Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

This is just so beautiful. The Dems are so blinded by their fanaticism in giving Trump the fruit, compounded with his trolling tweets holding their attention, that they don't notice the Wall slowly coming up and the judiciary being replaced under their noses.

Then it will finally hit them, wondering what the hell just happened.
 
Embarrassed to ask this given the material I've read, but if you're President and you're impeached by the House and not removed from office by the Senate in your first, then does that legally disqualify from running again? I venture to think it doesn't since that isn't mentioned in the Constitution which begs the question : why impeach him if you can't remove him?

Edit : Hmm, never mind. I was under the impression still that any person impeached from federal offices would be automatically disqualified from running for public office again, but it seems that the Senate can choose to vote separately on that matter. And assuming that unlike a vote for removal from office, that a vote for disqualification would only require a simple majority, then Democrats are still screwed on that end unless a few Republicans are stupid enough to join the other side which, again, makes their efforts a complete waste of time.
 
Last edited:
Embarrassed to ask this given the material I've read, but if you're President and you're impeached by the House and not removed from office by the Senate in your first, then does that legally disqualify from running again? I venture to think it doesn't since that isn't mentioned in the Constitution which begs the question : why impeach him if you can't remove him?

Edit : Hmm, never mind. I was under the impression still that any person impeached from federal offices would be automatically disqualified from running for public office again, but it seems that the Senate can choose to vote separately on that matter. And assuming that unlike a vote for removal from office, that a vote for disqualification would only require a simple majority, then Democrats are still screwed on that end unless a few Republicans are stupid enough to join the other side which, again, makes their efforts a complete waste of time.

Impeachment is set at two levels. For ex. The President. House can vote to impeach the President, which is essentially an indictment level process. It then moves on to the Senate, which actually tries the charges set forth by the House impeachment. Upon "conviction" which is 2/3s, it's then decided upon removal and or exclusion from running for office again. That's the basics.

That said, if the Dems impeach Trump in the House, it will be a purely political move, which is exactly the same thing that the Republicans did to Clinton when he was impeached. Never had a chance of being pushed through the Senate, but wanted to make a political statement by "impeaching the President". Which is funny, because if memory serves, Clinton's approval rating shot up to something absurd like 70% AFTER he was impeached. Will history follow the same course? Never can tell, but at least there is a precedent to follow.
 
That using the military funds to construct 100 miles of border or fencing or whatever has all the TDS people going apeshit.

Impeachment up in smoke and the wall is going to finally start being built. Good week!

Up to 140+ federal judges (including 2 Supreme Court justices), Guatemalan 3rd country immigration policy, and Mueller Hearing fail this week.

Still not tired of winning.
 
All things considered, we really shouldn't be too surprised by Nadler's inability to just stop barreling forwards as hard as he can regardless of the consequences. He always did have a problem with self-control, after all. Did you know he used to weigh 338lbs at 5'4", and only lost some of that weight because of surgery? Nadler was a big, big little guy in the 1990s. Still hasn't quite figured out how pants work, either.
07w-nadlerold-custom1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Dead bodies aren't proof of murder conspiracy. What I'm not seeing is proof that SHOULD be there, but isn't.

Who was the triggerman? Where'd they get the money to do it? What channels did the orders come down through? Who talked to who? These essential connections are never made convincingly, and all we're left to rely on is credulity, or, apparent incredulity that the only reason a lot of people around you can drop dead is if you're killing them all....

It's like Bigfoot, everyone is ignoring the proof we SHOULD have by now (bones, carcasses, poop) to focus on blurry photographs and footprints that can't be verified because we didn't see what made them. In essence, I'm not doubting that's a plaster cast of a very large print in your hands, I'm doubting if it shows what you say it does.

I do not think it possible you could whip up a murder conspiracy to kill 100 people, even slowly over 20 years, and not leave a single prosecutable trace, even if nobody wants to bring charges. I mean, even mob hits have clear front-runners for who did them, and who ordered them, even if nobody will prosecute.

I have yet to hear a reputable name come up when you have to go from "Hillary ordered them killed..." to "... and here's who passed the order on and here's who pulled the trigger" That second step is always woefully lacking in anything but suspicion.

