- Dragon Ball Z Forum
- →
- The Lounge
- →
- Deep Discussion
- →
- Impeach Trump Now
| We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum. If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away. Click here to Register! If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk If you're already a member please log in to your account: |
| Impeach Trump Now | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 30 2017, 12:38 AM (5,036 Views) | |
| * Yu Narukami | Feb 9 2017, 12:48 AM Post #76 |
Izanagi!
|
When did Obama use Executive Orders or propose policies to do things such as gagging different departments and organisations, manipulate stock by tweeting about certain companies, get rid of environmental regulations, get rid of the regulations on Wall Street among countless other damaging moves that were made that target the American people? Also, DeVos and Sessions both got confirmed, so anything that happens from here on out in relation to them is all on him. Honestly, the worst picks I've ever seen and I wish the GOP would grow actual spines and provide some level of meaningful, lasting scrutiny instead of acting tough during hearings and statements, just to back-pedal once they're voting. |
 |
 
|
| Political Piper | Feb 9 2017, 06:23 PM Post #77 |
 
|
That argument doesn't work because I can say the same about Trump. When did Trump use Executive Orders or propose policies to unilaterally supersede the nations immigration laws by unconstitutionally bypassing congress, an act Obama himself said 22 times the President cannot do? Or Obama's Executive Order 13672, which forced federal contractors to violate their religious beliefs which restricted their First Amendment liberties by forcing them to use vendors who disregard the religios teachings on marriage and gender identity, as an example which was the case for military chaplins? Or when Obama's DED threatened to revoke federal funding to schools that did not permit transgender laws which expressed transgender schools can use any bathroom they wish? Or when the IRS began targeting the Tea Party when they begin speaking out against Obama? I could go on and on with these examples, as I'm sure you could as well. So this type of argument is irrelevant and does not support your argument, nor mine. As for Jeff Sessions hearing, I think Ted Cruz put it best this way. Spoiler: click to toggle I'll quote Newton's 3rd law but change it a little bit - For every hypocritical comment or action on the right, there is an equal and hypocritical comment or action on the left. Edited by Political Piper, Feb 9 2017, 06:25 PM.
|
|
My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos FOOD FOR THOUGHT: | |
|
|
|
| * Yu Narukami | Feb 9 2017, 08:23 PM Post #78 |
|
Izanagi!
|
I mean, sure, talk about being constitutional when Trump's undoubtedly got a few conflicts of interest up his sleeve. Don't act as though Trump wouldn't act in an unconstitutional way; Congress is already giving him an easy ride when they really shouldn't be, the fact that he hasn't divested his business interests, as well as the continued insistence on not releasing his tax returns, means that we don't know whether any of his actions will end up intentionally benefiting his interests or not. I mean, the Executive Order has been temporarily stopped and it's fact that it was discriminatory against Muslims. So, what exactly, the order stopped Federal contractors from discriminating against people based on sexual orientation and gender identity? Where exactly were they forced to go to vendors who disagreed with their religious views? Again, an action that prevented schools from discriminating against transgender students. What's the whole controversy about transgender people being able to use the bathroom designated for the gender they identify as? In regards to the IRS, do you have any evidence that they were targeting the Tea Party when they began to speak out against Obama, and that it was for that reason? The DOJ investigated the incident and found nothing, the FBI found nothing that could end up leading to the IRS being charged for a federal crime. Ted Cruz, seriously? The guy who watched Trump criticise and slag off his wife, claimed to be against him and then ended up supporting him unequivocally in the end? As did Paul Ryan? These guys are spineless, and they're the very definition of being 'hyper-partisan'. |
|
|
|
| Political Piper | Feb 9 2017, 10:49 PM Post #79 |
|
It's also a fact that the majority of terrorism is compromised of Muslims who follow a radical viewpoint of the Quran. I don't think doing a ban on a country composed of Christians will really deter "radical Islam." You can't argue that it is discriminatory toward Muslims just because the temporary ban is directed at terrorist prone nations that just so happen to mostly contain Muslims. It just does't work that way.
Believe it or not but there are people out there who would abuse that. Maybe it's a pervert who likes to see women in a private state, or maybe kids do it as a joke to show off for their friends. I don't know about you but I wouldn't want a grown man to be in the bathroom with my young daughter. Should the privacy of the majority be compromised to satisfy the needs of a few? Either way, it confirms my earlier post that this bill is extremely abnormal.
