Pennock's Fiero Forum
  Totally O/T
  The Trump Impeachment Proceedings (Page 6)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Email This Page to Someone! | Printable Version

This topic is 13 pages long:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13 
Previous Page | Next Page
next newest topic | next oldest topic
The Trump Impeachment Proceedings by blackrams
Started on: 11-13-2019 02:37 PM
Replies: 483 (7783 views)
Last post by: MadMark on 02-09-2020 09:18 PM
williegoat
Member
Posts: 12513
From: Glendale, AZ
Registered: Mar 2009


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2019 08:24 PM Click Here to See the Profile for williegoatClick Here to visit williegoat's HomePageClick Here to Email williegoatSend a Private Message to williegoatEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Rickady88GT:


Honestly, I do not know for a fact if he needs to have a trial from the Senate to be considered "impeached". But the more I think about it, the more it makes sense to require a Senate trail. Out on the streets, the everyday "Joe" can't be convicted of a crime without a trial, even though "suspicion" cost them time in Jail and charges brought up against them.... they are still not convicted of the crime till the proper due process has played out. And even then the process is so strict on "dotting the i's and crossing the t's" that the case against the person can be dropped, dismissed or appealed on the smallest of issues.
It just makes sense to me that the full process needs to be carried out to the end. Without an end to the process, Trump can't be legitimately declared "impeached". He technically can only be called "in the process of being impeached".
This is the equivalent of being accused of a crime, being arraigned to court, having the charges against you formally read: then dismissing the Courtroom before the Jury is selected.

Here is why I think I disagree:

There are three pertinent clauses in the Constitution.

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5:
"The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."

Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7:
"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."


The phrase "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" means (to me) that the House creates the impeachment, which the Senate will try.

Of course I am just an old, retired truck driver.

IP: Logged
williegoat
Member
Posts: 12513
From: Glendale, AZ
Registered: Mar 2009


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2019 08:36 PM Click Here to See the Profile for williegoatClick Here to visit williegoat's HomePageClick Here to Email williegoatSend a Private Message to williegoatEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I probably should have said, "which the Senate may try". I don't think they are required to have a trial. As I understand it, they could drop the charges.
IP: Logged
Khw
Member
Posts: 11112
From: South Weber, UT. U.S.A.
Registered: Jun 2008


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 134
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2019 08:42 PM Click Here to See the Profile for KhwClick Here to Email KhwSend a Private Message to KhwEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by williegoat:

Here is why I think I disagree:

There are three pertinent clauses in the Constitution.

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5:
"The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."

Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7:
"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."


The phrase "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" means (to me) that the House creates the impeachment, which the Senate will try.

Of course I am just an old, retired truck driver.


I get what you are saying but your next article.

 
quote
Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7:
[i]"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."


"to try ALL Impeachments." A complete sentence used to express one thing. So, if the Senate does not get to try it, how can it be a Impeachment?
IP: Logged
williegoat
Member
Posts: 12513
From: Glendale, AZ
Registered: Mar 2009


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2019 08:49 PM Click Here to See the Profile for williegoatClick Here to visit williegoat's HomePageClick Here to Email williegoatSend a Private Message to williegoatEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Khw:


"to try ALL Impeachments." A complete sentence used to express one thing. So, if the Senate does not get to try it, how can it be a Impeachment?

The impeachment must exist, before it can be tried.
The House creates the impeachment, then sends it to the Senate for a trial.
It is just the way I read it, and more learned people than me say I am full of moose mud
IP: Logged
randye
Member
Posts: 9874
From: New Port Richey, Florida
Registered: Mar 2006


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 188
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2019 10:22 PM Click Here to See the Profile for randyeClick Here to visit randye's HomePageClick Here to Email randyeSend a Private Message to randyeEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by williegoat:

The phrase "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" means (to me) that the House creates the impeachment, which the Senate will try.

Of course I am just an old, retired truck driver.


It's even a bit more precise than that.

