General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis is different. It is even more "in your face" than anything that's gone before.
At the border in El Paso a few days ago, Trump reportedly ordered border agents to violate the law in several ways. He specifically told them to disregard judicial decisions and obey him: "Don't let asylum seekers in!"
Folks, if this was happening in another nation, we'd be rightly criticizing the citizens of that nation for "allowing" the blatant criminality of their government.
How is this any different? What WON'T we allow?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)And Pelosi taking impeachment off table, there is no remedy.
SlogginThroughIt
(1,977 posts)
Bettie
(16,107 posts)that it must be overwhelmingly bipartisan.
Never going to happen, so he gets away with everything and destroys our government and our only recourse is to vote next year. If we're allowed to that is.
SlogginThroughIt
(1,977 posts)Things are pretty bad but when we use impeachment as the tool to investigate with then we are done. There are other methods to getting the Mueller report that need to be exhausted first. And keep in mind that when she said that we didn’t even have a completed Mueller report. Using impeachment in that manner may very well be disastrous for our party and make our road to governing a more difficult one to travel. We don’t even know that we definitely have the numbers in the house to bring impeachment. Nevermind it not succeeding in the senate. If we use impeachment for discovery (Mueller report) and it fails.... We will be cut off at the knees. Meanwhile there are other avenues to go after the report. All of which put the onus on Republicans refusing to provide it.
Those actions by republicans and Trump are great for our party in the runup to 2020. I don’t like where we are at. I don’t like what Trump is doing to our country. But pinning our hopes on impeachment at this time when we know it goes nowhere? I agree with Pelosi. He isn’t worth the gamble. If we can’t vote this guy out then hang it up.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)
Grasswire2
(13,569 posts)....and the American people would be digesting the evidence of high crimes detailed in that report.
We now expect that the most incriminating evidence will not be ours without a tedious court battle.
And so the filing of Articles of Impeachment becomes our fastest way to ensure that the American people are fully informed. A House impeachment inquiry allows IMMEDIATE discovery of evidence, and disclosure to the House of Representatives.
Here's the thing.
We can't wait for bipartisanship.
1. It's never coming and 2. Trump is rushing to consolidate power and use all means -- even unlawful -- to sow chaos and weaken the Separation of Powers.
If the American people are presented with the evidence now, critical mass of opposition to Trump will take root.
And that is sure as hell NOT going to happen if we dither and dally waiting for Republicans.
SlogginThroughIt
(1,977 posts)Why would impeachment allow is to see the report unlike all the other avenues that are supposed to allow us to see the report? We are never going to see that report before controlling the house, and senate at a minimum and likely will need the presidency as well.
Let’s say we bring impeachment and we say that we need it as evidence. And the republicans say no, just like they are now? Then what? They won’t give it to is and they will claim that all along we were just using it to try and oust the president. And they will have a media complicit or at least willing to go along with their story.
Ligyron
(7,632 posts)I think you're right, by George.
Trump is violating the law left and right and instructing other to do so as well with the agents at the border, the ACA lawsuit and his conspiracy w Munchkin to avoid turning over his tax returns as clearly required by law.
Like nah, nah, nah, nahnah, whatcha gonna do about it you bunch of, (insert vaginal reference here)?
Enough is enough. If that Report shows up redacted all to hell and gone, (which it surely will) go for it..
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Response to SlogginThroughIt (Reply #4)
ehrnst This message was self-deleted by its author.
SlogginThroughIt
(1,977 posts)Thanks.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)
Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #1)
ehrnst This message was self-deleted by its author.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)because impeaching without both of those would be political theatre that would hand a victory to DT on a silver platter along with ammuntion that Dems just hate him for no reason, along with wasting valuable time and resources? That "off the table?"
But FYI, Dems are prepared now to deploy impeachment in case the enough GOP Senators are willing to turn on him.
Is that clearer?
Dyedinthewoolliberal
(15,574 posts)ie: not enough votes to remove him, without Republican help in the Senate. Republican leadership is non-existent and public outrage doesn't appear to be sufficient either. So yeah, no impeachment..........
