The Constitution was not built for this

[OKTexas]

It is time to pass laws governing both Impeachment in the House and Trial in the Senate.

Establishing pre-defined procedures for each that will satisfy the American insistence upon True Justice.

That way, partisan hacks in both House and Senate will be obliged to follow a prescribed set of rules.

Yeah, you go for that, it would require a constitutional amendment.

.

 

[Oldstyle]

Iron clad? LOL! Can't even site a statute or a real crime!

Directed verdict is the ONLY option when the Prosecution failed to present a case

"Statue?", "Crime?"

Dumb, dumb, impeachment is a POLITICAL process, mean't specifically for high crimes and misdemeanors, and abuse of power.

So what you're admitting is that isn't a prosecution of someone for committing a high crime or misdemeanor...it's a political maneuver because they don't like Trump?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Iron clad? LOL! Can't even site a statute or a real crime!

Directed verdict is the ONLY option when the Prosecution failed to present a case

"Statue?", "Crime?"

Dumb, dumb, impeachment is a POLITICAL process, mean't specifically for high crimes and misdemeanors, and abuse of power.

So you're impeachment is not for a crime, but because Trump is a Republican and the House is controlled by Stalinist democrats.

That's going to make an awesome commercial for Trumps 57 State Sweep

 

[OKTexas]

In anticipation of the reflexive "Vox, ha ha" response from Trumpists I'll say what I always say, disparaging the source of information loses all credibility if you can't factually refute what they report.
..................................................................................................................................
Republicans’ vote against Trump’s impeachment reveals a broken system — and a democracy at real risk of failure.
The Constitution was not built for this

"President Donald Trump deserved to be impeached over his conduct in the Ukraine affair. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did the right thing by pushing for an impeachment vote, and Democrats (all but a handful of them) did the right thing by voting to impeach.

But not a single Republican did. And the GOP’s willingness to back the president to the hilt, in spite of clear and obvious evidence of abuses of power, speaks to an urgent threat to American democracy: Our constitutional system is ill-equipped to withstand extreme polarization.

The framers designed impeachment to be a check on a president who twists the office’s powers for public gain. The system only works, however, under the assumption that members of Congress — particularly in the Senate, which has the power to remove the president — will be capable of separating their interests from those of the president’s.

“Where else than in the Senate could have been found a tribunal sufficiently dignified, or sufficiently independent?” Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 65. “What other body would be likely to feel CONFIDENCE ENOUGH IN ITS OWN SITUATION, to preserve, unawed and uninfluenced, the necessary impartiality between an INDIVIDUAL accused, and the REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE, HIS ACCUSERS?”

The highly partisan House vote, and the universal assessment in Washington that the Senate will vote to acquit Trump on party lines, reveals that Hamilton’s assumptions about our institutions no longer hold true. Under conditions of extreme polarization, where at least one party cares more about defeating its political opponents than safeguarding against abuses of power, the impeachment power is neutered unless the president’s opposition has the House and a two-thirds majority in the Senate (an extremely unlikely set of circumstances)."
.............................................................................................................................
Clearly the founders did not consider the possibility of Faux........an infotainment network dedicated to disinformation. Nor did they consider the possibility an entire congressional caucus would abdicate their responsibility to their oath of office, to the Constitution, and to their country by ignoring the overwhelming evidence of a prez's impeachable wrongdoing in order to protect their seat in government. IOW, they never contemplated the cowardice and duplicity of the POT.........party of Trump.

Oddly, the same circumstances, albeit reversed, ruled Clintons Impeachment.

R House impeached, D Senate acquitted.

Actually not, both houses had a Rs majority for clinton. But the commies voted to acquit, when he had already been convicted in a court.

.

 

[Oldstyle]

I've been amused to watch the far left's message morph from "Trump committed crimes!" to "You don't need to commit a crime to be impeachable!"

 

[OKTexas]

“The framers designed impeachment to be a check on a president who twists the office’s powers for public gain. The system only works, however, under the assumption that members of Congress — particularly in the Senate, which has the power to remove the president — will be capable of separating their interests from those of the president’s.” ibid

True.

The Framers also intended the impeachment process to be used to safeguard the people from imperious dullards such as Trump – from their arrogance and abuse of power.

You ignorant SOB, you might want to read that again. I even put the words in bold for ya. LMAO

.

 

[OKTexas]

Tell your bitch to hand over the Articles, let's get the trial going.

