Senate cannot try a private citizen !!!

[Skylar]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

You're lying again. The Constitution says there is...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Fawnboi is TILTING!

Laughing.....there is no exemption for private citizens. You've made that up. The constitution grants the Senate authority over ALL impeachment trials, with no exceptions.


"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

You ignore the constitution and imagine limits to the Senate's power that neither the Constitution nor history have ever recognized.

Good luck with that!

There's no exemption for non Apple employees from being fired from Apple computer. That's what you're arguing.

You're arguing that being fired from Apple can forbid you from ever holding office again?

If no, then clearly you're not familiar with the potential consequences of an impeachment trial.

As always, your pseudo-legal gibberish obligates no one to do anything. As Trump's impending impeachment trial demonstrates elegantly.

I can always count on you to deliberately misconstrue what I said.

What is the consequence to me of being impeached by the Senate?

It means they can then vote to disqualify him from ever holding a federal office again. As opposed to your backyard circle jerk with your buddies only results in a mess you yourself will end up cleaning.

There's no such consequence to me because I'm not a federal office holder, and neither is Trump, you fucking moron.

You get that the disqualification would apply to the future, right?

You understand the difference between the future, the past and the present, yes?

If you're impeached, you can never hold another office IN THE FUTURE. Trump has talked about running again IN THE FUTURE. And an impeachment trial conviction would prevent him from ever running again IN THE FUTURE.

Did you follow this time?

Votes are not there. Everyone knows it.

Dimwinger Temper Tantrum 2.0

And you've abandoned your blithering 'private citizen' nonsense, scrambling to a topic change.

That was easy.

 

[Nostra]

Conviction is DOA. Votes are not there.

Move on fuckwits.

The votes are indeed not there. The impeachment trial will proceed anyway.

So you admit it is just a temper tantrum.

Nope. Its an constitutionally authrorized impeachment.

Nope. A farce.

Nothing more than a temper tantrum.

 

[Faun]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

You're lying again. The Constitution says there is...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Fawnboi is TILTING!

Laughing.....there is no exemption for private citizens. You've made that up. The constitution grants the Senate authority over ALL impeachment trials, with no exceptions.


"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

You ignore the constitution and imagine limits to the Senate's power that neither the Constitution nor history have ever recognized.

Good luck with that!

There's no exemption for non Apple employees from being fired from Apple computer. That's what you're arguing.

You're arguing that being fired from Apple can forbid you from ever holding office again?

If no, then clearly you're not familiar with the potential consequences of an impeachment trial.

As always, your pseudo-legal gibberish obligates no one to do anything. As Trump's impending impeachment trial demonstrates elegantly.

I can always count on you to deliberately misconstrue what I said.

What is the consequence to me of being impeached by the Senate?

It means they can then vote to disqualify him from ever holding a federal office again. As opposed to your backyard circle jerk with your buddies only results in a mess you yourself will end up cleaning.

There's no such consequence to me because I'm not a federal office holder, and neither is Trump, you fucking moron.

LOLOL

Read it again, this time for clarity...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

... now show where "ALL" excludes private citizens or you're merely proving yet again that you're nothing but a fucking moron.

 

[Skylar]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

You're lying again. The Constitution says there is...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Fawnboi is TILTING!

Laughing.....there is no exemption for private citizens. You've made that up. The constitution grants the Senate authority over ALL impeachment trials, with no exceptions.


"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

You ignore the constitution and imagine limits to the Senate's power that neither the Constitution nor history have ever recognized.

Good luck with that!

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

LOL

I like how you're trying to redefine the word, "ALL."

Never used the word “all”, Dumbfuck.

Keep TILTING, Fawnboi.

The Constitution certainly does.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

Not 'all impeachment trials except whatever Nostra makes up'. But all impeachment trials. If someone has been impeached, then the senate has the sole power over their impeachment trial.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment AND William Belknap.

Keep running, Troll. The constitution doesn't change just because you ignore it.

You're posting non sequiturs. William Belknap was not legally impeached. The only thing "impending" with rerad to Trump is a Democrat circus.

Impeachment isn't a legal process. He was Constitutionally impeached. Just like Twice Impeached Trump. And just like Belknap, Twice Impeached Trump will be tried in the Senate, just like the Constitution authorizes.

Prove it was constitutional. What was the penalty he suffered?

Belknap wasn't legally impeached....says you, citing yourself.

Belknap was legally impeached, says the US Senate.

