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.

 

Democrats Impeachment Army: $110 Million, 1000 Staff, 2000 Volunteers

page: 4
36
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
a reply to: Lysergic

What's TDS?


If you read a medical journal it's Testosterone Deficiency Syndrome, however the alt-right mainstream media websites made it into an attack on those who don't support Trump, as Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Don't worry about it, it's just a hateful term that can be applied to both sides, or all sides when they get triggered.

What the creators of the term didn't realize is how universal the term is and how it can be used on all people... Trump Derangement Syndrome works just as well when applied to Trump supporters.

Imagine this scenario... Mueller investigation recommends impeachment and all the Trump support gets triggered and cries foul for months -- this will also be classified as Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Best to just ignore it and not use the term, it's too broad and there is too much hate in it. And it is not based on actual medicine.


I love how you guys have no real response to this, so you have to pretend that Trump supporters are claiming it's an actual clinical diagnosis that's been researched and published and defined by the APA or some such nonsense response. In reality, most of the time, it's just being said tongue-in-cheek.

Why the dishonesty? Why can't you just address it the way people are really using it?



Here is page 1 from this very thread:



Notice how many people agree with it? I think you guys should get together on how to belittle people properly so you're all on the same page.


I saw that. Did he say it's been published? What is that, a whole 12 people starred it? All for different reasons. I starred it because I thought it was funny, not because I think it's actually gonna be published.

Effective dodge though.




posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 06:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Butterfinger
a reply to: Annee

Kind of like "Anyone but Trump", or Hillary just because its time for a female?

I noticed that too.


I'd say Hillary because she had the background and experience for the job.

Why would her gender matter?



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 08:32 PM
link   


What are the factual grounds for Impeachment?


1. Being a criminal
2. Dereliction of duty (appointing people who either aren't qualified or completely opposed to their positions thereby destroying the government's ability to function)
3. Violating the constitution and the hatch act by profiteering from the Presidency
4. Simony
5. Treason. Collusion with Russia and China. Trying to put American security at risk by pushing Chinese phones on the government that our intelligence said can be compromised by China in exchange for a $500 billion dollar investment in land for a Trump resort.
6. Conflicts of interest of which there are too many to count



posted on Aug, 1 2018 @ 11:21 PM
link   
So many lulz, and from just one line.




posted on Aug, 2 2018 @ 01:06 AM
link   
This is an interesting and sad contrast, of 18 year old HEROS, vs. 18 year old SNOWFLAKES!
twitter.com...



posted on Aug, 2 2018 @ 06:21 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



In 2012, watching Romney predicable lose to Obama was politically excruciating. However, watching the excesses of Trump Derangement Syndrome is like a slow moving train wreck in comparison to what I had previously thought was a political low point.

Neither the GOP (excluding Trump) or the democrats have learned anything from the 2012 election. The need to field decent candidates , have a viable economic message and the need to "connect" with voters are ignored. None of Trump's personality or political failings are anywhere near grounds for impeachment. Heck, the unhinged nature of "big money" politics has never been illustrated better. If the billion dollars political funds raised for the 2012 (U.S.) congress and presidential election was bad, than the latest development is setting new lows.

Incidentally, for all the money spent in the 2012 political cycle, the status qua was returned (Obama re-elected and the balance of power in congress remained about the same). But raising vast amounts of money to achieve a at best delusional goal is something else entirely.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Aug, 2 2018 @ 06:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Skyfloating

Do you happen to have a link that properly breaks down how the funds are allocated to each group?

That is important context to know because NextGen America does not appear to be a group focused on impeachment. They are focused on energy initiatives and helping push candidates that support climate change agendas.

Your source, which is horrible to say the least, does not provide that context. I's nothing more than a propaganda piece.


edit on 2-8-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2018 @ 06:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
This is an interesting and sad contrast, of 18 year old HEROS, vs. 18 year old SNOWFLAKES!
twitter.com...


Well, I suppose if you want to disrespect the young men and women that join the military and fight for us today, that is one way to do it.

There are still 18 year olds that sign up and serve us today. Some of them die.

Yet people such as yourself and Fournier will conveniently forget to mention their sacrifices in order to push a political narrative about liberals.