In law individual words have meaning; very definite meaning.

The word *shall* is an imperative, as distinct from the words, "may" , "can" or "should".

Similarly, the word *will* is also an imperative.

Shall or will means that an act MUST be performed. It isn't optional or discretionary.

Articles of impeachment from the House of Representatives carry no legal "teeth", in that, by themselves they have no force of law to compel or punish the individual against whom the articles have been approved.

The trial on the articles filed by the House TO the Senate is of course the sole provenance of the Senate as is the acquittal or guilt decision and any punishment.

House Dems are not happy with that part of the U.S. Constitution and now are seeking to also control how the upper chamber does it's separate business.

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 12-20-2019).]

IP: Logged
Rickady88GT
Member
Posts: 8943
From: Central CA
Registered: Dec 2002


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 192
Rate this member

Report this Post12-20-2019 11:15 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Rickady88GTClick Here to Email Rickady88GTSend a Private Message to Rickady88GTEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by williegoat:

The impeachment must exist, before it can be tried.
The House creates the impeachment, then sends it to the Senate for a trial.
It is just the way I read it, and more learned people than me say I am full of moose mud


I think that the House does the "fact finding and investigation." Then votes on drafting up a list of "high crimes and misdemeanors" and sends that on the Senate for the trial. Without a trial, the House only accuses the President of High crimes and misdemeanors and threatens the President with an impeachment.
IP: Logged
blackrams
Member
Posts: 28136
From: Hattiesburg, MS, USA
Registered: Feb 2003


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 221
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 04:26 AM Click Here to See the Profile for blackramsClick Here to Email blackramsSend a Private Message to blackramsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Several Constitutional scholars have indicated that until the "accused" has been convicted by the Senate, the "accused" is only charged, the act of impeachment occurs when the Senate finds fault and impeaches the accused.

But, I would counter that half this country believes President has been impeached simply because the House charged him with High Crimes and Misdemeanors, that IMHO is a result of a lack of knowledge by the failing educational system and a biased media constantly hitting us with crap.

Rams
IP: Logged
williegoat
Member
Posts: 12513
From: Glendale, AZ
Registered: Mar 2009


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 05:20 AM Click Here to See the Profile for williegoatClick Here to visit williegoat's HomePageClick Here to Email williegoatSend a Private Message to williegoatEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
My opinion is based on the following definition (from: https://dictionary.law.com/...lt.aspx?selected=900 )
 
quote
2) to charge a public official with a public crime for which the punishment is removal from office

The Articles of Impeachment are a charge. The way I see it, impeachment does not require a trial or conviction, only a charge.

It is highly unlikely that he will be convicted and the senate could dismiss one or both charges without a trial. Regardless, history will still record that he has been impeached.

So to me, the question is: Are the Articles of Impeachment complete without being handed to the Senate? Do they exist on their own? I believe they do. Others do not.

[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 12-21-2019).]

IP: Logged
williegoat
Member
Posts: 12513
From: Glendale, AZ
Registered: Mar 2009


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 06:05 AM Click Here to See the Profile for williegoatClick Here to visit williegoat's HomePageClick Here to Email williegoatSend a Private Message to williegoatEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by randye:


It's even a bit more precise than that.

In law individual words have meaning; very definite meaning.

The word *shall* is an imperative, as distinct from the words, "may" , "can" or "should".

Similarly, the word *will* is also an imperative.

Shall or will means that an act MUST be performed. It isn't optional or discretionary.

Articles of impeachment from the House of Representatives carry no legal "teeth", in that, by themselves they have no force of law to compel or punish the individual against whom the articles have been approved.

The trial on the articles filed by the House TO the Senate is of course the sole provenance of the Senate as is the acquittal or guilt decision and any punishment.

House Dems are not happy with that part of the U.S. Constitution and now are seeking to also control how the upper chamber does it's separate business.


The phrase "shall have the sole power" does not require any action, it only grants power.

