Justice Roberts says what?

[bripat9643]

Nancy's faux impeachment of Trump is beginning to fall apart already.
The Belknap "precedent" is not even a "given".
Can you say "Constitutional Crisis"?

Kamala Harris could preside over Trump impeachment trial if John Roberts doesn’t

The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on...

www.foxnews.com

"The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on who should preside over impeachments for former presidents."

So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded.

I suspected that might happen. However, given his past behavior, you can never trust Roberts to follow the clear language in the Constitution.

I predict the Dims will drop this charade because even they are not stupid enough to subject themselves to the ridicule that would surely follow by proceeding.

 

[bripat9643]

.....as USUAL, more time and American tax payer $$$$$$ WASTED on crap
.....the Capitol/etc NEEDS to be invaded and those jackasses hit with frying pans!!!!!!!!!!!!
......so much bullshit waste
......remember the MLB steroid hearings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??????????

Like 11 Benghazi investigations to come up with.....ZIP?

MAGA

Zip? The Benghazi investigations came up with plenty. Obama and Hillary fucked that pooch in the caboose. They did not want to admit that Obama had not stopped terrorism during his reelection campaign.

As long as we are going off topic...You know what came up with ZIP? Mueller.

Sorry - They came up with Zip, Zero, Squat, Donut and Bupkis. "NO WRONGDOING" by Obama or Clinton.

GOP panel on Benghazi finds no Obama administration wrongdoing

The CIA and the military acted properly in responding to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, a Republican-controlled House committee has found.

www.latimes.com

In Final Report, Benghazi Committee Finds No New Evidence of Clinton Wrongdoing

Neither of the dueling reports from the Democrats or Republicans had new revelations about Clinton's culpability, but they'll re-inject the issue into the 2016 campaign.

foreignpolicy.com

Additionally, Mueller came up with PLENTY. Come out of your bubble please.

Obstruction of Justice in the Mueller Report: A Heat Map

The Mueller report describes numerous instances in which President Trump may have obstructed justice. A few days ago, I threw together a quick spreadsheet on Twitter to assess how Special Counsel Robert Mueller seemed to assess the evidence.

www.lawfareblog.com

He came up with nothing, bonehead.

 

[danielpalos]

..it's not so much as the energy/climate/etc as it is that it fks over the US .....just up front we have to PAY for all kinds of crap BEFORE even getting into the cutting emissions/etc

You mean like venture capital? In my opinion, it should be about returns to scale whenever possible. Fusion (an energy with a future) is one current and costly example until it comes online.

......no----I'm talking about all the '''paperwork''/man hours/WASTED time/committees/new regulation committees--discussions--etc/etc --and this is before all the regulations start which will WASTE more $$$$-----$$$$$ we DON'T have!!!!!!
--we will drown in DEBT long before we drown any climate problems appear----
.....SO, it's like other issues in the MSM--'''we''' don't concentrate on the REAL problems--the current problems that are more destructive---destructive NOW----than we do the other non-problems--

We would not need all of those regulations if capitalism were as efficient and promoted the general good instead of the private profit, even at the expense of the Poor. Flint Michigan is just one example.

..we do not need to waste $$$$$ WE DON'T HAVE on the Paris Accords......and it costs tax payer $$$$$ and time just for Biden to implement the SIGNING

We seem to have even less money to clean up the messes created by the private sector for private profit.

 

[bripat9643]

Nancy's faux impeachment of Trump is beginning to fall apart already.
The Belknap "precedent" is not even a "given".
Can you say "Constitutional Crisis"?

Kamala Harris could preside over Trump impeachment trial if John Roberts doesn’t

The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on...

www.foxnews.com

"The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on who should preside over impeachments for former presidents."

So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded.

Just think, we might even get witnesses this time unlike in Mitch's last faux "trial". Lotta evidence will be unfolding in the next couple weeks. Like all the violent insurrectionists who sincerely believe that Trump called him and sent them to "fight like hell".

And your threats of primaries are laughable. Senators with a backbone will do the right thing and their constituents will reward them.

There won't be any trial, moron, just a Dim dog and pony show.

 

[harmonica]

..it's not so much as the energy/climate/etc as it is that it fks over the US .....just up front we have to PAY for all kinds of crap BEFORE even getting into the cutting emissions/etc

You mean like venture capital? In my opinion, it should be about returns to scale whenever possible. Fusion (an energy with a future) is one current and costly example until it comes online.

