Unfortunately for you, the Founding Fathers "forgot" to put that in the Constitution.
flash mob impeachment -no Presiding SCOTUS / no Hearings
- Thread starter anatta
- Start date
Unfortunately for you, the Founding Fathers "forgot" to put that in the Constitution.
WTF?
The founders wrote in such a manner that there is a distinct difference in the phrasing if the "or" replaced the "and"
Your delusions to the contrary -those 2 words convey vastly different scenarios.
Precedence of banning only concurrent or after removal further cements that notion.
Dems are fucking Constitutional goofballs
They are revolutionaries who have no use for the Constitution.
And yet we know that most impeachment convictions have only included removal, and not banning. Therefore it does not require both. It can be one or the other.
you are unable to follow the idea that banning can only happen after or with concurrent removal,
despite my clear and exacting language and argument construction
I can follow that you are saying it, but unfortunately for you it is not in the Constitution. I once saw a driver try to explain he could not possibly be blowing a .18 on a breathalyzer, because he was drinking beer with only a 3% alcohol content. He was quite adamant that the police officer was not understanding his argument. The police officer understood, and realized the drunk driver was wrong.
you do not debate, you post stories or say something dumb like "it's not in the Constitution" when it is
Darth Omar
Russian asset
They’re making it up as they go.
Roberts can only preside over Biden’s trial lol. But get ready to witness some hubris with the Democrats. They’re out over their skis on this.
He is already impeached, and he was in office at the time. This is just following through with the trial portion and it is constitutional and needs to be done.
Darth Omar
Russian asset
Feeding the Carp so early in the day lol?
Darth Omar
Russian asset
President Joe Biden on Monday dealt Senate Democrats a blow when he said in an interview that it seems they will be unable to convict former President Trump — once again — during an impeachment trial.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bi...-at-impeachment.amp?__twitter_impression=true
___________
It needs to be done because Democrats need rid of him.
The Big Guy seems to indicate that it will be pointless. Trump is still immensely popular with republicans so any republicans who vote to convict will be thinking long and hard about that.
Politically, what’s to gain for democrats? Seems they have more to lose than to gain. Do they really want to have 0-2 hung on them as an historical record? And as mentioned, it’s going to appear as simple vindictiveness to lots of independent voters.
But I’m sure they’ll proceed, anyway.
They really have no choice but to proceed at this point. As for making sure trump never runs this Nation again they always have the 14th A.
Darth Omar
Russian asset
They have a choice and the Big Guy is giving them a hint. He can’t come out and say it [like Trump or a real leader would] without alienating his base.
This does him and his agenda no good, politically. And again, with going after Trump and going after him again and again. Nobody wants to see that but the hardcore Trump haters.
yep it's political theater.
lol..silly me.
the dude is a dunce when it comes to geopolitics
You keep saying it is in the Constitution, but have been unable to point to where.
IF trump had simply said the election was over and Biden won and left it there the events on Jan 6 would never have occurred and at this point trump would enjoying his civilian life. But instead trump claimed that if he lost it would be only because the election was rigged, when he did lose he and his minions continued to make the same claim and took to the courts over 80 times and lost every one except 1. All that lead up to sitting the stage for Jan 6, he even told his followers to come to Washington and get wild, he told them they had to fight to save their country and during the riot/insurrection instead of trying to put a stop to it he was calling those hiding from the mob trying to get them to overturn the election. No, the entire mess was a direct result of trumps Lies, he still claims the same lies are true, there is no remorse and he refuses to take any responsibility for what happened, the guy is mentally ill and a danger to the Republic and as such he needs to be held accountable and should be barred from ever holding any political office again, especially that of President. Trump is going to be sued over and over and there are criminal charges pending for a range of criminal activity and he is going to learn to regret ever having been President of the United States of America and he deserves whatever comes his way.
The Constitution only has the Chief Justice presiding over Presidential impeachment trials. The Chief Justice has no role in all other impeachment trials.
You obviously got a bad Russian translation of the Constitution, comrade dookie. If it's unconstitutional, SCOTUS will let everyone know.
Like the idea of Trump pardoning himself or his kids, there are some grey areas in the writings of the Constitution of the United States (not Russia, dookie@). Trump could have done that but it would have ended up in SCOTUS's lap for a ruling (I had money they'd rule against it leaving Trump with a guilty plea and no pardon.
). Now Congress wants a ruling on several things Trump did as the first step to clarifying where the lines are drawn. The Emoluments Clause is going to be a juicy one!!!!
An noted previously, Congress is interested in both Justice and setting the legal foundation for preventing a lot of shit that Trump did from happening again.
In most instances, nothing will happen to Trump per se, in others he could face major problems. Like with Hillary's crimes, out of sight, out of mind. She's gone. Effectively kicked out of the DNC leadership structure so interest was lost in pursuing justice against her in court. Same for Trump in some areas, but in others, the gray areas, Congress wants a ruling. To get a ruling literally calls for making a Federal case out of it.