Do you think Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?

[amvet]

8 hours ago, Jingthing said:

You saw the video. The answers are there. You do not even attempt to debate in good faith. Waste of time!

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I watched the video and I read the transcript and there are no facts there.  It is a hit piece.  I'm not a Trump supporter.  I'm a smart supporter both in leadership and response.  I don't lie or call people names or engage in any gamesmanship while posting.  I watched the video in hopes there would be something to back up the claims by Clapper and the other intelligence chiefs of the USA but it is just like the weapons of mass destruction.  Nothing there.  They are attempting to mislead the American people again to suit their own agenda.  It is an anti Putin diatribe offering no proof of any collusion and they left out all the facts of verifiable collusion by a foreign government to influence American elections by a foreign power the British. 

[craigt3365]

8 hours ago, amvet said:

I realize you can't discuss the facts because there are none but I'll try.  1.  What information did Putin get?  2.  What did he do to change that information and make it a weapon?   

Putin's goal is to destabilize the West. Cause chaos. Breakup the EU. And then reinstate Russia as a global power like they use to be. Oh...and make him the richest man in the world in the process.

 

He's messing around in many different countries. France, UK, Georgia, etc. Amazing you aren't aware of this.

[craigt3365]

46 minutes ago, amvet said:

I watched the video and I read the transcript and there are no facts there.  It is a hit piece.  I'm not a Trump supporter.  I'm a smart supporter both in leadership and response.  I don't lie or call people names or engage in any gamesmanship while posting.  I watched the video in hopes there would be something to back up the claims by Clapper and the other intelligence chiefs of the USA but it is just like the weapons of mass destruction.  Nothing there.  They are attempting to mislead the American people again to suit their own agenda.  It is an anti Putin diatribe offering no proof of any collusion and they left out all the facts of verifiable collusion by a foreign government to influence American elections by a foreign power the British. 

Read the article above. It lays the problems out quite nicely.

[Jingthing]

54 minutes ago, amvet said:

I watched the video and I read the transcript and there are no facts there.  It is a hit piece.  I'm not a Trump supporter.  I'm a smart supporter both in leadership and response.  I don't lie or call people names or engage in any gamesmanship while posting.  I watched the video in hopes there would be something to back up the claims by Clapper and the other intelligence chiefs of the USA but it is just like the weapons of mass destruction.  Nothing there.  They are attempting to mislead the American people again to suit their own agenda.  It is an anti Putin diatribe offering no proof of any collusion and they left out all the facts of verifiable collusion by a foreign government to influence American elections by a foreign power the British. 

Oh geeze, dude. So dishonest. Why do you bother? Do you think people won't notice.

I never said the video was about collusion. That's a sleazy game to invent what was claimed and then say you didn't see the evidence of what wasn't claimed.

The collusion possibility is still under investigation and we do not know for sure YET either way. WAIT ... like everyone else.

But what we already know should be DEEPLY DISTURBING to all Americans, regardless of partisanship. 

The video was about Putin's motivations, the evidence Putin was deeply involved, and what is already known was done -- WEAPONIZATION (using the most damaging TIMING possible) of information by a hostile foreign power (RUSSIA) to damage the candidacy of Clinton. 

Edited November 24, 2017 by Jingthing

[Srikcir]

8 hours ago, amvet said:

I realize you can't discuss the facts because there are none but I'll try.  1.  What information did Putin get?  2.  What did he do to change that information and make it a weapon?   

Representative Jackie Speier, a California Democrat who sits on the House committee - “ .... Russia was able to weaponize your platforms to divide us, to dupe us and to discredit democracy.”

For example (one of 15 examples shown in the article):

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/us/politics/russia-2016-election-facebook.html

(the biggest collection, put together by two American researchers who asked not to be identified to avoid online harassment, is posted at https://medium.com/@ushadrons)

[amvet]

34 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Putin's goal is to destabilize the West. Cause chaos. Breakup the EU. And then reinstate Russia as a global power like they use to be. Oh...and make him the richest man in the world in the process.

 

He's messing around in many different countries. France, UK, Georgia, etc. Amazing you aren't aware of this.

If you want to talk we need to agree on terms first. There is a difference between hacking and phishing.  What did the Russians hack?

