Pelosi Impeachment Inquiry

Tony Stark said:
The so called establishment candidate got millions more votes so I wouldn't say that.
More...

1. Was there significant enough election fraud to change the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election? With Hillary getting more votes than Trump, if there was election fraud, Hillary seemed more likely to benefit.

2. Did the Presidential with the most votes concede to the Presidential candidate with the lesser votes? If so, why?

3. As a result of the 2016 election, who was sworn in as President of the United States of America?

4. Do you believe Hillary’s “Basket of deplorables” comment helped or hurt her results?

5. Was it possible Hillary did not campaign enough in her “Blue Wall” states?

6. Why would you think a long term pro Bill Clinton and anti Bush Democrat, support a Republican Billionaire President against Hillary Clinton in 2016? Could it be I felt my own as well as our country’s interests would be better represented by successful billionaire Trump who spoke to our hopes versus the divisive and establishment Hillary?

I ask these questions in an attempt to help you with your apparent fixation or denial on the 2016 election results and the underlying cause of those election results.

However, this is 2019 and neither one of us is happy with our Government. Most seem unhappy with the candidates as well. Other than Biden or Sanders, each candidate has a redeeming factor or two in my opinion. Most certainly no candidate is worth getting excited about. Our system currently attracts sellouts, not the best and the brightest.

I am working on some “Internet government” ideas where those people who have verified online identities are able to directly participate in the workings of our Government. At this beginning stage, there are lots of things that need to be worked out.

You interested?
 
Tony Stark said:
North Korea wouldn't have had nuclear weapons if not for a republican president.With The US being bogged down in the unpopular illegal Iraq war NK knew there would be no support from the American people or American allies for a confrontation with North Korea.Bush is also partly to blame for Iran(Trump more so) because Saddam kept Iran in check.
More...

You may want to look up the full history behind North Korea obtaining nuclear weapons to be fully informed. The Democrats and Republicans were both complicit. North Korea’s first nuclear test was in 2006. However, they received the needed material from a nuclear reactor that Bill Clinton approved against the advice of national security experts, as I understand.

Iran, too, had help from many US Presidents, whether Democratic or Republican, and this includes Trump. The genie is out of the bottle. The Pakistan-Iran-North Korea connection makes it inevitable Iran acquires nuclear weapons. Iran has the capacity to make many more weapons per year than North Korea.

Anyone interested in world peace, yet?

Are you beginning to feel the full extent of the incompetence of our Government on both sides of the aisle now?

Want to do something about it?
 
maximumpossiblesuffering said:
2. Did the Presidential with the most votes concede to the Presidential candidate with the lesser votes? If so, why?

3. As a result of the 2016 election, who was sworn in as President of the United States of America?
More...


Different argument .You said Trump won because voters were dissatisfied.More voters voted for Hillary.Millions more.
 
Tony Stark said:
Trump started a commission to answer that question:rolleyes:
More...

Trump also approved $5,000,000,000 in aid for refugees, some of which were entering the United States illegally.

Sometimes it seems Trump can be practical and fair, even if it goes against his interests or prior commitments at times. Is this not an attribute we should require from all of our politicians?

However, we want the best and brightest working for us, right?

What would you be willing to contribute, whether it is time and or money to achieving the worthwhile goal of getting the best and the brightest to represent us?
 
maximumpossiblesuffering said:
Trump also approved $5,000,000,000 in aid for refugees, some of which were entering the United States illegally.

Sometimes it seems Trump can be practical and fair, even if it goes against his interests or prior commitments at times. Is this not an attribute we should require from all of our politicians?

However, we want the best and brightest working for us, right?

What would you be willing to contribute, whether it is time and or money to achieving the worthwhile goal of getting the best and the brightest to represent us?
More...


I do whats most practical and realistic,try to help democrats win.
 
"Tony Stark, post: 4935854, member: 495092"]Different argument .You said Trump won because voters were dissatisfied.More voters voted for Hillary.Millions more.

You can deny reality all you want and continue to be confused by what happens in the future. Remember the media, including many high profile Hollywood types didn’t think Trump had a chance and were crushed when reality set in. They had no idea how disenfranchised 60,000,000 voters felt.


Tony Stark said:
Yes,5-6 years into Bush's term.
More...

Looks like a little denial here as well. No material, no bomb. Surely you are not implying if there were a Democratic President in 2006, North Korea would not have test a nuclear weapon, right?


Tony Stark said:
Obama got them to stop making nukes,Trump made them start again.
More...

Iran continued to enrich uranium during Obama’s term. Iran’s long term plan was to acquire nuclear weapons regardless of which political party controls the Whitehouse.

As we can see, our leaders have been pretty weak.

Let’s find strong leaders and make sure our politician selection process allows the people to choose their candidates, not the political parties.

You in?
 
maximumpossiblesuffering said:
"Tony Stark, post: 4935854, member: 495092"]Different argument .You said Trump won because voters were dissatisfied.More voters voted for Hillary.Millions more.

You can deny reality all you want and continue to be confused by what happens in the future. Remember the media, including many high profile Hollywood types didn’t think Trump had a chance and were crushed when reality set in. They had no idea how disenfranchised 60,000,000 voters felt.




Looks like a little denial here as well. No material, no bomb. Surely you are not implying if there were a Democratic President in 2006, North Korea would not have test a nuclear weapon, right?




Iran continued to enrich uranium during Obama’s term. Iran’s long term plan was to acquire nuclear weapons regardless of which political party controls the Whitehouse.

As we can see, our leaders have been pretty weak.

Let’s find strong leaders and make sure our politician selection process allows the people to choose their candidates, not the political parties.

You in?
More...

1.Not enough to get more votes than Hillary

2.Al Gore wouldn't have went to war with Iraq which tied up our military which took the military threat off the table.The Iraq war was so unpopular with US allies NK also knew The US couldn't build a coalition to stop them.

3.From Vanzandts link


At the one-year mark, it’s clear that the nuclear agreement between Iran and the major powers has substantially restricted Tehran’s ability to produce the fissile material necessary to build a bomb. That’s a net positive—for the United States and the broader region.





One year after its conclusion, the JCPOA remains controversial in Tehran and Washington (as I describe in more detail here), with opponents unreconciled to the deal and determined to derail it. But opponents have had to scale back their criticism, in large part because the JCPOA, at least so far, has delivered on its principal goal—blocking Iran’s path to nuclear weapons for an extended period of time. Moreover, Iran’s positive compliance record has not given opponents much ammunition. The IAEA found Iran in compliance in its two quarterly reports issued in 2016.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top