• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Poll: When Trump fires Mueller, should he be impeached?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

When (okay, if) Trump fires Mueller, should he be impeached?

  • Total voters
    58
imported_tajmahal said:
Yes, often. He's a pretty typical New York asshole, have you ever met a New Yorker that wasn't a complete and total dick? I despise his character at the same time I applaud his political actions.
Click to expand...

There's a reason that Trump is universally reviled among actual New Yorkers (and especially within those elite circles whom he so desperately wants to be accepted). So, it doesn't shock me that here you admit you don't know dick about New Yorkers.
 
BAMAVOO said:
you would say yes if he just woke up, like your buddy in the other post. You guys had no issues with Trump until he put an R by his name. He is not an establishment guy, which makes him attractive to so many. If he had D by his name you guys would all be in love with him. Let the man do his job and maybe, juts maybe, you will see how wrong you have been.
Click to expand...

No.

I and many others already had issues with Trump well before he associated with Republicans. He promoted birther conspiracy crap; he was clueless about political issues for years; he has always been egocentric and greedy; and from numerous accounts, he committed sexual assault and even raped one of his previous wives. I would hate him as a Democrat if he pushed the policies he is now, because they include overt bigotry, deny climate change science and support reckless deregulation. His attempts to gut health care and waste money on a likely ineffective wall are just icing on the crappy cake.

"He is not an establishment guy," you say about a self-proclaimed billionaire appointing Goldman Sachs execs, politicians in the pocket of fossil fuel and telecoms, and immediate family members.

I will not let Trump do his job, as there is already plenty of evidence his policies are wrong. I know you're happy to be a clueless, craven sycophant, but those of us who live in a world of complexity and evidence-based reasoning won't be as easily fooled as you.
 
BAMAVOO said:
you would say yes if he just woke up, like your buddy in the other post. You guys had no issues with Trump until he put an R by his name. He is not an establishment guy, which makes him attractive to so many. If he had D by his name you guys would all be in love with him. Let the man do his job and maybe, juts maybe, you will see how wrong you have been.
Click to expand...

This is the poster child for cognitive dissonance.
 
mikeymikec said:
1) And yet you applaud Trump's political actions, which involve all of those things, and far, far worse.

2) Your latest response should indicate a complete disinterest in politics yet you exhibit the opposite (at least insofar as being a political cheerleader).

If you are a troll, you're particularly poor at it. If you're not a troll, then your motivations make very little sense, so either you're lying or you seriously need to examine why you have any interest in politics.
Click to expand...
Not really, i consider you a complete and total dick also, it's not a very high bar.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
run a search, it's not worth my time listing the posts where i've criticized President Trump. If it's worth YOUR time this forum has a handy -dandy search feature. Use it. Don't try to put the effort off on me, Homey doesn't play that game.
Click to expand...

No versions of Tajbot have the "providelinks", "provideevidence", or "evaluatefacts" functions enabled.
 
brycejones said:
No versions of Tajbot have the "providelinks", "provideevidence", or "evaluatefacts" functions enabled.
Click to expand...
If it's worth your time, look it up. I will not and do not play the game of " list every episode in the last 10 months where you've said XXXX and provide links etc. to it. " You want it, you do the work.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
If it's worth your time, look it up. I will not and do not play the game of " list every episode in the last 10 months where you've said XXXX and provide links etc. to it. " You want it, you do the work.
Click to expand...

tajbot 3.0 is such a downgrade and still can't provide evidence. Not sure what the developer was going for in this latest version.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
run a search, it's not worth my time listing the posts where i've criticized President Trump. If it's worth YOUR time this forum has a handy -dandy search feature. Use it. Don't try to put the effort off on me, Homey doesn't play that game.
Click to expand...

It's your reputation it's been shown that several people cannot think of a time you did. Just advice if you want more people to accept what you said take what you like of it.
 
shortylickens said:
Then how did he fire Jim Comey?
Click to expand...

Comey was FBI Director, Meuller is Spec Pros under DoJ. So maybe that's the difference?

However since Congress is contemplating drafting a bill to prevent Trump from firing him I would guess he presently can. Either that or the bill is pure political grandstanding in that it is totally meaningless.

