Trump impeachment
Comments
-
She was the fucking secretary of state at the time! Amazing how you loonies ignore all the crimes of the Clinton's and Obozo's.dhdawg said:
and she isn't the president of the united states. she's not even relevant in the party period anymore. great red herringdoogie said:I heard Trump arranged a US/ Russia uranium sale after Russia made contributions to the Trump family Trust. Somebody should look into that.
-
Crimes require trials and convictions.Sledog said:
She was the fucking secretary of state at the time! Amazing how you loonies ignore all the crimes of the Clinton's and Obozo's.dhdawg said:
and she isn't the president of the united states. she's not even relevant in the party period anymore. great red herringdoogie said:I heard Trump arranged a US/ Russia uranium sale after Russia made contributions to the Trump family Trust. Somebody should look into that.
-
No they don't. They require the commission. Prosecution, as we have seen, can be politically affected.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Crimes require trials and convictions.Sledog said:
She was the fucking secretary of state at the time! Amazing how you loonies ignore all the crimes of the Clinton's and Obozo's.dhdawg said:
and she isn't the president of the united states. she's not even relevant in the party period anymore. great red herringdoogie said:I heard Trump arranged a US/ Russia uranium sale after Russia made contributions to the Trump family Trust. Somebody should look into that.
-
Wrong, but consistent with the Clinton's ideology. It's not a crime if you're not caught, tried and convicted.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Crimes require trials and convictions.Sledog said:
She was the fucking secretary of state at the time! Amazing how you loonies ignore all the crimes of the Clinton's and Obozo's.dhdawg said:
and she isn't the president of the united states. she's not even relevant in the party period anymore. great red herringdoogie said:I heard Trump arranged a US/ Russia uranium sale after Russia made contributions to the Trump family Trust. Somebody should look into that.
-
I think that's written in the Constitution.Southerndawg said:
Wrong, but consistent with the Clinton's ideology. It's not a crime if you're not caught, tried and convicted.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Crimes require trials and convictions.Sledog said:
She was the fucking secretary of state at the time! Amazing how you loonies ignore all the crimes of the Clinton's and Obozo's.dhdawg said:
and she isn't the president of the united states. she's not even relevant in the party period anymore. great red herringdoogie said:I heard Trump arranged a US/ Russia uranium sale after Russia made contributions to the Trump family Trust. Somebody should look into that.
-
Fuck off.2001400ex said:
Yes. Read my comment again....DerekJohnson said:
Clinton was impeached for lying under oath.2001400ex said:I still don't think it'll happen. But it is surprising the number of Republicans speaking against Trump. If Clinton was impeached (not confirmed) for lying about his cigar placement. Imagine Trump under oath.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/house-committee-wants-evidence-trumps-wiretap-claim-070320519--politics.html -
That's a complete non sequitur.dhdawg said:
so the answer is to eliminate it.HoustonHusky said:
Maybe the EPA can turn another river orange and lie about it?2001400ex said:
That extra $54 billion for the military sure will help. Since we are gutting the EPA, I look forward to lighting rivers on fire again and ending the suffering by the wealthy.doogie said:Im just thankful that shrill bitch Russian agent never became President and America has been saved from surrender.
Way to little of the EPA focus is on actual pollution right now...
Cutting the budget of things that the EPA shouldn't be doing in the first place doesn't say anything about what happens to the things the EPA should be doing. If it is an across-the-board cut that is one thing, but if its a cut and elimination of sub-sections (as has been rumored) then your "point" is completely useless. -
Making it more effecient is one thing. Trump and his big oil stooge Pruitt are against the environment and the agency as a wholeHoustonHusky said:
That's a complete non sequitur.dhdawg said:
so the answer is to eliminate it.HoustonHusky said:
Maybe the EPA can turn another river orange and lie about it?2001400ex said:
That extra $54 billion for the military sure will help. Since we are gutting the EPA, I look forward to lighting rivers on fire again and ending the suffering by the wealthy.doogie said:Im just thankful that shrill bitch Russian agent never became President and America has been saved from surrender.
Way to little of the EPA focus is on actual pollution right now...
Cutting the budget of things that the EPA shouldn't be doing in the first place doesn't say anything about what happens to the things the EPA should be doing. If it is an across-the-board cut that is one thing, but if its a cut and elimination of sub-sections (as has been rumored) then your "point" is completely useless.
-
so, you've jumped back onto the Oil Is Evil bandwagon again?
-
When they buy off the gov't yesdoogie said:so, you've jumped back onto the Oil Is Evil bandwagon again?