......no----I'm talking about all the '''paperwork''/man hours/WASTED time/committees/new regulation committees--discussions--etc/etc --and this is before all the regulations start which will WASTE more $$$$-----$$$$$ we DON'T have!!!!!!
--we will drown in DEBT long before we drown any climate problems appear----
.....SO, it's like other issues in the MSM--'''we''' don't concentrate on the REAL problems--the current problems that are more destructive---destructive NOW----than we do the other non-problems--

We would not need all of those regulations if capitalism were as efficient and promoted the general good instead of the private profit, even at the expense of the Poor. Flint Michigan is just one example.

..we do not need to waste $$$$$ WE DON'T HAVE on the Paris Accords......and it costs tax payer $$$$$ and time just for Biden to implement the SIGNING

We seem to have even less money to clean up the messes created by the private sector for private profit.

....irrelevant--the US does not have the $$$$ for the Paris Accords--even if it was ''''''helpful''''

 

[danielpalos]

..it's not so much as the energy/climate/etc as it is that it fks over the US .....just up front we have to PAY for all kinds of crap BEFORE even getting into the cutting emissions/etc

You mean like venture capital? In my opinion, it should be about returns to scale whenever possible. Fusion (an energy with a future) is one current and costly example until it comes online.

......no----I'm talking about all the '''paperwork''/man hours/WASTED time/committees/new regulation committees--discussions--etc/etc --and this is before all the regulations start which will WASTE more $$$$-----$$$$$ we DON'T have!!!!!!
--we will drown in DEBT long before we drown any climate problems appear----
.....SO, it's like other issues in the MSM--'''we''' don't concentrate on the REAL problems--the current problems that are more destructive---destructive NOW----than we do the other non-problems--

We would not need all of those regulations if capitalism were as efficient and promoted the general good instead of the private profit, even at the expense of the Poor. Flint Michigan is just one example.

..we do not need to waste $$$$$ WE DON'T HAVE on the Paris Accords......and it costs tax payer $$$$$ and time just for Biden to implement the SIGNING

We seem to have even less money to clean up the messes created by the private sector for private profit.

....irrelevant--the US does not have the $$$$ for the Paris Accords--even if it was ''''''helpful''''

Why can we allegedly afford our useless and alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror?

 

[harmonica]

..it's not so much as the energy/climate/etc as it is that it fks over the US .....just up front we have to PAY for all kinds of crap BEFORE even getting into the cutting emissions/etc

You mean like venture capital? In my opinion, it should be about returns to scale whenever possible. Fusion (an energy with a future) is one current and costly example until it comes online.

......no----I'm talking about all the '''paperwork''/man hours/WASTED time/committees/new regulation committees--discussions--etc/etc --and this is before all the regulations start which will WASTE more $$$$-----$$$$$ we DON'T have!!!!!!
--we will drown in DEBT long before we drown any climate problems appear----
.....SO, it's like other issues in the MSM--'''we''' don't concentrate on the REAL problems--the current problems that are more destructive---destructive NOW----than we do the other non-problems--

We would not need all of those regulations if capitalism were as efficient and promoted the general good instead of the private profit, even at the expense of the Poor. Flint Michigan is just one example.

..we do not need to waste $$$$$ WE DON'T HAVE on the Paris Accords......and it costs tax payer $$$$$ and time just for Biden to implement the SIGNING

We seem to have even less money to clean up the messes created by the private sector for private profit.

....irrelevant--the US does not have the $$$$ for the Paris Accords--even if it was ''''''helpful''''

Why can we allegedly afford our useless and alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror?

1. irrelevant --- '''''wasting''''' $$$$ on one thing doesn't make it ok to waste MORE $$$$$
2. we should NOT war on crime????!!!!!!!????
3. more Americans were murdered by terrorists on 9-11 than died at Pearl Harbor--we should not have a war on terror????!!!

 

[danielpalos]

..it's not so much as the energy/climate/etc as it is that it fks over the US .....just up front we have to PAY for all kinds of crap BEFORE even getting into the cutting emissions/etc

You mean like venture capital? In my opinion, it should be about returns to scale whenever possible. Fusion (an energy with a future) is one current and costly example until it comes online.

