Donald Trump will be impeached.

[Dirius]

Trump actually gained senate seats which is unheard of. Important because the Senate confirms judges all over the country. The Senate also amends bills sent over by the House. There are hundreds of bills from the Repub controlled House that will most likely be confirmed next year by the Repub Senate. They didn't have enough votes in the last two years.

Not to mention the obvious irregularities within some districts were democrats clearly won by cheating, through magical ballot boxes that kept appearing. But that is another story that we shouldn't talk about, to prevent unnecessary triggering.

 

[Witchyone]

He has actually taken a tougher stance on Russia and Putin than previous presidents, by increasing military action on Russia's interests and that of its allies.

How so? The only thing I can think of that we've done that could possibly be considered going against a Russian military interest was bombing Syria, which was so limited it did nothing to change the situation except kill a few souls.

Regarding the whole "collusion" nonsense, what happened was that Russia spread information about Hillary Clinton's corruption, either through facebook, twitter, wikileaks, etc. That isn't illegal. And that has nothing to do with Trump, and there is no evidence so far that he was involved in it. And even if his campaign was, its illegality is still debatable. The russians did not "hack" your election. They spread propaganda which the american people chose to believe. And that is it. In a similar manner, Canada and different european governments, different international groups spread a vilification campaign against Trump, in television. How is that different from the Russian issue? It isn't.

It is very much illegal in this country for foreign agents to pose as Americans and spread propaganda to influence our elections. That's why there are Russians who have been charged with conspiracy.

How is Hollywood celebrities backed by European countries spreading political propaganda before the election, not exactly the same as russians spreading propaganda before the election? Had Hillary won, would you be pushing for an investigation regarding who funded the hollywood campaigns against Trump? You probably wouldn't.

Individual citizens can support any candidate or position they wish whether they are famous for not. It's protected speech. "Supported by European governments?" It's not the left's fault that we have all the best musicians, entertainers, and artists in our camp.

As for praising Putin, and "trashing" allies. He is merely making a point: harvesting a good diplomatic relation with Russia isn't a bad thing for the U.S. Its also not a bad thing to make it clear to NATO members that they should contribute more. And lets be realistic here: most "allies" have been taking advantage and criticizing the U.S. for a while now.

Kowtowing to a power hungry, chest-beating man like Putin does nothing but make Trump look like a giant wimp, a lapdog, a dummy. I bet Putin laughs his butt off after every encounter. I would like to see us have a better relationship with Russia, but not while the Russian government is actively trying to influence American elections.

The way Trump has spoken about and to our allies is not statesman-like. Allies are allowed to criticize and argue and to hold one another to agreements and common standards. In fact, they should. But they must also be respectful.

Whoopsie: I edited a little of your post because I thought it was mine. I capitalized European, then uncapitalized it when I realized what I did. I don't think I changed anything else...didn't mean to be shady.

 

[Witchyone]

For anyone who wants to know what is actually happening in real courts instead of in memes.

https://www.wired.com/story/mueller-investigation-trump-russia-complete-guide/

Flynn's sentencing hearing started yesterday but has been postponed, and the federal judge presiding over his case suggested that what he has done is treason.

 

[Dirius]

How so? The only thing I can think of that we've done that could possibly be considered going against a Russian military interest was bombing Syria, which was so limited it did nothing to change the situation except kill a few souls.

He increased sanctions against Russia for the invasion of crimea, and has sold weapons to the Ukraine to counter the russian invasion. He has publicly denounced Russia on the oil prices, the invasion, and some other things.

It is very much illegal in this country for foreign agents to pose as Americans and spread propaganda to influence our elections. That's why there are Russians who have been charged with conspiracy.

Individual citizens can support any candidate or position they wish whether they are famous for not. It's protected speech. "Supported by European governments?" It's not the left's fault that we have all the best musicians, entertainers, and artists in our camp.

Kowtowing to a power hungry, chest-beating man like Putin does nothing but make Trump look like a giant wimp, a lapdog, a dummy. I bet Putin laughs his butt off after every encounter. I would like to see us have a better relationship with Russia, but not while the Russian government is actively trying to influence American elections.

Actually it is not illegal if they don't reside in the U.S. because your jurisdiction doesn't extend to twitter accounts created in another country. If someone creates an account on twitter, his actions fall into the legal spectrum of the country in which he resides, despite whatever legal-junk TOS he "agreed" to when he signed-up (which by the way, those are only legal binding if the law of the country in which they are agreed on says so; and they can still be contested in the country's court of law, regardless of the laws of the U.S.). There is no restriction for individuals sharing information over the internet. At most your goverment can sanction the company within the territory of your country, but they can't sanction people from reading messages.