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Dyedinthewoolliberal
(15,574 posts)I really do. This is also a battle of perception. Impeaching him and failing to get the votes would be considered a victory to him and his supporters. We don't want to pick a fight we can't win...…… 
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)suegeo
(2,573 posts)We fight Fascists because they are Fascists, not because we are assured of a win.
The puppet not getting impeached is a win for him and his Nazi party.
It's the mafia vs. the law. Fight back against these mobbed up goons who stole an election, obstructed justice into the investigation of said crime/coup, and are now in the cover up stage + consolidating power.
Dyedinthewoolliberal
(15,574 posts)I'm not sure impeachment accomplishes anything unless it results in his being removed from office. The difference between Trump and Nixon is the Republican leadership in Congress weren't afraid of Nixon. That's why when threatened with impeachment if he didn't resign, Nixon capitulated. We do not have that hole card this time around. I believe getting the Mueller Report released will help with impeachment or forcing him to leave...….
Sugarcoated
(7,724 posts)Democrats need to do the right thing
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)even if it doesn't satisfy a need for vengance.
Sugarcoated
(7,724 posts)the perceived politics or the unlikely conviction in Senate. The need for vengeance, ie: a conviction, shouldn't be a factor. Nobody is above the law.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)What is "right" will be different to different people, depending on their individual priorities. You seem to think that it's always obvious, because you have very specific ideas on what is "right," so that must be the case for everyone, on any issue.
Do you vote to shut down the military base in your community knowing that doing so it will shutter many local businesses that have grown up around it?
Do you vote to build that much needed elementary school to ease overcrowding on historic park land that people use for recreation and hold very dear?
Can you tell everyone what the "right" thing to do when faced with those situations that aren't simple "right/wrong" choice as much as between "bad for some/bad for others"? Reality doesn't always present one with easy decisions, and sometimes people don't even perceive the actual options. What you dismiss as "perceived politics" are often what drives those decisions.
For instance, one could say that because alcohol is addictive, kills thousands every year via drunk driving and expensive medical conditions like liver failure, and destroys thousands of families, it's "wrong" to allow it. It is "right" to keep it out of people's hands.
But we know from experience that the choice isn't between "making it illegal" or "perpetuating the harm it does." We know that the best we can do is to mitigate the damage, keep it above ground and regulated, educate the public on the dangers, and provide avenues for recovery from addiction. "Doing what is right" is often very complicated, and any decision may have negative consequences.
There is a concept known as a "wicked problem" which defies "right" and "wrong" solutions. The concept that there is always a clear "right thing to do" doesn't fit into this kind of problem. Politicians deal with them all the time, even if it's not really clear to their constituents.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem
Among them are health care reform, poverty, systemic racism, the religious tension in the middle east, etc.
Emancipation was another example - when slaves were emancipated, Segregation and Jim Crow suppression replaced slavery because emancipation didn't solve the entrenched white supremacy. Emancipation is considered the "right" thing, however there were no real solutions or ideas on how to get white communities to accept free black people once they were free. There was no, "Slaves will be Emancipated and become members of society/ or they will remain Slaves" There were going to be ugly, horrific circumstances either way. The backlash against Emancipation by white supremacists was horrifying, and thousands of black citizens suffered torture and lynchings as a result.
Conviction of a POTUS with a GOP led Senate isn't just "unlikely" it's definitely not going to happen. What is driving the push for impeachment without a conviction indeed only serves to satiate a wish for vengance, understandable as it is, because it's not going to help Democrats or this country in any other way at all. There are more effective ways to use our time and energy that would be more productive to actually stopping his policies than political theatre (without hard evidence or bi-partisan support.)
Sugarcoated
(7,724 posts)One of the jobs of our legislators is oversight and enforcing the law. It's their job and if they don't do it, if they don't hold law breakers accountable for their crimes our system is a sham. There is a reason Republicans break the law over and over again and have for years, every administration to a fault: They are never held accountable, they know Dems will never do their job. For the good of the country , of course. *eyeroll*
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Then he gets to say that he's persecuted, and Dems just did this to smear him because they knew they couldn't remove him without the Senate.
You may be confusing impeachment with a criminal law process. It's not. It's a political process, and is carried out and decided by politicians, not a grand jury, and not a judge. It's not the Mafia vs the law, it's Democrats vs Republicans, and the Republicans have the Senate, and therefore hold the final decisionmaking power.
