Justice Roberts says what?

[WEATHER53]

See the MVA can’t suspend my license if I don’t have one over something I did when I had one

Simple enough blockheads?

 

[toobfreak]

FUCK YOU. They were not trying to convict an ex-president. And not for so specious and nebulous a thing as his telling a crowd to go CHEER the Senate. That is NOT a crime.

Opposition to the Reich is a crime.
This is what the democrats intend to make extremely clear.

This is just another Nancy Shitshow, emboldened by McConnell's total inability to restrain the bitch. She is after Trump for ONE REASON only: he scares the living CRAP out of them with his ability to engage 100 million people at the snap of his fingers. They have no precedent for that. No politician in Washington has that connection with America. Not Obama. None.

He is a grave threat to their autocratic rule and they are trying at all costs to get him out of office and now to KEEP him out, before he wrecks their little private party.

 

[meaner gene]

Sorry but again, Trump's not a president. The senate has no lawful power to punish civilians.

The founding fathers were not stupid. They needed a means of removing government officials committing high crimes. But if they can escape impeachment by resigning, you have an entire class of appointed officials, who would have no congressional check. They could commit a high crime that the president could pardon (if not for the impeachment exception to presidential pardon powers) but more importantly, the person could resign, and the president reappoints him as soon as the senate trial is declared moot.

Hence why the "disqualification from future office" was included as a remedy.

 

[WEATHER53]

Libbies want Trump disqualified as having ever been President
They are true worshippers of “if I don’t like it remove it from History so I can feel it never existed”

 

[meaner gene]

The Constitution demands that the Chief Justice preside- not anyone else for the impeachment trial of a President.

If Roberts refuses to do it, Chuck and Nancy have two alternatives.

One is to drop the case and admit the Impeachment was Fake.

Two, impeach and convict Roberts for dereliction of duty, have another Chief Justice nominated and confirmed.

You missed the point of why they needed somebody else to preside over an impeachment trial of the president. This is a job normally done by the president of the senate (aka the vice president) They knew it would be an untenable situation to have the person presiding over a trial, be the person who would benefit by a conviction.

As Trump is no longer president, VP Harris has no dog in the hunt, hence the chief justice is not needed to preside.

 

[Lesh]

There is also talk that Republican senators may choose a secret ballot so their voting base will not know how each member voted.

The same source also said the above.

If there is a secret ballot...Republican Senators will be free to vote as they please...and they will take pleasure in convicting Trump

 

[easyt65]

USSC Chief Justice John Roberts Has 'Check Out' as the Chief Justice and or as a USSC Justice at all, allowing the Socialist Democrats to do whatever they want.

Not long ago Chief Justice Roberts publicly acknowledged that Pa Democrats violated both Federal and State Constitutions and Federal and State election law by changing election laws, rules, and processes through judicial activism in the middle of an election...and then he added the USSC wanted no part in trying to fix the mess....which was his / their job.

Now Chief Justice is refusing to oversee another admitted politically partisan Democratic Party Impeachment of former Republican President Trump.

Instead, he is going to allow a Democrat run the admitted politically partisan Democratic Party Impeachment of the Republican former President.

In this case, the trial is just a formality before the 'lynching'...

...and Roberts wants no part of the entire 'shit-show's, choosing instead to just allow the '3rd-world nation' / tyranny state railroading to happen.

If he finds doing his job too much these days and can't stand firm against Socialist Democrat pressure he should have stepped down while Trump was President.

Leahy expected to preside over Trump impeachment trial instead of Chief Justice Roberts

Sen. Patrick Leahy will preside over the impeachment trial of former President Trump, signaling that Chief Justice John Roberts will not be forced to oversee the politically-charged arguments now that Trump is out of office.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Auld Phart]

Third thread on this, and it doesn't really matter.


Dems actually think 17 republicans are going to cross the aisle to convict.

(They've been licking rainbows again.)

 

[WEATHER53]

There is no impeachment for a former president over what some addled opposition party members feel he did while President.
They will try to Hoax this up into their own self styled “Impeachment” when factually and legally no such avenue exists but it’s all about mollifying their feelings of hated. Sad and sick people.

 

[Care4all]

Roberts and the court have a Constitutional duty to put the Nazis back into their place.

Until the Supreme Court (or perhaps federal court) says the act is useless....The senate can bar Trump from running again.

No. The Constitution is not worded that way that a power exists until explicitly forbidden. The Constitution is written to expressly enumerate what powers the Senate has, and as written, forbidding an officer from ever running for office again is a power ascribed to AN OFFICER OF THE UNITED STATES UPON CONVICTION OF IMPEACHMENT which can only be done:

1. To an Officer of the United States (Trump is a civilian).
2. As a result of conviction of crimes or misdemeanor (the Senate cannot convict private citizens of crimes ), Non bis in idem.

The Senate has the power to ascribe punishment to an officer of the government including barring from running for office up to impeachment upon conviction of a crime. Since Trump holds no office, he cannot be convicted by the Senate, cannot be punished by the senate. Whatever the democrats have in mind is to torture the law much as they did during the election and in the last impeachment. IMO, the Congress must first pass an amendment expressly empowering them to be able to pursue people out of office which they will never get passed as it would essentially award the Senate virtually unlimited legal power (which is kind of what Nancy is going for).