......no----I'm talking about all the '''paperwork''/man hours/WASTED time/committees/new regulation committees--discussions--etc/etc --and this is before all the regulations start which will WASTE more $$$$-----$$$$$ we DON'T have!!!!!!
--we will drown in DEBT long before we drown any climate problems appear----
.....SO, it's like other issues in the MSM--'''we''' don't concentrate on the REAL problems--the current problems that are more destructive---destructive NOW----than we do the other non-problems--

We would not need all of those regulations if capitalism were as efficient and promoted the general good instead of the private profit, even at the expense of the Poor. Flint Michigan is just one example.

..we do not need to waste $$$$$ WE DON'T HAVE on the Paris Accords......and it costs tax payer $$$$$ and time just for Biden to implement the SIGNING

We seem to have even less money to clean up the messes created by the private sector for private profit.

....irrelevant--the US does not have the $$$$ for the Paris Accords--even if it was ''''''helpful''''

Why can we allegedly afford our useless and alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror?

1. irrelevant --- '''''wasting''''' $$$$ on one thing doesn't make it ok to waste MORE $$$$$
2. we should NOT war on crime????!!!!!!!????
3. more Americans were murdered by terrorists on 9-11 than died at Pearl Harbor--we should not have a war on terror????!!!

Yes, it does. One promotes the general welfare while the other promotes the general warfare.

 

[harmonica]

..it's not so much as the energy/climate/etc as it is that it fks over the US .....just up front we have to PAY for all kinds of crap BEFORE even getting into the cutting emissions/etc

You mean like venture capital? In my opinion, it should be about returns to scale whenever possible. Fusion (an energy with a future) is one current and costly example until it comes online.

......no----I'm talking about all the '''paperwork''/man hours/WASTED time/committees/new regulation committees--discussions--etc/etc --and this is before all the regulations start which will WASTE more $$$$-----$$$$$ we DON'T have!!!!!!
--we will drown in DEBT long before we drown any climate problems appear----
.....SO, it's like other issues in the MSM--'''we''' don't concentrate on the REAL problems--the current problems that are more destructive---destructive NOW----than we do the other non-problems--

We would not need all of those regulations if capitalism were as efficient and promoted the general good instead of the private profit, even at the expense of the Poor. Flint Michigan is just one example.

..we do not need to waste $$$$$ WE DON'T HAVE on the Paris Accords......and it costs tax payer $$$$$ and time just for Biden to implement the SIGNING

We seem to have even less money to clean up the messes created by the private sector for private profit.

....irrelevant--the US does not have the $$$$ for the Paris Accords--even if it was ''''''helpful''''

Why can we allegedly afford our useless and alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror?

1. irrelevant --- '''''wasting''''' $$$$ on one thing doesn't make it ok to waste MORE $$$$$
2. we should NOT war on crime????!!!!!!!????
3. more Americans were murdered by terrorists on 9-11 than died at Pearl Harbor--we should not have a war on terror????!!!

Yes, it does. One promotes the general welfare while the other promotes the general warfare.

no it doesn't

 

[danielpalos]

..it's not so much as the energy/climate/etc as it is that it fks over the US .....just up front we have to PAY for all kinds of crap BEFORE even getting into the cutting emissions/etc

You mean like venture capital? In my opinion, it should be about returns to scale whenever possible. Fusion (an energy with a future) is one current and costly example until it comes online.

......no----I'm talking about all the '''paperwork''/man hours/WASTED time/committees/new regulation committees--discussions--etc/etc --and this is before all the regulations start which will WASTE more $$$$-----$$$$$ we DON'T have!!!!!!
--we will drown in DEBT long before we drown any climate problems appear----
.....SO, it's like other issues in the MSM--'''we''' don't concentrate on the REAL problems--the current problems that are more destructive---destructive NOW----than we do the other non-problems--

We would not need all of those regulations if capitalism were as efficient and promoted the general good instead of the private profit, even at the expense of the Poor. Flint Michigan is just one example.

..we do not need to waste $$$$$ WE DON'T HAVE on the Paris Accords......and it costs tax payer $$$$$ and time just for Biden to implement the SIGNING

We seem to have even less money to clean up the messes created by the private sector for private profit.

....irrelevant--the US does not have the $$$$ for the Paris Accords--even if it was ''''''helpful''''

Why can we allegedly afford our useless and alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror?

1. irrelevant --- '''''wasting''''' $$$$ on one thing doesn't make it ok to waste MORE $$$$$
2. we should NOT war on crime????!!!!!!!????
3. more Americans were murdered by terrorists on 9-11 than died at Pearl Harbor--we should not have a war on terror????!!!

