It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

‘Prediction professor’: Trump will be impeached

page: 2
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 02:29 AM
link   
So, he doesn't even take office until January 20th, but someone is already saying he will be impeached?

Really? Are you flocking kidding me?

Holy crap.

People are uninformed, but they are not that *stupid*.

LMAO!

Wake the # up people!!!




edit on 11/12/2016 by Riffrafter because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 02:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Snippythehorse
Perhaps he could start with Glass Stegal.....?
that would be totally appropriate...
He could undercut a large portion of his opposition by sticking to basics......


His infrastructure projects would find wide appeal even among liberals. I think if he started there, he might cement himself to firmly for any shenanigans.

Time will tell, but the "establishment" that he ran against doesn't want him for all the reasons the professor in the article mentioned. He's not controllable or predictable, ironically exactly what the people wanted.

The problem is ... (and this is a whole tear onto itself) ... is that you can't "fix" or get rid of the establishment by electing an outsider figurehead. You can't. He's one man, just one guy. Congress and the senate arguably have far more collective power. If you throw in all the states and their individual houses of congress/senates...

This "top down" change doesn't work, has never worked, and will never work. You can't replace one man at the top and expect "trick down change".

We all (or should) know by now that supply side (trickle down) economics isn't a workable system. It simply doesn't "trickle down" as expected. Change of this magnitude won't, either.

What has happened though, is Trump has changed the paradigm. He's shown the people's hand, and the "establishment" will adjust accordingly. I fully expect to see more and more "anti-establishment" candidates ... who are "anti-establishment" in name only. It's what the people want, it's what they'll vote for.

Every candidate now will be tripping over themselves to project that image, meanwhile continuing business as usual behind the scenes. The paint job changes, but the siding stays the same folks.

If Americans were actually serious about change, they'd start from the foundation and work their way up. Not simply toss a fish out of water into the mix and waiting to see the outcome.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 02:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: agenda51
a reply to: Kettu

my history is fine. your just trapped in a two party mentality. Bush Sr. and Junior were corrupt globalists. reagan was a populist and the last good president we had. before him was Kennedy. the rest have all been crooks.

wether they have an R or a D by their name doesnt tell me squat.


Reagan isn't conservative enough to be even considered a "conservative" by today's standards. He rose taxes and supported gun control.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 02:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Greggers

Ummm ok, if you say so. The congressional majority is R. Trump will be able to do these things.

His own party has no interest in renegotiating NAFTA.

And yes, the healthcare system in the united states has been on the way to pricing itself out of the reach of ordinary Americans for a long time now. Long before the ACA took effect, health insurance rates were rising steadily, and plans were constantly exceeding their ability to generate a profit and were therefore routinely dropped.

Were you under the impression that the ACA was enacted simply to cover pre-existing conditions?

It wasn't. The idea (poor though it may have been) was to normalize the risk pool so costs would be lower across the board AND better coverage could be afforded by more people.

It didn't work. There are lots of reasons for that.

But going back to the way it was just puts us right back on a collision course with single payer.

And besides, Trump PROMISED to replace it with something better. Are you saying he lied?



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 02:55 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

I say if Trump accomplishes 1/10th of what he wants, no-one will be any better off



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 02:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter

lesser people have been impeached for less
...

Sorry, I am wrong. It appears there aren't any lesser examples.
edit on 12-11-2016 by sunkuong because: (no reason given)


(post by Riffrafter removed for a manners violation)

posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 03:02 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 03:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Greggers

A- I'm not a Trump supporter. I simply preferred him over Clinton, and I did not vote, at all.

and this?



And yes, the healthcare system in the united states has been on the way to pricing itself out of the reach of ordinary Americans for a long time now. Long before the ACA took effect, health insurance rates were rising steadily, and plans were constantly exceeding their ability to generate a profit and were therefore routinely dropped.

How old are you exactly? I ask simply to gauge your timeline of the experience of obamacare.

Healthcare wasn't great before the "ACA" (in quotations for a reason), but it wasn't this horrible thing you portray. The ACA has done one and one thing only, raise rates and tax the youth.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 03:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Greggers

A- I'm not a Trump supporter. I simply preferred him over Clinton, and I did not vote, at all.

A-I never said you were.




Healthcare wasn't great before the "ACA" (in quotations for a reason), but it wasn't this horrible thing you portray. The ACA has done one and one thing only, raise rates and tax the youth.


You asked about my age. I'm over 40. I never said healthcare was horrible. What I did say was that it was pricing itself out of the range of many, and over time was getting worse.

It will continue to get worse, whether the ACA is repealed or not.

And you're right -- as I said, the ACA has not worked.

It needs to be replaced with something better.

If Trump does not keep his promise to replace it with something better, we will eventually end up with single payer.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 03:23 AM
link   
Trump knows how to build new bridges with people so they can make money. If Republican turncoats in congress and senators try to stifle Trumps economic plans, and the American people see his plans are very good and people can clearly see that, but these fools try to play politics and hurt the American people like they have been doing, (and pretending they are on our side), Then we really flatten them all politically next run. Trumps promise to empower we the people again is a valid platform that we deserve as a country, and we haven't had it in decades. No one is going to impeach him based on gibberish.
edit on 12-11-2016 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 03:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Greggers

Ummm ok, if you say so. The congressional majority is R. Trump will be able to do these things.

His own party has no interest in renegotiating NAFTA.

And yes, the healthcare system in the united states has been on the way to pricing itself out of the reach of ordinary Americans for a long time now. Long before the ACA took effect, health insurance rates were rising steadily, and plans were constantly exceeding their ability to generate a profit and were therefore routinely dropped.

