Is impeachment and removal from office possible? What would it take?

[RickD]

I had a friend when I was younger, who had a brother with schizophrenia.

Has anyone ever tried to have a rational conversation with someone that has schizophrenia?

Reading this discussion, reminds me of the time one of my other friends tried to have a normal, rational discussion, with the friend's brother that had schizophrenia.

[abelcainsbrother]

The Mueller report documents a number of 'interactions' between the Trump campaign and Russia. Many of which Trump and his campaign lied about repeatedly to the American people and to law enforcement.
Since "collusion" is not a legal crime, the Mueller report did not address whether or not the interaction and cooperation between the Trump campaign and Russia met the threshold for 'collusion'.

Mueller was interested in determining whether or not the interaction between the Trump campaign and Russia reached the legal threshold for 'criminal conspiracy' which is a crime.
And Mueller concluded
"The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government in its election interference activities"

If Q and the alt-right had real insight into the Mueller report and were interested in communicating the truth, they could have accurately reported that the report did not establish that the Trump campaign engaged in criminal conspiracy with Russia.
Instead they just parroted Trump's talking point of "no collusion" which is factually inaccurate.
This just demonstrates that Q and the alt-right were just repeating Trump's false narrative and didn't even know that Mueller was investigating 'criminal conspiracy' instead of 'collusion'.

As I pointed out above, Mueller didn't give Trump or the MSM what they wanted.
- The Mueller report did not validate the MSM claim of collusion between Trump and Russia
- And the Mueller report did not validate Trump's claim of "no collusion".

And the Mueller report also demonstrated that Q and the alt-right were either misinformed or lying when they falsely claimed that it validated Trump's claim of "no collusion".

I think you're trying to play word games.Just as you just admitted the Mueller report showed no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.I remember months ago when we discussed the Mueller report before telling you that there were things in it that were wrong,

Over the past months You've been factually wrong on wide range of assertions that you have made... RBG, the Mueller report, "No Collusion, No Obstruction", and the list goes on.
And you are also wrong about what you claim that I "just admitted".

Please show me where I "just admitted" that the Mueller report showed no collusion?
You won't find it because I said no such thing, the Mueller report said no such thing, and in his testimony before Congress Mueller said that his report said no such thing.

In fact even though Mueller's report said that he could find no definitive proof of criminal conspiracy, he did provide 14 specific examples of 'cooperation' and 'coordination' that could be interpreted by some as 'collusion' between the Trump campaign and Russia.
https://www.justsecurity.org/63838/guid ... collusion/

The redacted Mueller Report documents a series of activities that show strong evidence of collusion. Or, more precisely, it provides significant evidence that Trump Campaign associates coordinated with, cooperated with, encouraged, or gave support to the Russia/WikiLeaks election interference activities. The Report documents the following actions (each of which is analyzed in detail in Part II):

1. Trump was receptive to a Campaign national security adviser’s (George Papadopoulos) pursuit of a back channel to Putin.

2. Kremlin operatives provided the Campaign a preview of the Russian plan to distribute stolen emails.

3. The Trump Campaign chairman and deputy chairman (Paul Manafort and Rick Gates) knowingly shared internal polling data and information on battleground states with a Russian spy; and the Campaign chairman worked with the Russian spy on a pro-Russia “peace” plan for Ukraine.

4. The Trump Campaign chairman periodically shared internal polling data with the Russian spy with the expectation it would be shared with Putin-linked oligarch, Oleg Deripaska.

5. Trump Campaign chairman Manafort expected Trump’s winning the presidency would mean Deripaska would want to use Manafort to advance Deripaska’s interests in the United States and elsewhere.

6. Trump Tower meeting: (1) On receiving an email offering derogatory information on Clinton coming from a Russian government official, Donald Trump Jr. “appears to have accepted that offer;” (2) members of the Campaign discussed the Trump Tower meeting beforehand; (3) Donald Trump Jr. told the Russians during the meeting that Trump could revisit the issue of the Magnitsky Act if elected.

