Justice Roberts says what?

[DrLove]

I have read several speculations that Roberts would want no part of this Kangaroo Court, but nothing that originated from his august lips. I personally think he would be crazy to participate but it's not my call. Having ANY Democrat preside simply adds to the illegitimacy of the proceedings.

Whilst we all know that the "trial" will be a farce, I personally favor the minimalist defense: Bring a dictionary and a copy of the Constitution.

(A). There was no "insurrection." (And of course Trump said NOTHING that would incite an insurrection), and

(B). This ain't authorized under the Constitution.

I rest my case.

It doesn't really matter, because if Trump decides to run a few years out, he could just go go any competent Federal District Court and have the conviction tossed out.

A timeline of Seditious Incitement - This covers ALL of it leading up to the Rump Riot but I'll paste January 6th.

January 6, 2021: President Trump, members of his family and supporters speak at the rally on the National Mall in Washington D.C.

Donald Trump Jr. warms up the crowd, saying of Republican lawmakers, “If you’re gonna be the zero and not the hero, we’re coming for you.”

Rudy Giuliani is next. “If we’re right, a lot of them will go to jail. So let’s have trial by combat … I’ll be darned if they’re going to take our free and fair vote…We’re going to fight to the very end to make sure that doesn’t happen.”

Finally, President Trump makes a series of incendiary statements during his speech:

“I would love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed the military, the Secret Service and we want to thank you and the police and law enforcement great you’re doing a great job, but I would love it if they could be allowed to come up with us.”

He directs them to the Capitol: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol– and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.”

“You’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”

“Something is wrong here, something is really wrong, can’t have happened and we fight, we fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

“So we are going to–we are going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we are going to the Capitol, and we are going to try and give–the Democrats are hopeless, they are never voting for anything, not even one vote but we are going to try–give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re try–going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country. So let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.”

Incitement Timeline: Year of Trump’s Actions Leading to the Attack on the Capitol

A highly detailed chronology of the year leading up to the attack on the Capitol.

www.justsecurity.org

 

[d0gbreath]

High crimes and misdemeanors. Not “because you put ketchup on steak”

Not a good argument for your side.

 

[Aldo Raine]

.....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.

WTF is your point on the SECOND Impeachment clown show????????

I am glad that ewe like your God/King trying to overthrow our government!!!

MAGA

???!!!!!!!!!hahakajjajjjahahhahahahahah
MORE babble crap from you

Did ewe actually say something?

MAGA

how many babble crap replies will you post? = you are full of shit

No I already shit ewe out!!!

MAGA MAGA

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Chief Justice John Roberts reportedly wants no part of Trump's impeachment trial (yahoo.com)

" Trump's trial is a bit of a constitutional oddity. On the one hand, it's a presidential impeachment, but on the other hand, the trial will take place after he leaves office, which is why there's a chance Roberts may have some wiggle room. "

Gee, what's Schumer going to do with his 'erection' now?

Justice Roberts could of [sic] avoided the whole impeachment trial if he would of [sic] acted on the voter fraud of the 2020 election, but no, like a establishment republican [sic] he cowardly went along with the progs and denied the voices of 75 million citizens. Fuck Justice Roberts.....

(a) there was never "voter fraud" to act on; (b) Texas has no standing to tell Pennsylvania how to run its elections; and (c) election day is over and you don't get to pile on extra votes to bring your LOSING total up to 75 million .... ESPECIALLY when in the same post you think you're gonna bring up "voter fraud".

Really....a machine flipping thousands of votes for Trump to BIDEN is a big RED FLAG?

Why wasn't those same votes flipped when they were hand counted?

 

[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.

Shameful....This is a farce....One wonders when they will schedule the public execution of the entire Trump family....?

Then we can turn NFL stadiums into execution fields where those opposing the Democrat progressives can be marched out and hung in front of the lemmings....

The Khmer Rouge is alive and well in the urban plantations.
The democrats and Hollywood are prepping for it with movies like "The Hunt" where "deplorables" are hunted.

Hollywood blockbuster that satirizes killing of ‘deplorables’ causes outrage: ‘Demented and evil’

A controversial movie about privileged vacationers hunting “deplorables” for sport is reportedly ruffling feathers more than a month before its scheduled release and after tragic mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Pogo]

Chief Justice John Roberts reportedly wants no part of Trump's impeachment trial (yahoo.com)

" Trump's trial is a bit of a constitutional oddity. On the one hand, it's a presidential impeachment, but on the other hand, the trial will take place after he leaves office, which is why there's a chance Roberts may have some wiggle room. "

Gee, what's Schumer going to do with his 'erection' now?

