Senate cannot try a private citizen !!!

[Nostra]

One more time

Nostra You're talking in circles as always.

A. Trump was President when Impeached in the House

B. He is now a private citizen but that does not protect him. Private citizens have been both Impeached and tried in the past

C. Since he is NOW a private citizen the CJ of SCOTUS is not required for the Senate trial. MANY non Presidents have been Impeached and tried in the Senate with either the VP or the President Pro Tem presiding.

So just shut the fuck up.

You're wrong and you're lying and Trolling

Links have been provided on this thread to support all of that

Funny to watch you clowns try to get out of the corners I back you into,

 

[Skylar]

One more time

Nostra You're talking in circles as always.

A. Trump was President when Impeached in the House

B. He is now a private citizen but that does not protect him. Private citizens have been both Impeached and tried in the past

C. Since he is NOW a private citizen the CJ of SCOTUS is not required for the Senate trial. MANY non Presidents have been Impeached and tried in the Senate with either the VP or the President Pro Tem presiding.

So just shut the fuck up.

You're wrong and you're lying and Trolling

Links have been provided on this thread to support all of that

Funny to watch you clowns try to get out of the corners I back you into,

Laughing......we'll laugh together as Trump is lawfully tried in the Senate in his impeachment trial. Just like William Belknap was tried after he left office before him.

So much for your imagination, eh Troll?

 

[BS Filter]

Senator Leahy is home. He was drunk and scared some people because his speech was slurred. He's gonna sleep it off and be back as the presiding judge tomorrow. Harumph harumph.

 

[Nostra]

One more time

Nostra You're talking in circles as always.

A. Trump was President when Impeached in the House

B. He is now a private citizen but that does not protect him. Private citizens have been both Impeached and tried in the past

C. Since he is NOW a private citizen the CJ of SCOTUS is not required for the Senate trial. MANY non Presidents have been Impeached and tried in the Senate with either the VP or the President Pro Tem presiding.

So just shut the fuck up.

You're wrong and you're lying and Trolling

Links have been provided on this thread to support all of that

Funny to watch you clowns try to get out of the corners I back you into,

Laughing......we'll laugh together as Trump is lawfully tried in the Senate in his impeachment trial. Just like William Belknap was tried after he left office before him.

So much for your imagination, eh Troll?

 

[Skylar]

One more time

Nostra You're talking in circles as always.

A. Trump was President when Impeached in the House

B. He is now a private citizen but that does not protect him. Private citizens have been both Impeached and tried in the past

C. Since he is NOW a private citizen the CJ of SCOTUS is not required for the Senate trial. MANY non Presidents have been Impeached and tried in the Senate with either the VP or the President Pro Tem presiding.

So just shut the fuck up.

You're wrong and you're lying and Trolling

Links have been provided on this thread to support all of that

Funny to watch you clowns try to get out of the corners I back you into,

Laughing......we'll laugh together as Trump is lawfully tried in the Senate in his impeachment trial. Just like William Belknap was tried after he left office before him.

So much for your imagination, eh Troll?

Laughing....keep ignoring the Constitution, precedent and reality.

Its not like Trump's impeachment trial will magically disappear. You guys tried that with the election already.

Try again, Troll.

 

[Nostra]

One more time

Nostra You're talking in circles as always.

A. Trump was President when Impeached in the House

B. He is now a private citizen but that does not protect him. Private citizens have been both Impeached and tried in the past

C. Since he is NOW a private citizen the CJ of SCOTUS is not required for the Senate trial. MANY non Presidents have been Impeached and tried in the Senate with either the VP or the President Pro Tem presiding.

So just shut the fuck up.

You're wrong and you're lying and Trolling

Links have been provided on this thread to support all of that

Funny to watch you clowns try to get out of the corners I back you into,

Laughing......we'll laugh together as Trump is lawfully tried in the Senate in his impeachment trial. Just like William Belknap was tried after he left office before him.

So much for your imagination, eh Troll?

Laughing....keep ignoring the Constitution, precedent and reality.

Its not like Trump's impeachment trial will magically disappear. You guys tried that with the election already.

Try again, Troll.

I’m the only one actually quoting the Constitution, Stupid.

 

[Skylar]

One more time

Nostra You're talking in circles as always.