WARNING: LONG SERIOUS POST

Let me play Devil's advocate.
For the record, I am on the fence - the evidence isn't very strong, but boy there is a lot of it, and I think the strongest case is none of this shit is reported in the MSM. So I'm spinning a bit of a yarn that will be taking the fact there is a conspiracy for granted, and as such much of the content of this post should not be taken at face value, but as should be taken a base for further thought about the matter. There are many lens you can use too look at the same event, and have a very different view.
I would be writing a very different post pointing out some of the large flaws in some of the Clinton 'bodies' if you were a seething CDS sufferer.

"Never work with the same shooters twice"
The reason none of this ties back to the Clintons the Clinton's never have anyone killed - directly. They always seem to work with some of the dirtiest and scummiest people; these are very likely the who arranges and organizes the actual killings, the Clintons simply cover for them. They also never really work with the same scumbags repeatedly - there's a scandal, the Clintons are tangentally implicated, and as the trials and investigations go on, bodies turn up.
And while some familiar faces keep turning up as you look into Clinton dealings, when there's a scandal with a bodycount, you never see the Clintons with the exact same scumbags again.

Allow me to present the case of Vincent "Chin" Gigante who fooled juries and even the FBI and prosecutors with a crazy act for almost 30 years. Despite constant FBI surveillance, Vincent put on this crazy act while being one of the most ruthless crime bosses with some of the best information security - underlings were forbidden from even saying his name. He was only caught because members of OTHER crime families outed him as running shit at Mafia overmeetings as people like Sammy "The Bull" turned federal witness.

So in other words: Vincent and his crew were under strict, constant FBI surveillance and wiretapping for nearly 30 years, while Vincent was organizing crimes and ordering far more than 100 hits. The Clintons have much less law enforcement scrutiny. And again, with law enforcement up his ass, and they never actually got Chin - they got associates who rolled on him and managed to live long enough to testify.

So take the case of John Ashe, former President UN General Assembly. He died while awaiting trial for a bribery scandal that had ties to many Clinton Global Foundation donors. The real target of the investigation that nabbed Ashe, was CGF donor and triad-connected Billionaire Ng Lap Seng. Ng Lap Seng was also involved in the Chinese fund-raising scandal when Bill was president.
While the Clintons and the CFG were only somewhat tied to John Ashe, in a way that was likely not directly criminal but would placed the CGF under increased scrutiny, Ng Lap Seng (a billionaire with ties to violent Chinese Mobsters, and also the Clintons) was DIRECTLY related, and benefited greatly and directly from John Ashe's death (to a degree, he still got convicted for bribery eventually; incidently in 2017 after Hilary lost). The Clintons also benefited - provided John Ashe had evidence of their involvement and would have turned state's evidence - but in a much less direct way.

Remember also Bill had access to the US intelligence apparatus for 8 post-soviet years. Any information, any briefings - say, briefings about top-tier assassins, would have been trival for him to get his hands on. Bill, unlike his wife, is also very charismatic and good at offering people things they want to do things for him. Its not inconceivable that Bill got contacts and information that would give him access to a level of political killers (CIA or perhaps ex-soviet assets) that even if they didn't make the bodies drop, might be able to suggest ways and methods that a killing could be accomplished with no ties. But again, speculation, and impossible to prove unless someone talks.

Another thing its impossible to prove that the CGF operated in a pay-for-play fashion. But here's what is provable: Donations to the CGF peaked in 2014 (the year after Hilary stepped down as Secretary of State) at 172 million. AFTER stepping down from SoS, donations dropped $64 million to 108. 2017, the first year after Hilary lost the election, donations had dropped to $27 million.
You can also show that after businessmen from certain countries hired Bill for speaking gigs to the tune of $500,000 for a single 20 minute speech and then donation millions to the CGF, Hilary Clinton would issue favorable rulings.
So you can't prove anything criminal was going on, but man its one HELL of a coincident not one MSM outlet reported on during the 2016 election.