The impeachment is already over and doesn't involve the Chief Justice. The House does that.

And it was determined during the last impeachment attempt that the impeachment isn't official until it's delivered to the Senate....

That won't happen until Monday, January 25th....

House will send Trump impeachment article to Senate on Monday (msn.com)

So it appears that Pelosi fucked this one up too...

Trump wasn't impeached until AFTER he left office, dumbass!!!!

The article of impeachment was voted on and signed January 13. THAT's when he was impeached. If that hadn't been done ------------- there would be nothing to deliver to the Senate.

"Consider that valid", pancake.
DUH.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

.....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.

WTF is your point on the SECOND Impeachment clown show????????

I am glad that ewe like your God/King trying to overthrow our government!!!

MAGA

Govt is the lib god. Thats all they have.

tRump is yours!

MAGA

I supported him. I don't nor will I ever support Rs or Ds who have been destroying this country for decades.

 

[Pogo]

A House Impeachment and subsequent Senate Trial are in the Constiution as a way to "remove" a President.
Since Trump has already left the White House, he is no longer there to be "removed". ...

Actually what Article 1 Section 3 Clause 7 says about that is:

>> 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 Senate can do no more than remove from office and disqualify future office. In this case the first is not in play, the second is.

Everyone know they don't have the votes, and you know your tribe doesn't have the votes. It's a clown show....and you know it.

And there it is YET AGAIN.

>> However much there is a tendency to do so by the society at large, the astute professional helper avoids labeling people, for when such occurs the impetus to do so usually has come from a desire to quit learning about a person; all the things a person is now or can be in future time are efficiently discounted when such labels are affixed, the erroneous supposition being that the person has been thus essentially defined. Kierkegaard's famous line, "Once you label me, you negate me," drives the point home. << (here)​

Well you should be negated. I can't believe that your okay with your tribe and their clown show of an impeachment.
If they weren't your tribe, you wouldn't be condoning this type of behavior from them. Just embrace who you are.

And again inserting strawmen ("condoning"). Once again I've posted no value judgments, I've explained the process. But you can't handle that.

Obviously, since you've been repeatedly corrected on this and you persist, you're trolling.
Write yourself up.

Obviously, you don't know what trolling is.
The republicans are not going to let Pelosi get a win on this. Everyone on the Hill knows it, dems don't care.
It's not justice, it's a vendetta. This will end up in front of the Supreme Court. I'm sure Roberts will be listening.
In the end, no matter what you, and your tribe says, no matter how many funny emogi's you give me.
Trump will run in 2024 if he wishes, I kinda think your tribe is afraid of just that.

Not a vendetta, just something that has to be done. I do not presume you approve the attack on the Capital Building. I also presume you are aware he invited them there for the "Stop The Steal" rally that morning and saw his appeal to the crowd sending to the Capital along with hearing his lawyer and his son's word on his stage. President's do not get to pull that kind of stuff, especially trying to overthrow an election. It must be answered by the adults of both houses in one way or another, lest we see repeat, possibly every 4 years. I understand you to be in trump's corner, but at some level you know this to be true and that he brought it on himself and the rest of the country.

EXACTLY. If the entity with the power to do so (the House) does NOT impeach, they're tacitly approving it. Lack of that action declares that it's OK. Whatever happens or doesn't happen in trial, the statement MUST be made, or future POTUSes will think they can do it too.

That's exactly what the protestors were saying about the Democrat [sic] party stealing the election. There is plenty of proof to illustrate election fraud but it was suppressed by the media, the Democrat [sic] party and the supreme court. Something that corrupt needs to be addressed or it will happen again and again. Furthermore, the American peoples confidence in our voting system has been shattered and needs to be repaired. If this election was actually fair, nothing will be hurt by allowing investigations take place. And no more of this Comey bullshit where he finds Hillary guilty then comes up with some bogus bullshit for not charging her. We need to be totally open and honest.

If "we need to be totally open and honest" the FIRST thing to do is toss this unbelievable malarkey about "election fraud" into the fucking dumpster where it belongs (and came from). What was it, 64? lawsuits filed by Rooty Tooty that all went splat? Over and over and over Rooty Hairdye had to admit at the outset "no your honor we are not alleging fraud", member them? All those recounts, hand recounts, re-recounts, that showed no discrepancies at all, member them?