"Will" is my word, not the Constitution, and I changed will to may, here: http://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...L/124289-6.html#p201

[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 12-21-2019).]

IP: Logged
GTGeff
Member
Posts: 1935
From: Up Nort
Registered: Dec 2001


Feedback score:    (6)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 06:19 AM Click Here to See the Profile for GTGeffSend a Private Message to GTGeffEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Is the President not entitled to a speedy trial?
IP: Logged
williegoat
Member
Posts: 12513
From: Glendale, AZ
Registered: Mar 2009


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 06:22 AM Click Here to See the Profile for williegoatClick Here to visit williegoat's HomePageClick Here to Email williegoatSend a Private Message to williegoatEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by GTGeff:

Is the President not entitled to a speedy trial?

The way I understand it, the 6th Amendment applies only to criminal proceedings.
IP: Logged
LitebulbwithaFiero
Member
Posts: 2973
From: LaSalle, Michigan
Registered: Jun 2008


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 08:43 AM Click Here to See the Profile for LitebulbwithaFieroClick Here to Email LitebulbwithaFieroSend a Private Message to LitebulbwithaFieroEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Impeachment is the same as an indictment.

As Willie said, it is the process of bringing charges against someone, like the President.

It does not mean he is guilty or is hoong to be removed from office.

It means
- He is believed to have committed a crime
- And that they nelieve they have enough evident to convict him


 
quote
Originally posted by williegoat:

The way I understand it, the 6th Amendment applies only to criminal proceedings.


The crimes they are accusing the President of don't fall into this category?

[This message has been edited by LitebulbwithaFiero (edited 12-21-2019).]

IP: Logged
olejoedad
Member
Posts: 13483
From: Clarendon Twp., MI
Registered: May 2004


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 184
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 09:35 AM Click Here to See the Profile for olejoedadClick Here to Email olejoedadSend a Private Message to olejoedadEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I haven't seen evidence of any crimes committed by the President during this impeachment.
I have seen hurt feelings, disagreements on foreign policy and some criminal activity by some law enforcement officials though.....
IP: Logged
Monkeyman
Member
Posts: 15589
From: N. Wilkesboro, NC, USA
Registered: Nov 1999


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 182
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 10:38 AM Click Here to See the Profile for MonkeymanSend a Private Message to MonkeymanEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Trump has not yet been impeached although there's little doubt he will be. The impeachment isn't official until the House actually submits the articles of impeachment to the Senate. In theory, if the House of Representatives decides NOT to submit the impeachment articles to the Senate, Trump wouldn't be impeached.

Once the articles of impeachment have been submitted to the Senate, the Senate then basically does 2 things. 1) They decide if the impeached is guilty of the alleged crimes (which won't happen PERIOD. Remember when Trump said he could shoot someone on 5th Street in NYC and get away with it? Yeah, like that.) and 2) whether to remove the guilty party from office. Note, even if Trump were to be removed from office, he could still run for President next year and win. The crimes he has been accused of are not ones in which he wouldn't be able to run for office again if found guilty (those would be things like treason, etc).

I'm not giving my opinion as to whether Trump is guilty, innocent, a good man or a bad man. I'm only stating facts.
IP: Logged
blackrams
Member
Posts: 28136
From: Hattiesburg, MS, USA
Registered: Feb 2003


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 221
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 10:52 AM Click Here to See the Profile for blackramsClick Here to Email blackramsSend a Private Message to blackramsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Seems the pot is calling the kettle black.

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 12-21-2019).]

IP: Logged
Rickady88GT
Member
Posts: 8943
From: Central CA
Registered: Dec 2002


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 192
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 10:58 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Rickady88GTClick Here to Email Rickady88GTSend a Private Message to Rickady88GTEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by williegoat:

The way I understand it, the 6th Amendment applies only to criminal proceedings.