Yes, it does. One promotes the general welfare while the other promotes the general warfare.

no it doesn't

Yes, it does. Our infrastructure is becoming third world. Our large military expenditures is doing nothing to improve our Standard of living.

 

[Pogo]

Too little too late.

In my book, Roberts is a piece of shit.

I think the rumors about him are true

Absolutely they are.

He is a pedophile like most of them.

Why does anyone on this message board think Roberts is a pedophile? Got any evidence?

He hung out with Epstein and flew on his plane.

Got any proof of that? Where are the pics? If you are talking about the flight log, how do you knw it wasn't Fox News reporter John Roberts?

Chief Justice Roberts is a DC guy and has been since Reagan was President.. Why would he know Epstein, who was a NY mogul?

Lol, if Roberts heard the case about voter fraud and ruled with Trump. Anonymous girls would be coming out. There is a pedophile ring our leaders are supporting. That's one of the reasons Trump had to leave. He was about to expose it.

He could not hear the case about voter fraud because only two justices felt Texas has standing. It's far too complicated for such shallow minds.

When is Trump going to expose it then?

I'm laughing because one day, what I'm talking about is going to slap you in the face so hard. You gonna realize your approved speech now. Is treasonous speech in a few years. Liberals are never happy.

You write like a kindergartener.

"You gonna" "Is treason speech in a few years."

What language is that supposed to be?

Translation, what you and your peers think is right now. The squad might seem it offensive in a couple of years. Then all a sudden you're a traitor to your country. See how that works?

In two years, the Republicans will relegate AOC, Nancy, Chuckie, and the rest of the Democrats into the dustbin of history. Why are you "skeered"?

They got away with cheating in a presidential election. They aren't going anywhere, unless Harris totally messes up.

Can I ask why you failed to address my original question? Are you admitting you have no evidence?

View attachment 447747
Your party is the party of pedophilia. You are the problem, because you see this sick shit and support it.

Pogo finds abusing a child funny. Tell me Pogo, would you let your daughter spend the night with Biden, alone with him?

I find your level of abject stupidity to be fucking hilarious.

Too bad you can't also appreciate what a pathetic joke you are.

I take that as a yes and disturbing. You can't see what perverts you are.

Hey dickhead, you post one time where I have posted anything supporting pedophilia and I kiss your ass in NYC's Time Square at noon on the day of your choosing. On the other hand, you will do the same for me if you can show in this thread where you have answered my question about what proof you have regarding John Roberts.

A close family member spent 5 years in a federal prison for child pornograhy. At the time, I had three young children, Had he done anything to them, they never would have found his body. You can take your stupid accusation and go fuck your illegal underage girlfriend to your hearts content. Just apologize for your incredibly asinine mistake and STFU forever on this forum, because you crossed the line.

That ought to shut you the fuck up, you lousy excuse to waste alien skin!

Your party is the party of pedophilia, so go screw yourself.

The poster you are referring to is a Republican

That's part of why I told him he's embarrassing himself.
Not all of it though.

 

[jknowgood]

Too little too late.

In my book, Roberts is a piece of shit.

I think the rumors about him are true

Absolutely they are.

He is a pedophile like most of them.

Why does anyone on this message board think Roberts is a pedophile? Got any evidence?

He hung out with Epstein and flew on his plane.

Got any proof of that? Where are the pics? If you are talking about the flight log, how do you knw it wasn't Fox News reporter John Roberts?

Chief Justice Roberts is a DC guy and has been since Reagan was President.. Why would he know Epstein, who was a NY mogul?

Lol, if Roberts heard the case about voter fraud and ruled with Trump. Anonymous girls would be coming out. There is a pedophile ring our leaders are supporting. That's one of the reasons Trump had to leave. He was about to expose it.

He could not hear the case about voter fraud because only two justices felt Texas has standing. It's far too complicated for such shallow minds.

When is Trump going to expose it then?

I'm laughing because one day, what I'm talking about is going to slap you in the face so hard. You gonna realize your approved speech now. Is treasonous speech in a few years. Liberals are never happy.

You write like a kindergartener.

"You gonna" "Is treason speech in a few years."

What language is that supposed to be?

Translation, what you and your peers think is right now. The squad might seem it offensive in a couple of years. Then all a sudden you're a traitor to your country. See how that works?