----------------- and you clowns wanna plant your collective flag on LITERALLY NOTHING but the imaginarium rantings of a KNOWN compulsive LIAR who's notorious for inability to deal with Reality, notorious for making shit up, notorious for not being able to handle losing, misspeaking, fucking up in any way, you wanna plant your fucking flag on THAT??? You want endless perpetual "investigations" (now serving number 65, number 66, number 67...) just to put off the pathetic inability to handle the fact that YOU LOST???

Explain to the class HOW any of that makes a damn lick of sense. When you enter into a contest, you do so with the understanding that you may --- OR MAY NOT --- win it.

Y'ALL LOST. Time to move on, Trooper.


And just a wee bit on the end, apparently you don't know this either ---- the FBI investigates. That's what the I is for. It does not prosecute. And just a wee bit on the beginning, there is no such thing, and there never has been such a thing, as the "Democrat Party".

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

The impeachment trial process is to remove a sitting president.
Trump is no longer a sitting president, he's a private citizen.
Yes, this really could end up in front of the Supreme Court.

Anyone wonder why they didn't impeach Nixon once he resigned????

You folks are pathetic.......

 

[Pogo]

A House Impeachment and subsequent Senate Trial are in the Constiution as a way to "remove" a President.
Since Trump has already left the White House, he is no longer there to be "removed". ...

Actually what Article 1 Section 3 Clause 7 says about that is:

>> 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 Senate can do no more than remove from office and disqualify future office. In this case the first is not in play, the second is.

Everyone know they don't have the votes, and you know your tribe doesn't have the votes. It's a clown show....and you know it.

And there it is YET AGAIN.

>> However much there is a tendency to do so by the society at large, the astute professional helper avoids labeling people, for when such occurs the impetus to do so usually has come from a desire to quit learning about a person; all the things a person is now or can be in future time are efficiently discounted when such labels are affixed, the erroneous supposition being that the person has been thus essentially defined. Kierkegaard's famous line, "Once you label me, you negate me," drives the point home. << (here)​

Well you should be negated. I can't believe that your okay with your tribe and their clown show of an impeachment.
If they weren't your tribe, you wouldn't be condoning this type of behavior from them. Just embrace who you are.

And again inserting strawmen ("condoning"). Once again I've posted no value judgments, I've explained the process. But you can't handle that.

Obviously, since you've been repeatedly corrected on this and you persist, you're trolling.
Write yourself up.

Obviously, you don't know what trolling is.
The republicans [sic] are not going to let Pelosi get a win on this. Everyone on the Hill knows it, dems [sic] don't care.
It's not justice, it's a vendetta. This will end up in front of the Supreme Court. I'm sure Roberts will be listening.
In the end, no matter what you, and your tribe says, no matter how many funny emogi's you give me.
Trump will run in 2024 if he wishes, I kinda think your tribe is afraid of just that.

Write yourself up AGAIN, troll.

You have no argument. Just divisive bullshit.

Divisive as in what your tribe is doing with going forward with a trial with a private citizen? That kind of divisive?
It's going to end up in the SC, and Robert's recognizes that.

Strike three, troll.

YOU have no argument. All YOU do is fling turds and strawmen.

SHOW ME where the fuck I "condoned" anything asshole. SHOW ME where the fuck I picked a "tribe".

Pretty sad when the only participant in a thread who can't resist trolling is a fucking moderator.

We sit, and we wait.

 

[Mac-7]

The impeachment is already over and doesn't involve the Chief Justice. The House does that.

What about the trial in the senate?

 

[Pogo]

You see what you want to see, Pogo/troll. I read the words from Trump, and not seeing what you and yours are seeing.
If he wanted a riot, he would have stated just that, he didn't. He was speaking how he felt about the election and the process.
That is not inciting a riot. And, what they've learned about the participants of the actual riot, tends to lean toward
the professional agitators like we've seen last summer with the mostly peaceful protests.

I find it odd how there have been all these hundreds, if not thousands of accusations here that he incited a riot, yet not so much as one single leftist hack can quote his words that actually did so. It's always "well, people say he did", or "Everybody knows he did" or some such.

I worry for our country when so many mindless partisans do not even ask one simple question -- "is this true". These true believers simply do not care. All they know is that all their little mates would kick them out of the club if they DID ask that question.

Mitch McConnell states that Trump is at fault for what happened that day and let me be clear if you believe Mitch McConnell is a leftist hack then you are nuts!