[amvet]

22 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Representative Jackie Speier, a California Democrat who sits on the House committee - “ .... Russia was able to weaponize your platforms to divide us, to dupe us and to discredit democracy.”

For example (one of 15 examples shown in the article):

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/us/politics/russia-2016-election-facebook.html

(the biggest collection, put together by two American researchers who asked not to be identified to avoid online harassment, is posted at https://medium.com/@ushadrons)

How is a facebook ad to outlaw the burka or promote Trump rallies in Florida weaponizing information? Did you read the article you posted?  How much money was spent on facebook ads supposedly subscribed by Putin?  Why is that important?  Because the amount is trivial when compared to Democratic party expenditures. 

[amvet]

34 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Oh geeze, dude. So dishonest. Why do you bother? Do you think people won't notice.

I never said the video was about collusion. That's a sleazy game to invent what was claimed and then say you didn't see the evidence of what wasn't claimed.

The collusion possibility is still under investigation and we do not know for sure YET either way. WAIT ... like everyone else.

But what we already know should be DEEPLY DISTURBING to all Americans, regardless of partisanship. 

The video was about Putin's motivations, the evidence Putin was deeply involved, and what is already known was done -- WEAPONIZATION (using the most damaging TIMING possible) of information by a hostile foreign power (RUSSIA) to damage the candidacy of Clinton. 

I have not seen anything in that video that was about American elections meddling that was DEEPLY DISTURBING.  Show me something.  What was WEAPONIZED? Wikileaks released accurate true email information from the Democratic party that showed they were unethical at best.  Good.  The American people should have information about both parties and I am all in favor of transparency in elections.  Was it one sided?  Maybe but the Democratic party was trying to buy incriminating information from the British and that was eventually released even-though it was not substantiated. 

 

The video was about Putin's motivations.  OK.  He is a bad guy.  What does that have to do with getting Trump impeached?

[craigt3365]

Give up guys. He'll never understand. This is one of the biggest problems we have today. Many, for some unknown reason, just don't understand. Or don't want to due to their political leaning.

[Credo]

The problem is that Trump followers are a cult; for his  followers it's more like a religion than anything else.   

 

[F4UCorsair]

7 minutes ago, Credo said:

The problem is that Trump followers are a cult; for his  followers it's more like a religion than anything else.   

 

 

But the thread title is............Do you believe Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?

 

Your off topic post adds NOTHING!!

[Srikcir]

3 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Give up guys. He'll never understand. This is one of the biggest problems we have today. Many, for some unknown reason, just don't understand. Or don't want to due to their political leaning.

It feels less than an understanding and more of an advocacy.

 

The good news is that Facebook, Google and other social media platform operators as well as the majority of Congress (aka Republicans) now recognize the threat of covert Russian propaganda designed to split American voters (which favors a weak and/or unqualified candidate) and build a base of political support for a specific POTUS candidate. Both current NSA Director Mike Rogers and former NSA Director James Clapper agree that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to the disadvantage of one candidate. Both agree that Russia is an enemy of the US, especially in such fashion.

 

Facebook and others have begun costly changes to detect foreign origin fake news and covert accounts/tweets designed as American origin. US Congress in the vacuum of Trump's leadership and denial of Russian intrusion are exploring possible legislation for greater transparency of foreign election intrusion designed to protect American voter independence.

[Credo]

9 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

But the thread title is............Do you believe Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?

 

Your off topic post adds NOTHING!!

Gee, thanks.   Let us know when your appointed the expert on this, or any other thread.   

[Srikcir]

35 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

But the thread title is............Do you believe Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?

 

Your off topic post adds NOTHING!!

As opposed to your just posted NOTHING contribution?

 

Potential Congressional impeachment by a Republican majority of Trump will be partly influenced by his voter popularity (ironically, Clinton's approval rating jumped to an all-time high of 73% in the wake of the House of Representatives' approval of articles of impeachment (http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/20/impeachment.poll/).

 

Trump's voter base has shrunk considerably since his election to about 33%. He has essentially lost Democratic crossover votes and the Independent vote that gave him majority in swing states. Trump's hardcore base seems immune to facts and more akin to having by some opinions a cult or religious characteristic that depends on pure faith. Hence, Credo's remarks.