A. Trump was President when Impeached in the House

B. He is now a private citizen but that does not protect him. Private citizens have been both Impeached and tried in the past

C. Since he is NOW a private citizen the CJ of SCOTUS is not required for the Senate trial. MANY non Presidents have been Impeached and tried in the Senate with either the VP or the President Pro Tem presiding.

So just shut the fuck up.

You're wrong and you're lying and Trolling

Links have been provided on this thread to support all of that

Funny to watch you clowns try to get out of the corners I back you into,

Laughing......we'll laugh together as Trump is lawfully tried in the Senate in his impeachment trial. Just like William Belknap was tried after he left office before him.

So much for your imagination, eh Troll?

Laughing....keep ignoring the Constitution, precedent and reality.

Its not like Trump's impeachment trial will magically disappear. You guys tried that with the election already.

Try again, Troll.

I’m the only one actually quoting the Constitution, Stupid.

And it doesn't say a THING that you do. As the only requirements you've cited in the Constitution.....are for the Chief Justice.

Not for the Senate. And not for the Impeachment Trial.

Here's the Constitution yet again:

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

Trump was impeached. Thus, the senate has the sole power to try him in his impeachment trial. Your 'private citizen' batshit is just your imagination. There is no such restriction in the Constitution of the Senate's power to try impeachments. As demonstrated by the impeachment trial of William Belknap AFTER he left office.

Remember, you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

I believe this point was made the first three times you posted it. It's not necessary to do so again.

 

[Skylar]

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

I believe this point was made the first three times you posted it. It's not necessary to do so again.

The problem with that 'point' is that's a restriction on the chief justice. Not the Senate. Nor the impeachment trial.

There's nothing that prevents senate impeachment trials of those who have left office. If someone has been impeached, the Senate has sole authority over their impeachment trial.

As the impeachment trial of William Belknap demonstrated elegantly.......when he was tried by the senate AFTER he left office. The only requirement for an impeachment trial is that someone be impeached.

Exactly as Trump was. That he's no longer President only means that Roberts isn't required to preside over his trial.

 

[Care4all]

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

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

Get stuffed.

Trump had everything to do with it.... He seeded the big lie, and egged it on.

As far as your c l aim the President is different than the vp and office holders......your claim, has no legs.

The constitution's impeachment clause is written with all three positions are held equally, in the same sentence regarding impeachment.



The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Very nice. Trump is no longer in office. They are scared he will run again and it will be much harder to defraud him a second time. That is the truth, try admitting it.

They are most certainly trying to strip him from being able to run for any office, ever again. It's the sole purpose for the impeachment, even after he no longer held the office. No one is hiding that purpose.

Then that would fail since this process is unconstitutional

What process is unconstitutional? Impeachment?

There is no Mulligan for a President or any office holder, committing an abusive or criminal act, 2 weeks from leaving office.... impeachment does not just disappear because the abuse took place two weeks from leaving.

You cannot remove what is not there. Democrats have conducted a four year sideshow. If anybody embarrasses this country it is those assholes.

There are two separate votes required to complete a Senate impeachment trial.

One VOTE to convict and remove from office or not. Takes 2/3s voting to convict.

And the second, separate vote required, which only requires a majority vote, not the 2/3s vote, is whether or not to strip those impeached, from ever holding office again.

You can't vote to strip him from holding office again, without the impeachment trial, and that vote cast...

Thus, his holding office or not, matters naught....

Why are they so scared of one man? This much fuss you can bet he was working for the people. That is not done in DC. He had to be doing something right and that is not done in DC either.

You have admitted fraud by hiding evidence and censorship of the topic. You know you cannot beat him in a fair election. That is what you are admitting now. How is that serving the people like the government should?

We did beat him, by a landslide...7 million plus votes and 306 to 232 electoral votes.

Trump concocted the Big Lie, that the election was stolen from him months before the election was held, when his internal polling told him he was going to lose big-time to Biden.

You defrauded Trump. There was massive fraud and now a massive cover up that has failed.

There truly and honestly was no massive voter fraud. You've been convinced there was... I can see that...but you've been conned, by a bunch of con artists...God as my witness!

There truly and honestly was no massive voter fraud.

No. There was truly and honestly massive fraud. Biden is a BOGUS POTUS.

Then tell me exactly what massive voter fraud took place, in at least 3 to 4 of these contentious battle ground, that would have been enough, to over turn that state's election.

