This isn’t diplomacy

[AUDub 11,858]

Sigh

Quote

The phone call between the leaders was intended to patch things up between the new president and his ally. The two have had a series of public spats over Trump’s determination to have Mexico pay for the planned border wall, something Mexico steadfastly refuses to agree to.

You have a bunch of bad hombres down there, Trump told Pena Nieto, according to the excerpt seen by the AP. You aren’t doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn’t, so I just might send them down to take care of it.

No, Mexico isn’t going to pay for your stupid, ineffective, idiotic wall. Trump is basically asking Mexico to pay for his ridiculous campaign promises that demonized their entire country.

Trump is threatening to use our military in an invasion of Mexico to extort billions of dollars out of them. Why aren’t officials of both parties sending representatives to drag this guy out of the oval office and begin impeachment proceedings right now?

[bigbird 60,939]

His words and rhetoric are innane and frivolous. But seriously, Impeachment for what?

[SaltyTiger 8,574]

Mexico denies remarks were threatening. Probably chuckling like I did.

http://time.com/4657474/donald-trump-enrique-pena-nieto-mexico-bad-hombres/ 

[homersapien 12,238]

31 minutes ago, bigbird said:

His words and rhetoric are innane and frivolous. But seriously, Impeachment for what?

Incapacitation is the reason.   The emoluments clause is the method.

[TexasTiger 14,300]

18 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Incapacitation is the reason.   The emoluments clause is the method.

The 25th Amendment addresses incapacitation. Violation of the Emoluments clause may be cause for impeachment. 

[bigbird 60,939]

30 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Incapacitation is the reason.   The emoluments clause is the method.

Okay, so pay for play. And he isn't incapacitated...

[TexasTiger 14,300]

59 minutes ago, bigbird said:

His words and rhetoric are innane and frivolous. But seriously, Impeachment for what?

Gross incompetence is not a basis for impeachment. But I'm sure most Republicans see the grave damage he is doing to valuable alliances-- the question is what will they do about it? When an arguably impeachable offense is alleged, will their view of his incompetence incline them to impeach and convict? I doubt it, unless his approval has sunk enough to contain the backlash from primary voters. Evangelicals should be happy with President Pence, but will the frustrated working class accept it?

[bigbird 60,939]

3 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Gross incompetence is not a basis for impeachment. But I'm sure most Republicans see the grave damage he is doing to valuable alliances-- the question is what will they do about it? When an arguably impeachable offense is alleged, will their view of his incompetence incline them to impeach and convict? I doubt it, unless his approval has sunk enough to contain the backlash from primary voters. Evangelicals should be happy with President Pence, but will the frustrated working class accept it?

I agree, we might not like what he's doing or how he's doing it but he hasn't done anything that is impeachable. People calling for impeachment sound silly.

I think his handling of the EO was absolutely ridiculous it could have, and should have, been handled in a much more delicate and thoughtful way. That said what he did in itself is not illegal I just don't agree with how he handled it. We deserve better

[Strychnine 1,808]

8 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Gross incompetence is not a basis for impeachment. But I'm sure most Republicans see the grave damage he is doing to valuable alliances-- the question is what will they do about it? When an arguably impeachable offense is alleged, will their view of his incompetence incline them to impeach and convict? I doubt it, unless his approval has sunk enough to contain the backlash from primary voters. Evangelicals should be happy with President Pence, but will the frustrated working class accept it?

 

Considering the damage that gross incompetence can do in that particular office, it really should be.

[TexasTiger 14,300]

5 minutes ago, Strychnine said:

 

Considering the damage that gross incompetence can do in that particular office, it really should be.

Perhaps, but in a politicized environment it could easily be abused-- one party often runs on the idea the other is incompetent. OTOH, as unusual and unlikely as it may be, perceived meltdowns might prompt the PTB to weigh Sect 4 of the 25th amendment.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

No, this is not diplomacy.  This is political theater.

No, this is not incapacitation.  This is playing to the rabid ideological base.

 

[homersapien 12,238]

24 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Perhaps, but in a politicized environment it could easily be abused-- one party often runs on the idea the other is incompetent. OTOH, as unusual and unlikely as it may be, perceived meltdowns might prompt the PTB to weigh Sect 4 of the 25th amendment.

When Trump goes down, it will have bipartisan support.

[homersapien 12,238]

49 minutes ago, bigbird said:

Okay, so pay for play. And he isn't incapacitated...

He suffers from a untreatable personality disorder that makes him unfit for the job.  That sounds like incapacitation to me.

But from a legal standpoint, the emoluments clause is a stronger case for impeachment.

[homersapien 12,238]

47 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Gross incompetence is not a basis for impeachment. But I'm sure most Republicans see the grave damage he is doing to valuable alliances-- the question is what will they do about it? When an arguably impeachable offense is alleged, will their view of his incompetence incline them to impeach and convict? I doubt it, unless his approval has sunk enough to contain the backlash from primary voters. Evangelicals should be happy with President Pence, but will the frustrated working class accept it?