In two years, the Republicans will relegate AOC, Nancy, Chuckie, and the rest of the Democrats into the dustbin of history. Why are you "skeered"?

They got away with cheating in a presidential election. They aren't going anywhere, unless Harris totally messes up.

Can I ask why you failed to address my original question? Are you admitting you have no evidence?

View attachment 447747
Your party is the party of pedophilia. You are the problem, because you see this sick shit and support it.

My party? The Republican Party that I have been a member flor over 40 years? You really are fucked in the head!

I have asked for your evidence, of which you have none. You will note, not a single person has come to your aid. That speaks volumes, because none of you know anything!

The democrat party has been sexualizing little kids for years. They are not bashful anymore to hide it.

 

[ElmerMudd]

Democrats must impeach Trump because to many Americans see Biden as illegitimate. Biden will always be in trumps shadow. Nobody cares about him or his ccp prepared speeches.

Trump minions worship the man, Trump. Trump's glory and power is what is most important.
Biden and good Americans care about what is done under a President, it is not to glorify the President.
The President's that focus on what is good for America not themselves are the most successful.
Trump was a failure. Trump and his minion's, like you, focused on what was best for Trump.

 

[ElmerMudd]

Nancy's faux impeachment of Trump is beginning to fall apart already.
The Belknap "precedent" is not even a "given".
Can you say "Constitutional Crisis"?

Kamala Harris could preside over Trump impeachment trial if John Roberts doesn’t

The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on...

www.foxnews.com

"The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on who should preside over impeachments for former presidents."

So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded.

Lie, they have not chosen who will preside.
As a person who hopes Trump is convicted, the trial would be tainted by a Democrat presiding.
I am confident Roberts will preside.

Roberts said he IS NOT PRESIDING.
Roberts only presides when the PRESIDENT is impeached, not citizen Trump
Nancy's Kangaroo Court should be hilarious, with "heels up" Kamala deep-sixing her 2024 GOP opponent, no conflict there!

You are a fricking liar.
There has not been a final decision on who will preside. Roberts can preside. Why can't you tell the truth?

Why Is John Roberts Even in the Impeachment Trial?

Last night, the chief justice showed he wasn’t just a potted plant. But the founders would have wanted him to play an even stronger role in impeachment.

www.politico.com

This is from the link in the OP. ( a hint at where Roberts is, not a final answer, but a lean direction)
Chief Justice Roberts reportedly does not want to preside over a second Trump impeachment

Is that Robert's "final answer"? No, but it is more definitive than the politico article, which has no indication which way Roberts is leaning. The politico article compares the impeachment of citizen Trump to the impeachment of PRESIDENT Bill Clinton, a bullshit comparison.

Also from the OP link:
"The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on who should preside over impeachments for former presidents."

Here is a 2nd independent source of Robert's leaning:

Chief Justice John Roberts reportedly wants no part of Trump's impeachment trial - NewsBreak

Constitutionally-speaking, Chief Justice John Roberts is meant to preside over President Trump's impeachment trial, but he apparently wants out, Politico reports. Multiple Republican and Democratic sources have reportedly told Politico that Roberts is seeking a way to avoid the job because of...

www.newsbreak.com

So you are the LIAR

I am sure he does not want to. But the Democrats and Republicans want a fair, reliable trial. Democrats know they cannot have a biased presider.

A news program said that after the senate gets sworn in they "select" someone to preside.
Not sure who would accept the job?

Hopefully, the Democrats will not follow Trump in over using the power of the Preidency to undermine the tenets of our Constitution.
To put a biased individual to overssee the impeachment undermines the purpose of impeachment.

 

[Nostra]

Nancy's faux impeachment of Trump is beginning to fall apart already.
The Belknap "precedent" is not even a "given".
Can you say "Constitutional Crisis"?

Kamala Harris could preside over Trump impeachment trial if John Roberts doesn’t

The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on...

www.foxnews.com

"The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on who should preside over impeachments for former presidents."

So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded.

The Constitution is clear. No Chief Justice presiding, there is no trial.


Nazi’s Kangaroo Court is done.

 

[danielpalos]

Nancy's faux impeachment of Trump is beginning to fall apart already.
The Belknap "precedent" is not even a "given".
Can you say "Constitutional Crisis"?

Kamala Harris could preside over Trump impeachment trial if John Roberts doesn’t

The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on...

www.foxnews.com

"The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on who should preside over impeachments for former presidents."

So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded.