There have been so many bogus claims that truly have been debunked, many because procedures were just misunderstood and even twisted to appear bad, when they weren't.

But if there are any that I may not have researched yet, I'd like to know them...So I can dig in to the details.

The Trump team of lawyers have act u ally not brought any actual fraud cases to court. All those cases that dems remind trumpets they lost in court were not fraud cases, but election law procedural issues... and they brought the same procedural issues to as many as ten states, losing in all of them, because the relief they were asking in every one of those cases, was to invalidate ALL absentee ballots in a county with a big city, and mostly minority voters, legally and constitutionally granted the rig h t to vote...because a handful of absentee ballot envelopes May have had a signature not checked, and things like that...and the case Judges basically said, ARE YOU CRAZY? to the Trump lawyers.

No cases of vote switching, or Dominion voting machine irregularities, or milktary swat teams capturing voter servers in Germany, or ballot stuffing, or any of the accusations made by Giuliani and team, in your right wing media was brought to court, by Giuliani and team....not one....ask yourself why not even one?

My bet is the law teams know if they presented a known bogus claim to the court, they could lose their law licences or censured in the least.

---------

Trump has to overturn too many states, to even come close to winning enough electoral votes... It's an impossible task, imo.

The voter fraud took place in six swing states. Witnesses and data prove the fraud. You are lying, I am not.

Why was the data that you claim proved such, never brought to court in a suit, by Giuliani or Powel or any of his legal teams?

Why wasn't this data turned over to the administration's cyber security, or brought to AG Barr at the DOJ showing this claim of voter fraud and have his prosecutors get the fbi to investigate?

Why wasn't this evidence of fraud brought before the FEC. Federal Election commission, who handles elections??

Why wasn't this evidence that trump legal team has of fraud brought before each of those 6 States, Secretary of State?

None of that was done lastamender... nothing was ever turned over to the courts, or cyber security, or to the States, or to the Doj prosecutors Barr told in each State to help investigate any fraud, or the fbi, or election commission.....

....to me, that's an alarm going off, that something just ain't right about that.... It's a tale tell sign that this so called solid data evidence that proves it, as you and many many others are claiming, isn't solid evidence at all...

And they've never gone to court with it, because the evidence doesn't really exist...and they don't want to be laughed out of court,

And their CON job on you all, ended by it....exposed.

 

[Lastamender]

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

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

Get stuffed.

Trump had everything to do with it.... He seeded the big lie, and egged it on.

As far as your c l aim the President is different than the vp and office holders......your claim, has no legs.

The constitution's impeachment clause is written with all three positions are held equally, in the same sentence regarding impeachment.



The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Very nice. Trump is no longer in office. They are scared he will run again and it will be much harder to defraud him a second time. That is the truth, try admitting it.

They are most certainly trying to strip him from being able to run for any office, ever again. It's the sole purpose for the impeachment, even after he no longer held the office. No one is hiding that purpose.

Then that would fail since this process is unconstitutional

What process is unconstitutional? Impeachment?

There is no Mulligan for a President or any office holder, committing an abusive or criminal act, 2 weeks from leaving office.... impeachment does not just disappear because the abuse took place two weeks from leaving.

You cannot remove what is not there. Democrats have conducted a four year sideshow. If anybody embarrasses this country it is those assholes.

There are two separate votes required to complete a Senate impeachment trial.

One VOTE to convict and remove from office or not. Takes 2/3s voting to convict.

And the second, separate vote required, which only requires a majority vote, not the 2/3s vote, is whether or not to strip those impeached, from ever holding office again.

You can't vote to strip him from holding office again, without the impeachment trial, and that vote cast...

Thus, his holding office or not, matters naught....

Why are they so scared of one man? This much fuss you can bet he was working for the people. That is not done in DC. He had to be doing something right and that is not done in DC either.

You have admitted fraud by hiding evidence and censorship of the topic. You know you cannot beat him in a fair election. That is what you are admitting now. How is that serving the people like the government should?

We did beat him, by a landslide...7 million plus votes and 306 to 232 electoral votes.

Trump concocted the Big Lie, that the election was stolen from him months before the election was held, when his internal polling told him he was going to lose big-time to Biden.

You defrauded Trump. There was massive fraud and now a massive cover up that has failed.

There truly and honestly was no massive voter fraud. You've been convinced there was... I can see that...but you've been conned, by a bunch of con artists...God as my witness!