I'm not talking about the spokesperson that may have delivered the pro-Hillary speeches, but the foreign powers that may have funded it. If I take your view on things, then by analogy, you would consider that just as bad. I mean, if the saudi royal family "donated" money to Hillary at the height of her campaign, then by logic you would seek an investigation regarding that, wouldn't you? In a similar manner, if certain european groups funded pro-Hillary campaing rallies, advertising, etc.. that would also be bad?

The way Trump has spoken about and to our allies is not statesman-like. Allies are allowed to criticize and argue and to hold one another to agreements and common standards. In fact, they should. But they must also be respectful.

First of all, your allies have been more disrespectful towards him and you than he has been to them, such as when the president of France saying he needed an army to protect from the U.S. (which is by implication, a threat of war).

Second, what has Trump said that its so offensive? The only thing he told them is that they should put down the money they had agreed to contribute to NATO, which they have not. He has also said somethings about trade agreements that should benefit the americans, but never did he say anything bad about the countries. At most, he might have said something specifically about the country leader, which is different. In your view:

Trump is bad = talks about money and trade agreements
Macron is good(?) = talks about creating an army to combat the U.S.

Is that logical?

 

[unique_astrology]

On the day transit Saturn is conjunct the MC (3rd and final pass in 2019) of my natal for Putin in St Petersburg:

Jared Kushner – Noon Chart Jan 10, 1981, 12:00 pm, EST +5:00 White House Dist of Columbia 38°N53’50” 077°W02’13”

Sun 20°Cp23’09”

Transits Nov 4 2019 – Noon Chart Nov 4 2019, 12:00 pm, EST +5:00 White House Dist of Columbia 38°N53’50” 077°W02’13”

Mars 20°Li25’44”
Pluto 20°Cp53’32”

Plus transit Mars at 199°10′ is on natal Saturn/Pluto midpoint at 199°18′.

January 2020 coming right up.

 

[unique_astrology]

More info in the below linked post.

https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showpost.php?p=924488&postcount=1

"My chart for Putin was made on April 23, 2014 (actually was first made in 2012), more than a year before tRump announced his candidacy and I found the January 13, 2020, conjunction of Sun, Saturn, and Pluto at 294°42' and 294°45."

https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showpost.php?p=785741&postcount=261

"The Sun (294°42′), Saturn (294°42'), and Pluto (294°45′) on January 13, 2020.

George Washington's inauguration secondary progressed Sun/Pluto midpoint at 294°14' on Jan 13, 2020

trump's natal Saturn 115°43' is opposite

trump’s progressed inauguration MC at 293°28' (add 1 degree the next day)

Nixon’s natal White House IC at 295°51'

Richard M Nixon resigns as President, the MC of that chart is 114°27′ (IC is at 294°27′)

Watergate arrest’s Zenith at 294°22'

Watergate arrest’s Mars opposite at 114°48'

JFK secondary progressed Sun at assassination opposite at 114°01'

Noon chart for Mercer has a Sun/Saturn midpoint at 114°48′ opposite 294°48′

Bannon on Jan 13, 2020. His secondary progressed Neptune will be at 204°47′ – squared by 90°

Republican party secondary progressed Mars on Jan 13, 2020 at 294°18'
trump jr. has secondary progressed Mars (in longitude) on his papa’s Saturn

My Putin MC in Moscow (chart made in 2012) 294°19'

Except for The Washington and JFK charts all of them are connected to right wing people or events.

Charts related to the presidency from 1789 - Washington's inauguration, 1946 - trump's birth, 1972 - several Watergate points, and the 2017 inauguration, coming to or originally involving a common point at 294 degrees on January 13th, 2020, with three transiting bodies held by that same degree on that day. It might mean something related to the presidency term that began on January 20, 2017."

 

[Oddity]

Normally wouldn't post something like this in here, but yesterday Ben Shapiro pretty much nailed the problem. I think I linked that properly: https://youtu.be/Bl-sIVCJ1DI?t=580

 

[Witchyone]

He increased sanctions against Russia for the invasion of crimea, and has sold weapons to the Ukraine to counter the russian invasion. He has publicly denounced Russia on the oil prices, the invasion, and some other things.



Actually it is not illegal if they don't reside in the U.S. because your jurisdiction doesn't extend to twitter accounts created in another country. If someone creates an account on twitter, his actions fall into the legal spectrum of the country in which he resides, despite whatever legal-junk TOS he "agreed" to when he signed-up (which by the way, those are only legal binding if the law of the country in which they are agreed on says so; and they can still be contested in the country's court of law, regardless of the laws of the U.S.). There is no restriction for individuals sharing information over the internet. At most your goverment can sanction the company within the territory of your country, but they can't sanction people from reading messages.