Hard evidence? No. Just confessions from top IRS officials who apologized for the targeting as well as other circumstantial evidence. But no, no hard evidence. 1 2 3 4
Just cause someone may be spineless or act like a douche, doesn't mean their arguments are flawed and compromised. Isn't there a stereotype that all high school nerds are weak willed yet incredible smart? Attacking his personality isn't the same as attacking his statements of incidents. |
|
My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos FOOD FOR THOUGHT: | |
|
|
|
| Daemon Keido | Feb 9 2017, 10:53 PM Post #80 |
Warmaster of Chaos
|
The majority of terror plots made and broken up in America are in fact not muslim exfremist in particular but religious extremist in general. Keep in mind that any Neo-Nazi, KKK or extreme-right group that demands violence against ANYONE not them count as terrorists. Every firebombed PP was by a terrorist. And how many of those peroetrators were Muslim? |
A Shadow is merely Darkness in the presence of Light Thanks Kid Buu for this awesome sig! The Emperor Protects | |
|
|
|
| * Yu Narukami | Feb 9 2017, 11:02 PM Post #81 |
|
Izanagi!
|
Really? I had no idea that Saudi Arabia was part of the ban, that's news to me. Tell me, do you really think that if a person who's cis-gendered is unhinged enough to go into the other bathroom, the prospect of breaking a law would stop them? How would you even enforce it? The only way this even makes sense is if there are CCTV cameras and security guards outside of each toilet in the country, and is that the case right now? Actually, I was talking about Cruz' lack of integrity. He made a principled stand against Trump, and then what did he do? He rolled over and just accepted it because he wanted to stay within party lines. Tell me, what's more 'hyper-partisan' than giving up your principles just to fall in line with your party? |
|
|
|
| Political Piper | Feb 10 2017, 12:09 AM Post #82 |
|
Nope, Saudi Arabia is not part of the ban, just like 42 other Muslim countries aren't part of the ban. It's hard to ban a religion when 86% of Muslim countries are able to enter. There are plenty of people who are sick enough to go into a women's bathroom. Are you really okay with a grown man standing next to a young girl in the same bathroom? Or better yet, do you think a young girl would like that? Or even better yet, should the requests of a few dictate the scenario for the many? That is one of the biggest hypocrisy's with the progressive ideology. They are all for individual liberty but at the expensive of other people's liberty. Should a religious baker be forced to deliver goods to a gay couple if the baker deems homosexual as against their religion? Which has happened recently but I can't remember the name. Likewise, should a priest or pastor? 66% of Americans oppose Transgender laws on businesses, schools, and public facilities. If people believe that it is the right to make children feel uncomfortable then they should also believe it is the right of those children to feel comfortable. So how do we fix this standstill? We could: 1) Base this issue on what the majority of Americans think and go from there. 2) Let the states decide. The state legislatures understand better than anyone how progressive they are and aren't. Or 3) Create separate bathrooms specifically designed for transgender so everyone is comfortable, but then we get to the problem of who pays for it. Let's not forget that for centuries there has been a separation between the privacy of men and women. The problem is that Obama made that decision for everyone and if they didn't reply he would cut funding. He violated the rights and civil liberties of the majority to satisfy the progressive minority. What if someone gets in to office and makes it so every private business has to adopt the transgender law? When I was young and went to the bathroom, I felt uncomfortable when there was older men in there. I couldn't imagine if I was a girl in the same scenario. If someone sees a man walk into a girls bathroom they may think somethings up because they know a man isn't suppose to be in there. Maybe he's doing something maleficent to somebody in there? That person may feel obligated to let someone know. This new belief takes away that extra safety not. So my solution would be to let the states decide. But I think we have gotten very far off topic. Edited by Political Piper, Feb 10 2017, 12:10 AM.
|
|
My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos FOOD FOR THOUGHT: | |
|
|
|
| * Yu Narukami | Feb 10 2017, 12:29 AM Post #83 |
|
Izanagi!
|
And you think that people who are unhinged enough to seriously consider doing that in the first place are not going to do it now? They're not going to care if they have an 'excuse' for it, so arguing that bathroom laws somehow 'empower' them is absolutely ridiculous. As I said, what's to stop a grown cis-gendered man walking into a Women's bathroom normally? Are there guards outside? As for how many Americans support transgender laws on businesses, schools and public facilities, could I ask where you got that information? Would it happen to be the Wilson Perkins Allen Opinion Research survey? 'Cause, PRRI also did a survey, and look at the findings; https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/americans-are-embracing-transgender-rights/497444/ As for denying services on Religious grounds, where do ya think a good stopping point would be? If you oppose gay marriage on religious grounds, that'd mean that you also oppose homosexuality in general on religious grounds, right? Would it be okay to deny any service, even, say, serving a homosexual man in a shop just because they're gay and you're religious? 'Cause if not, that's not consistent, and the 'justification' for not baking a cake goes out the window. Edit: Also, have a look at this, it's really interesting. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/01/trump-immigration-ban-terrorism/514361/ Edited by Yu Narukami, Feb 10 2017, 12:31 AM.
|
|
|
|
| Political Piper | Feb 10 2017, 04:03 AM Post #84 |
|
No, there's not guards stationed outside. Not every perv is bold and daring to walk into a place they are forbidden. Granting them access though takes that hesitation away. It's a lot easier to walk into a place that says Welcome anyone can enter, than keep out. As for your other question.