Alas, the Constitution definitely picks a team on who has the authority to make that call:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

And as predictable as Trump's impeachment trial.......your argument devolves into you, once again, insisting that your imagination is the sole legal authority to which all the law is bound.

Shocker.

<YAWN!>

You're reguritating the same talking points over and over again.

And by the 'same talking points', you mean what the constitution ACTUALLY says? Yeah, I am.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

I quote the constitution, you quote yourself. Our sources are not equal.

 

[Faun]

Poor Fawnboi. He is losing it today.

It's not possible to lose to someone who can't stop lying as you are doing.

 

[Nostra]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

You're lying again. The Constitution says there is...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Fawnboi is TILTING!

Laughing.....there is no exemption for private citizens. You've made that up. The constitution grants the Senate authority over ALL impeachment trials, with no exceptions.


"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

You ignore the constitution and imagine limits to the Senate's power that neither the Constitution nor history have ever recognized.

Good luck with that!

There's no exemption for non Apple employees from being fired from Apple computer. That's what you're arguing.

You're arguing that being fired from Apple can forbid you from ever holding office again?

If no, then clearly you're not familiar with the potential consequences of an impeachment trial.

As always, your pseudo-legal gibberish obligates no one to do anything. As Trump's impending impeachment trial demonstrates elegantly.

I can always count on you to deliberately misconstrue what I said.

What is the consequence to me of being impeached by the Senate?

It means they can then vote to disqualify him from ever holding a federal office again. As opposed to your backyard circle jerk with your buddies only results in a mess you yourself will end up cleaning.

There's no such consequence to me because I'm not a federal office holder, and neither is Trump, you fucking moron.

You get that the disqualification would apply to the future, right?

You understand the difference between the future, the past and the present, yes?

If you're impeached, you can never hold another office IN THE FUTURE. Trump has talked about running again IN THE FUTURE. And an impeachment trial conviction would prevent him from ever running again IN THE FUTURE.

Did you follow this time?

Votes are not there. Everyone knows it.

Dimwinger Temper Tantrum 2.0

And you've abandoned your blithering 'private citizen' nonsense, scrambling to a topic change.

That was easy.

Nope. Still unconstitutional....and a temper tantrum.

 

[Nostra]

Poor Fawnboi. He is losing it today.

It's not possible to lose to someone who can't stop lying as you are doing.

 

[Faun]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

LOLOL

Nowhere does the Constitution say that. You're fucking hallucinating again. Want proof...?

Quote the Constitution saying the Senate shall preside over impeaching the president.....

quit being anal retentive. Evryone knows what I meant. You pretend you don't because you know you've lost this argument.

You're a fucking moron... try quoting the part you "meant"... you'll still prove yourself to be the fucking moron the forum knows you to be....

You've already thoroughly embarassed yourself. There's no need for me to double down on your humiliation.

Laughing...says the poor dip that made up a passage in the Constitution that doesn't exist to support his failed argument.....while ignoring that the constitution actually says.

Here's the ACTUAL constitution:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

There's no caveats or exemptions from that Senate's authority over impeachment trials. You imagined it.

I made up nothing:

"When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside"​

Try quoting the relevant passage.

Again, fucking moron, that only determines "when" a Chief Justice presides. It doesn't determine who can be tried. Your stupidity knows no boundaries.

 

[Skylar]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

You're lying again. The Constitution says there is...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Fawnboi is TILTING!

Laughing.....there is no exemption for private citizens. You've made that up. The constitution grants the Senate authority over ALL impeachment trials, with no exceptions.


"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

You ignore the constitution and imagine limits to the Senate's power that neither the Constitution nor history have ever recognized.

Good luck with that!

There's no exemption for non Apple employees from being fired from Apple computer. That's what you're arguing.

You're arguing that being fired from Apple can forbid you from ever holding office again?

If no, then clearly you're not familiar with the potential consequences of an impeachment trial.

As always, your pseudo-legal gibberish obligates no one to do anything. As Trump's impending impeachment trial demonstrates elegantly.

I can always count on you to deliberately misconstrue what I said.

What is the consequence to me of being impeached by the Senate?

It means they can then vote to disqualify him from ever holding a federal office again. As opposed to your backyard circle jerk with your buddies only results in a mess you yourself will end up cleaning.

There's no such consequence to me because I'm not a federal office holder, and neither is Trump, you fucking moron.

You get that the disqualification would apply to the future, right?

You understand the difference between the future, the past and the present, yes?

If you're impeached, you can never hold another office IN THE FUTURE. Trump has talked about running again IN THE FUTURE. And an impeachment trial conviction would prevent him from ever running again IN THE FUTURE.

