If Mr. Trump was a Democrat
- Thread starter chair
- Start date
:darwinsm:
Lon
Well-known member
Incorrect. The reason we don't hold past presidents accountable is 1) water under the bridge 2) the shadow cast on our nation etc. Kennedy was no angel. You and I BOTH know that. If you want to special plead and forget the log in one eye opposed to another, that's your prerogative but we REALLY should see Trump in historical context. You know what "I" see as a contrast? That he is a republican. I think, for the most part, we've not been kind to Presidents with failures. There is some good, in looking back over the failures of past presidents. We really have to focus on accomplishments too!
Again, is it good to ONLY look at one parties' failures?
Fair, but is the defense "At least he isn't as bad as" or "it was never proven?"
Right, and Epstein killed himself...? I acquiesce conspiracy theories aren't but discussion points.
There have been several 'theories.' At the very least, I do question their scruples and morals. There is good evidence their funds are involved in shady deals, deleted emails, collusion with Obama (evidenced in declassified data) etc. Do I mean to cast all dispersion on the Clinton's? No, just saying that stabbing at moralities of any president current is 1) just current events and 2) seated in a larger discussion. I'm not sure it is a good talking point, though it is certainly of precedence (political mudslinging).
I'm not sure 'most' Americans believe that. Sentiment is different than legalities. It seems we'd have had a LOT of vice presidents stepping up in history if it were a factor.
The main point in thread is that we not point a finger at one fault in a president, if we ignore the same or similar in one of our preferred party (I've left any particular party ship but I do vote for republicans more often).
For anyone with even a slight attachment to reality, it comes down to evidence.
I don't know of any humans who are. Still, evidence is required.
I'm just using the same yardstick for all of them. Actual cases of presidential appointees, indicted, convicted, or pardoned for crimes in the course of their duties. If you think that's too hard on republicans, then the problem is not with me showing it to you.
I'd be happy to show you the same measurement for Trump, using the same rules. You want me to show you?
I'm skeptical. George H.W. Bush ran a relatively clean administration, as did Gerald Ford.
I notice that Ford, Carter, and George W. Bush are generally well-liked today, even if they weren't very good presidents.
We should simply ignore the stuff that lacks evidence. And yes, we should compare presidents against their fellow presidents, not angels.
Considering Trump was one of his pals, and there is considerable evidence that Trump was complicit in some of Epstein's activities, and considering who had control of the federal prison system at the time, I'm a little skeptical. Who had the motive and the opportunity? Yep.
I'm just showing you how the records compare. Apples to apples.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
In addition to appointees, it's worth noting that Trump's last three campaign managers have all been arrested...
For what? :idunno:
Lon
Well-known member
No surprise, we both disagree. There is a genuine distaste in bringing charges on any president. Both sides are noticeable during attempted impeachment. Anyone with an education and a strong ability to self-reflect will see that it is as bad (literally) to side with one group as the other because it simply pits two parties. I don't like being duped and I don't like doing something 'we did last year in a different party." Patterns are hard to break from, but it is why I'm not democrat or republican at present. I don't want to be a dupe, a cog in a wheel.
There is plenty of evidence for things. It doesn't always mean indictments.
:nono: I'm just saying it is both sides.
Impeachments are difficult. We've not managed to do it often in history.
Yes, but Nixon...etc. I've left room. The goal is to get us all thinking about what does and does not apply to both sides because as the years roll by, there is a noticeable pattern.
You don't think Ford did well? He just wasn't elected but I think he was a good president.
Agree. Maybe you are more partisan than other Democrats. I do think I'm a hypocrite, to a degree. I didn't defend Obama or Clinton. I voted for, but was sorry, about George W.
It's a talking point rather than an investigation. While I don't think a public investigation serves us well, I'd like to see some of these carried out in private, where we the people get rather just a verdict and perhaps declassification after they've passed on. There are probably better ideas out there, I'm old-school. I liked my news a bit more censored, it is just that no news source does well with that any more. It used to be 'scrupples' but now it is about staying alive in a competitive business so I empathize, just wish a few news sources went back to Old-school. I guess the 700 Club, but some would balk at that and I'm not charismatic.....
Sure, its an 'what if' thread so it coaxes the speculation and comparisons.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Look it up if you're curious.
Oh, I know the answers. :chuckle:
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Then don't waste my time with stupid questions.
Again, comes down to evidence.
That's what trips them up, every time. You can always jigger up something that sounds suspicious, but sufficient evidence to get an indictment is another matter.
As you see, there's a lot more on one side than the other. Now, either Democrats are massively more intelligent than republicans, or republicans commit more crimes in office.
Yep. The president has to do something really off the scale to get impeached. Oral sex in the oval office, repeated felonies, collusion with unfriendly governments. Stuff like that.
I showed you the pattern. And yes, it's noticeable. Some presidents predictably, have more criminals in their administrations. And there's a common thread there.
Nor did most Americans.
Bracketed by Nixon and Carter, he still doesn't look so good.
(Barbarian points out that Epstein's "suicide" was rather timely and convenient for Donald Trump)
Hard to have much sympathy for a person like that. But it's still very suspicious,and I wouldn't be surprised if Trump was involved. But we'll likely never know for sure.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
looks like the bananahead doesn't :chuckle:
When he is Inmate Trump do we still have to refer to him as President?
She likes wasting our time with stupid comments. :chuckle:
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
you're delusional :chuckle:
:chuckle:
Lon
Well-known member
:nono: We've never executed a president. We've never imprisoned a president.
:nono: Both sides have had track records. I sincerely believe rose-colored glasses would cloud the issue on finger-pointing.
Good to see room for other glasses.
:think:
Quit a few good ones on this list (as well as the cabinet choice process).
Depends when you mean. After Nixon's Pardon? Of course. Before and after? :nono:
Nope, he faired the same as Obama and better than Truman, for instance.
It is truly hard to feel sympathy for any human predator because the victims will always outweigh them in our minds for justice.
I'd have hated to be in politics (Clintons/Trumps) with pictures with him. It is always guilty by association. I genuinely have a hard time with some of the scruples of both but if anyone was involved in any of the scandals associated with them, they will have to stand before their Maker.