Trump 2020

We did it before

Lmao

But invading it now would be bad

Trump has a decent chance of winning in 2020 if the economy continues to thrive.

Unemployment is at a 50 year low, wages are growing, worker productivity is increasing, median household income has increased by over 5,000 since Trump was elected.

The economy is looking pretty good right now

Sources for each of my claims

Unemployment: https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-september-nonfarm-payrolls-grew-steadily-11570192288

Wages: https://www.aei.org/economics/wages-rising-the-trump-economy-is-now-working-best-for-lower-wage-workers/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2019/05/03/263000-new-jobs-added-in-april-more-than-expected-wages-up-3-2-from-a-year-ago/

Productivity: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/06/productivity-first-quarter-2019.html

Income: https://www.heritage.org/markets-and-finance/commentary/middle-class-incomes-surging-thanks-trump-policies

Yeah he also brought us through the slowest post-WW2 economic recovery

Also his stimulus wasn't very well designed

Blacks voting for the same party that enslaved them <:MadClown:583243630240727061>

Dems need to be more transparent with the impeachment process

The party flip narrative is kinda bs. It makes the mislesding assumption that Republicans suddenly became racist to appeal to Southerners.

No one has ever given a single example of an explicitly racist pitch by Nixon during his long career.

Nixon had a great record on civil rights. He supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. He was an avid supporter of the desegregation of public schools.

He also put into affect America's first affirmative action program.

Nixon barely even campaigned in the Deep South

He lost it to a Democrat segragationist

I disagree with the War on Drugs, but Nixon didn't initiate it with the goal of negatively affecting black people.

Can I have a source please?

Democrats are selectively leaking certain information from their secret meetings just to fit their narrative rather than showing the whole testimony of their witnesses.

This inquiry has been a sham from the start and Democrats have shown no interest in holding fair proceedings or upholding due process.

Before they put Mueller and Lewandowski in front of the American public but they were unable to gain more support for impeachment. Now they're holding secret meetings and selectively leaking information to try to change reshape people think of this issue.

They've excluded the House Judiciary Committee, which consists of many Republicans and ardent supporters of the president, from participating in these hearings despite the fact that the committee is responsible for overseeing adminstration of justice and federal impeachments.

The opening statement is just scratching the surface on what these witnesses have testified about and doesn't give a clear picture of the issues, the Democrats are only leaking certain parts of these testimonies rather than letting the American people see the full thing.

You can literally see that they only leaked the parts of the opening statement. You can't find these witnesses full testimonies anywhere, only the Democrat's abridged version of them.

Don't you think the Democrats should be more transparent about this?

Well that's good news

Yes but only a minority of all Republicans in the House had access to the hearings.

It was pretty stupid of them to storm the meeting like that but I still do believe that the Dems need to be way more transparent with this inquiry.

Yup but at least the American people will finally be able to know what's fully going on.

This next year following the election is going to chaotic.

There's so much stuff going on it's hard to keep up

Possibly

He's a pretty old dude

I feel like Trump could win

There are a lot of accurate election models that point to him winning

If the economy manages to continue thriving then that'll definitely help.

If not then he's pretty much screwed

We need voter ID

Loo

Lol

Open borders kinda cringe ngl

Trump

I'm glad Bannon was fired lol

<:BruhMoment:583238348059967499>

They stormed out because the Democrat Chairman stopped debate on their proposed additions to the Deborah Sampson Act

They were trying to introduce amendments covering veterans' firearm rights and VA child care. The purpose of the bill was to extend care and benefits to veterans so what they were introducing kinda did relate to the main purpose of the bill.

It was about care and benefits. What they were trying to add would directly benefit these veterans yet the Democrat chairman shut down debate over it.

The proposed amendments to the bill would've HELPED the veteran women yet the Chairman shut down debate over it.

It wasn't just guns the amendments also covered VA child care.

It was on women's care and benefits. Granting them gun rights is a benefit to them.

They should have at least let the debate occur instead of silencing it.

Suppressing debate doesn't seem like good behavior for a committee chairman.

It wasn't totally unrelated to the bill what they were trying to add would have benefitted veterans and the purpose of the bill was care and benefits for vets.