I'm not talking about the spokesperson that may have delivered the pro-Hillary speeches, but the foreign powers that may have funded it. If I take your view on things, then by analogy, you would consider that just as bad. I mean, if the saudi royal family "donated" money to Hillary at the height of her campaign, then by logic you would seek an investigation regarding that, wouldn't you? In a similar manner, if certain european groups funded pro-Hillary campaing rallies, advertising, etc.. that would also be bad?



First of all, your allies have been more disrespectful towards him and you than he has been to them, such as when the president of France saying he needed an army to protect from the U.S. (which is by implication, a threat of war).

Second, what has Trump said that its so offensive? The only thing he told them is that they should put down the money they had agreed to contribute to NATO, which they have not. He has also said somethings about trade agreements that should benefit the americans, but never did he say anything bad about the countries. At most, he might have said something specifically about the country leader, which is different. In your view:

Trump is bad = talks about money and trade agreements
Macron is good(?) = talks about creating an army to combat the U.S.

Is that logical?

You're just making a series of bad analogies, comparing unlike things.

 

[rahu]

i don't think drumpf will be impeached... as he allegedly said, he could shoot some one on the street and not be prosecuted.
with nancy pelosi asarty whip, she will not push for impeachment because of the possibility of drumpf bringinig out the skeletons in her closet that will show pelosi's political start, just as dianne feinstein's,came because they both participated in he coverup of the cia's invovement with the drug motivated assassinations of mayor george moscone and supervisor harvey milk back in 1978.

https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=82603

reply #5drumpf's a mobster ,going back to his involvement with rpy cohn in the 70's and 80's.they all knew about this.

 

[david starling]

Normally wouldn't post something like this in here, but yesterday Ben Shapiro pretty much nailed the problem. I think I linked that properly: https://youtu.be/Bl-sIVCJ1DI?t=580

Get yer free guns here! Also, legal help if you decide to shoot someone!

 

[JUPITERASC]

 

[Oddity]

Get yer free guns here! Also, legal help if you decide to shoot someone!

Thus illustrating my point. You guys really don't care about the actual illegal things Trump has done, you only care to prove that he 'stole' the presidency.

He didn't.

 

[david starling]

Thus illustrating my point. You guys really don't care about the actual illegal things Trump has done, you only care to prove that he 'stole' the presidency.

He didn't.

Nah. That was just a comment about Ben's mindset.

 

[david starling]

Oddity, have you ever felt the need to buy a gun? I haven't.

 

[david starling]

Thus illustrating my point. You guys really don't care about the actual illegal things Trump has done, you only care to prove that he 'stole' the presidency.

He didn't.

It was handed to him by the unfair Electoral College, winner-take-all election rules. It cancels out the popular vote majority, which is how all other elective offices are decided. There is a slim chance he could have broadened his appeal beyond the more rural areas in order to win the majority popular vote, but he would have needed to drastically alter his us-versus-them campaign rhetoric and his policy proposals.

 

[Dirius]

You're just making a series of bad analogies, comparing unlike things.

As a matter of fact, I only posted one analogy (the support HC recieved from media, hollywood and foreign countries) which is true and to the point. The rest of the post was a brief explanation about international law and national sovereignity, so you could comprehend that the rest of the world is not subject to the laws passed by the U.S. legislation. The other issues are facts about Trump's presidency you can look up yourself.

Dissmissing my post just reveleas the weakness in your argument, not the other way around.

 

[unique_astrology]

The 2017 Inauguration's 2019 solar return (precession corrected) occurs at 0:12:35 am, EST. It is followed 3 minutes and 22 seconds later by a lunar eclipse. The return and the eclipse charts have the Moon on the MC and the Sun on the IC in the White House. A full moon indicating that the term has expanded as much as it can and will begin diminishing from this time on (thanks to the Democratically controlled House of Representatives). I think the inauguration the return springs from will indeed be finished before another solar return for it next January 20th.

tRump in 2019 with indictments falling like a blizzard - "There's a lot of trouble with this Sollozzo business. Its very unfortunate. I know the Tattaglia's are a little misfortunate...down on their heads. Well...that's life. Everyone's got their own circle of sorrow."

Buford T. Justice to tRump someday: "My handle is Smokey Bear and I'm tail grabbin' your a** right now!"

 

[david starling]

So....how's the stock market doing these days? Haven't been paying it much attention, but with a President many claim is a financial genius, it must be at record-breaking levels!

 

[david starling]

Our Electoral College President's plan to cut poor people out of the Food Stamp Program is brilliant! All the dumpster-diving will prevent old food from going to waste!

 

[david starling]

Have you had a chance to see what's been dubbed "The Great Wall of America"? It was worth every taxpayer dollar, even though it ended up costing three times the original estimate, took land away from hardworking American ranchers and farmers, and wreaked havoc on the animal migration avenues. So what if it's failed to curtail illegal immigration due to the network of tunnels underneath? It's a magnificent structure that has to be seen from the air to be truly appreciated!