Roberts wasn't corrupt enough so Dems appoint Leahy to preside over impeachment

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
22,707
Reaction score
18,368
Points
2,415
If Roberts won't do it, and you don't want Leahy to preside, or anyone else who is affiliated with a U.S. political party, who ya gonna call? Queen Elizabeth?
How about just calling off the whole charade?
It's not a "charade." The guy was a criminal when he was in office, and he must be held accountable, regardless of the fact that he no longer is in office.

Remember that trump just totally ignored everyone who didn't vote for him when he was in office and just bad-mouthed them, and millions did not vote for him, considering that he did not win the majority vote in either the 2016 or 2020 elections. He would not even submit to Congress' lawful oversight.
What happened to him being charged criminally the minute he was out of office? That’s how crimes are handled for a private citizen.
 

Cecilie1200

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
50,286
Reaction score
12,226
Points
2,180
Roberts should have done it, but let's face it. No matter who presides, the right would be screaming about it. It's what they do.
Why "should" Roberts have done it? What do you think you "know" that he doesn't?

And you're damned right we'd be screaming about it no matter what. And since what the left does is dream up insane new abuses of power and then send compliant mindless drones like you out to parrot talking points about how it's "perfectly normal, nothing to see here", opposing your shit very much is what we do.
He should have done it because "When the president is tried, the chief justice shall preside.”

T**** was President when he was impeached and he is being tried for acts committed while he was the President. I don't see how a sitting senator from either side can be considered impartial. He acts as referee. It's like having a pitcher's mom be umpire in the World Series.
Except that the President isn't being tried. I don't know if you noticed, but Donald Trump stopped being President on January 20.

Yes, he was President when he was "impeached". And now he isn't, which makes the "impeachment" a moot point. The purpose of impeachment - real impeachment, not the made-for-TV vengeance ritual the Democrats are engaged in - is to remove an elected official from office. Since term limits have already accomplished this purpose, your masters are just wasting the taxpayers' time and money to advance their petty political goals and to divert attention from the fact that they can't make good on any of the pie-in-the-sky bullshit they sold to gullible morons like you in the campaign.
 

Leo123

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
11,732
Reaction score
5,319
Points
400
If Roberts won't do it, and you don't want Leahy to preside, or anyone else who is affiliated with a U.S. political party, who ya gonna call? Queen Elizabeth?
How about just calling off the whole charade?
It's not a "charade." The guy was a criminal when he was in office, and he must be held accountable, regardless of the fact that he no longer is in office.

Remember that trump just totally ignored everyone who didn't vote for him when he was in office and just bad-mouthed them, and millions did not vote for him, considering that he did not win the majority vote in either the 2016 or 2020 elections. He would not even submit to Congress' lawful oversight.
How was Trump a criminal? Trump didn’t badmouth anybody in fact, he helped a lot of people including a lot of blacks. His economy was also great and he created a lot of jobs until the Democrats used the pandemic to shut everyone’s livlihood down. It’s really the Democrats who are criminals
 

Leo123

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
11,732
Reaction score
5,319
Points
400
If Roberts won't do it, and you don't want Leahy to preside, or anyone else who is affiliated with a U.S. political party, who ya gonna call? Queen Elizabeth?
How about just calling off the whole charade?
It's not a "charade." The guy was a criminal when he was in office, and he must be held accountable, regardless of the fact that he no longer is in office.

Remember that trump just totally ignored everyone who didn't vote for him when he was in office and just bad-mouthed them, and millions did not vote for him, considering that he did not win the majority vote in either the 2016 or 2020 elections. He would not even submit to Congress' lawful oversight.
What happened to him being charged criminally the minute he was out of office? That’s how crimes are handled for a private citizen.
There were no crimes.
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
44,549
Reaction score
10,802
Points
2,040

Might as well appointed George Soros.
Roberts bailed on his own.
Nope... Roberts told them that what they are doing is unconstitutional...Then refused to play their game....
You're gonna hafta provide a quote for that.
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
44,549
Reaction score
10,802
Points
2,040

Might as well appointed George Soros.
Roberts bailed on his own.
Nope... Roberts told them that what they are doing is unconstitutional...Then refused to play their game....
You would think having Chief Justice Roberts say, "No thanks. I don't believe I'll participate" would be a red flag to these people, but apparently not.
Why?
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
44,549
Reaction score
10,802
Points
2,040

Might as well appointed George Soros.
Roberts bailed on his own.
Nope... Roberts told them that what they are doing is unconstitutional...Then refused to play their game....
You would think having Chief Justice Roberts say, "No thanks. I don't believe I'll participate" would be a red flag to these people, but apparently not.
You don't get to make the rules for a senate trial of a former president.
No such thing.
Yeah? Hide and watch, kid.
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
22,707
Reaction score
18,368
Points
2,415

Might as well appointed George Soros.
Roberts bailed on his own.
Nope... Roberts told them that what they are doing is unconstitutional...Then refused to play their game....
You would think having Chief Justice Roberts say, "No thanks. I don't believe I'll participate" would be a red flag to these people, but apparently not.
You don't get to make the rules for a senate trial of a former president.
No such thing.
Yeah? Hide and watch, kid.
I will watch the farce. It won’t be Constitutional in any way, but you clowns will beat off to it.
 

Polishprince

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
28,127
Reaction score
14,095
Points
1,415

Might as well appointed George Soros.
Roberts bailed on his own.
Nope... Roberts told them that what they are doing is unconstitutional...Then refused to play their game....
You would think having Chief Justice Roberts say, "No thanks. I don't believe I'll participate" would be a red flag to these people, but apparently not.
You don't get to make the rules for a senate trial of a former president.
No such thing.
Yeah? Hide and watch, kid.
I will watch the farce. It won’t be Constitutional in any way, but you clowns will beat off to it.

Considering the fact that President Trump will be officially exonerated by the event, I can't see a downside.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top