 

Such insulated support by Trump's core supporters may not be a firm defense against Trump's impeachment if his disapproval among voters is a substantial majority, particularly in Red states. And/or if Special Counsel can prove Trump's collusion with the Russians to influence the elections in his favor, and/or if Trump has committed federal/state crimes (even if not related to Russian collusion).

Edited November 24, 2017 by Srikcir
replace "this" with "Trump's"

[Berkshire]

1 hour ago, Credo said:

The problem is that Trump followers are a cult; for his  followers it's more like a religion than anything else.   

 

Yes, a cult of mindless Trump minions....

 

[amvet]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

Give up guys. He'll never understand. This is one of the biggest problems we have today. Many, for some unknown reason, just don't understand. Or don't want to due to their political leaning.

Because I don't agree with you does not mean I don't understand.  The American way is not to shut up voices of dissent.  I don't like Trump.  I don't think he is smart enough to be President.

 

He could not have beaten anyone except Hillary.  If you want to impeach him find something he did wrong.  Putin and Russia didn't hack anything.  If I believe all of the unsubstantiated claims at most Russian interests spent a small amount of money on pro Trump and anti Hillary advertising in facebook and may have assisted Wikileaks in phishing emails to release that should have been released anyway.  

 

You don't have a big problem with people understanding.  You have a big problem with people understanding and not buying the medias attempt to influence news instead of reporting it by both sides Fox and CNN. 

[amvet]

22 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Yes, a cult of mindless Trump minions....

 

Because people didn't like Hillary and the Democratic party you are assuming they are Trump supporters instead of people who rebelled at being called "Deplorable." The majority of Americans don't call people names after kindergarten and try and insult people who don't agree with them.  That is the way of the current Democratic Party but it's not how you win friends and influence people and win future elections. 

[ilostmypassword]

4 minutes ago, amvet said:

Because people didn't like Hillary and the Democratic party you are assuming they are Trump supporters instead of people who rebelled at being called "Deplorable." The majority of Americans don't call people names after kindergarten and try and insult people who don't agree with them.  That is the way of the current Democratic Party but it's not how you win friends and influence people and win future elections. 

So you're saying that Hillary Clinton more often engaged in name calling than Donald Trump? As often as Donald Trump? Who do you think you're kidding with your Bizarro world version of reality? But congratulations for once again making the conversation about Hillary Clinton rather than Donald Trump.

Edited November 24, 2017 by ilostmypassword

[Berkshire]

1 minute ago, amvet said:

The majority of Americans don't call people names after kindergarten and try and insult people who don't agree with them. 

You're right, the majority of Americans don't.  There is one doofus who does with regularity....D. Trump.

[Becker]

1 hour ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

But the thread title is............Do you believe Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?

 

Your off topic post adds NOTHING!!

Pointing out that you and some others are more like cult followers than people who react rationally to what the man-child says and does is highly relevant to whether you believe he will be impeached or not. So I suggest you leave the moderation to the mods, alright?

 

PS. I don't believe the man-child will be successfully impeached. The GOP sold their soul to the devil a long time ago. What I am hoping for is that he's finally put out of his misery by a massive heart attack.

Based on the amount of McD food he consumes and the lack of exercise (lazy slob using a golf cart everywhere on the course) I have hopes it will happen before it's too late.

 

PPS. Don't you man-child cult followers feel just a little bit stupid believing all the promises he made and has broken?

"I'll be so busy I won't have time to play golf!". BWAHAHAHAHAHA

Edited November 24, 2017 by Becker

[amvet]

13 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

So you're saying that Hillary Clinton more often engaged in name calling than Donald Trump? As often as Donald Trump? Who do you think you're kidding with your Bizarro world version of reality? But congratulations for once again making the conversation about Hillary Clinton rather than Donald Trump.

I have asked a number of times for someone to post any evidence of Russian hacking (not phishing) or any evidence of Russian meddling in any meaningful way into the American electoral process and Trumps collusion in those things.  The only meddling I have seen was the creation of a phony report by the British government (if ex Russian spies are the Russian government than ex British spies are the British government).  

 

Name calling  was engaged in by both sides during the election and I found it reprehensible but not a high crime or misdemeanor to trigger impeachment.  

