there was no high crime nor misdemeanor. Furthermore, that bimbo Nancy Pelosi won't even take it to the Senate. You as a constitutional follower and scholar must think that is a damn joke, Let's go to the Senate.
Last edited:
Raoul, you know good and well
- Thread starter i am herdman
- Start date
You're not going to like that decision, extra.
Yeah, I heard the same malarkey from you cons in the days before the House was taken by dems.
Really?!?! Because I'm pretty sure everyone knew the Dems were going to take the House in the weeks leading up to that election.
I firmly believe Trump used Congressionally appropriated funds to get the Ukrainian president to announce a phony investigation into Joe Biden.
I believe Trump has violated the law, the crimes are solicitation of bribery and solicitation of foreign governmental influence into a campaign. Both of these are crimes.
I believe Congress has a Constitutional mandate to oversee the Executive Branch. I believe Trump acted in obstruction and contempt of this.
The joke to me?
It is a joke that the Democrats don't have the balls to plainly state the crimes as titles to articles of impeachment. It's in the details, sure, but I like a nice big headline without having to read the indictment.
It is a joke the Senate leadership will immediately violate their oaths, as they have already acted as impartial jurors by meeting with the White House to orchestrate the trial (I do not have a Constitutional issue with them not convicting because of thinking the charges are not high enough for removal, or even as partisanship, but for fvck's sake they can't even keep up appearances).
And I believe it is a joke millions of Americans are willing to accept bald-faced corruption from the President.
The money the Ukraine got within 55 days? OK. The impeachment based on no factual or hard evidence? Other than telling a guy in Ukraine wha'ts up with this and look into it? They got their money in less than two months. That is not illegal. That's his job to look out in the best interest of the country. The leader of the Ukraine has even validated the phone call.
The aid that was delivered when it was reported there was a whistleblower from the CIA?
When intelligence officers and career State workers, high fvxking ranking ones at that, step up, I take their words seriously. Trump had the opportunity to present his "facts". All he presented was a call re-creation that supported the allegations. Mulvaney stuck his dick in his mouth and admitted it on TV. There is no "what's up with that", it is actual Russian propaganda, the nation that has occupied....Ukraine! You people live in a fvxking alternate universe.
What I posted is 100% illegal AF. Unless your guy does it, then fvck it and wave the flag.
Was not illegal. Check that out is illegal? Fake whistle blower. The damn articles of impeachment don't even mention illegal or a US code. All a political stunt and if it was illegal and he is a "clear danger" as stated then why not take it to trial in the Senate?
They all have their hands in the cookie jar and let's see what happens in his second term and who gets charged with what. They know it.
Summary: you can't impeach the president unless i am herdman agrees to it.
Yep....fvck it, wave the flag, throw in some QAnon and Russian propaganda to boot.
What was "Fake" about the whistleblower?
Articles of Impeachment were written and approved by house vote.
How many Republican Congressmen discussed Trumps honesty, fairness and character when attempting to defend him? You can count 'em on no hands - Zero, Zilch, Nada.
This lady sums it up in 30 secs
Lack of evidence to convict. That's the whole reason this wasn't an article of impeachment.
Also, right, wrong or indifferent, this sort of thing was also done by your Lord and Savior Obama and yet he was never brought up on charges.
It's a double standard and you know it, ya flaming liberal.
Trumpublican: "Now, you know...someone in the past has most certainly done this. C'mon!"
Everyone else: "Well, if they did... they weren't dumb enough to get caught."
You will find out soon enough in the next year or so.
Why do you think they are so nervous? Second term is gonna be good!
Last edited:
There is no requirement that articles of impeachment cite specific legal codes. Nixon's did not. Most intelligent people who read those can infer that Nixon engaged in conspiracy and obstruction of justice.
While the word "bribery" is not used, most intelligent people can infer from the text of the articles that there was a bribe involved. Unfortunately, Congress did not consider that most people do not read shit, and many are not intelligent. This is why I like nice, concise headlines. The second part? The exact words in the text are "Using the powers of his high office, President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election."
Did you read the text of the articles of impeachment?
Obama solicited the interference of a foreign government into a Presidential election? Goddamn, he must really hate Hillary.
Do you take it so serious that you read the Mueller report?
Do you take it so serious that you read the House Intelligence Committee report?
Do you take it so seriously that you read the full text of the articles of impeachment?
You will find out soon enough in the next year or so.
Benghazi !!!
You're right, Mr. Political Scientist. I'm sure all the Dems' attorneys did not know what you clearly understand of the Constitution. They simply weren't aware of the things you claim and that's why they didn't bother using the "official" term bribery.
You know, you can continue hoping and praying for an impeachment and removal by the Senate, but it's not happening, and I don't need to have a PhD in Poly Sci to understand that much.
The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
________United States Constitution
As soon as articles of impeachment are submitted to the Senate, which is the last step.
It's kind of like when you are about to order cabinets from a cheap supplier in Taiwan and you forgot to click to submit order.
You may think you ordered the cheap cabinets, but you did not. They're still setting in your basket online.
cheetos is impeached ever since the House vote was tallied.
The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
_______United States Constitution
process incomplete as noted by one of your side's star witnesses. are you so stupid that you cannot discern the process from the role? apparently so.
According to the Constitution, impeachment is a process, not a vote.
Impeachment as contemplated by the Constitution does not consist merely of the vote by the House, but of the process of sending the articles to the Senate for trial. Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution: The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment.
If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn’t actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn’t truly impeached at all.
For the House to vote “to impeach” without ever sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate for trial would also deviate from the constitutional protocol. It would mean that the president had not genuinely been impeached under the Constitution; and it would also deny the president the chance to defend himself in the Senate that the Constitution provides.
the framers’ definition of impeachment assumed that impeachment was a process, not just a House vote.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
HERDNATION.COM PFF: Offense and Defense versus ODU- Latest: jeremycriss