The Constitution is clear. No Chief Justice presiding, there is no trial.


Nazi’s Kangaroo Court is done.

A deputy chief justice can do the job.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Nancy's faux impeachment of Trump is beginning to fall apart already.
The Belknap "precedent" is not even a "given".
Can you say "Constitutional Crisis"?

Kamala Harris could preside over Trump impeachment trial if John Roberts doesn’t

The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on...

www.foxnews.com

"The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on who should preside over impeachments for former presidents."

So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded.

STATEMENT: "So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded."

RESPONSE: The Kangaroo Court was established by Moscow Mitch when Trump was first impeached. If the Chief Justice does not preside, and if the Vice President does, the trail will be just that; the defense will be allowed to present exculpatory evidence, if any attorney is willing to represent Trump and if any exculpatory evidence exists.

 

[kyzr]

Nancy's faux impeachment of Trump is beginning to fall apart already.
The Belknap "precedent" is not even a "given".
Can you say "Constitutional Crisis"?

Kamala Harris could preside over Trump impeachment trial if John Roberts doesn’t

The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on...

www.foxnews.com

"The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on who should preside over impeachments for former presidents."

So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded.

STATEMENT: "So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded."

RESPONSE: The Kangaroo Court was established by Moscow Mitch when Trump was first impeached. If the Chief Justice does not preside, and if the Vice President does, the trail will be just that; the defense will be allowed to present exculpatory evidence, if any attorney is willing to represent Trump and if any exculpatory evidence exists.

For the record, you don't see any conflict of interest if Kamala presides over a trial whether or not an ex-president can run against her in 2024, or be disqualified? That's just fine with you???? Besides, she is NOT an experienced judge, she was a DA, she is not even qualified to run a trial. But that would be perfect, a long shitty trial followed by another acquittal.

There is no "Moscow Mitch" only a Moscow Bernie. When you impeach for a non-crime, you get an acquittal, duh.
Trump has a good attorney, I hope he drags the trial out for 2 fucking years.

 

[Nostra]

Nancy's faux impeachment of Trump is beginning to fall apart already.
The Belknap "precedent" is not even a "given".
Can you say "Constitutional Crisis"?

Kamala Harris could preside over Trump impeachment trial if John Roberts doesn’t

The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on...

www.foxnews.com

"The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on who should preside over impeachments for former presidents."

So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded.

The Constitution is clear. No Chief Justice presiding, there is no trial.


Nazi’s Kangaroo Court is done.

A deputy chief justice can do the job.

Nope.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Nancy's faux impeachment of Trump is beginning to fall apart already.
The Belknap "precedent" is not even a "given".
Can you say "Constitutional Crisis"?

Kamala Harris could preside over Trump impeachment trial if John Roberts doesn’t

The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on...

www.foxnews.com

"The Constitution says that in impeachments for presidents, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is the presiding officer. For lesser impeachments, the presiding officer has been the same as for other Senate business — either the vice president or a senator. The Constitution is not clear on who should preside over impeachments for former presidents."

So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded.

STATEMENT: "So if Kamala Harris presides over Nancy's Kangaroo Court, just imagine how fast the trial will be and how little the defense will be allowed to present. OBJECTION!! What a joke. If ANY Republicans vote guilty they are done, gone, primaried and discarded."

RESPONSE: The Kangaroo Court was established by Moscow Mitch when Trump was first impeached. If the Chief Justice does not preside, and if the Vice President does, the trail will be just that; the defense will be allowed to present exculpatory evidence, if any attorney is willing to represent Trump and if any exculpatory evidence exists.

For the record, you don't see any conflict of interest if Kamala presides over a trial whether or not an ex-president can run against her in 2024, or be disqualified? That's just fine with you???? Besides, she is NOT an experienced judge, she was a DA, she is not even qualified to run a trial. But that would be perfect, a long shitty trial followed by another acquittal.

There is no "Moscow Mitch" only a Moscow Bernie. When you impeach for a non-crime, you get an acquittal, duh.
Trump has a good attorney, I hope he drags the trial out for 2 fucking years.

Your rambling rant rhetoric is irrational. Reasonable people understand that Vice President Harris seeks justice, and equal justice before the law. She has the chops to preside over the preceding's but it is most likely that the Chief Justice will once again serve in that capacity.

Since McConnell and Schumer will need to work out the details, I suspect it will represent a real trial, unlike the first one when only McConnell decided on the details.