 

I'm not a Trump support and did not vote for the man and am offended by people constantly calling me a Trump supporter because I am looking for the truth.  

[amvet]

1 hour ago, Srikcir said:

As opposed to your just posted NOTHING contribution?

 

Potential Congressional impeachment by a Republican majority of Trump will be partly influenced by his voter popularity (ironically, Clinton's approval rating jumped to an all-time high of 73% in the wake of the House of Representatives' approval of articles of impeachment (http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/20/impeachment.poll/).

 

Trump's voter base has shrunk considerably since his election to about 33%. He has essentially lost Democratic crossover votes and the Independent vote that gave him majority in swing states. Trump's hardcore base seems immune to facts and more akin to having by some opinions a cult or religious characteristic that depends on pure faith. Hence, Credo's remarks.

 

Such insulated support by Trump's core supporters may not be a firm defense against Trump's impeachment if his disapproval among voters is a substantial majority, particularly in Red states. And/or if Special Counsel can prove Trump's collusion with the Russians to influence the elections in his favor, and/or if Trump has committed federal/state crimes (even if not related to Russian collusion).

Unless Hillary runs again I don't think there is much debate that Trump is a one term President. 

[Slip]

17 minutes ago, amvet said:

I would think that if there was any credible evidence of hacking we would have seen it by now with all of the intelligence agencies working on it.   It would silence all of the critics like me in a nano second. 

That is because that is what you want to believe, as has been mentioned previously by others in the thread.  Did you look at the link I gave you?  He presents a lot of evidence which you may or may not find credible, but to dismiss it simply because you haven't heard of it already lacks intellectual diligence.  He is certainly of the opinion that the Russians engaged in hacking using the information gained from their phishing.

[FritsSikkink]

3 hours ago, amvet said:

If you want to talk we need to agree on terms first. There is a difference between hacking and phishing.  What did the Russians hack?

Phishing is a way to get someone's credentials for an application.

Hacking is looking for weak spots in someone's computer / server to gain access to files, programs and applications.

[amvet]

15 minutes ago, Slip said:

That is because that is what you want to believe, as has been mentioned previously by others in the thread.  Did you look at the link I gave you?  He presents a lot of evidence which you may or may not find credible, but to dismiss it simply because you haven't heard of it already lacks intellectual diligence.  He is certainly of the opinion that the Russians engaged in hacking using the information gained from their phishing.

The link is a request for donations.  I reported it. 

[amvet]

2 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

Phishing is a way to get someone's credentials for an application.

Hacking is looking for weak spots in someone's computer / server to gain access to files, programs and applications.

Correct.  Now you have to tell CNN and the "American intelligence community."

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, amvet said:

Because people didn't like Hillary and the Democratic party you are assuming they are Trump supporters instead of people who rebelled at being called "Deplorable." The majority of Americans don't call people names after kindergarten and try and insult people who don't agree with them.  That is the way of the current Democratic Party but it's not how you win friends and influence people and win future elections. 

But our president calls people names just like a kindergartener. Both political parties are worthless. The approval polls prove that.

[craigt3365]

54 minutes ago, amvet said:

I have asked a number of times for someone to post any evidence of Russian hacking (not phishing) or any evidence of Russian meddling in any meaningful way into the American electoral process and Trumps collusion in those things.  The only meddling I have seen was the creation of a phony report by the British government (if ex Russian spies are the Russian government than ex British spies are the British government).  

 

Name calling  was engaged in by both sides during the election and I found it reprehensible but not a high crime or misdemeanor to trigger impeachment.  

 

I'm not a Trump support and did not vote for the man and am offended by people constantly calling me a Trump supporter because I am looking for the truth.  

Not worth our time trying to show you. It's all over the media. If you don't know this by now you never will. Very sad commentary. 

[Ron19]

A post containing a link contravening forum rules has been removed.

[amvet]

17 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Not worth our time trying to show you. It's all over the media. If you don't know this by now you never will. Very sad commentary. 

No evidence of hacking has ever been posted in main stream media.  It is a sad commentary that the media is trying to influence instead of report.  As reported above there is a difference between phishing and hacking the media and "intelligence community" think you are too dumb to know.