Did you follow this time?

Votes are not there. Everyone knows it.

Dimwinger Temper Tantrum 2.0

And you've abandoned your blithering 'private citizen' nonsense, scrambling to a topic change.

That was easy.

Nope. Still unconstitutional....and a temper tantrum.

Oh, its absolutelyy constitutional. As the exemptions you made up to the Senate's authority over impeachment trials don't exist. The senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials. Not just the one's you imagine they do. Says who?

Says the US Constitution:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

Try again, Troll.

 

[toobfreak]

You've been sold a bill of goods by your mind control handlers...
NONE, ZIP, ZERO of those cases rejected by the court, brought by Trump team lawyers to court, involved any CLAIMS OF VOTER FRAUD.

Seems the government disagrees with you that the election was on the up and up, that there was no evidence, that the claims of cheating are "baseless," and someone is going to get to the bottom of it.

 

[Faun]

Poor Fawnboi. He is losing it today.

It's not possible to lose to someone who can't stop lying as you are doing.

 

[Faun]

No, not just "ever held." If you are currently not holding a federal office, you can't be impeached.

LOL

Fucking moron, Twice Impeached Trump was already impeached while he was president. You're hallucinating again.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Nope! They are under investigation for being TRUMP sympathizers...

Trump "sympathizers"? Nothing authoritarian or fascist about that....right?
When did we turn into the CCP? Or do you imagine it's some sort of crime to
politically support Trump?

They apparently imagine that it SHOULD be.

 

[Skylar]

You've been sold a bill of goods by your mind control handlers...
NONE, ZIP, ZERO of those cases rejected by the court, brought by Trump team lawyers to court, involved any CLAIMS OF VOTER FRAUD.

Seems the government disagrees with you that the election was on the up and up, that there was no evidence, that the claims of cheating are "baseless," and someone is going to get to the bottom of it.

Rand Paul is 'the government'?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

You're lying again. The Constitution says there is...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Fawnboi is TILTING!

Laughing.....there is no exemption for private citizens. You've made that up. The constitution grants the Senate authority over ALL impeachment trials, with no exceptions.


"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

You ignore the constitution and imagine limits to the Senate's power that neither the Constitution nor history have ever recognized.

Good luck with that!

There's no exemption for non Apple employees from being fired from Apple computer. That's what you're arguing.

You're arguing that being fired from Apple can forbid you from ever holding office again?

If no, then clearly you're not familiar with the potential consequences of an impeachment trial.

As always, your pseudo-legal gibberish obligates no one to do anything. As Trump's impending impeachment trial demonstrates elegantly.

I can always count on you to deliberately misconstrue what I said.

What is the consequence to me of being impeached by the Senate?

It means they can then vote to disqualify him from ever holding a federal office again. As opposed to your backyard circle jerk with your buddies only results in a mess you yourself will end up cleaning.

There's no such consequence to me because I'm not a federal office holder, and neither is Trump, you fucking moron.

You get that the disqualification would apply to the future, right?

You understand the difference between the future, the past and the present, yes?

If you're impeached, you can never hold another office IN THE FUTURE. Trump has talked about running again IN THE FUTURE. And an impeachment trial conviction would prevent him from ever running again IN THE FUTURE.

Did you follow this time?

Votes are not there. Everyone knows it.

Dimwinger Temper Tantrum 2.0

And you've abandoned your blithering 'private citizen' nonsense, scrambling to a topic change.

That was easy.

Nope. Still unconstitutional....and a temper tantrum.

Oh, its absolutelyy constitutional. As the exemptions you made up to the Senate's authority over impeachment trials don't exist. The senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials. Not just the one's you imagine they do. Says who?

Says the US Constitution:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

Try again, Troll.

"It's Constitutional because I WAAAAAANT IIIIIIT!!"

Impeachment
A process that is used to charge, try, and remove public officials for misconduct while in office.

impeachment

Definition of impeachment in the Legal Dictionary by The Free Dictionary

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

It's a bitch when all those messy words you tried to use to get what you want turn out to actually mean things.

Try again, troll. And the next time you want to quote the Constitution, try to understand what it says.

 

[Nostra]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

You're lying again. The Constitution says there is...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Fawnboi is TILTING!

Laughing.....there is no exemption for private citizens. You've made that up. The constitution grants the Senate authority over ALL impeachment trials, with no exceptions.


"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

You ignore the constitution and imagine limits to the Senate's power that neither the Constitution nor history have ever recognized.

Good luck with that!