There truly and honestly was no massive voter fraud.

No. There was truly and honestly massive fraud. Biden is a BOGUS POTUS.

Then tell me exactly what massive voter fraud took place, in at least 3 to 4 of these contentious battle ground, that would have been enough, to over turn that state's election.

There have been so many bogus claims that truly have been debunked, many because procedures were just misunderstood and even twisted to appear bad, when they weren't.

But if there are any that I may not have researched yet, I'd like to know them...So I can dig in to the details.

The Trump team of lawyers have act u ally not brought any actual fraud cases to court. All those cases that dems remind trumpets they lost in court were not fraud cases, but election law procedural issues... and they brought the same procedural issues to as many as ten states, losing in all of them, because the relief they were asking in every one of those cases, was to invalidate ALL absentee ballots in a county with a big city, and mostly minority voters, legally and constitutionally granted the rig h t to vote...because a handful of absentee ballot envelopes May have had a signature not checked, and things like that...and the case Judges basically said, ARE YOU CRAZY? to the Trump lawyers.

No cases of vote switching, or Dominion voting machine irregularities, or milktary swat teams capturing voter servers in Germany, or ballot stuffing, or any of the accusations made by Giuliani and team, in your right wing media was brought to court, by Giuliani and team....not one....ask yourself why not even one?

My bet is the law teams know if they presented a known bogus claim to the court, they could lose their law licences or censured in the least.

---------

Trump has to overturn too many states, to even come close to winning enough electoral votes... It's an impossible task, imo.

The voter fraud took place in six swing states. Witnesses and data prove the fraud. You are lying, I am not.

Why was the data that you claim proved such, never brought to court in a suit, by Giuliani or Powel or any of his legal teams?

Why wasn't this data turned over to the administration's cyber security, or brought to AG Barr at the DOJ showing this claim of voter fraud and have his prosecutors get the fbi to investigate?

Why wasn't this evidence of fraud brought before the FEC. Federal Election commission, who handles elections??

Why wasn't this evidence that trump legal team has of fraud brought before each of those 6 States, Secretary of State?

None of that was done lastamender... nothing was ever turned over to the courts, or cyber security, or to the States, or to the Doj prosecutors Barr told in each State to help investigate any fraud, or the fbi, or election commission.....

....to me, that's an alarm going off, that something just ain't right about that.... It's a tale tell sign that this so called solid data evidence that proves it, as you and many many others are claiming, isn't solid evidence at all...

And they've never gone to court with it, because the evidence doesn't really exist...and they don't want to be laughed out of court,

And their CON job on you all, ended by it....exposed.

There was massive fraud, you repeating lies and a corrupt court system denying access to evidence won't change that fact. In fact you are reinforcing the obvious guilt by insisting there was no fraud.

 

[Care4all]

Just like his last impeach.ent, his cry was not that he did not use Military funds allocated by congress for the Ukraine to bribe the Ukraine President in to investigating his presidential candidate opponent and family and make an announcement on CNN International about it... but procedural and due process cries and unfairness cries....


Giving senators an out, to not convict him....


------


His defense is the same ole, same ole.... procedural, or constitutionally, or no due process, or wrong person as the judge.....or, the...he's no longer in office....defense.

Not denying or arguing he did not commit the offence he was charged with...but technicalities....

Giving senators, who all spoke out against trump and what he seeded with their attackers that made them attack them... after coming to the floor from their bunkers or from under the table in some hiding hole, still all shaking from their fear....

to now, another technical out, so TRUMP, a man of lawlessness, can get away with his abuses of power, once again.

 

[Care4all]

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

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

Get stuffed.

Trump had everything to do with it.... He seeded the big lie, and egged it on.

As far as your c l aim the President is different than the vp and office holders......your claim, has no legs.

The constitution's impeachment clause is written with all three positions are held equally, in the same sentence regarding impeachment.



The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Very nice. Trump is no longer in office. They are scared he will run again and it will be much harder to defraud him a second time. That is the truth, try admitting it.

They are most certainly trying to strip him from being able to run for any office, ever again. It's the sole purpose for the impeachment, even after he no longer held the office. No one is hiding that purpose.

Then that would fail since this process is unconstitutional

What process is unconstitutional? Impeachment?