Fact is Trump didn’t do much before or during the assault on the Capitol and afterwards when he realized manyRepublicans were pissed he issued a statement, and even then his comments were wrong for the moment!!

Finally, those believing the Senate Trial is the Impeachment phase need to brush up on their U.S. Government courses and let be clear if the Senate does Convict this is no longer a leftist thing but a bipartisan thing where enough Senators from both sides said Trump was guilty!

Now with that written I will warn that if Trump is convicted it will be tossed by the USSC because is not a sitting President and he has left office...

Thank you for confirming that none of the leftist hacks here are capable of anything more than "but people say so".

Thank you for confirming that you are unable to understand the difference between the Impeachment in the House and the Senate Trial.

And

Thank you for showing the board how you believe the Democrats are the only ones wanting to punish Trump and those like you for your insurrection against the U.S. Government when it is clear many Republicans from McConnell to Cheney want some sort of punishment!

Isn’t it amazing anyone that does not drink Trump bath water must be a RINO or Leftist whore in the mind of someone like you when in fact Trump was best friends with Clinton and major donor for the Democrats for decades, so which one of us is the true leftist whore here and remember you are the one crying over Trump and not me!

Yep. The typical emotional relationship between Cult Personality and his kneepadders.

 

[Auld Phart]

The impeachment trial process is to remove a sitting president.
Trump is no longer a sitting president, he's a private citizen.
Yes, this really could end up in front of the Supreme Court.

Anyone wonder why they didn't impeach Nixon once he resigned????

You folks are pathetic.......

Pathetic is the look on Nancys goons faces walking the article of impeachment to the Senate, and being redirected to the Dead Letter Office.

 

[Pogo]

The impeachment is already over and doesn't involve the Chief Justice. The House does that.

What about the trial in the senate?

That's where the Chief Justice comes in. Supposed to.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

The impeachment is already over and doesn't involve the Chief Justice. The House does that.

What about the trial in the senate?

According to the Constitution, the chief justice doesn't have a choice....

If there is an impeachment trial, he must preside over it

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

The impeachment trial process is to remove a sitting president.
Trump is no longer a sitting president, he's a private citizen.
Yes, this really could end up in front of the Supreme Court.

Anyone wonder why they didn't impeach Nixon once he resigned????

You folks are pathetic.......

Pathetic is the look on Nancys goons faces walking the article of impeachment to the Senate, and being redirected to the Dead Letter Office.

Show me where in the Constitution does it give the Chief Justice a choice??

I'll wait

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Yall are the same goofy ass morons who thought the Vice President had a choice on whether or not he could overturn an election....

I would shut the fuck up about what you "think" the Constitution allows one to do

 

[Mac-7]

According to the Constitution, the chief justice doesn't have a choice....

If there is an impeachment trial, he must preside over it

And if he doesent are you going to impeach the the chief justice too?

 

[Auld Phart]

The impeachment trial process is to remove a sitting president.
Trump is no longer a sitting president, he's a private citizen.
Yes, this really could end up in front of the Supreme Court.

Anyone wonder why they didn't impeach Nixon once he resigned????

You folks are pathetic.......

Pathetic is the look on Nancys goons faces walking the article of impeachment to the Senate, and being redirected to the Dead Letter Office.

Show me where in the Constitution does it give the Chief Justice a choice??

I'll wait

Show me where he is required to appear for the impeachment for a non president.

 

[Pogo]

Chief Justice John Roberts reportedly wants no part of Trump's impeachment trial (yahoo.com)

" Trump's trial is a bit of a constitutional oddity. On the one hand, it's a presidential impeachment, but on the other hand, the trial will take place after he leaves office, which is why there's a chance Roberts may have some wiggle room. "

Gee, what's Schumer going to do with his 'erection' now?

Justice Roberts could of [sic] avoided the whole impeachment trial if he would of [sic] acted on the voter fraud of the 2020 election, but no, like a establishment republican [sic] he cowardly went along with the progs and denied the voices of 75 million citizens. Fuck Justice Roberts.....

(a) there was never "voter fraud" to act on; (b) Texas has no standing to tell Pennsylvania how to run its elections; and (c) election day is over and you don't get to pile on extra votes to bring your LOSING total up to 75 million .... ESPECIALLY when in the same post you think you're gonna bring up "voter fraud".

Really....a machine flipping thousands of votes for Trump to BIDEN is a big RED FLAG?

Nope. It's a BIG RED FANTASY.

Shakespeare wrote about it ---- A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying NOTHING.