Disrespectful and sad.



posted on Aug, 2 2018 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: carewemust
This is an interesting and sad contrast, of 18 year old HEROS, vs. 18 year old SNOWFLAKES!
twitter.com...


Well, I suppose if you want to disrespect the young men and women that join the military and fight for us today, that is one way to do it.

There are still 18 year olds that sign up and serve us today. Some of them die.

Yet people such as yourself and Fournier will conveniently forget to mention their sacrifices in order to push a political narrative about liberals.

Disrespectful and sad.


This is one place I can agree with you. There were certainly cowards and "snowflakes" in 1944, and there are heroes among today's youth. I served with some fine young men and women.



posted on Aug, 2 2018 @ 11:17 AM
link   
I am sure people I know will be working on that.a reply to: Skyfloating



posted on Aug, 2 2018 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Thats my point.

"Qualifications be damned" you said, surrounding himself with yes-men.

Seems like most Hillary voters just wanted a female president... qualifications be damned.

thehill.com...

www.eonline.com...

I'm surprised you are surprised that people do this in politics. Thats how you get stuff done in that world, you cant trust many.



posted on Aug, 2 2018 @ 03:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

It shouldn't matter, her gender... But to many, both for and against, it did... I dislike her intensely, not because she's female, but because she's a two bit shyster lawyer who rode coattails to offices far beyond her capabilities...there really is a reason she's never going to be President.

I'm still not sure what background and experience you're referencing. There are people, both male and female, who are far more qualified, not to mention appealing.



posted on Aug, 2 2018 @ 08:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Annee

It shouldn't matter, her gender... But to many, both for and against, it did... I dislike her intensely, not because she's female, but because she's a two bit shyster lawyer who rode coattails to offices far beyond her capabilities...there really is a reason she's never going to be President.

I'm still not sure what background and experience you're referencing. There are people, both male and female, who are far more qualified, not to mention appealing.


I was still in the military during most of the 2016 campaign. Majority of people I worked with voted for Trump, despised Hillary. We all knew she should've been prosecuted for that email fiasco.

I don't recall one person ever bringing up her gender as a reason to be against her.



posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 08:32 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

The only reason her gender is brought up is to try to shame people into voting for her because they don't want to be labeled "Sexist". The same crap was pulled by the Obama crowd. If you didn't vote for Obama you were "Racist". It didn't matter that he had no qualifications, his being black was the only qualification the he needed.



posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 11:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328



What are the factual grounds for Impeachment?


1. Being a criminal
2. Dereliction of duty (appointing people who either aren't qualified or completely opposed to their positions thereby destroying the government's ability to function)
3. Violating the constitution and the hatch act by profiteering from the Presidency
4. Simony
5. Treason. Collusion with Russia and China. Trying to put American security at risk by pushing Chinese phones on the government that our intelligence said can be compromised by China in exchange for a $500 billion dollar investment in land for a Trump resort.
6. Conflicts of interest of which there are too many to count
Geez.... talking points from Moveon, Huffpo, Salon, or ThinkProgress? or all 4 maybe.... and … are you sure you aren't talking about Hillary?
edit on 3-8-2018 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 08:24 PM
link   
No these are facts, and unlike conservatives I don't need someone to tell me what to think or say.
Trump is the most impeachable President in US history- he's far worse than Nixon, he's more corrupt than all other Presidents combined.



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Oh and his attacks on the media are anti first-ammendment, so he's violating the constitution again that he swore to protect. His inappropriate involvement in the legal system could also be seen as unconstitutional.



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 10:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328
Oh and his attacks on the media are anti first-ammendment, so he's violating the constitution again that he swore to protect. His inappropriate involvement in the legal system could also be seen as unconstitutional.

So using ones first amendment rights is now anti first amendment?
I am confused?



posted on Aug, 23 2018 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Skyfloating

Well this is the guy to become an hero to us all. Two rounds in the back of the skull with a bolt action should be a good suicide.



posted on Aug, 23 2018 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Steyer’s organizations, NextGen America and Need to Impeach, will also have a combined 1,000 employees and 2,000 staffers as they take the case for impeachment to voters in November, according to Politico.



Trump creating more jobs... WINNING!!!



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join