So putting this all together:
The fact "They haven't been caught so they can't be involved" falls apart when you take cases like Vincent Gigante, or the Unabomber, or even the Golden State killer, who escape detection and often suspicion while carrying out their crimes for decades, despite intense investigation, until a stray fact or small slip up causes the crack that brings everything together.

The Clintons DO have a history of covering up crimes and wrong doings (or more specifically, having family and close friends cover up damning information; see White Water). Bill made a lot of friends and did a lot favors as president. Sure that was 20 years ago, but a lot of bodies dropped in the 90s and early 00's. Bill would be able to bring a lot of soft influence to bare if he say, wanted a death ruled a suicide and no further investigation. Remember he had Janet Reno seal the medical records of a lawyer who had investigated him for White Water.

Which, even if you accept all this as fact, doesn't prove that the Clintons are actually creating the bodies that just so happen to drop in their wake.

Its also possible the Clintons suffer from a problem of Wishing to Be Free of Meddlesome Priests; while again you can't prove that the CGF operated in a pay-for-play fashion, donations seem to follow Hilary's actions and delivery of favorable decisions to countries after donations to the CGF. That is, even if the CGF doesn't operate in a Pay-for-Play fashion it gives the appearance of operating in that fashion (ane its possible the Clintons purposely worked to trump up that appearence, so they could exploit it to gain more donations while doing nothing illegal), so it is possible that Clinton associates, or people who wanted to be Clinton associates, on their own initiative planed and carried out the killings in the hope of currying favor with the Clintons.

So Its entirely possible the Clintons just happen to end up getting in bed with the shadiest & scummiest people, and it just happens that when they shit they're up to gets exposed, those shady people with no assistance or even promises of assistance from the Clintons, decided to start offing investigators, reporters, and witnesses to shut them up. It could just be coincidence.

But man it sure is one HELL of a coincidence that keeps happening, and no one except for one former NYT reporter talks about or looks into with strenous effort or any goal other than defending Hilary from the accusations.
 
Last edited:
Clinton's approval rating shot up to something absurd like 70% AFTER he was impeached. Will history follow the same course? Never can tell, but at least there is a precedent to follow.

Another God knows how long of circus antics from House democrats to help them in 2020 elections, with a stunt House impeachment that immediately drops dead in the Senate to infuriate people worked into thinking impeachment will lead to removal from office and imprisonment will cause maximum embarrassment to the party. The reason to talk about impeachment and harass the president is to stymie him legislatively and look for damaging material to run as campaign ads, without a proper impeachment process. Endless inquiry, smears, rumors, innuendo, investigations, getting embarrassing material on President Trump and his family and associated to immediately plant it to a sympathetic press and spin it as loose cannon "leaking" is the play they've been running. Legislatively, it worked. In the 2018 midterms, it worked.

The old guard like Pelosi, Schumer, Nadler, etc that hate President Trump know that is an angle that has worked for them and they want to keep running it. They don't want to sack up with an impeachment vote because the "he will rot in jail!" stuff is not going to happen. The youngbloods and a lot of the general public doesn't get it and actually wants an impeachment process to start, which would be calamitously embarrassing for democrats when it bombs.

Any tactic that drags on too long is a drag. Its going to be hard to tell people that the check was NOT in the mail if they try to wrap this up without a proper impeachment vote, many people will go berserk. That is why its so vital to tell people that a sitting president cannot be indicted, to get people out there in 2020 to finally see justice served! Whether people go for that or think its a 4 year gyppo remains to be seen.
 
I don't know if it's arrogance or senility that makes the DNC think seriously going for Impeachment is a good idea.

Have they forgotten the 90s?
Arrogance makes them think that it'll work this time. And yes, a good portion of them are probably either senile or need to go take their brain medicine... and by brain medicine I do not mean the blood of immigrant children to extend life. I mean their anti-psychotics and/or Alzheimers medicine.
 
I don't know if it's arrogance or senility that makes the DNC think seriously going for Impeachment is a good idea.

Have they forgotten the 90s?
This is what happens after decades of promoting people to the top solely on the basis of race, sex and connections with no regard to merit and competence.

It's like Gregor Mendel cross-pollinated the dumbest Democrats he could find over generation after generation and all that is left is a party full of Charles the Seconds.
 
Back