There is a difference between stupid, futile, self-defeating attacks rising out of anger to satify ones urge to 'slay the dragon', and effective battles that make the best use of resources and time and do some GOOD, while not being as big and dramatic as one who reads Tolkien might be picturing.
Give me the effective battle that gets somewhere over a very dramatic Hollywood bloodbath that makes one cheer and think that that special effects were worth the ticket price plus the popcorn. My main goal is to get us beyond this dystopia with something left intact of our institutions, schools and healthcare, not to "DESTROY THEM ALL, THE FACISTS!" Yeah, that would be gravy, but not at the sacrifice of the important stuff.
If Schumer was to offer Trump a deal - if he resigns, Pence resigns, they and their families can all leave the country on a plane tonight, leave everything, just never come back or do business in the U.S. again, and he took it, I would be over the moon. Sure, I'd love to see a perp walk, but I'll take DONE over a Hollywood ending if it's offered.
I don't need to see him on a hook in the town square if there's a way to do this more quickly and get us back on track. Then again, I'm a pragmatist when it comes to saving civilization. When one has kids, one gets different priorities.
jmowreader
(50,557 posts)When we see the real report, and not just the bullshit four-page thing Barr wrote before the report was ever issued, this country will divide into three camps: Democrats, Republicans and Trumpists. There are more Republicans than there are Trumpists, and they'll want his head.
As I've said before, the most important thing to a politician is his seat. If the Republicans tell their elected officials, "it's either you or him," Trump's gone.
ScratchCat
(1,990 posts)Is due to the fact the the economy is decent to pretty good for most people. Its a sad commentary. Most people aren't paying attention. They turn their head in disgust routinely, but shrug their shoulders when the media starts the "bothsideisms".
Farmer-Rick
(10,170 posts)Not what I'm hearing. Salaries are stagnant. Grain markets are crushed. Small farm Livestock production, usually the farm style of last resort for small farmers, are increasingly being taken over by factory contract farming that leads to nothing but debt. Large corporations, conglomerates and monopolies are sucking up every market so that it is almost impossible to start your own local business. Part timers and contractors fill the ranks of the emploed while having to pay twice the amount of taxes than what Warren Buffet pays. Do you think those $60,000 student loans that blossomed to over $100,000 thanks to lax laws in interest accural, are good for the economy? Do you think ruinous medical costs make for a good economy? Do you think a country with more people in poverty than in the middle class makes for a good economy?
Do you think Trump is NOT jiggling the numbers? The man who canot speak a sentence without lying, is letting his government workers publish the true economic statistics? I don't think so.
No, the economy sucks for most people. As my daughter said, it costs time and money to get out to a protest. And then what if you are injured? You can't afford medical bills. And what if you are arrested? You can't afford a lawyer or fines and jail time. No, keeping people poor is what's keeping them out of the streets, for now.
ScratchCat
(1,990 posts)
Eyeball_Kid
(7,432 posts)The countries with laws and customs bent toward the middle and working classes have responded in the past to political pressure by the middle and professional classes, partly because middle class citizens have time outside of their jobs to consider political action and involvement. Those countries with perpetually low wage jobs and a tiny middle class/professional class are beset with a very long work week with little leisure time and low income. Those with leisure time are more prone to become activists in civic affairs. We've known for decades that the US middle class is shrinking due to increases in the high cost of living and stagnant wages.
Farmer-Rick
(10,170 posts)
You are so right
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Just because Trump keeps saying the economy is great, doesn't mean it's true. Sure, if you are a millionaire or a billionaire, it's great, but for the rest of us - even if we are still employed and holding our own - there is still a huge amount of economic fear out there that the other shoe is going to drop at any time now.
How much bullshit are people going to put up with? I just think about my purchasing power now versus 20 years ago and it sucks.
True Blue American
(17,984 posts)That should do it.
Even Barr was on the spot today by his backing the lawsuit. He finally answered that he did not think the Court would simply cancel the ACA. They would make time to fix it! Ha!
NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)the numbers have been pretty good in terms of GDP growth, job creation, inflation and unemployment, which are what most people pay attention to when watching the nightly news. Most of it is leftover from Obama, and also the "sugar high" of the tax cuts and crazy deficit spending. The debt and deficit numbers are so HUGE that most people can't comprehend how much $1 trillion is, let alone over $20 trillion.
and, Trump promotes ANY good number as the best thing ever without much push back from Democrats. Bad numbers are generally ignored by Trump. A lot of times, I'll see the Trumpian talking head say that the economy is great, and the Democratic response is "yes, but..." most people don't hear beyond the "yes"
Obama usually let the economic numbers speak for themselves, which allowed Fox News to control the narrative most of the time and why so many people were unhappy when the economy was doing pretty good.
stopwastingmymoney
(2,042 posts)999 Americans out of a thousand don’t know that, I’d bet
ETA for clarity: *example of bad numbers being ignored
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)fear being primaried if they make a move to stop him.
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)rile up his base
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)I'm not recalling where I have replied to you, let alone contradicted you on anything in this thread...
It seems as though you are following me around on other threads now. Should I be flattered?
Here is my response that I gave to you:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11996097
You stated that Nancy was "afraid" to rile up his base, as though she was a coward, and that just didn't please you at all, in the least. When one states that a woman 'fears' something, it's usually calling her weak. Whereas if a man refrains from an unwise action, or states that he fears a negative outcome from an action, it's often referred to as "being realistic."
I have said on other threads that the GOP was promising their base in 2018 that Dems would immediately impeach Trump if they took the house, in order to get them riled up to vote for GOP congresspersons. That is the kind of unneccessary riled up that none of us want. Even you have to admit that. Refusing to stoke that furnace and funding for GOP candidates might be considered a wise move, yes?
I recall being supportive of Pelosi for being realistic and throwing water on that promise while trolling DT in the process by saying "He's not worth it." Unfortunately, many men on the left felt emasculated by that as well when they found out that they weren't going to get the televised impeachment gladiator match that they were "owed" by the Speaker.
We don't need to repeat the stupid mistakes of the GOP, like the pointless "Benghazi" investigations that were clearly about throwing red meat to the base, while wasting taxpayer money on something they knew they were not going to win, AND handing their opponent a win on a silver platter. They were convinced they were going to show how weak, emotional and confused she would be under questioning, and it backfired. Spectacularly.
Handing Trump a win in an impeachment that doesn't take him out (which is what would happen WHEN the GOP Senate doesn't vote to remove him) would be an idiotic mistake of epic proportions, and would indeed rile up his base uneccessarily to defend him in 2020.
Yes, I would rather Speaker Pelosi "fear" the result of a spectacularly stupid stunt simply to soothe the anxiety of legions of Lefty men across the country who feel "disrespected" by her doing what she was chosen by her peers to do, which is use her vast experience and strategize, instead of going Clint Eastwood on Dear Leader.
She is going lead and make the hard decisions, and those who say that she's "unlikeable" or "weak and afraid" when she doesn't make them happy are unfortunately going to be left to stew in their own juice while she does her damn job.
certainot
(9,090 posts)directly proportion to the left/dem's ignorance of the rw talk radio monopoly - the ONLY advantage they have, and advantage they've had for 30 years, ignored for 30 years
defacto7
(13,485 posts)And this is one of strongest performing areas in the country.
Soxfan58
(3,479 posts)And the World Court to step in. I know they will be powerless but just to stand against this would be something.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)to ease the situation at border? More help with processing asylum seekers? Beds, shelters, food, etc.
This may be dumb question, sorry. Is it because Trump's WH has to execute any efforts to alleviate things?
Horse with no Name
(33,956 posts)Let me see if I can find a link.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-national-emergency-20190214-story,amp.html
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Specifically for the housing and well being of asylum seekers.
So basically you saying money is there...trump just not putting where compassionate people feel he should?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)one can waste a lot of energy being mad at representatives for things they have no control over, and not seeing when they are indeed being very effective....
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)is with the lack of care and ability to process people. If Congress appropriated funds with monies mandated for this purpose, trump is obligated to fulfill. If not, they should appropriate more $$.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)do the monies come from, and what is it taken away from?