What witnesses would you like to see in this trial partisan?

The house is free to call any witness they used to make their determination. The senate isn't the place to continue the investigation. You're not very smart, are ya?

.

 

[MarcATL]

Which is why the democrats rushed it and now won't put it before the Senate....Trump did nothing wrong except....GRRRRR, Orange Man Bad...Beat Hilary....GRRRRRR

Yeah, we all know Trump is Mr. Perfect.

 

[MarcATL]

The house is free to call any witness they used to make their determination. The senate isn't the place to continue the investigation. You're not very smart, are ya?

.

What's the Senate's role here fluffy?

 

[MarcATL]

I've been amused to watch the far left's message morph from "Trump committed crimes!" to "You don't need to commit a crime to be impeachable!"

Lindsey Graham's opinion on impeachment was different during Clinton era - CNN Video

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article230483449.html

#TooEasy #LOLGOP #TooFunny #CLASSIC

 

[Oddball]

In anticipation of the reflexive "Vox, ha ha" response from Trumpists I'll say what I always say, disparaging the source of information loses all credibility if you can't factually refute what they report.
..................................................................................................................................
Republicans’ vote against Trump’s impeachment reveals a broken system — and a democracy at real risk of failure.
The Constitution was not built for this

"President Donald Trump deserved to be impeached over his conduct in the Ukraine affair. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did the right thing by pushing for an impeachment vote, and Democrats (all but a handful of them) did the right thing by voting to impeach.

But not a single Republican did. And the GOP’s willingness to back the president to the hilt, in spite of clear and obvious evidence of abuses of power, speaks to an urgent threat to American democracy: Our constitutional system is ill-equipped to withstand extreme polarization.

The framers designed impeachment to be a check on a president who twists the office’s powers for public gain. The system only works, however, under the assumption that members of Congress — particularly in the Senate, which has the power to remove the president — will be capable of separating their interests from those of the president’s.

“Where else than in the Senate could have been found a tribunal sufficiently dignified, or sufficiently independent?” Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 65. “What other body would be likely to feel CONFIDENCE ENOUGH IN ITS OWN SITUATION, to preserve, unawed and uninfluenced, the necessary impartiality between an INDIVIDUAL accused, and the REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE, HIS ACCUSERS?”

The highly partisan House vote, and the universal assessment in Washington that the Senate will vote to acquit Trump on party lines, reveals that Hamilton’s assumptions about our institutions no longer hold true. Under conditions of extreme polarization, where at least one party cares more about defeating its political opponents than safeguarding against abuses of power, the impeachment power is neutered unless the president’s opposition has the House and a two-thirds majority in the Senate (an extremely unlikely set of circumstances)."
.............................................................................................................................
Clearly the founders did not consider the possibility of Faux........an infotainment network dedicated to disinformation. Nor did they consider the possibility an entire congressional caucus would abdicate their responsibility to their oath of office, to the Constitution, and to their country by ignoring the overwhelming evidence of a prez's impeachable wrongdoing in order to protect their seat in government. IOW, they never contemplated the cowardice and duplicity of the POT.........party of Trump.

Vox or not, the Constitution is only a prop of convenience for liberoidal freaks like you...It's the bane of your existence when its provisions give you results that you don't like.

See: the electoral college,

Now go piss up a rope.

 

[OKTexas]

The house is free to call any witness they used to make their determination. The senate isn't the place to continue the investigation. You're not very smart, are ya?

.

What's the Senate's role here fluffy?

To try the case the house presents to them, if they ever do. It's pretty clear in the Constitution, of course you commies only care about it when you think it will be to your benefit. McConnell is talking about using the same rules that were passed 100/0 in the clinton trial. You folks always want to change the rules to rig shit, it ain't gonna work.

.

 

[Norman]

In anticipation of the reflexive "Vox, ha ha" response from Trumpists I'll say what I always say, disparaging the source of information loses all credibility if you can't factually refute what they report.
..................................................................................................................................
Republicans’ vote against Trump’s impeachment reveals a broken system — and a democracy at real risk of failure.
The Constitution was not built for this

"President Donald Trump deserved to be impeached over his conduct in the Ukraine affair. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did the right thing by pushing for an impeachment vote, and Democrats (all but a handful of them) did the right thing by voting to impeach.

But not a single Republican did. And the GOP’s willingness to back the president to the hilt, in spite of clear and obvious evidence of abuses of power, speaks to an urgent threat to American democracy: Our constitutional system is ill-equipped to withstand extreme polarization.