Were you under the impression that the ACA was enacted simply to cover pre-existing conditions?

It wasn't. The idea (poor though it may have been) was to normalize the risk pool so costs would be lower across the board AND better coverage could be afforded by more people.

It didn't work. There are lots of reasons for that.

But going back to the way it was just puts us right back on a collision course with single payer.

And besides, Trump PROMISED to replace it with something better. Are you saying he lied?



Oh changes are coming for sure.

I can't wait to see how them douchebags handle having the same health ins as the rest of us.

If they want anything above basic make them pay for it, let's see what they pass for us.

Every govt employee, same as the rest of the population.

Think these people need diamond health ins on OUR dime?

F them. Think of the money saved if they have to pay.






posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 03:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
Trump knows how to build new bridges with people so they can make money. If Republican turncoats in congress and senators try to stifle Trumps economic plans, and the American people see his plans are very good and people can clearly see that, but these fools try to play politics and hurt the American people like they have been doing, (and pretending they are on our side), Then we really flatten them all politically next run. Trumps promise to empower we the people again is a valid platform that we deserve as a country, and we haven't had it in decades. No one is going to impeach him based on gibberish.


AMEN!






posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 07:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Kettu

Your speculation involves Trump failing miserably. I'm not a Trump fan/supporter, but I don't think he will fail as a president.

If NAFTA can be renegotiated, and the ACA goes bu-bye, he will be one of the most successful presidents in recent history.


He'll never get NAFTA renegotiated. He has very little support for that in Congress. VERY little.

And killing the ACA doesn't make him successful unless he can replace it with something better, as he promised. The system as it existed before was broken.


Lol sure because nafta has worked so well just like the idea of ttp was going to be great and was the downfall of Hillary. They will renegotiate nafta and you know they will because he has the ability to make deals better then any of them do. That they do trust him with however everything else not so much



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 07:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: Greggers

Really? This was the headlines within 24 hours of Trump being elected.

Ottawa offers to renegotiate NAFTA in effort to warm ties with Trump

Mexico and Canada Announce Willingness to Renegotiate NAFTA


Yes, really.


I said he doesn't have support in Congress. Are Canada and Mexico in Congress?


Actually, you're wrong.
He has support. FACT. Your last bit makes no sense.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99


congress cannot just decide to enact the impeachment process, there has to be an actual reason for it.


Conflict of interest. Sedition. Failure to pay taxes. Influence buying. Acting as an undisclosed agent of a foreign power. Those are just the ones we already know about. The RNC used Trump to attract the low information voters and will replace him with a fundamentalist Christian free trade globalist, Pence. Forward the Dominion.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 08:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Vector99


congress cannot just decide to enact the impeachment process, there has to be an actual reason for it.


Conflict of interest. Sedition. Failure to pay taxes. Influence buying. Acting as an undisclosed agent of a foreign power. Those are just the ones we already know about. Forward the Dominion.


According to you, he's almost as bad as Hillary.



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 08:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Vector99


congress cannot just decide to enact the impeachment process, there has to be an actual reason for it.


Conflict of interest. Sedition. Failure to pay taxes. Influence buying. Acting as an undisclosed agent of a foreign power. Those are just the ones we already know about. The RNC used Trump to attract the low information voters and will replace him with a fundamentalist Christian free trade globalist, Pence. Forward the Dominion.


Your link got me looking up this en.wikipedia.org... and then

this :Globalism in particular :


[align=center]Manfred Steger distinguishes between different globalisms such as justice globalism, jihad globalism, and market globalism.[1] Market globalisms include the ideology of neoliberalism. In some hands, the reduction of globalism to the single ideology of market globalism and neoliberalism has led to confusion. For example, in his 2005 book The Collapse of Globalism and the Reinvention of the World, Canadian philosopher John Ralston Saul treated globalism as coterminous with neoliberalism and neoliberal globalization. He argued that, far from being an inevitable force, globalization is already breaking up into contradictory pieces and that citizens are reasserting their national interests in both positive and destructive ways.[/align]

@Citizens and in particular *national interests* , then posing pence as a predator and the RNC as organised religo-nuts carries some weight as a potential truth , but rather little substance given that this one is about the nation vs corrupt globalist interests. Is pence a billionaire ? In the multinational trustee club ? no , but if he was a big JW or something your view would be considered further. Who is the trump really with -another and different Israel ? Got anything properly juicy old friend? Or are the facts we see today really actually as raw and unobscured as they appear ?



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Greggers

Ummm ok, if you say so. The congressional majority is R. Trump will be able to do these things.

I can't wait to see how them douchebags handle having the same health ins as the rest of us.

If they want anything above basic make them pay for it, let's see what they pass for us.

Every govt employee, same as the rest of the population.

Think these people need diamond health ins on OUR dime?

F them. Think of the money saved if they have to pay.




As an FYI, government employees pay for their insurance. BlueCross-BlueShield is fairly common and the Government does what many employers do and pays a share of it. Perhaps you are thinking of the plans for Congressmen and Senators.
edit on 11/12/2016 by pteridine because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2016 @ 09:09 AM
link   
This is interesting because I am predicting that Trump may actually save us from the onslaught of super extreme Right-wing legislation that the GOP congress under Ryan is most assuredly going to bombard us with.

If Trump were to veto their attempts to bring America back to medieval times (yes I know America didn't exist then) then maybe they will try to impeach him.

He has already disagreed with some of their positions, like wanting to give government lands to the states for example. That's the kind of issue the could drive the Tea Party into a frenzy and make them attack him.




top topics



 
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join