 minutes away.

Well yes. Setting up anti-missile batteries seems like the appropriate response to this, doesn't it?

lol you are ridiculously out of touch with the reality of the situation.

Russians are responding to American provocation, not the other way round.

U.S. launches long-awaited European missile defense shield

By Ryan Browne, CNN
Updated 2246 GMT (0646 HKT) May 12, 2016

The U.S. launched a new ground-based missile defense system in Romania Thursday, sparking fresh tensions with Russia, which quickly blasted the system as a threat to its security.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/11/politics/nato-missile-defense-romania-poland/

Unless you think October comes before May?

Trump only stated that he "expects the Russian government to de-escalate violence in the Ukraine and return Crimea... and at the same time, he fully expects to – and wants to – get along with Russia."

In other words he's simply continuing the same narrative as the Obama administration.

Coupled with his sudden announcement to upgrade his nukes, as well as the American build up of troops on russias borders, the constant demonization of Russia in the liberal press, the construction of US bases in all countries surrounding Russia, the repeated threats to take military action against Russia, the recent American military drills right on russias border, the building od nuclear missile launchers on russias borders....and you still claim that none of this is directed at Russia?


Most americans are ridiculously out of touch with the danger their leaders are taking them into.


Ukraine was destabilized by the US, not Russia.
Russia does not control events in eastern Ukraine.
Crimea has been part of Russia for centuries.
Crimea voted in a referendum to return to Russia.
there was no "invasion of Crimea"
There was no "invasion of Ukraine"
Russia rejected eastern Ukraines call to become part of Russia. So obviously Russia is not the aggressive force that Washington is portraying it to be.

Until you get these basic elementary facts right...you will continue to have a very incorrect idea of the situation, programmed into you by neocon liberal propaganda.


But I have one question: Why do you want Russia to be the enemy of America? The cold war ended in 1991.

At the moment Russia still has the edge militarily.

Aurata you know I'm with you on the whole anti-Russian hysteria and the fact that the U.S. is just as dirty and has been antagonizing, so I hope you'll listen when I say this-

The U.S. is at least one order of magnitude stronger than Russia militarily.

First up I meant in terms of nuclear capability.

Russia has 1,735 strategic warheads deployed on 521 ICBMs, SLBMs, and strategic bombers, and 2,700 non-deployed strategic and deployed and non-deployed tactical warheads, and 3,200 additional warheads are awaiting dismantlement.

The United States has 1,481 strategic nuclear warheads deployed on 741 ICBMs, SLBMs, and strategic bombers, and 2,570 non-deployed strategic warheads, and roughly 500 deployed and non-deployed tactical warheads, and approximately 2,500 warheads retired and awaiting dismantlement.
http://theduran.com/russia-vs-the-us-who-has-the-stronger-military/

So Russia is clearly superior.

Secondly, talking conventional warfare is irrelevant...because any war with Russia would quickly go nuclear.

And Russia has promised it will never again fight a conventional war on its own soil. In fact Putin has kept making these kind of statements but the idiots in Washington ignore him. That is how stupid the neo-con leadership in Washington is.


But lets entertain your idea that both sides would keep their hands off the nukes.

The scenario we would be looking at is an American invasion of Russia (because unlike the US,  Russia isn't threatening anyone). In that case, you wouldn't have a hope. Lets see..you can't even defeat a few Taliban with AK-47's, but you think you can take Russia?

First off, the numbers are pretty meaningless given tge rekatively small gap. At that point you're talking diminishing returns. Do you think those extra 200 are going to make a big difference.

Second, you are making a classic mistake in comparing guerilla warfare to conventional warfare between armies.

The USSR didnt do so well in Afghanistan either. And Syria and Ukraine spasm onward.

The Russian military is just flat out not as capable as the U.S. military. That's okay. Nothing wrong with that being the case or admitting to it.

Yeah whatever. The peaceful transition of power which is NOT happening, is indefensible.

Trump has tanks. Revolutionaries want to take the government from the rightful elected president? Come get some.

Yes, good idea. Because Tiananmen Square worked out so very well for the Chinese.

Not that I'm defending it but those soldiers and tanks combined with the suppression of the event through the state controlled media played out surprisingly well for the regime. It's incredible the number of 20 something Chinese students who have no knowledge what so ever of these events. Obliviously those that do are reluctant to expand on them at great length.

+1 There were no lasting negative consequences for the regime. The protests would not have been so strong had the Chinese economy not been struggling with high inflation.  To a lot of the protestors, "democracy" was the solution because they saw democratic nations such as the USA and much of Europe doing well. They were not committed to a democractic society. We have not seen protests on that scale since because we haven't seen comparable economic struggles in China since 1989.

The Gate of Heavenly Peace was an interesting documentary about the protests. A professor mentioned what he saw when students took a vote on a proposed action. Some students wanted those who opposed the motion thrown out of the lecture hall.

Sorry snowflakes but I am 43 years old, left leaning and I voted for Donald Trump, which marks the first time I voted for a republican.  I blame your college professors for making you so intolerant and incapable of understanding that not everyone shares the same political opinions you do.  Might want to venture outside the echo chamber kids.   Kisses darlings! :)

WTF? I highlight an example of intolerance of different opinions and yet you get the completely opposite conclusion? I think you need to crawl out your own echo chamber first before lecturing others. Once you see the full picture you'll realise that making assumptions about somebody's age and education are dumb in the extreme when you can't even read their comments in full.

I suspect the point that TylerDurden was trying to make is that he respects illogical incoherence buttressed by emotive racial allegiances ahead of anything else.  Hence what you or any other poster may have contributed to the discussion is of little consequence or relevance to his deranged mental afflictions as he put finger to keyboard.

Furthermore, to attempt to engage in any meaningful discourse with said poster would be an exercise in extreme futility.

Leading Putin Critic Warns of Xenophobic Conspiracy Theories Drowning U.S. Discourse and Helping Trump

https://theintercept.com/2017/03/07/leading-putin-critic-warns-of-xenophobic-conspiracy-theories-drowning-u-s-discourse-and-helping-trump/

Mandatory reading from the great Glenn Greenwald.

Leading Putin Critic Warns of Xenophobic Conspiracy Theories Drowning U.S. Discourse and Helping Trump

https://theintercept.com/2017/03/07/leading-putin-critic-warns-of-xenophobic-conspiracy-theories-drowning-u-s-discourse-and-helping-trump/

Mandatory reading from the great Glenn Greenwald.

You nailed it Adel.  That is, you are a prime example of the sort of 'snowflakes' many of us refer to when it comes to political discourse.  I'm disappointed however.  You didn't call me a 'racist' or an 'Islamaphobe', which is a sure sign that even the most fainthearted, illiberal, self appointed guardians of public morality that Western universities produce are beginning to see that such accusations have no merit and do not win arguements.  Congrats dear.  :)