The house is responsible for drawing up articles of impeachment, so when those articles of impeachment are voted on and passed then delivered to the Senate are those articles of impeachment still called articles of impeachment or are they called and impeachment?
IP: Logged
olejoedad
Member
Posts: 13483
From: Clarendon Twp., MI
Registered: May 2004


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 184
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 02:42 PM Click Here to See the Profile for olejoedadClick Here to Email olejoedadSend a Private Message to olejoedadEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Once the Articles have been voted on and passed by the House, then it is Impeachment.
Until the vote, it is an investigation.
IP: Logged
randye
Member
Posts: 9874
From: New Port Richey, Florida
Registered: Mar 2006


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 188
Rate this member

Report this Post12-21-2019 03:37 PM Click Here to See the Profile for randyeClick Here to visit randye's HomePageClick Here to Email randyeSend a Private Message to randyeEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by LitebulbwithaFiero:


The crimes they are accusing the President of don't fall into this category?



NO

ARTICLE I: ABUSE OF POWER

ARTICLE II: OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS

Neither are a criminal offense codified in law or statute.

IP: Logged
cliffw
Member
Posts: 32691
From: Bandera, Texas, USA
Registered: Jun 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 286
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2019 09:29 AM Click Here to See the Profile for cliffwClick Here to Email cliffwSend a Private Message to cliffwEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Tony Kania:
Proudly.

I believe that you know where I stand. I am not interested in the first half, let alone the second half. But, I must pay attention.


I, proudly, was interested in the first half. The national rally for impeachment ? There was none ! It was in the Dumbocratic wet dreams. Which they have had since 2016.

Paying attention ? Then you should have been interested in the first half. Hell Tony, I even listen to MSNBC, CNN, NBC, and the rest of the lame stream outlets.

Anywho, funny this :

Nancy Pelosi, Nutsy Nancy, is now asking for a Quid Pro Qou, from the Senate. She won't give them what they don't want, unless they give her what she wants.

What does she want ? She wants the Senate to do what her House could not do. To find reason to impeach her President.
IP: Logged
Tony Kania
Member
Posts: 20545
From: The Inland Northwest
Registered: Dec 2008


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 301
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2019 11:43 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Tony KaniaSend a Private Message to Tony KaniaEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I have a fiver on late night raids waking up several democrats for treason.
IP: Logged
blackrams
Member
Posts: 28136
From: Hattiesburg, MS, USA
Registered: Feb 2003


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 221
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2019 12:27 PM Click Here to See the Profile for blackramsClick Here to Email blackramsSend a Private Message to blackramsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Tony Kania:

I have a fiver on late night raids waking up several democrats for treason.


Will you be surprised if they happen to be employed by the FBI?

Rams
IP: Logged
Tony Kania
Member
Posts: 20545
From: The Inland Northwest
Registered: Dec 2008


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 301
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2019 12:43 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Tony KaniaSend a Private Message to Tony KaniaEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by blackrams:


Will you be surprised if they happen to be employed by the FBI?

Rams



Not after recent revelations. Or revelations of past. Or continued revelations.
IP: Logged
blackrams
Member
Posts: 28136
From: Hattiesburg, MS, USA
Registered: Feb 2003


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 221
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2019 03:14 PM Click Here to See the Profile for blackramsClick Here to Email blackramsSend a Private Message to blackramsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
What I, Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans all find funny is, this impeachment was so urgent to get done in the House and yet, Speaker Pelosi is holding it. Must really be “Urgent”!


Like when is going to make a difference......

Rams

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 12-22-2019).]

IP: Logged
Jake_Dragon
Member
Posts: 30687
From: Long Beach
Registered: Jan 2001


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 390
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2019 03:43 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Jake_DragonSend a Private Message to Jake_DragonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by blackrams:

What I, Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans all find funny is, this impeachment was so urgent to get done in the House and yet, Speaker Pelosi is holding it. Must really be “Urgent”!


Like when is going to make a difference......

