- Nov 14, 2011
- 122,988
- 74,283
- 2,635
You failed to address my question.... where does the Constitution afford due process on non-legal matters?In other words, not the same thing. On the one hand, you want us to believe that Schiff's kangaroo court is some kind of legal process observing due process, and on the other you want to take all the rules of due process and throw them out the window. You can't have it both ways, turd.That's why I said, "essentially," ya lying fucking moron.You already admitted it's not the same thing. The fact that Trump isn't getting due process couldn't be more obvious.There's been no trial yet, lying fucking moron. What part of that escapes your lying fucking moronicship?So it's the same thing, only not."Essentially" as in the same thing with the exception that it's outside the Judiciary. Indictment is a formal criminal charge where due process grants a criminal trial; while impeachment is a formal procedural charge where due process grants a procedural trial.
There is no due process in Schiff's kangaroo court.
The only difference is one is regarding legal matters while the other is political matters.
But since you want to harp on that difference, show where the Constitution grants due process to non-legal matters....