There is no Mulligan for a President or any office holder, committing an abusive or criminal act, 2 weeks from leaving office.... impeachment does not just disappear because the abuse took place two weeks from leaving.

You cannot remove what is not there. Democrats have conducted a four year sideshow. If anybody embarrasses this country it is those assholes.

There are two separate votes required to complete a Senate impeachment trial.

One VOTE to convict and remove from office or not. Takes 2/3s voting to convict.

And the second, separate vote required, which only requires a majority vote, not the 2/3s vote, is whether or not to strip those impeached, from ever holding office again.

You can't vote to strip him from holding office again, without the impeachment trial, and that vote cast...

Thus, his holding office or not, matters naught....

Why are they so scared of one man? This much fuss you can bet he was working for the people. That is not done in DC. He had to be doing something right and that is not done in DC either.

You have admitted fraud by hiding evidence and censorship of the topic. You know you cannot beat him in a fair election. That is what you are admitting now. How is that serving the people like the government should?

We did beat him, by a landslide...7 million plus votes and 306 to 232 electoral votes.

Trump concocted the Big Lie, that the election was stolen from him months before the election was held, when his internal polling told him he was going to lose big-time to Biden.

You defrauded Trump. There was massive fraud and now a massive cover up that has failed.

There truly and honestly was no massive voter fraud. You've been convinced there was... I can see that...but you've been conned, by a bunch of con artists...God as my witness!

There truly and honestly was no massive voter fraud.

No. There was truly and honestly massive fraud. Biden is a BOGUS POTUS.

Then tell me exactly what massive voter fraud took place, in at least 3 to 4 of these contentious battle ground, that would have been enough, to over turn that state's election.

There have been so many bogus claims that truly have been debunked, many because procedures were just misunderstood and even twisted to appear bad, when they weren't.

But if there are any that I may not have researched yet, I'd like to know them...So I can dig in to the details.

The Trump team of lawyers have act u ally not brought any actual fraud cases to court. All those cases that dems remind trumpets they lost in court were not fraud cases, but election law procedural issues... and they brought the same procedural issues to as many as ten states, losing in all of them, because the relief they were asking in every one of those cases, was to invalidate ALL absentee ballots in a county with a big city, and mostly minority voters, legally and constitutionally granted the rig h t to vote...because a handful of absentee ballot envelopes May have had a signature not checked, and things like that...and the case Judges basically said, ARE YOU CRAZY? to the Trump lawyers.

No cases of vote switching, or Dominion voting machine irregularities, or milktary swat teams capturing voter servers in Germany, or ballot stuffing, or any of the accusations made by Giuliani and team, in your right wing media was brought to court, by Giuliani and team....not one....ask yourself why not even one?

My bet is the law teams know if they presented a known bogus claim to the court, they could lose their law licences or censured in the least.

---------

Trump has to overturn too many states, to even come close to winning enough electoral votes... It's an impossible task, imo.

The voter fraud took place in six swing states. Witnesses and data prove the fraud. You are lying, I am not.

Why was the data that you claim proved such, never brought to court in a suit, by Giuliani or Powel or any of his legal teams?

Why wasn't this data turned over to the administration's cyber security, or brought to AG Barr at the DOJ showing this claim of voter fraud and have his prosecutors get the fbi to investigate?

Why wasn't this evidence of fraud brought before the FEC. Federal Election commission, who handles elections??

Why wasn't this evidence that trump legal team has of fraud brought before each of those 6 States, Secretary of State?

None of that was done lastamender... nothing was ever turned over to the courts, or cyber security, or to the States, or to the Doj prosecutors Barr told in each State to help investigate any fraud, or the fbi, or election commission.....

....to me, that's an alarm going off, that something just ain't right about that.... It's a tale tell sign that this so called solid data evidence that proves it, as you and many many others are claiming, isn't solid evidence at all...

And they've never gone to court with it, because the evidence doesn't really exist...and they don't want to be laughed out of court,

And their CON job on you all, ended by it....exposed.

There was massive fraud, you repeating lies and a corrupt court system denying access to evidence won't change that fact. In fact you are reinforcing the obvious guilt by insisting there was no fraud.

Bring it forward then... post it.... share with us, this irrefutable evidence.

 

[MadDog]

There was massive fraud, you repeating lies and a corrupt court system denying access to evidence won't change that fact. In fact you are reinforcing the obvious guilt by insisting there was no fraud.