The framers designed impeachment to be a check on a president who twists the office’s powers for public gain. The system only works, however, under the assumption that members of Congress — particularly in the Senate, which has the power to remove the president — will be capable of separating their interests from those of the president’s.

“Where else than in the Senate could have been found a tribunal sufficiently dignified, or sufficiently independent?” Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 65. “What other body would be likely to feel CONFIDENCE ENOUGH IN ITS OWN SITUATION, to preserve, unawed and uninfluenced, the necessary impartiality between an INDIVIDUAL accused, and the REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE, HIS ACCUSERS?”

The highly partisan House vote, and the universal assessment in Washington that the Senate will vote to acquit Trump on party lines, reveals that Hamilton’s assumptions about our institutions no longer hold true. Under conditions of extreme polarization, where at least one party cares more about defeating its political opponents than safeguarding against abuses of power, the impeachment power is neutered unless the president’s opposition has the House and a two-thirds majority in the Senate (an extremely unlikely set of circumstances)."
.............................................................................................................................
Clearly the founders did not consider the possibility of Faux........an infotainment network dedicated to disinformation. Nor did they consider the possibility an entire congressional caucus would abdicate their responsibility to their oath of office, to the Constitution, and to their country by ignoring the overwhelming evidence of a prez's impeachable wrongdoing in order to protect their seat in government. IOW, they never contemplated the cowardice and duplicity of the POT.........party of Trump.

Democrat's vote for impeachment is a sign something is wrong...

Yes, something is very wrong with the DEMOCRAPS. It's the same false accusation brigade, AGAIN. Trump was carrying his duty investigating corruption and draining the swamp, as promised.

 

[OKTexas]

I've been amused to watch the far left's message morph from "Trump committed crimes!" to "You don't need to commit a crime to be impeachable!"

Lindsey Graham's opinion on impeachment was different during Clinton era - CNN Video

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article230483449.html

#TooEasy #LOLGOP #TooFunny #CLASSIC

So was schmukey schumers. Your point?

 

[Oldstyle]

I've been amused to watch the far left's message morph from "Trump committed crimes!" to "You don't need to commit a crime to be impeachable!"

Lindsey Graham's opinion on impeachment was different during Clinton era - CNN Video

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article230483449.html

#TooEasy #LOLGOP #TooFunny #CLASSIC

Two can play at that game, Marc! Would you like me to show you, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Nadler's "opinions" on impeachment during the Clinton era?

 

[MarcATL]

Let's talk after November elections

That's what I thought.

#LOLGOP #TooFunny

 

[MarcATL]

Two can play at that game, Marc! Would you like me to show you, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Nadler's "opinions" on impeachment during the Clinton era?

Please do. Present them.

 

[OKTexas]

The house is free to call any witness they used to make their determination. The senate isn't the place to continue the investigation. You're not very smart, are ya?

.

What's the Senate's role here fluffy?

To try the case the house presents to them, if they ever do. It's pretty clear in the Constitution, of course you commies only care about it when you think it will be to your benefit. McConnell is talking about using the same rules that were passed 100/0 in the clinton trial. You folks always want to change the rules to rig shit, it ain't gonna work.

.

Hey commie, where'd ya go? Did you run out of gas?

.

 

[Auld Phart]

“The framers designed impeachment to be a check on a president who twists the office’s powers for public gain. The system only works, however, under the assumption that members of Congress — particularly in the Senate, which has the power to remove the president — will be capable of separating their interests from those of the president’s.” ibid

True.

The Framers also intended the impeachment process to be used to safeguard the people from imperious dullards such as Trump – from their arrogance and abuse of power.

Tell your bitch to hand over the Articles, let's get the trial going.

Such is the reprehensible, misogynist right.

Trump has only himself to blame for the disgrace of impeachment.

And it’s incumbent upon the Speaker to make an effort to ensure the Articles of Impeachment are given a fair hearing in a fair trial, however futile those efforts might be in a Senate controlled by blind partisan Republicans.

Trump has only himself to blame for the disgrace of impeachment.

Right

Just ignore the fact that there have been some dems looking for reasons to impeach him since the day he took office.

and some are looking for more reasons to bring even more charges against him.

But, it's all Trumps fault.

 

[Auld Phart]

Two can play at that game, Marc! Would you like me to show you, Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Nadler's "opinions" on impeachment during the Clinton era?

Please do. Present them.