Rams



I hope someone is watching the money, you either get famous or infamous
But they always have a soft place to land.
IP: Logged
randye
Member
Posts: 9874
From: New Port Richey, Florida
Registered: Mar 2006


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 188
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2019 05:18 PM Click Here to See the Profile for randyeClick Here to visit randye's HomePageClick Here to Email randyeSend a Private Message to randyeEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by blackrams:

What I, Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans all find funny is, this impeachment was so urgent to get done in the House and yet, Speaker Pelosi is holding it. Must really be “Urgent”!


Like when is going to make a difference......

Rams



There actually was / is an urgency on the shampeachment timing for the Dims.

Political acts NEVER happen in a vacuum. There are always other agendas, concerns and political maneuvering going on in the background.

There are several issues at play here but first and foremost is the Dims use of this for the 2020 elections. It is ALWAYS about power for the Left. How to get it and how to keep it at ANY cost.

Ten Months is an eternity in electoral politics so if the Dims pop their shampeachment cork too early, (as they just did), it's intended effect is vastly diminished by next Oct. / Nov.
If they pop it too late it's just seen by voters and played by Republicans as the unsavory, partisan political attack intended for the election that it really is.

After that there is the just released IG Horowitz report, the Durham investigation with possible coming criminal indictments and the looming threat of AG Barr's investigation - involvement in the Ukraine matter all of which will divert public attention from the shampeachment and focus on actual criminal activity by the Dims

Then there is the issue of the Senate rules for a shampeachment trial.

The Dims want desperately to have control over that process. They have a visceral fear of one or more Bidens being subpoenaed along with Mr. Ciaramella, (the "whistleblower"), and Adam Shift-for-brains, all of which will collapse their "Ukraine centered" shampeachment articles and further justify the President's actions as right and proper.

Hell, the Senate majority could even try to call Ukranian President, Volodymyr Zelensky (if he chose to cooperate), which could provide a very "tasty" conundrum for Dims as they have to choose between publically attacking a foreign leader live on U.S. television, or trying to be polite as he burns their Ukraine shampeachment theory to ashes.

What they want is a repeat performance of the clown show they put on in the House, limited to their select slate of faux "witnesses" to try to avoid that exposure.

So, Yes, when does matter a lot to them

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 12-22-2019).]

IP: Logged
blackrams
Member
Posts: 28136
From: Hattiesburg, MS, USA
Registered: Feb 2003


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 221
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2019 05:35 PM Click Here to See the Profile for blackramsClick Here to Email blackramsSend a Private Message to blackramsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
My query should have been in sarcastic font.

I've said all along that this is and always has been about the 2020 elections.

Rams
IP: Logged
randye
Member
Posts: 9874
From: New Port Richey, Florida
Registered: Mar 2006


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 188
Rate this member

Report this Post12-22-2019 05:49 PM Click Here to See the Profile for randyeClick Here to visit randye's HomePageClick Here to Email randyeSend a Private Message to randyeEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by blackrams:

My query should have been in sarcastic font.

I've said all along that this is and always has been about the 2020 elections.

Rams


Oh I knew that Ron. I just had some time today for a long winded post.

The one thing that always strikes me is how the left always forgets about the unintended consequences of their actions.

Being impulsive is an act based in emotion and as we know that's precisely how Leftists make their decisions and form their opinions.

This shampeachment is no different.
IP: Logged
rinselberg
Member
Posts: 8393
From: Sunnyvale, CA (USA)
Registered: Mar 2010


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 113
Rate this member

Report this Post12-23-2019 01:33 PM Click Here to See the Profile for rinselbergClick Here to visit rinselberg's HomePageClick Here to Email rinselbergSend a Private Message to rinselbergEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
They're trying to add a new chapter to Trump's "bio"... the man who once pulled the strings that controlled the Miss Universe contest was elected President, and then staged a brand new international spectacle... the "Miss Conduct" pageant.

I was thinking about trying to work up something in the spirit of the season, starting with "T'was the night before Impeachment and all through the House..."