7. A Trump Campaign official told the Special Counsel he “felt obliged to object” to a GOP Platform change on Ukraine because it contradicted Trump’s wishes; however, the investigation did not establish that Gordon was directed by Trump.

8. Russian military hackers may have followed Trump’s July 27, 2016 public statement “Russia if you’re listening …” within hours by targeting Clinton’s personal office for the first time.

9. Trump requested campaign affiliates to get Clinton’s emails, which resulted in an individual apparently acting in coordination with the Campaign claiming to have successfully contacted Russian hackers.

10. The Trump Campaign—and Trump personally—appeared to have advanced knowledge of future WikiLeaks releases.

11. The Trump Campaign coordinated campaign-related public communications based on future WikiLeaks releases.

12. Michael Cohen, on behalf of the Trump Organization, brokered a secret deal for a Trump Tower Moscow project directly involving Putin’s inner circle, at least until June 2016.

13. During the presidential transition, Jared Kushner and Eric Prince engaged in secret back channel communications with Russian agents. (1) Kushner suggested to the Russian Ambassador that they use a secure communication line from within the Russian Embassy to speak with Russian Generals; and (2) Prince and Kushner’s friend Rick Gerson conducted secret back channel meetings with a Putin agent to develop a plan for U.S.-Russian relations.

14. During the presidential transition, in coordination with other members of the Transition Team, Michael Flynn spoke with the Russian Ambassador to prevent a tit for tat Russian response to the Obama administration’s imposition of sanctions for election interference; the Russians agreed not to retaliate saying they wanted a good relationship with the incoming administration.

I've already explained the Mueller report showed no collusion.I'm not going to keep repeating it.You are just choosing to believe what you want to,while ignoring evidence. You have not proven me wrong about RBG either as you just believe the MSM. And You just ignored the evidence I posted that proves the Mueller report is a lie.I'm the only one providing evidence while you you are just posting things you believe is true and claiming it is true without evidence.You believe the Mueller report eventhough it has false information in it. How can you ignore the evidence I've given? And just state you are correct without any evidence? The evidence I posted shows the so-called Russian agents that the Mueller report points to as your post shows are NOT Russian agents,but worked for the CIA. This is what they are now admitting through their lawyers.Do you understand what this means when you post that portion of the Mueller report?

We even have proof the e-mails wikileaks had could not have been down loaded over the internet because it is impossible to download the e-mails as fast as they were obtained.They were downloaded on to a bar that plugs into the computer which is the only way they can be down loaded so fast.It cannot be done over any internet.This is forensic science. Yet the Mueller report is claiming Russia hacked into the DNC computers and downloaded them. When are you going to decide to go by evidence instead of just believing what you read? I have provided evidence and am not just telling you to believe the alt-right media like you're doing claiming what the MSM and Mueller report states is true.

[abelcainsbrother]

I had a friend when I was younger, who had a brother with schizophrenia.

Has anyone ever tried to have a rational conversation with someone that has schizophrenia?

Reading this discussion, reminds me of the time one of my other friends tried to have a normal, rational discussion, with the friend's brother that had schizophrenia.

This conversation did go off the rails but I still have a lot of respect for DBowling.I don''t take it personal,especially over politics but there are legit reasons why I feel like I do.I just hope that if people read through they actually click on the links I provided and actually examine the links I've posted that go a long with why I trust the alt-right media when it comes to doing investigative journalism and reporting the truth.Back through the last several pages or so I've posted links that help to provide evidence for my argument.Sure it can be alittle time consuming watching the videos I've posted but if a person desires to understand they should consider the evidence I've provided for my argument that we can trust the alt-right media and Q and the Q anons to give us the truth.We cannot trust the mainstream media to give us the truth and facts.Now there is a strategy in play to change the MSM but it has not worked yet.