There is no stopping point. Religious liberty and Freedom of speech wasn't the "First" Amendment for a random reason. A shop owner who owns his own private shop can and should be able to deny service to anyone he chooses, especially, and I can't stress this enough, especially if that person may intentionally, or unintentionally, violate his religious liberty. Just like a KKK member should be able to hold hate-filled rallies and preach how he hates anyone but the white race. That is the ethos of the First Amendment. It is EXTREMELY important that that right never goes away. Like EXTREMELY EXTREMELY important. We may not like it or agree with it, but it doesn't matter. It is their right. Make sense? Edited by Political Piper, Feb 10 2017, 04:16 AM.
|
|
My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos FOOD FOR THOUGHT: | |
|
|
|
| Daemon Keido | Feb 10 2017, 04:40 AM Post #85 |
|
Warmaster of Chaos
|
Dude, they are comitting a crime in touching the child in such a way regardless of their permission to be there. Any pervert willing to go to such lengths will not care if they were allowed to be in the bathroom to begin with. Do you worry this much about gay adults doing this to children of the same sex in bathrooms as well? Your argument could just as easily be placed upon them. But it fails much more readily because more people are able to admit that gay people are no more likely to illegal perversion than straight people. And soon the same will be true of transgender people compared to cisgendered people. You are assuming that criminals are waiting for the crime to no longer exist so that they can more easily commit the crime. This is not the case. When pot became legal in certain states, did it become easier to be a pot dealer, or harder? Harder, I think most would agree. And yet, by your argument deployed against this criminal act, it should have in fact made it much easier to be a dealer. The fact is, you are attributing the restrictions of morality upon choices made on impulse and oportunity, where such forward thinking is not often applied. And on the second point you made...... If it is such an important right that religious belief transcend any other choice, is it fair to allow a medical professional from refusing service to a patient that requires it of them in a religious belief basis? Would it be right for an oncologist to refuse to treat a gay man with testicular cancer because his religion requires he do so? And if it does not, why must this be the cutoff, if the religious freedom is such an important right? The right also enforces freedom FROM religion, form having another faith forced down your throat. And that goes both ways, Piper. Both for the religious, and nonreligious. Otherwise the right is useless. Edited by Daemon Keido, Feb 10 2017, 04:42 AM.
|
|
A Shadow is merely Darkness in the presence of Light Thanks Kid Buu for this awesome sig! The Emperor Protects | |
|
|
|
| Political Piper | Feb 10 2017, 12:41 PM Post #86 |
|
You are confusing looking - which would not be a crime, with assaulting - which is a crime. But since this is a Trump topic and I have been told in the past to stay on the subject if I start going off topic, I'm assuming all three of us will be getting warned by a mod soon when they read the posts. So as for Trump's impeachment. Senator Waters is the first to call for impeachment due to Trump working with Putin and Putin invading Korea. I do feel bad for the Korean's, they were a good ally to us. Who do you think will fall on the bandwagon next? |
|
My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos FOOD FOR THOUGHT: | |
|
|
|
| Tinny | Feb 10 2017, 01:27 PM Post #87 |
 
|
Took me a while to respond but I can understand if you're fed up with the obstruction so far, however that's just a symptom of a much more polarized political populace as well as having honestly a system that encourages this in our two party system. However, words can be dangerous, yelling "fire!" In a crowded theater can get you arrested because of the damage that single word can do. Words are also powerful, and arguably something everyone can use, which is why they're enshrined within the document to begin with. They aren't protecting some frilly nonsense, they're protecting one of the most powerful tools the American people have. When you are the president, not simply the head of government but head of state and a symbol of America, your word is especially powerful can decide much, beck as we've already seem, stock prices can be effected with his tweets. He's the president, he doesn't get the luxury of being able to say whatever and have it just be "oh he said something stupid." He is now in charge of being the face of America, not just to other nations, but to us. So yes, the question of "Is the president respectable" is important, maybe not as important as his executive orders, but it's still part of his job, to suggest that his job isn't also to be an shining example of what America can be, to show our legitimacy and national unity, is a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to be the head of state. There's no Queen Elizabeth for us to look at as the symbol of our country, just the president, who takes the role of both head of government, and head of state. Also the transgender bathroom thing is pretty damn minor to compare to the president often saying patently false things or him trying to "Joke" about destroying a judges career. And even of it weren't, I still think your argument is ridiculous, what do we do about a older gay man and a young boy, which can happen right more? In fact I think you realize this considering you didn't bother to answer Daemon's question on that. So what then, if you think the transgender thing is bad, what do you suggest we do about the homosexual who is already allowed in the men's/women's bathroom? Edit: the rest of your post I can at minimum understand, but President and Trump ate one in the same more, they both have to be the best person they can be and a shining example for the country, if not the world, to follow as part of their job as head of state. And Trump completely and utterly fails here. Being the president is easily the toughest job in the world, more or less because you are expected to be the perfect person. Trump hasn't even shown himself to be a mature person. Edit: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2017/PPP_Release_National_21017.pdf Pretty sure the PPP doesn't support Trump but wow, those numbers... Probably gonna make a separate thread just for this poll later but wow, among other things, about half the population super impeachment, and apparently a plurality of the people (along with people who aren't sure and people who side with Trump), at 48% think SNL has more credibility than our president. Sad, but not surprising. Edited by Tinny, Feb 10 2017, 03:55 PM.