It's already been done... by the Republicans on the House Oversight Committee.

(Saint?) Nicholas Ballasy for PJ Media; December 18, 2019.
https://pjmedia.com/trendin...poem-on-eve-of-vote/

This images is larger than 153600 bytes. Click to view.
IP: Logged
2.5
Member
Posts: 40622
From: Southern MN
Registered: May 2007


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 178
Rate this member

Report this Post12-23-2019 02:02 PM Click Here to See the Profile for 2.5Send a Private Message to 2.5Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Mmm peach cobbler.

IP: Logged
blackrams
Member
Posts: 28136
From: Hattiesburg, MS, USA
Registered: Feb 2003


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 221
Rate this member

Report this Post12-23-2019 02:19 PM Click Here to See the Profile for blackramsClick Here to Email blackramsSend a Private Message to blackramsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I believe we can all agree that President Clinton was Impeached and tried. He was also acquitted during the Senate trial, whether or not I agree with that verdict is irrelevant. The fact is, he was impeached.

Following that thought process, I would consider President Trump, simply awaiting trial.

It really doesn’t matter, this isn’t about anything but the 2020 election. We all know it whether we admit it or not.

Rams

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 12-23-2019).]

IP: Logged
williegoat
Member
Posts: 12513
From: Glendale, AZ
Registered: Mar 2009


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-23-2019 02:22 PM Click Here to See the Profile for williegoatClick Here to visit williegoat's HomePageClick Here to Email williegoatSend a Private Message to williegoatEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

I was thinking about trying to work up something in the spirit of the season, starting with "T'was the night before Impeachment and all through the House..."

It's already been done... by the Republicans on the House Oversight Committee.


It's a Christmas miracle! Rinselberg is thinking like a Republican.
IP: Logged
Rickady88GT
Member
Posts: 8943
From: Central CA
Registered: Dec 2002


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 192
Rate this member

Report this Post12-23-2019 06:26 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Rickady88GTClick Here to Email Rickady88GTSend a Private Message to Rickady88GTEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by blackrams:

I believe we can all agree that President Clinton was Impeached and tried. He was also acquitted during the Senate trial, whether or not I agree with that verdict is irrelevant. The fact is, he was impeached.

True, he was let off the hook by the Democrats who controlled the Senate at the time. But the fact is that the process was allowed to play out. This time the House is playing politics and refusing to let the system play out.
I agree that there is no reason to say that Trump is not impeached. The House is done with their part of the process of impeachment and now it is time for the Senate to do their's.
 
quote

Following that thought process, I would consider President Trump, simply awaiting trial.

Agreed
 
quote

It really doesn’t matter, this isn’t about anything but the 2020 election. We all know it whether we admit it or not.

Rams


How ironic that the dems have said that Trump tried an illegal or unfair tactic (scandals) to win the election, but now they actually are the ones using scandals to influence the election.

IP: Logged
cliffw
Member
Posts: 32691
From: Bandera, Texas, USA
Registered: Jun 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 286
Rate this member

Report this Post12-23-2019 08:28 PM Click Here to See the Profile for cliffwClick Here to Email cliffwSend a Private Message to cliffwEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Now, breaking news, ... the House (which is not in session) is threatenig to bring forth more Articles of Impeachment.

This ought to be good.
IP: Logged
blackrams
Member
Posts: 28136
From: Hattiesburg, MS, USA
Registered: Feb 2003


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 221
Rate this member

Report this Post12-23-2019 08:58 PM Click Here to See the Profile for blackramsClick Here to Email blackramsSend a Private Message to blackramsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by cliffw:

Now, breaking news, ... the House (which is not in session) is threatenig to bring forth more Articles of Impeachment.

This ought to be good.


This process has been so corrupted by the Democrat leadership, it really doesn't matter. Unless President Trump actually shoots someone in Times Square with Republican witnesses, I don't see anyone changing their minds. DJTs base is solidly behind him and the left wants him out anyway they can do it.