The minority committee members did not object to the underlying bill but offered amendments to improve the bill and the benefits it offered.

```Roe and minority members defended their amendments following the hearing, saying they had bipartisan support. This also isn't the first time those amendments have been shot down by committee leadership. The amendments were ruled out of order when members tried to add them to a previous bill in July. 

Members also offered the amendments as standalone bills, but so far, those bills have not gotten a hearing. ```

Anyways I need to do work right now, it was nice talking with you.

Later 👋

The amendments had bipartisan support, so they likely would've been added to the bill if debate had not been shut down, and they were related to the bill because they involved benefits for veterans.

```"I've been here 11 years in this committee which is the most bipartisan committee in Congress," Ranking Member Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tenn., said. "We took pride in that. I have never seen this type of behavior since I have been here in this committee. We've never suppressed the debate. We've always allowed the debate. ... That's how our country works ... I'm embarrassed by what this committee has become." ```

```At issue was debate on the Deborah Sampson Act, an omnibus bill to improve women veterans' care and remove barriers. Republican members offered amendments to the bill, but Chairman Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif., refused to allow amendments or debate on the bill before calling for a vote, which passed the bill to the House floor. 

After further requests for debate or clarification on parliamentary procedure were similarly denied, Republican members, stood and exited the hearing room together.```

Except it was an impeachment measure

Obamacare is garbage tbh

And it cancelled a ton of people's private plans

Yeah I agree

Government is part of the reason why healthcare is so expensive

The U.S. health care cost crisis didn’t start until 1965. The government increased demand with the passage of Medicare and Medicaid while also restricting the supply of doctors and hospitals.

Why are we talking about this in Trump channel

Legalize marijuana

They've been trying to impeach for nearly 3 years <:kek:538084230408830987>

Impeachment will never pass the Senate so this whole thing could backfire on them

Plus impeachment is still pretty unpopular in battleground states

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/10/30/whistleblower_exposed_close_to_biden_brennan_dnc_oppo_researcher_120996.html not surprising tbh

```More than two months after the official filed his complaint, pretty much all that’s known publicly about him is that he is a CIA analyst who at one point was detailed to the White House and is now back working at the CIA.

But the name of a government official fitting that description — Eric Ciaramella — has been raised privately in impeachment depositions, according to officials with direct knowledge of the proceedings, as well as in at least one open hearing held by a House committee not involved in the impeachment inquiry. Fearing their anonymous  witness could be exposed, Democrats this week blocked Republicans from asking more questions about him and intend to redact his name from all deposition transcripts.

RealClearInvestigations is disclosing the name because of the public’s interest in learning details of an effort to remove a sitting president from office. Further, the official's status as a “whistleblower” is complicated by his being a hearsay reporter of accusations against the president, one who has “some indicia of an arguable political bias … in favor of a rival political candidate" -- as the Intelligence Community Inspector General phrased it circumspectly in originally fielding his complaint.

Federal documents reveal that the 33-year-old Ciaramella, a registered Democrat held over from the Obama White House, previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan, a vocal critic of Trump who helped initiate the Russia “collusion” investigation of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.```

This whole Ukraine impeachment fiasco was started by a partisan whistleblower who didn't even have firsthand information and had ties to Democrats.

And I gotta admit that a lot of the attacks are Vindman are pretty messed up.

He worked with Democrats and is a registered Dem

He obviously has a bias and also he didn't even provide firsthand information

I never said that, I'm just saying that you shouldn't start a whole impeachment fiasco over whistleblower complaint that had no firsthand information and was started by a Democrat.

At least wait until you get the full facts

The fact that they're a Democrat shows that they have a bias against Trump and they could have easily misrepresented the facts to try to hurt the president.

All the evidence they have is either secondary or immaterial.

The transcript of the telephone call and the statements of the two participants, Trump and Zelensky, is really the only relevant evidence. All other witnesses are simply offering their interpretations and opinion of the conversation to which they were not a part of.

The witness testimonies were not based on any firsthand knowledge.

They were just built on speculation

But from what we can see for now they didn't provide any firsthand information.

Which witness had firsthand information?

Vindman is claiming there were omissions. It is only him claiming so, no one else has claimed this. The White House has professional stenographers that record these things yet he is claiming the stenographer left something out.

Ukraine hasn't come out and tried to claim the transcript was wrong. Other people that were on the call haven't claimed it was wrong.

Obama didn't lose the popular vote tho

Socialism depends on the wealth created by capitalism.

If they want to keep socialism going then the evil billionaires have to keep making money for their system.

Bernie Sanders doesn't have a chance of becoming president

It's most likely gonna be Biden or Warren

Whoever the DNC wants to be the nominee

He won by 77 electoral votes

Who here likes racing?

-df communism

-df socialism

funny