[Philip]

If Trump doesn't lower his loudmouth, arrogant, aggressive style, and become more presidential in his delivery, he might very well lose this coming election. Not by ticking off Republicans, but by alienating those more moderate and independent - ESPECIALLY women! He thinks the same bombastic approach that won his first term will work again. The problem is, so many despised Hillary and Bill - so he had that going for him. Many also hated what Obama had done to the country - and the recession had kept the economy in tatters.

And if the present economy goes very stagnant or worse before the election - Trump could well lose. Remember, there are many first-time voters who don't like all of this aggressive stuff - AND they are much easier to be influenced by those on the left. And if Biden is the nominee - he'll track to the middle and try to look much more moderate and centrist - which might be enough to swing the election his way. I'd say if any of the other Democratic candidates are the nominee, it's almost certainly Trump II - because much of America is afraid of their radicalism.

The biggest challenge Trump has is himself! He appears unable to reflect, listen and learn from his mistakes. And unable to change and adapt. If only he'd change spiritually, that would solve a lot of problems and bad impulses he has.

[abelcainsbrother]

If Trump doesn't lower his loudmouth, arrogant, aggressive style, and become more presidential in his delivery, he might very well lose this coming election. Not by ticking off Republicans, but by alienating those more moderate and independent - ESPECIALLY women! He thinks the same bombastic approach that won his first term will work again. The problem is, so many despised Hillary and Bill - so he had that going for him. Many also hated what Obama had done to the country - and the recession had kept the economy in tatters.

And if the present economy goes very stagnant or worse before the election - Trump could well lose. Remember, there are many first-time voters who don't like all of this aggressive stuff - AND they are much easier to be influenced by those on the left. And if Biden is the nominee - he'll track to the middle and try to look much more moderate and centrist - which might be enough to swing the election his way. I'd say if any of the other Democratic candidates are the nominee, it's almost certainly Trump II - because much of America is afraid of their radicalism.

The biggest challenge Trump has is himself! He appears unable to reflect, listen and learn from his mistakes. And unable to change and adapt. If only he'd change spiritually, that would solve a lot of problems and bad impulses he has.

It has always bothered you with how Trump fights back.You see this as his loudmouth,arrogant,aggressive style.I see it as Trump just giving the left and MSM back a taste of their own medicine.But I sat for years watching Republicans lose political battle after political battle because they would not stand up and fight for what they want.They were afraid the MSM would attack them,while Trump aggressively hits back at the media and fights back.I've come to the conclusion that standing up and fighting for what you want politically is the only way to win politically.In America"s history Trump is actually tame compared to how some US President's have been.As Trump just mouths off back at them while we have had past President that have gotten physically violent and have challenged political opponents to a fist fight.Although I don't want our side to get complacent and take things for granted Trump is almost assured victory as long as the economy does not tank.You make some very good points about how unpopular Bill and Hillary were and that certianly had something to do with Trump winning.I also think people that were opposed to Trump because of the MSM claiming he would be unhinged,get us into war,etc have come to realize that President Trump is not the monster they claimed he'd be and things have not gotten worse like they claimed,they have actually gotten better.It was exaggeration.Still it is hard to turn around decades of policy failures from past President's and politcians in just 3 or even 4 years,but things have improved for most Americans.
You've Got To Stand For Something.
https://youtu.be/XHIw6vs4z0w

[edwardmurphy]

If Trump doesn't lower his loudmouth, arrogant, aggressive style, and become more presidential in his delivery, he might very well lose this coming election. Not by ticking off Republicans, but by alienating those more moderate and independent - ESPECIALLY women!

I'd say if any of the other Democratic candidates are the nominee, it's almost certainly Trump II - because much of America is afraid of their radicalism.

Can I get an example of this "radicalism"?

[Philip]

Can I get an example of this "radicalism"?

Just keep reading the daily news - you'll see plenty of it. But perhaps what I see as extreme liberalism, you see as a good thing.

[edwardmurphy]

I can't read the news with your eyes. Can you give a few examples of what you regard as radical?

[RickD]

I can't read the news with your eyes. Can you give a few examples of what you regard as radical?

For starters, anyone who's promising free stuff, without realizing how expensive it is, to make it free.