That last part was meant to be a funny...…….

The really funny part is, they have no one to blame but themselves. They ran Hillary Clinton for President. There wasn't a conservative on the planet that would have voted for her.

Edited: If the truth was known, my bet is, the Clintons are pulling the strings on this whole process from behind the curtain. If, that were to be discovered, a bloody battle would be a real possibility.

Rams

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 12-23-2019).]

IP: Logged
randye
Member
Posts: 9874
From: New Port Richey, Florida
Registered: Mar 2006


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 188
Rate this member

Report this Post12-23-2019 09:22 PM Click Here to See the Profile for randyeClick Here to visit randye's HomePageClick Here to Email randyeSend a Private Message to randyeEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by blackrams:

I believe we can all agree that President Clinton was Impeached and tried. He was also acquitted during the Senate trial, whether or not I agree with that verdict is irrelevant. The fact is, he was impeached.



I think that the facts show and we can all agree that Clinton committed actual criminal acts, (perjury before a grand jury, witness tampering / influence, obstruction of justice) for which he was indicted.

He also lost his SCOTUS bar practice permit which was never reinstated.

He was later cited for willful contempt of court by Federal Judge, Susan Webber Wright and assessed a $90,000.00 fine and referred to the Arkansas Supreme Court for other disciplinary action.

He surrendered his Arkansas Bar license for 5 years and paid a nominal $25,000.00 fine as part of a plea bargain with the independent counsel Robert Ray on the day before he left office, knowing that in 2 days he would no longer be immune from criminal prosecution and possible jail time.

The Arkansas Bar license was never renewed and remains abandoned.

...

Conversely, President Trump has never been charged, indicted or convicted of any statutory criminal act.

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 12-23-2019).]

IP: Logged
blackrams
Member
Posts: 28136
From: Hattiesburg, MS, USA
Registered: Feb 2003


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 221
Rate this member

Report this Post12-27-2019 09:47 AM Click Here to See the Profile for blackramsClick Here to Email blackramsSend a Private Message to blackramsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by randye:


I think that the facts show and we can all agree that Clinton committed actual criminal acts, (perjury before a grand jury, witness tampering / influence, obstruction of justice) for which he was indicted.
...

Conversely, President Trump has never been charged, indicted or convicted of any statutory criminal act.



Oh, I agree. What I have accepted is that President Trump has been impeached by the House. That is not to suggest in anyway that he is guilty. I see this accusation as simply an attempt to influence the 2020 election. Reference Slick Willy, there was never any doubt in my mind he lied under oath.
Now, I'm just waiting (Like the Senate) for Speaker Pelosi to quit playing games (like she has some authority in the Senate) and present the articles of impeachment to the Senate.
Says she wants a "fair" trial. IOWs, she isn't willing to let Senator McConnell do what she just did in the House. The hypocrisy is pegged off the scale.

Rams

IP: Logged
williegoat
Member
Posts: 12513
From: Glendale, AZ
Registered: Mar 2009


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 90
Rate this member

Report this Post12-27-2019 12:26 PM Click Here to See the Profile for williegoatClick Here to visit williegoat's HomePageClick Here to Email williegoatSend a Private Message to williegoatEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I wonder if the Senate must pretend the articles do not exist (since they have not been formally presented), or if they could just go ahead and draft a resolution refuting or condemning them.



^
seems to be a useful symbol as of late
IP: Logged
Jake_Dragon
Member
Posts: 30687
From: Long Beach
Registered: Jan 2001


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 390
Rate this member

Report this Post12-27-2019 12:42 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Jake_DragonSend a Private Message to Jake_DragonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by williegoat:

I wonder if the Senate must pretend the articles do not exist (since they have not been formally presented), or if they could just go ahead and draft a resolution refuting or condemning them.