Are you aware that accusations of fraud from Dominion software were NEVER included in any of the suits? Probably because Rudy, Lin, Lindsey and others know they, as lawyers, can’t lie to the court

 

[IM2]

This is true. I lived in Portland for years and it's always been a battle between the white supremacists in the smaller mountain towns and the left wing anarchists in Portland, Bend, Eugene and Corvallis.

I live in Oregon now. There aren't white supremacists infesting the smaller towns. Like any other state, there are libertarian-minded people in the small towns who oppose the liberal weenies in the larger ones.

Yes there are and since you are one of them you will deny it.

 

[Skylar]

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

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

Get stuffed.

Trump had everything to do with it.... He seeded the big lie, and egged it on.

As far as your c l aim the President is different than the vp and office holders......your claim, has no legs.

The constitution's impeachment clause is written with all three positions are held equally, in the same sentence regarding impeachment.



The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Very nice. Trump is no longer in office. They are scared he will run again and it will be much harder to defraud him a second time. That is the truth, try admitting it.

They are most certainly trying to strip him from being able to run for any office, ever again. It's the sole purpose for the impeachment, even after he no longer held the office. No one is hiding that purpose.

Then that would fail since this process is unconstitutional

What process is unconstitutional? Impeachment?

There is no Mulligan for a President or any office holder, committing an abusive or criminal act, 2 weeks from leaving office.... impeachment does not just disappear because the abuse took place two weeks from leaving.

You cannot remove what is not there. Democrats have conducted a four year sideshow. If anybody embarrasses this country it is those assholes.

There are two separate votes required to complete a Senate impeachment trial.

One VOTE to convict and remove from office or not. Takes 2/3s voting to convict.

And the second, separate vote required, which only requires a majority vote, not the 2/3s vote, is whether or not to strip those impeached, from ever holding office again.

You can't vote to strip him from holding office again, without the impeachment trial, and that vote cast...

Thus, his holding office or not, matters naught....

Why are they so scared of one man? This much fuss you can bet he was working for the people. That is not done in DC. He had to be doing something right and that is not done in DC either.

You have admitted fraud by hiding evidence and censorship of the topic. You know you cannot beat him in a fair election. That is what you are admitting now. How is that serving the people like the government should?

We did beat him, by a landslide...7 million plus votes and 306 to 232 electoral votes.

Trump concocted the Big Lie, that the election was stolen from him months before the election was held, when his internal polling told him he was going to lose big-time to Biden.

You defrauded Trump. There was massive fraud and now a massive cover up that has failed.

There truly and honestly was no massive voter fraud. You've been convinced there was... I can see that...but you've been conned, by a bunch of con artists...God as my witness!

There truly and honestly was no massive voter fraud.

No. There was truly and honestly massive fraud. Biden is a BOGUS POTUS.

Then tell me exactly what massive voter fraud took place, in at least 3 to 4 of these contentious battle ground, that would have been enough, to over turn that state's election.

There have been so many bogus claims that truly have been debunked, many because procedures were just misunderstood and even twisted to appear bad, when they weren't.

But if there are any that I may not have researched yet, I'd like to know them...So I can dig in to the details.

The Trump team of lawyers have act u ally not brought any actual fraud cases to court. All those cases that dems remind trumpets they lost in court were not fraud cases, but election law procedural issues... and they brought the same procedural issues to as many as ten states, losing in all of them, because the relief they were asking in every one of those cases, was to invalidate ALL absentee ballots in a county with a big city, and mostly minority voters, legally and constitutionally granted the rig h t to vote...because a handful of absentee ballot envelopes May have had a signature not checked, and things like that...and the case Judges basically said, ARE YOU CRAZY? to the Trump lawyers.

No cases of vote switching, or Dominion voting machine irregularities, or milktary swat teams capturing voter servers in Germany, or ballot stuffing, or any of the accusations made by Giuliani and team, in your right wing media was brought to court, by Giuliani and team....not one....ask yourself why not even one?

My bet is the law teams know if they presented a known bogus claim to the court, they could lose their law licences or censured in the least.

---------

Trump has to overturn too many states, to even come close to winning enough electoral votes... It's an impossible task, imo.

The voter fraud took place in six swing states. Witnesses and data prove the fraud. You are lying, I am not.

Why was the data that you claim proved such, never brought to court in a suit, by Giuliani or Powel or any of his legal teams?