The bitch be slapped down. Fuck her.

The Senate has already impeached and tried an office holder, the secretary of war, after he no longer held the seat. He resigned right before he was impeached....trying to stop the impeachment. The congress deliberated on it, and decided to impeach him so they could prevent the crook, from ever holding office again....So they did, then 3 weeks later, as a civilian, non office holder, he wa s tried in the Senate.

This was Secretary of War, William Belknap.

 

[eagle7-31]

USSC Chief Justice John Roberts Has 'Check Out' as the Chief Justice and or as a USSC Justice at all, allowing the Socialist Democrats to do whatever they want.

Not long ago Chief Justice Roberts publicly acknowledged that Pa Democrats violated both Federal and State Constitutions and Federal and State election law by changing election laws, rules, and processes through judicial activism in the middle of an election...and then he added the USSC wanted no part in trying to fix the mess....which was his / their job.

Now Chief Justice is refusing to oversee another admitted politically partisan Democratic Party Impeachment of former Republican President Trump.

Instead, he is going to allow a Democrat run the admitted politically partisan Democratic Party Impeachment of the Republican former President.

In this case, the trial is just a formality before the 'lynching'...

...and Roberts wants no part of the entire 'shit-show's, choosing instead to just allow the '3rd-world nation' / tyranny state railroading to happen.

If he finds doing his job too much these days and can't stand firm against Socialist Democrat pressure he should have stepped down while Trump was President.

Leahy expected to preside over Trump impeachment trial instead of Chief Justice Roberts

Sen. Patrick Leahy will preside over the impeachment trial of former President Trump, signaling that Chief Justice John Roberts will not be forced to oversee the politically-charged arguments now that Trump is out of office.

www.foxnews.com

And that led to 2,2 million mail ballots counted.....problem is there were 1.8 million mailed out. Do the math,

 

[lantern2814]

Wouldn’t that mean Leahy also can not then vote when the roll call is made? That would be a blatant conflict of interest. Not that the Dems care about rules and such.

 

[meaner gene]

There is no impeachment for a former president over what some addled opposition party members feel he did while President.

If his punishment is stopped by his no longer being in office. What stops an impeached president from stalling his trial for days, weeks or even months, waiting for the end of his term in office to take place prior to their convicting him. Thus leaving no punishment congress could impose on him.

 

[toobfreak]

The Senate has already impeached and tried an office holder, the secretary of war, after he no longer held the seat.

He was not the president, the constitution specifically enumerates the president and assigns him special powers and privileges and this conviction will be fought fiercely, especially when the charge is specious and gratuitous. There was no insurrection, not even the people actually ARRESTED there are being charged as such and Trump had no hand, conscious or otherwise in directing them.

Get stuffed.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

John "Lefty" Roberts is such a fucking coward.

Someone on the left has pictures. I not sure who, but someone has pictures.

You are a conspiracy whacko too? I 'm sorry! I thought you were smarter than that.

Sometimes conspiracies are real. That being said, I was being a bit facetious. I don't know for a fact someone has incriminating pictures of Robert, but Robert does at times turn himself in contortions to give the left what they want.

Really? The ObamaCare case was the only one of significance.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Trump was i

it is first sign that Roberts might have a tiny backbone

He shows backbone by refusing to do his job? the man is a coward

He is doing his job. The Senate can't try any civilian and Trump is now a civilian.

CORRECT. Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution states: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The Constitution also allows for involuntary removal from office of the president, vice president, Cabinet secretaries, and other executive officers, as well as judges, who may be impeached by the House of Representatives and tried in the Senate.

Any official convicted by the Senate is immediately removed from office, and the Senate may also order, by a simple majority, that the removed official be forever disqualified from holding any federal office.

The Constitution makes no allowance for impeaching a person from office who HOLDS NO OFFICE and is not a civil officer of the United States. Period. End of story.


Before Nancy can have her pound of flesh, she would need to have an amendment ratified to the Constitution first making allowance for the Senate to try civilians and FORMER officers of the United States, which they cannot do as this would create a legal quandry of giving the Senate unlimited power to cross legal boundaries into civilian courts.

Trump was impeached while he was President. So the impeachment is valid.

Once impeached the Senate must put him on trial. It's up to the Senate when to schedule the trial.

The fact that he is no longer President is not relevant.

When Sen. Blount was impeached in 1797, the fact that he had already been expelled from the Senate was deemed not relevant.

U.S. Senate: Blount Expulsion

Hey dumbass! Blount ws expelled. He was also NOT the President.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The Senate has already impeached and tried an office holder, the secretary of war, after he no longer held the seat. He resigned right before he was impeached....trying to stop the impeachment. The congress deliberated on it, and decided to impeach him so they could prevent the crook, from ever holding office again....So they did, then 3 weeks later, as a civilian, non office holder, he wa s tried in the Senate.

This was Secretary of War, William Belknap.