That will happen.  McConnell and Ryan will turn on him like he was Ceasar.

[bigbird 60,939]

10 minutes ago, homersapien said:

He suffers from a untreatable personality disorder that makes him unfit for the job.  That sounds like incapacitation to me.

But from a legal standpoint, the emoluments clause is a stronger case for impeachment.

That's your, as well as many others, opinions. America requires a little more than that.

[maxwere 82]

All this talk about the wall and no one is talking math.  Does this thing follow the Rio Grande or straight line?  If the former its like 3.14x as far.

[japantiger 4,117]

Here is what we know:

• Trump and MX president had a call
• We don't know how long it lasted or what was discussed
• An unknown source reported that Trump threatened to send in US troops
• The Mexican Foreign Relations Department had earlier told The AP: "The negative statements you refer to did not occur during said telephone call. On the contrary, the tone was constructive."
• Mexico's foreign relations department said the report was "based on absolute falsehoods."
• MX President denies that Trump threatened to send in US troops

Editorial comments

• Hysteria continues to rule the press; every negative comment made is picked up as fact even when proven wrong
• Unknown and unverifiable sources are quoted as gospel by the press
• Event when things have been proven wrong; some on here continue to discuss it as if it happened anyway
• Homey, Tex and others above use fake news to start ridiculous discussion on impeachment for non existent offenses
• All the above; but Trump is the one with personality disorder?  You guys really need help....

 

[TexasTiger 14,300]

9 hours ago, maxwere said:

All this talk about the wall and no one is talking math.  Does this thing follow the Rio Grande or straight line?  If the former its like 3.14x as far.

Border ain't no straight line.

[SaltyTiger 8,574]

11 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Border ain't no straight line.

3.14 x  is no problem. with enough money we can make the Rio run north, 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

24 minutes ago, japantiger said:

Here is what we know:

• Trump and MX president had a call
• We don't know how long it lasted or what was discussed
• An unknown source reported that Trump threatened to send in US troops
• The Mexican Foreign Relations Department had earlier told The AP: "The negative statements you refer to did not occur during said telephone call. On the contrary, the tone was constructive."
• Mexico's foreign relations department said the report was "based on absolute falsehoods."
• MX President denies that Trump threatened to send in US troops

Editorial comments

• Hysteria continues to rule the press; every negative comment made is picked up as fact even when proven wrong
• Unknown and unverifiable sources are quoted as gospel by the press
• Event when things have been proven wrong; some on here continue to discuss it as if it happened anyway
• Homey, Tex and others above use fake news to start ridiculous discussion on impeachment for non existent offenses
• All the above; but Trump is the one with personality disorder?  You guys really need help....

 

Thanks for facts.

[TexasTiger 14,300]

9 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

3.14 x  is no problem. with enough money we can make the Rio run north, 

We're flush.

[AUloggerhead 2,518]

7 hours ago, japantiger said:

Here is what we know:

• Trump and MX president had a call
• We don't know how long it lasted or what was discussed
• An unknown source reported that Trump threatened to send in US troops
• The Mexican Foreign Relations Department had earlier told The AP: "The negative statements you refer to did not occur during said telephone call. On the contrary, the tone was constructive."
• Mexico's foreign relations department said the report was "based on absolute falsehoods."
• MX President denies that Trump threatened to send in US troops

Editorial comments

• Hysteria continues to rule the press; every negative comment made is picked up as fact even when proven wrong
• Unknown and unverifiable sources are quoted as gospel by the press
• Event when things have been proven wrong; some on here continue to discuss it as if it happened anyway
• Homey, Tex and others above use fake news to start ridiculous discussion on impeachment for non existent offenses
• All the above; but Trump is the one with personality disorder?  You guys really need help....

 

I'm inclined to view all initial "news" reports with a lot of skepticism.  I get it that the overwhelming number of journos today are left-leaning and can barely contain their disgust/hostility with Trump and anything he says or does.  But still ... if you're in the business of reporting, then report what you can verify rather than the first rumor you hear.  This isn't rocket surgery.  

[creed 1,790]

I'm not a fan for building a wall. However,  I see an opportunity to reduce some of our prison over crowding by letting some of our bad hombres dig a few tunnels to escape to Mexico with the promise to never come back. ;-)

[homersapien 12,238]

On 2/2/2017 at 11:48 AM, bigbird said:

That's your, as well as many others, opinions. America requires a little more than that.

Yeah, I figure at least another year, maybe two.

It's hard for people to let go of their dreams, especially when you are personally invested.

[bigbird 60,939]

That can go both ways...like those wanting catastrophic failure and dreaming of impeachment.

I don't like Trump personally and think he has struggled so far in his implementation of his presidency, but I'm not a fan of people giddy with anticipation that our president fail. That, to me, is sad. Its the same as some were towards Obama or would have been towards HC. Instead of people trying to work the problem they dig their heels in and close their eyes hoping 4 years goes by quickly. That's why nothing ever gets done and nothing ever gets better.