[edwardmurphy]

For starters, anyone who's promising free stuff, without realizing how expensive it is, to make it free.

And do you have a specific example of that happening? Seriously, guys, if the Dems have gone full on radical then that should be trivial.

Here are the Democratic frontrunners' websites. Can you point me to something you regard as radical?

Joe Biden
Elizabeth Warren
Bernie Sanders
Kamala Harris
Pete Buttigieg

[edwardmurphy]

A couple of my links don't work. Click here to feel the Bern. And here's Kamala.

[abelcainsbrother]

I was right again.Now I'm not trying to brag,this is about me showing with evidence I was right after getting my news from the alt-right,Q and the Q anons and how they are treated as not reliable news source.

Now just a few posts up or so me and DBowling were discussing the Mueller report and I reminded DBowling that when we discussed the Mueller report months ago that I pointed out there was false information in the Mueller report.I pointed out that we have forensic science based evidence that shows that it is impossible for Russia to have hacked into the DNC computers and downloaded the e-mails.This is because it has been shown that these e-mails were downloaded far faster than any internet service can provide. You know things can only be downloaded only so fast over the internet and these DNC e-mails could not have been downloaded over the internet.So this is not conspiracy theory.The evidence shows that the only way they could have been downloaded is by inserting or putting a bar in a computer and down loading them onto the bar that plugs into the computer.Yet in the Mueller report DBowling posted above you can see where it mentions wikileaks and the e-mails linking this to Russia to give the impression of colluding with Russia,and yet it is incorrect info and was fake news in the MSM.As you know it is the alt-right media that has constantly said it was Seth Rich who downloaded the DNC e-mails and gave them to wikileaks in order to expose how they were rigging the DNC primary for Hillary over Bernie Sanders. Seth Rich worked for the Bernie Sanders campaign and was trying to expose the corruption of the DNC primary.This makes sense since we know the e-mails were downloaded onto a bar that plugs into the computer because Seth Rich had access to the DNC computers.Seth Rich was murdered for doing this too and we need justice.

But also in the Mueller report it points to so-called Russia agents that members of the Trump campaign were working with,and yet this is false as I pointed out above. I posted a BCP video above where Black Conservative Patriot who is apart of the alt-right media shows that they were not Russian agents but worked for John Brennon's CIA.So that those people in the Trump campaign were not interacting with Russian agents but CIA agents.You can go back up above and watch the video I posted. But I also have a news link also you can read yourself.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/0 ... ssias-boy/

So just as I have been saying we cannot trust the MSM to give us the truth and facts as they pushed these Russia collision lies for over two years and it is fake news and Mueller in his report just regurgitated their talking points without gathering the facts like those in the alt-right media did.And so I was right when I said the Mueller report has false information in it,and I was right because I get my news from the Alt-right news programs who do real investiogative jounalism,unlike the MSM who reports fake news to hurt President Trump and help the Democrats.Including Fox News.

[abelcainsbrother]

A couple of my links don't work. Click here to feel the Bern. And here's Kamala.

Neither one of them have a chance.The DNC wants Joe Biden and we know the DNC primary is rigged and it does not matter how Democrats vote in their primary as the DNC decides who wins for Democrat voters,not Democrat voters. This corruption has been swept under the rug and has not been dealt with,not even by Bernie Sanders himself.Bernie is too much of a wimp to point out how he and his voters were robbed in the 2016 Democrat primary.Too much of a wimp to fight so that this corruption is dealt with so that Democrat voters have a voice instead of the DNC.

[Philip]

Ed: And do you have a specific example of that happening? Seriously, guys, if the Dems have gone full on radical then that should be trivial.

Rick: For starters, anyone who's promising free stuff, without realizing how expensive it is, to make it free.

[abelcainsbrother]

Ed: And do you have a specific example of that happening? Seriously, guys, if the Dems have gone full on radical then that should be trivial.

Rick: For starters, anyone who's promising free stuff, without realizing how expensive it is, to make it free.

I wish I knew how to post things like that.