^
seems to be a useful symbol as of late



^
Better one

I don't normally follow politics and the lessons I learned in school were a long time ago so perhaps I am a bit rusty.
But there is a reason our government is broken up into different branches so one branch can not take control and dictate rule over all of us.
Its setup that way so it doesn't lead to a monarchy where the ruling class does what they want and the citizens have no voice.

VOTE people while you still can.
IP: Logged
cliffw
Member
Posts: 32691
From: Bandera, Texas, USA
Registered: Jun 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 286
Rate this member

Report this Post12-27-2019 12:49 PM Click Here to See the Profile for cliffwClick Here to Email cliffwSend a Private Message to cliffwEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by blackrams:
The really funny part is, ...


Umm, I believe you are wrong, . The really funny part is Nutsy Nancy wants the Senate to ASK her President to give evidence of guilt. Which he could have already done if he had done anything wrong. He is such a, in their words, "such a threat", that they could not wait for the courts to compel testimony.
What happens now ? The courts ? Why would the President do something for the Senate he would not do for the House ? No court makes anyone prove their innocence or testify against themselves. He does have Executive Privileges, for a reason, likely because of this sham. They have been wanting to, and have tried many times, to make a case. (Once for disparaging Colin Kapernick's kneeling for the National anthem.) They failed again and now want the Senate to do it.

I don't care if he was asking for opposition research, from a foreign country. They did not interfere with our elections. Biden clearly asked for quid pro quo, involving his son. You would be a fool to not think there is plenty of quid pro quo going on to keep party votes, or change them. Dumb members of Congress did indeed go to Ukrain to get dirt on President Trump and Shillary did so to help her win the election (as documented in Ukrainian courts).

blackrams, the part not even remotely funny, is how the Dumbs cried about how Putin was trying to divide the Country (which he did try). Yet they have divided it deeply. Which begs the question ... who is colluding with Russia? We know Shillary, and the DNC did.

 
quote
Originally posted by LitebulbwithaFiero:
The crimes they are accusing the President of don't fall into this category?


Obstruction of Congress ? Click to show

Abuse of power ?

Click to show

No. Well, that would be up to you.
Nutsy Nancy did not even want to ...

 
quote
Originally posted by cliffw:
Nancy Botox, , ... she is the Speaker of the House.
The Speaker of the House 'presides' over the House.
THEY RULE !

Last night, for sure historic, our third President has had Articles of Impeachment passed by the House. Who was presiding over the House ? Not Nancy. How many "Where is Hunter ?" T-shirts were sold ? Where IS Nancy ? A historic moment.

She was there. She chose not to preside. She was given opening remarks. And the impeachment vote tally count.


Her opening remarks :
Pointing to a poster with the US flag, with the words "the Republic for which it stands". Look up the definition for Republic. Hell, I will do it for you.

noun
a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.
The supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote, which they will do in eight months.

LitebulbwithaFiero, you are the Republic.
IP: Logged
randye
Member
Posts: 9874
From: New Port Richey, Florida
Registered: Mar 2006


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 188
Rate this member

Report this Post12-27-2019 07:50 PM Click Here to See the Profile for randyeClick Here to visit randye's HomePageClick Here to Email randyeSend a Private Message to randyeEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by blackrams:


Says she wants a "fair" trial. IOWs, she isn't willing to let Senator McConnell do what she just did in the House. The hypocrisy is pegged off the scale.

Rams


I have recently had to revise my opinion that all leftists are hypocrites.

It is now inescapably apparent that many leftists are NOT hypocrites.

They are simply totalitarian statists who believe that they are superior to everyone else and that rules and laws do not apply to them.
IP: Logged
Previous Page | Next Page

This topic is 13 pages long:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13 
next newest topic | next oldest topic

All times are ET (US)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Back To Main Page

Advertizing on PFF | Fiero Parts Vendors
PFF Merchandise | Fiero Gallery | Ogre's Cave
Real-Time Chat | Fiero Related Auctions on eBay



Copyright (c) 1999, C. Pennock