Fern
 
Maxima1 said:
That compilation is from the news

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...d08da6-7dc2-11e7-83c7-5bd5460f0d7e_story.html

The adviser, George Papadopoulos, offered to set up “a meeting between us and the Russian leadership to discuss US-Russia ties under President Trump,” telling them his Russian contacts welcomed the opportunity, according to internal campaign emails read to The Washington Post.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/20/t...on-of-interest-in-senate-intels-russia-probe/

"The Daily Caller was told that during the campaign’s first meeting after the formation of its national security team, held on March 31, 2016, Papadopoulos suggested that Trump, who was in attendance, meet with people in the Russian government."
Click to expand...

There's absolutely nothing wrong mentioned in either of those two quotes. Campaigns and president-elects routinely meet with foreign govts and are expected to. This is desirable. You don't assume office without wanting to 'hit the ground running'.

The problem would be (illegal) content or objective(s) of the meeting. But there's nothing in those quotes to indicate a problem. Despite, and contrary to, the 'unhingedness' of recent times things aren't criminal merely because one can work the word "Russian" into the story.

Fern
 
Fern said:
There's absolutely nothing wrong mentioned in either of those two quotes. Campaigns and president-elects routinely meet with foreign govts and are expected to. This is desirable. You don't assume office without wanting to 'hit the ground running'.

The problem would be (illegal) content or objective(s) of the meeting. But there's nothing in those quotes to indicate a problem. Despite, and contrary to, the 'unhingedness' of recent times things aren't criminal merely because one can work the word "Russian" into the story.

Fern
Click to expand...

I brought up the catalyst that ties into all of the other bizarre behavior of the campaign and pretty much nailed it because Mueller disclosed this for obvious reasons. They were still hell-bent on negotiating with the Russians even post-Page and after knowledge of Russian interference. Many on here seem to be completely ignorant of many of the meetings (e.g. Mayflower Hotel) and other things about the campaign that they have constantly lied about.
 
Commodus said:
No.

I and many others already had issues with Trump well before he associated with Republicans. He promoted birther conspiracy crap; he was clueless about political issues for years; he has always been egocentric and greedy; and from numerous accounts, he committed sexual assault and even raped one of his previous wives. I would hate him as a Democrat if he pushed the policies he is now, because they include overt bigotry, deny climate change science and support reckless deregulation. His attempts to gut health care and waste money on a likely ineffective wall are just icing on the crappy cake.

"He is not an establishment guy," you say about a self-proclaimed billionaire appointing Goldman Sachs execs, politicians in the pocket of fossil fuel and telecoms, and immediate family members.

I will not let Trump do his job, as there is already plenty of evidence his policies are wrong. I know you're happy to be a clueless, craven sycophant, but those of us who live in a world of complexity and evidence-based reasoning won't be as easily fooled as you.
Click to expand...

Same here. Trump always has and still does represent some of the worst traits in humanity. Couple that with the fact that he's run his own businesses into the ground and finds it very hard to deal with people (unless you call bullying and suing others as "working with people") and I consider him terribly unqualified.

I wouldn't vote for any current (R) because they have gone collectively insane; that, and I don't want one party controlling all branches of government.

So, if Trump would have been the (D) candidate in 2016 I would either have made a protest vote for someone like Johnson, or a write-in for someone else. There's a reason he was President in a Simpsons episode--he's the worst, most ludicrous choice imaginable to be President.

Edit: you mentioned climate change above. That one issue is enough for me to vote against any candidate.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
No, I didn't, I said I thought Trump was an asshole. These other fuckholes want me to verify I said it before.
Click to expand...

tajbot 3.0 is unable to access the content of previous posts when constructing new posts. Sad, lame effort on the part of the developer.

Specifically the part in bold in the context of the question tajbot 3.0 was responding to:

mikeymikec said:
Out of curiosity, does anyone remember if taj has acknowledged any of Trump's flaws/mistakes? (and not in a "and that's why we love him" sort of way)
Click to expand...

imported_tajmahal said:
Yes, often. He's a pretty typical New York asshole, have you ever met a New Yorker that wasn't a complete and total dick? I despise his character at the same time I applaud his political actions.
Click to expand...
 
So, no he shouldn't be impeached and i'm shocked, SHOCKED that Washington D.C. is a seething swamp full of corruption, fraud and graft. That the people that benefit the most from this corruption are fighting so hard to maintain it.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
So, no he shouldn't be impeached and i'm shocked, SHOCKED that Washington D.C. is a seething swamp full of corruption, fraud and graft. That the people that benefit the most from this corruption are fighting so hard to maintain it.
Click to expand...

This is tajbot 3.0 with the reset option enabled trying to dig out of a failed exchange.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top