Why wasn't this data turned over to the administration's cyber security, or brought to AG Barr at the DOJ showing this claim of voter fraud and have his prosecutors get the fbi to investigate?

Why wasn't this evidence of fraud brought before the FEC. Federal Election commission, who handles elections??

Why wasn't this evidence that trump legal team has of fraud brought before each of those 6 States, Secretary of State?

None of that was done lastamender... nothing was ever turned over to the courts, or cyber security, or to the States, or to the Doj prosecutors Barr told in each State to help investigate any fraud, or the fbi, or election commission.....

....to me, that's an alarm going off, that something just ain't right about that.... It's a tale tell sign that this so called solid data evidence that proves it, as you and many many others are claiming, isn't solid evidence at all...

And they've never gone to court with it, because the evidence doesn't really exist...and they don't want to be laughed out of court,

And their CON job on you all, ended by it....exposed.

Its the same silly Birther conspiracy from the same silly people.

The Republican Governor of Hawaii can't be trusted, nor can the Republican Director of the Department of Health, nor can Hawaii be trusted on the validity of its own vital documents......because a game show host peddles a batshit conspiracy theory he claims to have evidence for, but never produces.

Now its the Republican Governor of Georgia that can't be trusted, nor can the Republican Secretary of State of Georgia, nor can Georgia be trusted on the validity of its own election.......because a game show host peddles a batshit conspiracy theory he claims to have evidence for, but never produces.

These guys aren't creative....but they are green. As that's some recycled batshit they're using.

 

[j-mac]

Resolutions introduced through the hopper that directly call for
an impeachment are referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, whereas
resolutions merely calling for a committee investigation with a view
toward impeachment are referred to the Committee on Rules. Deschler Ch
14 Sec. Sec. 5.10, 5.11. In the 105th Congress the House adopted a
privileged resolution reported by the Committee on Rules referring a
communication from an independent counsel alleging certain impeachable
offenses to the Committee on the Judiciary. Later, the House adopted a
privileged resolution reported by the Committee on the Judiciary
authorizing an impeachment inquiry by that committee. Manual Sec. 603.
All impeachments to reach the Senate since 1900 have been based on
resolutions reported by the Committee on the Judiciary. Before that
committee's creation in 1813, impeachments were referred to a special
committee for investigation. Manual Sec. 603; 6 Cannon Sec. 657.


Sec. 7 . Committee Investigations

Committee impeachment investigations are governed by those
portions of Rule XI relating to committee investigative and hearing
procedures, and by any rules and special procedures adopted by the
House and by the committee for the inquiry. Manual Sec. 605; Deschler
Ch 14 Sec. 6.3. The House may by resolution waive or supplement a
requirement of these rules in a particular case. In several recent
instances, the House agreed to a resolution authorizing the counsel to
the Committee on the Judiciary to take depositions of witnesses in an
impeachment investigation and waiving the provision of Rule XI that
requires at least two committee members to be present during the
taking of such testimony. Deschler Ch 14 Sec. 6.3; 105-2, H. Res. 581,
Oct. 8, 1998, p 24679; 110-2, H. Res. 1448, Sept. 17, 2008, p 19502;
111-1, H. Res. 424, May 12, 2009, p __. Authorities to conduct an
inves

House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House - Chapter 27. Impeachment

www.govinfo.gov

And....

Key members of the House Judiciary Committee introduced a single article of impeachment Monday that has already gathered at least 218 cosponsors, according to a congressional aide involved in the process, meeting the majority needed for passage in the House.

The House Judiciary Committee was who introduced the article of impeachment.

So what rules were violated again? And you have yet to show me any constitutional requirements that weren't met.

Are you also in favor of convicting people upon indictment of a GJ? No evidence, no hearing? No witnesses? Just have the prosecution lay out a case and go straight to sentencing? Yeah, that sounds fair, not.

 

[j-mac]

I’m citing the Constitution, Stupid.

You should find someone to read it to you.

Here's the constitution:

Show me where it says that Roberts must preside over the impeachment trial of an ex-president.

If you're citing the constitution, this will be remarkably easy. If you're citing your imagination, it will be a bit harder.

No such thing as impeaching a private citizen.

Next?

They didn’t impeach a private citizen

They also didn’t give it fair consideration either...Just pure TDS, and get him....I can’t think of anything more unamerican...