And the Supreme Court of the era stated the action was not constitutional, but refused to take up the case.

The court was led by a coward - a John Roberts type.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

8 other Justices.

Why put an obviously partisan senator from the opposing party in charge?

That would defeat his purpose of not wanting the supreme court justices viewed as part of the partisan ranks....

The Senate president is who presides over all impeachment regardless of party affiliation of the impeached person, except for a sitting president...because the VP has a direct conflict of interest with the President.

The VP, recused herself, for conflict of interest. The rules replaces a votes, with the longest serving member, of the Senate.

The rules replaces a votes, with the longest serving member, of the Senate.

Who should also recuse himself, for the same reason

impeachment is a specific delegated partisan process, by our founders.... but a direct conflict of Interest, should still be good cause, to recuse!

Well hell's bells, you could say the whole Senate has a conflict of interest, they were all witnesses.

Besides Hawley and Cruz who were arguably co-conspirators. (-:

I think the const is clear that here has to be a "trial" in the Senate. But the issue and facts are pretty clear. The dems could agree to just submit it all in documentation and take a vote. There's no way Trump's gonna be convicted anyway. We should be focusing on getting the senate operating to pass covid relief without giving up any potential removal of the fillibuster

McConnell wants to save the party. Right now, the GoP lost their cash cow corporate donors, because of Trump's Big Lie that caused the insurrection... He also lost his Majority Leader status, he blames the selfish TRUMP for Georgia loss.

I heard this made him burning mad...in my opinion he loves his party. He wants the Republicans to be able to continue, with their younger generations.... He feels if Trump is left out there to tease about running in 2024, his GOP and future republican 2024 presidential candidates will be snuffed out, and cash deprived if Trump continues to steal the limelight....he's a ball n chain for the party's foreseeable future.....only to find in 2024 when Trump is 78, he changed his mind and won't run.

One way for the republican survival and future, is to convict and vote to keep him from ever holding office. It nips it now. Likely nips his Pac funding too. Anger from trump supporters have time to let off steam, years before the 2024 election.

If those things above are true, the closer to the vote, Mitch could basically whip 17 senators to vote to remove.

YES. I KNOW it is a long shot!!!

All we can do is hope that 17 Republican Senators will grow a spine...like the way the Grinch who stole Christmas grew a heart.....

I'm not holding my breath....

You are going to die if you do that! Good idea!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The

Roberts and the court have a Constitutional duty to put the Nazis back into their place.

Until the Supreme Court (or perhaps federal court) says the act is useless....The senate can bar Trump from running again.

No. The Constitution is not worded that way that a power exists until explicitly forbidden. The Constitution is written to expressly enumerate what powers the Senate has, and as written, forbidding an officer from ever running for office again is a power ascribed to AN OFFICER OF THE UNITED STATES UPON CONVICTION OF IMPEACHMENT which can only be done:

1. To an Officer of the United States (Trump is a civilian).
2. As a result of conviction of crimes or misdemeanor (the Senate cannot convict private citizens of crimes ), Non bis in idem.

The Senate has the power to ascribe punishment to an officer of the government including barring from running for office up to impeachment upon conviction of a crime. Since Trump holds no office, he cannot be convicted by the Senate, cannot be punished by the senate. Whatever the democrats have in mind is to torture the law much as they did during the election and in the last impeachment. IMO, the Congress must first pass an amendment expressly empowering them to be able to pursue people out of office which they will never get passed as it would essentially award the Senate virtually unlimited legal power (which is kind of what Nancy is going for).

The bitch be slapped down. Fuck her.

The Senate has tried people after they have left office several times. This is nothing new.

YOU be slapped down. FUCK YOU!!!

Really? Which President was that?

 

[Pogo]

Trump was i

it is first sign that Roberts might have a tiny backbone

He shows backbone by refusing to do his job? the man is a coward

He is doing his job. The Senate can't try any civilian and Trump is now a civilian.

CORRECT. Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution states: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The Constitution also allows for involuntary removal from office of the president, vice president, Cabinet secretaries, and other executive officers, as well as judges, who may be impeached by the House of Representatives and tried in the Senate.

Any official convicted by the Senate is immediately removed from office, and the Senate may also order, by a simple majority, that the removed official be forever disqualified from holding any federal office.

The Constitution makes no allowance for impeaching a person from office who HOLDS NO OFFICE and is not a civil officer of the United States. Period. End of story.


Before Nancy can have her pound of flesh, she would need to have an amendment ratified to the Constitution first making allowance for the Senate to try civilians and FORMER officers of the United States, which they cannot do as this would create a legal quandry of giving the Senate unlimited power to cross legal boundaries into civilian courts.

Trump was impeached while he was President. So the impeachment is valid.

Once impeached the Senate must put him on trial. It's up to the Senate when to schedule the trial.

The fact that he is no longer President is not relevant.

When Sen. Blount was impeached in 1797, the fact that he had already been expelled from the Senate was deemed not relevant.

U.S. Senate: Blount Expulsion

Hey dumbass! Blount ws expelled. He was also NOT the President.

NOR IS RUMP. DUH.