There's no exemption for non Apple employees from being fired from Apple computer. That's what you're arguing.

You're arguing that being fired from Apple can forbid you from ever holding office again?

If no, then clearly you're not familiar with the potential consequences of an impeachment trial.

As always, your pseudo-legal gibberish obligates no one to do anything. As Trump's impending impeachment trial demonstrates elegantly.

I can always count on you to deliberately misconstrue what I said.

What is the consequence to me of being impeached by the Senate?

It means they can then vote to disqualify him from ever holding a federal office again. As opposed to your backyard circle jerk with your buddies only results in a mess you yourself will end up cleaning.

There's no such consequence to me because I'm not a federal office holder, and neither is Trump, you fucking moron.

You get that the disqualification would apply to the future, right?

You understand the difference between the future, the past and the present, yes?

If you're impeached, you can never hold another office IN THE FUTURE. Trump has talked about running again IN THE FUTURE. And an impeachment trial conviction would prevent him from ever running again IN THE FUTURE.

Did you follow this time?

Votes are not there. Everyone knows it.

Dimwinger Temper Tantrum 2.0

And you've abandoned your blithering 'private citizen' nonsense, scrambling to a topic change.

That was easy.

Nope. Still unconstitutional....and a temper tantrum.

Oh, its absolutelyy constitutional. As the exemptions you made up to the Senate's authority over impeachment trials don't exist. The senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials. Not just the one's you imagine they do. Says who?

Says the US Constitution:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

Try again, Troll.

Unconstitutional temper tantrum.

 

[366h34d]

So what? Neither did Johnson's nor Clinton's. It's still a stain on a presidency that can't be washed away.

There have been four presidential impeachments. And half of them were Trump.

YOu are right. He has 2. However, it just shows you how wrong the process was?

Oh? Why is that?

Do you think impeachment is for jaywalking?

No, now why didn't you answer the question I asked? Why was the impeachment process wrong?

Nothing wrong with the process. Impeachment is a tool to remove an official without assassin the official because he/she is incompetent or moralless. Now, someone just devalues it.

 

[Nostra]

No, not just "ever held." If you are currently not holding a federal office, you can't be impeached.

LOL

Fucking moron, Twice Impeached Trump was already impeached while he was president. You're hallucinating again.

 

[Skylar]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

You're lying again. The Constitution says there is...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Fawnboi is TILTING!

Laughing.....there is no exemption for private citizens. You've made that up. The constitution grants the Senate authority over ALL impeachment trials, with no exceptions.


"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

You ignore the constitution and imagine limits to the Senate's power that neither the Constitution nor history have ever recognized.

Good luck with that!

There's no exemption for non Apple employees from being fired from Apple computer. That's what you're arguing.

You're arguing that being fired from Apple can forbid you from ever holding office again?

If no, then clearly you're not familiar with the potential consequences of an impeachment trial.

As always, your pseudo-legal gibberish obligates no one to do anything. As Trump's impending impeachment trial demonstrates elegantly.

I can always count on you to deliberately misconstrue what I said.

What is the consequence to me of being impeached by the Senate?

It means they can then vote to disqualify him from ever holding a federal office again. As opposed to your backyard circle jerk with your buddies only results in a mess you yourself will end up cleaning.

There's no such consequence to me because I'm not a federal office holder, and neither is Trump, you fucking moron.

You get that the disqualification would apply to the future, right?

You understand the difference between the future, the past and the present, yes?

If you're impeached, you can never hold another office IN THE FUTURE. Trump has talked about running again IN THE FUTURE. And an impeachment trial conviction would prevent him from ever running again IN THE FUTURE.

Did you follow this time?

Votes are not there. Everyone knows it.

Dimwinger Temper Tantrum 2.0

And you've abandoned your blithering 'private citizen' nonsense, scrambling to a topic change.

That was easy.

Nope. Still unconstitutional....and a temper tantrum.

Oh, its absolutelyy constitutional. As the exemptions you made up to the Senate's authority over impeachment trials don't exist. The senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials. Not just the one's you imagine they do. Says who?

Says the US Constitution:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

Try again, Troll.

Unconstitutional temper tantrum.

A thoroughly constitutional impeachment. So far, the most bipartisan presidential impeachment in US history.

 

[bripat9643]

Conviction is DOA. Votes are not there.

Move on fuckwits.

The votes are indeed not there. The impeachment trial will proceed anyway.

So you admit it is just a temper tantrum.

Nope. Its an constitutionally authrorized impeachment.

NOT.