 

[JoeB131]

lol....So, once again the GOP, must do what YOU want them to eh? What a little snot you are.

Actually, I would expect them to do it because it's the right thing.

And maybe they don't want a future Democratic President calling down a mob of people on them at some future date.

Had a commander in when I was in the Army who had a sign that said, "If you see something wrong and you don't do anything about it, you've set a new standard."

 

[JoeB131]

STOP THE LYING.

Bill Clinton was not Impeached for getting a blow job or for lying to Congress, and his civil case was NOT stopped because it had no merit. You are a LIAR, and you have never stopped telling the same lie after it has been debunked over and over.

Actually, it was thrown out for having no merit. Here, let me help you out.

Paula Jones Case Is Dismissed; Judge Says Even If Tale Is True, Incident Was Not Harassment

archive.nytimes.com

In a stunning court victory for President Clinton, a federal judge on Wednesday threw out the Paula Jones sexual misconduct lawsuit, which had flooded the nation with months of sensational disclosures and denials while causing a separate criminal inquiry into Clinton's conduct in the White House.

"There are no genuine issues for trial in this case," Judge Susan Webber Wright of Federal District Court ruled in flatly rejecting all of Mrs. Jones' claims that she suffered sexual harassment and emotional distress in an encounter with Clinton in 1991, when he was governor of Arkansas and she was a state employee.

Bill Clinton was found Guilty of Contempt of Court in a civil case in which he was being sued for Sexual Harassment. The Judge ruled him to be in Contempt of Court for being DISHONEST and for ATTEMPTING TO MISLEAD THE COURT, JURY, AND JUDGE.

For his crime he was publicly rebuked and was stripped of his license to practice law in Arkansas.

He hadn't practiced law in 20 years at that point, and he had no intention of living in Arkansas again. Talk about your meaningless punishments.

I mean, seriously, do you think that he was going to go back to doing real estate closings in AR after being president?

Most Americans opposed impeaching Clinton. They thought he was doing a great job and the case had no merit. (Unlike Trump, where majorities favored impeaching him both times)

Poll: Americans remain opposed to Clinton impeachment - October 13, 1998

www.cnn.com

The sexual predator and pedophile took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution and Constitutional Rights of Americans, but that day in court President Clinton attempted to deny the plaintiff a fair and honest trial by lying his ass off and attempting to mislead the court.

Except the case had no merit, and Judge Weber Wright had previously ruled that whether or not Clinton had a relationship with Lewinsky was not relevant to the trial.

As far as the court case, it was NOT dropped for 'lack of merit'. After his actions the case was tossed - a new trial was probably going to follow. So, Slick Willy PAID HER OFF - PAID HER TO GO AWAY.

You clearly don't know the actions in the case.

Judge Weber Wright dismissed the case in April, 1998 because it had no merit. Jones had failed to prove that any action was taken against her for refusing Clinton's advances. The law, as written at that time, had to show that there was retaliation. Clinton wasn't her direct supervisor. He had not directed anyone to move against her. The only thing that was done to her was that she was moved away from other employees, but that was because (according to her supervisor), she spent the whole day talking and not getting any work done.

Now, - pay attention here, because I know you are a little slow - AFTER the case was dismissed, the Supreme Court ruled in Burlington v. Ellerth that the mere perception of a hostile work environment was enough to constitute sexual harassment. This meant that Jones might have had a narrow grounds for appeal.

It was at that point, the Clinton legal team settled, but ONLY after Jones' team dropped any insistence on an apology and admission of wrongdoing. This was a $750,000 settlement in a case where both sides had already spent millions in legal fees.

Jones later admitted in an interview with Penthouse magazine (where she also took off her clothes, proving most people look better with their clothes on) that she had been used by Clinton's enemies.

Paula Jones to Penthouse: The Right ‘Used Me’

The Bill Clinton accuser complained in 2000 that conservatives had abused her for their own gain. So what is she doing back with the alt-right?

www.thedailybeast.com

In 2000, Jones sat down for an accompanying Penthouse interview with Joe Conason, coauthor of that same year’s The Hunting of the President: The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton. Jones still thought she had been “done wrong” by the Clintons and their attack machine, but she seemed to have also grown wary of the right, concluding, “I was used by a lot of people to get to him.”

“I feel like I came out with the wrong end of the stick, you know?” she said.