How does this process work along with the executive order declaring "the Emergency" at the border, which is also drawing monies from other projects? What say does Homeland Security have in determining where those funds are used?
Why do you think that this has not already been done, or being done today by COB, if it is as easy as you state?
What if you are wrong, and it's not that simple?
Will that stop the blaming Democratic leaders in Congress for any and all things that Trump does, and hence the negative consequences that are a direct result?
Have you forgotten why the federal government shut down for over a month? Google it.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)I'm not suprised.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)fescuerescue
(4,448 posts)anonymous people on the Internet demand that you answer a bunch of questions.
I can only guess that they teach high school part time and like giving quizzes.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)KPN
(15,645 posts)power by letting it bother you.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)that's why it seems so difficult. Hopefully it will convince people to vote against him in 2020. And against the Republicans.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)to do their job.
Why is that?
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)
Initech
(100,075 posts)And that is scary. 
Texin
(2,596 posts)There will be nothing the KGOP will not allow this cretin to do.
I'm very doubtful we will survive as a republic or perhaps as a species as a consequence.
Moostache
(9,895 posts)and then realize, anthropomorphic climate change has already started the most recent one and it NEVER ends pretty for those larger than a hamster.
The species is doomed alongside the rest of large terrestrial mammals and aquatic life as well. Hell, we are experiencing a massive loss of INSECT BIOMASS right now...the bugs go, and we can do nothing but follow into extinction in the long run...
SKKY
(11,807 posts)...of their Supervisors. Their Supervisors told them, "It is against the law to deny someone seeking asylum." Even at the border, it seems cooler heads are at least in some instances prevailing.
NJCher
(35,669 posts)Trump will not say it, but he would love impeachment. It would be all about him and he would glory in coalescing the headlines about himself. I hate this idiot as much as the next person and I cannot wait to get rid of him, but I think we should get used to the idea that no one takes him seriously and we should look at his ridiculous actions as just more acting out.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)that Democrats were just trying to smear him, since they knew it wouldn't work.
Paladin
(28,257 posts)I going to try to view the whole thing as a social science experiment: let's just see how much fascist shit trump can get away with, absent any meaningful response from a Democratic Party that has misplaced its spine. History is not going to be kind to us.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)NJCher
(35,669 posts)in hearing and legislative matters.
We have a very impressive group of candidates on the Democratic side. The most time effective thing we can do is get behind the best candidate and win the presidency.
treestar
(82,383 posts)the rule of law - thinks he can order things regardless of what the law is. No wonder he wants to get rid of judges. Get rid of the judicial branch, which interprets the laws. He wants to be the law.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)He doesn't ask permission, he just does things when they pop into his head, and then Congress, to the extent of their power, reverses or mitigates damage. Without the cooperation of the GOP Senate, we can't remove him from office other than to vote him out.
Saying that "we" are "allowing" him to do this implies that "we" are complicit and responsible for his actions. "We" does not include anyone who voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, or any Democrat in congress or the Senate. It sounds as though you believe that anyone that doesn't physically prevent him from doing something is complicit, as though it is "our" responsibility to do so.
It's like saying, "Why did you allow that driver to rear end your car when you were stopped at the light?" Yes, you were driving on the road, and yes, you were not moving your vehicle at the light, but that wasn't being complicit, or "allowing" the damage to your car by that other driver.
Elections have consequences, he's POTUS now, and him doing this kind of shit is one of those consequences.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)do that, so we'll do nothing. I would much rather have future generations read the list of impeachable offenses on record in history books and have his name listed as a president who was impeached than some silly one liner saying Democrats did nothing to stop him because they didn't want to.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)So if Democrats aren't impeaching him, they are "doing nothing?" False dillema. You seem to be fond of those.
Nixon wasn't impeached, but we know what his impeachable offenses were. Look it up if you don't believe me. We don't need impeachment to damn him to history any more than we need statues of Confederate leaders in town squares to damn the Confederacy to the trash heap of history.