|
 Above signature created by Graffiti 
| |
|
|
| Sam | Feb 11 2017, 05:22 AM Post #88 |
It takes a mere second for treasure to turn to trash.
|
Nobody is getting warned  . Just try to stay on topic. Good of you to notice. I mostly agree with Tinny and Daemon on this, to be honest myself and try to stay on topic. That study/poll he linked is quite interesting.I think the man is deeply disturbed. I actually am beginning to doubt his simple mental competency. The issue of impeachment does look to be a not-so insignificant possibility somewhere down the road. Edited by Sam, Feb 11 2017, 05:23 AM.
|
|
WoW Legion Ending - Thank you Darker for making this into one, big incredible gif! <3 | |
|
|
|
| EMIYA | May 17 2017, 04:17 PM Post #89 |
"I am the bone of my sword."
|
I was thinking of making another topic but with this at least still on the 1st page, I'll just update this one. So if you haven't been caught up yet...and if you haven't...welcome to Earth fellow alien. A lot has happened since the creation of this topic and the issues of people wanting Trump to be impeached. There were a lot of personal reasons for it but perhaps not necessarily enough legal reasons to have him impeached, not too directly at least. Well, while impeachment has not come yet, I think its safe to say that the current levels of actions our so called "President" has taken has finally hit a nerve where even fellow Republicans are finally putting their foot down. Many are calling it Watergate 2.0, in fact some are saying that this may be worse than Watergate. Of course this thing really got to hand after Trump fired Comey, an act that was egregiously shocking to all parties. At once there was already a notable difference in what Trump was saying and what the White House officials spoke, leading to contradicting views on the matter and putting in questionable views on the issue at hand. The firing of Comey was potentially seen as an obstruction of justice and an act to hinder the investigation into the Trump team's ties with Russia. According to the memo by Comey, Trump repeatedly told him to cease investigation into Flynn's ties with Russia. And then, in what may be the biggest bombshell dropped since the Watergate Scandal, we find out that not only did Trump only have Russian officials in the White House and refused American journalists. But also gave extremely classified information, supposedly on ISIS, to Russian diplomats. I don't want to be the one to call out "Impeachment" but I think its almost certain we have come to a tipping point. The pot is overflowing now, there is a big mess all over the floor and its only a matter of time before someone is caught. If the idea of Trump getting impeached was even remotely possible before, than what can possibly happen during a scandal such as this? We've proven time adn time again Trumps own personal incompetence with the office. We've proven time and time again in inability to provide even some of his most basic plans to the American people. His wall...a failure. The new healthcare plan? A failure an widely criticized. A man who constantly fired anyone who tried to impede him in anyway like Yates and now Comey. Trumps foolishness and incompetence has never been surprising and for most of us, we know he's not capable of running the country. Unfortunately this wasn't enough for others...until now. Now, with the acts of Trump going as far as to risk highly classified information to Russian diplomats, and a gun so hot that forget smoke, you can see a finger on the trigger, things have become a lot more intense than they've ever been when it has come to Trump. Democrats are pissed, Republicans are pissed. Our allies, the one who expected us to keep such information secret are pissed. The general public is pissed. Is this...as they say...the straw that breaks the camel's back? Or do you think that even this isn't enough? |
|
|
|
| + Saiyan Paladin | May 17 2017, 06:02 PM Post #90 |
 
|
Nah, he'll just have Bannon or Sessions do/say something egregiously stupid this week and the media will shift their entire focus to that and this controversy will fade away just like anything else he has done. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
 |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Deep Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
 4:58 PM Jul 13
|
Theme Designed by McKee91
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy