When will Trump be impeached? -2019 Better late than never- Congratulations!

The "strupid bombing" is an international war crime. Innocent people were killed. Obviously America flouting international law is no big deal to you.

the neo-liberal establishment is very funny. they can make mountains out of molehills, spin the media to create whatever impression they want.

if they could impeach him over "contact with Russia" then they could definitely impeach over an international war crime.

What's funny is that you think laws apply to the US presidents.  This is no SK, amigo.  They never go to prison and get impeached only if they piss off someone very powerful in the establishment - and trump has now been turned into a puppet of the establishment -

Why are you repeating back what I just told you as if it was something you thought up by yourself? Try to pay attention.

Of course the deep state can impeach him whenever they want for any reason they choose. They have him by the goolies which is why he has become a controlled zombie that dares not step out of line.

The real (hidden) government of the US never changes: only the figureheads selected by the people.

1) why would people be eager to impeach the legally binding elected president?

Trump is basically a zombie owned by the deep state now.

At best, he's extremely easy to manipulate. They only had to show him pictures of crying babies and he stupidly bombed Syria without even thinking.

That is a war crime, and the deep state know they can have him impeached at any moment for it.

But so long as he keeps doing as he's told they'll keep him around.

The next plans of the globalists are to keep isolating Russian support of Assad by continuing to use false flag gas attacks in Syria. Keep ramping up pressure on Russia to dessert Assad.

Once Syria falls, Iran will be next. Ultimately Washington wants to send their paid jihadists to start wars all over China and Russia.

You should totally impeach Trump, how could anyone disagree?  I mean no president has attacked another country, have they?   
   

1) why would people be eager to impeach the legally binding elected president?

Trump is basically a zombie owned by the deep state now.

At best, he's extremely easy to manipulate. They only had to show him pictures of crying babies and he stupidly bombed Syria without even thinking.

That is a war crime, and the deep state know they can have him impeached at any moment for it.

But so long as he keeps doing as he's told they'll keep him around.

The next plans of the globalists are to keep isolating Russian support of Assad by continuing to use false flag gas attacks in Syria. Keep ramping up pressure on Russia to dessert Assad.

Once Syria falls, Iran will be next. Ultimately Washington wants to send their paid jihadists to start wars all over China and Russia.

You should totally impeach Trump, how could anyone disagree?  I mean no president has attacked another country, have they?   
 

I beg your pardon, but...you're still missing the point.

The Syria strike is the first time that a president has engaged in an unambiguous war crime without any cover.

There was no UN resolution. There was no NATO participation, no coalition of the willing.

Nothing. Trump was led into committing an unambiguous war crime by the CIA. In doing so, he has given his enemies (the Hilary brigade, the military-security complex, the CIA a clear-cut case for impeachment. Now they own him.

1) why would people be eager to impeach the legally binding elected president?

Trump is basically a zombie owned by the deep state now.

At best, he's extremely easy to manipulate. They only had to show him pictures of crying babies and he stupidly bombed Syria without even thinking.

That is a war crime, and the deep state know they can have him impeached at any moment for it.

But so long as he keeps doing as he's told they'll keep him around.

The next plans of the globalists are to keep isolating Russian support of Assad by continuing to use false flag gas attacks in Syria. Keep ramping up pressure on Russia to dessert Assad.

Once Syria falls, Iran will be next. Ultimately Washington wants to send their paid jihadists to start wars all over China and Russia.

You should totally impeach Trump, how could anyone disagree?  I mean no president has attacked another country, have they?   
 

I beg your pardon, but...you're still missing the point.

The Syria strike is the first time that a president has engaged in an unambiguous war crime without any cover.

There was no UN resolution. There was no NATO participation, no coalition of the willing.

Nothing. Trump was led into committing an unambiguous war crime by the CIA. In doing so, he has given his enemies (the Hilary brigade, the military-security complex, the CIA a clear-cut case for impeachment. Now they own him.

Lol are you sure about that?  Except for a quick google search.  Listen I'm not here to educate people, but really? 

1) why would people be eager to impeach the legally binding elected president?

Trump is basically a zombie owned by the deep state now.

At best, he's extremely easy to manipulate. They only had to show him pictures of crying babies and he stupidly bombed Syria without even thinking.

That is a war crime, and the deep state know they can have him impeached at any moment for it.

But so long as he keeps doing as he's told they'll keep him around.

The next plans of the globalists are to keep isolating Russian support of Assad by continuing to use false flag gas attacks in Syria. Keep ramping up pressure on Russia to dessert Assad.

Once Syria falls, Iran will be next. Ultimately Washington wants to send their paid jihadists to start wars all over China and Russia.

You should totally impeach Trump, how could anyone disagree?  I mean no president has attacked another country, have they?   
 

I beg your pardon, but...you're still missing the point.

The Syria strike is the first time that a president has engaged in an unambiguous war crime without any cover.

There was no UN resolution. There was no NATO participation, no coalition of the willing.

Nothing. Trump was led into committing an unambiguous war crime by the CIA. In doing so, he has given his enemies (the Hilary brigade, the military-security complex, the CIA a clear-cut case for impeachment. Now they own him.

Lol are you sure about that?  Except for a quick google search.  Listen I'm not here to educate people, but really?

No please.. educate us.

A US president.

1) why would people be eager to impeach the legally binding elected president?

Trump is basically a zombie owned by the deep state now.

At best, he's extremely easy to manipulate. They only had to show him pictures of crying babies and he stupidly bombed Syria without even thinking.

That is a war crime, and the deep state know they can have him impeached at any moment for it.

But so long as he keeps doing as he's told they'll keep him around.

The next plans of the globalists are to keep isolating Russian support of Assad by continuing to use false flag gas attacks in Syria. Keep ramping up pressure on Russia to dessert Assad.

Once Syria falls, Iran will be next. Ultimately Washington wants to send their paid jihadists to start wars all over China and Russia.

You should totally impeach Trump, how could anyone disagree?  I mean no president has attacked another country, have they?   
 

I beg your pardon, but...you're still missing the point.

The Syria strike is the first time that a president has engaged in an unambiguous war crime without any cover.

There was no UN resolution. There was no NATO participation, no coalition of the willing.

Nothing. Trump was led into committing an unambiguous war crime by the CIA. In doing so, he has given his enemies (the Hilary brigade, the military-security complex, the CIA a clear-cut case for impeachment. Now they own him.

Lol are you sure about that?  Except for a quick google search.  Listen I'm not here to educate people, but really?

No please.. educate us.

A US president.

Lol ok then please do a Google search, if you can't find the answer to, "There was no UN resolution. There was no NATO participation, no coalition of the willing." then you must be using a different internet.



 

No please.. educate us.

A US president.

Lol ok then please do a Google search, if you can't find the answer to, "There was no UN resolution. There was no NATO participation, no coalition of the willing." then you must be using a different internet.

You've got nothing.

I asked you for the last time a US president ordered an unprovoked attack on another country, without a UN resolution, NATO participation, or coalition of the willing.

Obama’s Wall Street speaking fee

So what? He got paid to speak and spoke. He gets big bucks for his star power. It's a free country. That's his right. He can use that money to fund a charity or do whatever else he wants with it. It's not like there is a secret conspiracy going on; he's no longer in power. Just a famous guy people will pay a lot to see / make an appearance.

Obama’s Wall Street speaking fee

So what? He got paid to speak and spoke. He gets big bucks for his star power. It's a free country. That's his right. He can use that money to fund a charity or do whatever else he wants with it. It's not like there is a secret conspiracy going on; he's no longer in power. Just a famous guy people will pay a lot to see / make an appearance.

Exactly!  We agree that Obama’s engagements with Wall Street are very profitable and similar to those of other presidents.

There should be no problem at all with retired ex-presidents doing Wall Street speaking tours.

No please.. educate us.

A US president.

Lol ok then please do a Google search, if you can't find the answer to, "There was no UN resolution. There was no NATO participation, no coalition of the willing." then you must be using a different internet.

You've got nothing.

I asked you for the last time a US president ordered an unprovoked attack on another country, without a UN resolution, NATO participation, or coalition of the willing.

I don't leave links because half the internet is a lie, that's why I said do a search and research yourself.  What are you searching for, in Google?   Search for,  "How can Trump bomb Syria?"  Lol funny 2 days ago the results were totally different, but you should still be able to find your answer.   

So for this thread to impeach, this just started with bombing Syria?

It's funny because there were plenty of masked people on both sides.  Hillary nazis are fighting Trump nazis - I'm actually enjoying this.

Me too, this is how I always forecasted America's future...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kFKc-djl24&t=0s

Dude you were destine for so much more.  Forecast away, seems intriguing.

I see that President Candidate Trump spoke at the weekend to the 46% of all Americans that voted for him touting his non-accomplishments and his disdain of the enemy; not Iran or North Korea but the US media.

He's preparing for 2020. Already raised tens of millions of dollars. Slogan will be 'Keep America Great'.

He's preparing for 2020. Already raised tens of millions of dollars. Slogan will be 'Keep America Great'.

I'm continually amazed at how long the American election cycle is. Maybe not the worst thing he could do? To make the election cycle four years is an interesting gambit.

So, for those who like to “rationalize” that Trump only won because of the votes of fascists, sexists, racists, bigots and all the other ISTs, then it looks like Obama’s victory in 2012 was also facilitated by the votes of fascists, sexists, racists, bigots and all the other ISTs…… 

It’s these “Obama-Trump” voters that Trump needs to keep if he plans to run and win in 2020.

Some excerpts:

Democrats say they now know exactly why Clinton lost

Tribune Washington Bureau 7 hrs ago

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrats-say-they-now-know-exactly-why-clinton-lost/ar-BBAyW55?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=LENDHP

WASHINGTON — A group of top Democratic Party strategists have used new data about last year's presidential election to reach a startling conclusion about why Hillary Clinton lost. Now they just need to persuade the rest of the party they're right.

Many Democrats have a shorthand explanation for Clinton's defeat: Her base didn't turn out, Donald Trump's did and the difference was too much to overcome.

But new information shows that Clinton had a much bigger problem with voters who had supported President Barack Obama in 2012 but backed Trump four years later.

Those Obama-Trump voters effectively accounted for more than two-thirds of the reason Clinton lost, according to Matt Canter, a senior vice president of the Democratic political firm Global Strategy Group.

In his group's analysis, about 70 percent of Clinton's failure to reach Obama's vote total in 2012 was because she lost these voters.

Canter and other members of Global Strategy Group have delivered a detailed report of their findings to senators, congressmen, fellow operatives and think tank wonks — all part of an effort to educate party leaders about what the data say really happened in last year's election.

"We have to make sure we learn the right lesson from 2016, that we don't just draw the lesson that makes us feel good at night, make us sleep well at night," Canter said.

His firm's conclusion is shared broadly by other Democrats who have examined the data, including senior members of Clinton's campaign and officials at the Democratic data and analytics firm Catalist. (The New York Times, in its own analysis, reached a similar conclusion.)

Each group made its assessment by analyzing voter files –– reports that show who voted in every state, and matching them to existing data about the voters, including demographic information and voting history. The groups determined how people voted — in what amounts to the most comprehensive way to analyze the electorate short of a full census…..

                       

I see that President Candidate Trump spoke at the weekend to the 46% of all Americans that voted for him touting his non-accomplishments and his disdain of the enemy; not Iran or North Korea but the US media.

As opposed to the White House Correspondent's Dinner which further showcased the media and Hollywood descending into a tiny echo chamber.

I see that President Candidate Trump spoke at the weekend to the 46% of all Americans that voted for him touting his non-accomplishments and his disdain of the enemy; not Iran or North Korea but the US media.

As opposed to the White House Correspondent's Dinner which further showcased the media and Hollywood descending into a tiny echo chamber.

Not as tiny as Trump's hands. Did you even watch it? The media got ribbed on.

Looking at the latest congressional spending compromise that appears to be heading for approval, it’s hard to see any real “Trump” impact….  In fact, it looks like congressional business as usual….  Congressional Democrats and Republicans never seem to have any problems compromising when it comes to spending money and taking care of their special interests….

What's in and what's out in the latest government spending bill

By Ted Barrett, CNN
Updated 0410 GMT (1210 HKT) May 1, 2017
     
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/01/politics/government-spending-bill-details/

  (CNN) Negotiators reached a critical agreement Sunday night on a large spending bill that if approved this week would fund the government for months, senior aides from both parties told CNN.

As of Sunday night, Democratic and Republican aides disagreed about some of the figures that were initially put out as word of the deal broke.

Below is what aides to both parties agreed is included in the bill, when asked by CNN:
     
 •   $1.5 billion for border security -- technology and repairing existing infrastructure with language saying no new border wall construction
•   No money for deportation force or federal cuts to sanctuary cities
•   Billions in new defense spending, including the global war on terrorism
•   No funding cut for Planned Parenthood
•   National Institute of Health funding increase of $2 billion
•   Increase clean energy and science funding
•   Energy Efficiency And Renewable Energy is up $17 million over Fiscal Year 2016
•   Department of Energy Office of Science is up $42 million over Fiscal Year 2016
•   Provide permanent fix for miners health insurance
•   $295 million for Puerto Rico Medicaid
•   Disaster package including funding for California, West Virginia, Louisiana and North Carolina, increased funding for transit infrastructure grants and opioid epidemic
•   Restored year round Pell Grants
     

Did you even watch it?

I heard some terrorist delivered some hate speech?