Yet another False dillema - unless Dems impeach him, there will be nothing in the history books about him but a "some silly one liner saying Democrats did nothing to stop him because they didn't want to." I would rather have future generations talk about the health care they have, and the education they could afford because Democrats weren't wasting their time trying to please people with a mentality of never ever being satisfied with what they did with an incredibly stupid display of political bad judgement that didn't do anything but make Trump look like a winner.
You keep accusing Democratic leaders of "not wanting to remove him." What evidence do you have that they could be doing something (other than a pointless, futile exercise in political theatre by impeaching him when we know it won't remove him) and they just refuse to. That makes no sense, if one actually keeps informed about what Congress is doing... or just even looks at the homepage of DU..
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1017538026
What actual evidence convinces you that Democratic leaders are not doing everything legally possible to mitigate the damage Trump is doing? None has been offered. That seems more like someone wanting a scapegoat for their own anxiety.
It looks like no actual names of Democratic leadership who "allowing this" are forthcoming, and no one has given examples any concrete things that they aren't doing that they can (other than "Nancy had better impeach him now, or I'm going to remain very very upset," and you've been shown plenty of what they are doing to resist.
.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)post it. Having now seen, from your responses to others, that snark is your preferred language, I will respond.
To begin, Trump is not my president. He may be yours, but I require a POTUS selected by Americans in a free and fair election, not one preferred and owned by Russians.
Next, that example about the cars was not just lame; it was inaccurate. You see, when the same driver in the same car rear-ends you at a stoplight the 3rd, 4th, 5th etc. time, then yeah, you are "allowing" it.
There was no mention or even an implication in my post that anyone "physically" intervene with Trump, so, cute Ii'l shruggy icons aside, I'm left wondering why you thought a strawman necessary.
We "allow" the Trump regime to continue to consolidate its power as long as we are not doing everything possible to stop him. Some alternatives might not interest you as they involve "coloring outside the lines". "Radical" things like a national strike; several million people converging on the Capitol Building and the White House; civil disobedience on a national scale; in general, lots of "We're mad as hell and we're not going to take this any more!"
I will close by saying that I will not actually respond further to you as we both know that would be useless. Feel free to characterize this as my being a coward or having no answer to your faultless logic. If it makes you feel better, just imagine that, after each of your posts, I respond "WhatEVER!"
marieo1
(1,402 posts)I am all for impeachment but if we do we must remember who will be in charge then, Pence and the rest of the wacko's. I wish there was a way we could impeach all of them. DJT has surrounded himself with a bunch of criminals, white nationalists, wacko's to protect him from impeachment Pelosi knows to impeach DJT is to jump out of the frying pan into the fire!! Smart lady!!
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)One year of trump
Paladin
(28,257 posts)
shanti
(21,675 posts)The devil you know, and all that...at least he's not demented.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)To pass, any of our Dems could beat him.
KPN
(15,645 posts)what we won't allow, but what or whom is the problem.
The easy and convenient answer is tRump and those who support him. But when we allow this stuff to happen despite its immorality, despite its horror, its sheer egregiousness and its enormity -- it strikes me that we inescapably are part of the problem. Afterall, we are the majority. How long will we allow this to go on?
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)KPN
(15,645 posts)the very least. Where is our collective outrage? We are the majority are we not?
raccoon
(31,110 posts)On the White House lawn, they wouldn’t do anything.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)Eliot Rosewater
(31,111 posts)We are being attacked from all sides, including a group allegedly on the left who are NOT who they say they are.
Cetacea
(7,367 posts)But not sure which group you are referring to.
stillcool
(32,626 posts)are impotent...as is the GOP. We had protests just last week, but no one seems to care about that. Maybe we're too far gone. I know I am.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)Trump is trying to make us the party of illegal immigration. He's run on that issue almost exclusively, why wouldn't use the chance to weaponize asylum seekers?
Ultimately, whatever court decisions that have gone before his term in office will be appealed, and he knows that he's got a majority on the SCOTUS.
We need to keep our focus on the American people, their jobs, and their healthcare.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)isn't a president directly ordering a government agency to violate legal rulings and federal law an impeachable offense??
Mr.Bill
(24,289 posts)The republican House would have impeached her the first week she was in office.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Atticus
(15,124 posts)and, to their credit, they told their employees NOT to "obey" and that they could face personal liability if they did.
