Serious Question

[Oddball]

Although people concentrate on Trump's call to violence

More bullshit fake news. I was watching everything live that day.

No, you don't get it.

Trump released the transcript of his speech at least five hours before he gave it...See?

Then, the insurrectionists took their Ovaltine secret decoder ring and used it to discover the secret message, that told them to follow the secret plan to lay siege to the capitol!

It's all clear once you adjust the tin foil on your head correctly!

 

[toobfreak]

It's interesting that the phrase High Crimes does not refer to serious crimes but rather crimes committed by those of high rank.

YOU'RE SO FULL OF CRAP. Do you make it up or get all your facts from a children's book. The Constitution says:

The President shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

 

[toobfreak]

If that were the case, it has been serious misused

BINGO.

 

[OKTexas]

It's interesting that the phrase High Crimes does not refer to serious crimes but rather crimes committed by those of high rank.

YOU'RE SO FULL OF CRAP. Do you make it up or get all your facts from a children's book. The Constitution says:

The President shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Yep they gave examples and their intent was clear. Leave it to the commies to try to bastardize a concept so simple.

.

 

[Care4all]

we were not BIG GOVT at the time of our founders, we did not even have any crimes or misdemeanor codes...or any federal criminal code until 50 to 100 years after the constitution was written... is what i was reading the other day on our history...

 

[White 6]

Where does the Senate get the jurisdiction to put a private citizen on trial? From what I can find only the Article 3 courts have that authority.

Your thoughts?

.

Not surprising at all, as it goes along with:
Supreme Court: Retirees Can Be Court-Martialed for Crimes Committed After Service
You ain't free and clear, with the piper paid, by getting out just in time.

Trump isn't military and impeachment isn't a court-martial, dizzy.

He was the Commander of the entire military, hence the salutes rendered him before he left office in disgrace. No other elected official is saluted (a gesture of military respect of authority) except a president. Why did you think presidents were saluted. Other politicians are not saluted, but the president is, every time. The Flag of the United States is saluted every time, and his actions disgraced his office and the flag.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

we were not BIG GOVT at the time of our founders, we did not even have any crimes or misdemeanor codes...or any federal criminal code until 50 to 100 years after the constitution was written... is what i was reading the other day on our history...

If we didn't have any, how did the founders write it in the Constitution?

 

[White 6]

Where does the Senate get the jurisdiction to put a private citizen on trial? From what I can find only the Article 3 courts have that authority.

Your thoughts?

.

Not surprising at all, as it goes along with:
Supreme Court: Retirees Can Be Court-Martialed for Crimes Committed After Service
You ain't free and clear, with the piper paid, by getting out just in time.

Presidents can get impeached by Congress but Congress does not try criminal cases. Criminal trials and military court Marshalls are not impeachments and are not conducted by Congress. You can try an ex-president for a crime in criminal court but the Constitution states only Federal office holders can be impeached.

It was not written to allow a president to commit heinous crimes against the country and escape judgement in the Senate, simply because he committed the offenses on last week in office or by resigning to avoid punishment.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Although people concentrate on Trump's call to violence of the day of the insurrection, he had been stoking the fires for weeks before the siege.

You mean just like they did before the baseball shooting? Just like they did before the Supreme Court riot?

 

[easyt65]

Where does the Senate get the jurisdiction to put a private citizen on trial? From what I can find only the Article 3 courts have that authority.

Your thoughts?

It's not Constitutional. Pelosi admitted it, declaring the purpose of her 2nd politically partisan Impeachment has nothing to do with the United States but is for the benefit of the Democratic Party, to eliminate former President Trump as a political threat in 2024 and beyond.

Just like with the last one, in which she also destroyed her own Impeachment attempt by destroying the Democrats' false narrative, she and the Democrats have already lost this battle. Joe Biden himself declared the Impeachment 'Moot', useless, as Trump is already out of office.

The Democrats are coming off a massive win by retaking the US Senate and the WH, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not choose to use that momentum to do great things for this nation. She chose to use that newly TAKEN power to abuse the Constitution....AGAIN....to seek revenge for an election lost and to attempt to eliminate a threat to the Democratic Party in 2024 and beyond. After being handed a VICTORY, Nancy Pelosi has chosen once again to lead the Democrats to another DEFEAT.

She and he Democrats have already lost this fight. They do not have the votes ... again ... to Impeach the former President in the US Senate. She threw the Constitution and the chance to unify the country to the side in order to seek revenge for being rejected by the American people in 2016, to take that revenge out n the man the Democrats were unable to defeat for the last 4 years. She gambled. She has lost....and history will record and show this.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's interesting that the phrase High Crimes does not refer to serious crimes but rather crimes committed by those of high rank. The actual term High Crimes and Misdemeanor is bet described as bad behavior by those of high rank which can be anything from bad language in front of ladies to murder.

Without talking to the founders, it's hard to say. But the founders never imagined the Democrat party would get so power hungry and un-American that they would be to the point of damn near Communism. They never imagined that serving the federal government would be lavish career and all representatives retiring as millionaires or multimillionaires.

If James Madison could come back to life today, he'd curse the Democrat party for what they did to this county, and curse out the Republican party for allowing it to happen and not taking a stand.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Where does the Senate get the jurisdiction to put a private citizen on trial? From what I can find only the Article 3 courts have that authority.

Your thoughts?

.

Not surprising at all, as it goes along with:
Supreme Court: Retirees Can Be Court-Martialed for Crimes Committed After Service
You ain't free and clear, with the piper paid, by getting out just in time.

Presidents can get impeached by Congress but Congress does not try criminal cases. Criminal trials and military court Marshalls are not impeachments and are not conducted by Congress. You can try an ex-president for a crime in criminal court but the Constitution states only Federal office holders can be impeached.

It was not written to allow a president to commit heinous crimes against the country and escape judgement in the Senate, simply because he committed the offenses on last week in office or by resigning to avoid punishment.

He committed no crimes heinous or otherwise. Your first idiotic impeachment established that. Your current impeachment is not only idiotic but meaningless and pathetic. Temper tantrums are unbecoming to adults.

 

[White 6]

Where does the Senate get the jurisdiction to put a private citizen on trial? From what I can find only the Article 3 courts have that authority.

Your thoughts?

.

Not surprising at all, as it goes along with:
Supreme Court: Retirees Can Be Court-Martialed for Crimes Committed After Service
You ain't free and clear, with the piper paid, by getting out just in time.

Presidents can get impeached by Congress but Congress does not try criminal cases. Criminal trials and military court Marshalls are not impeachments and are not conducted by Congress. You can try an ex-president for a crime in criminal court but the Constitution states only Federal office holders can be impeached.

It was not written to allow a president to commit heinous crimes against the country and escape judgement in the Senate, simply because he committed the offenses on last week in office or by resigning to avoid punishment.

He committed no crimes heinous or otherwise. Your first idiotic impeachment established that. Your current impeachment is not only idiotic but meaningless and pathetic. Temper tantrums are unbecoming to adults.

I have actually never been impeached, accused or tried for any crime, so I had no "first" impeachment.

 

[Care4all]

we were not BIG GOVT at the time of our founders, we did not even have any crimes or misdemeanor codes...or any federal criminal code until 50 to 100 years after the constitution was written... is what i was reading the other day on our history...

If we didn't have any, how did the founders write it in the Constitution?

The States. Common law.

 

[Care4all]

Where does the Senate get the jurisdiction to put a private citizen on trial? From what I can find only the Article 3 courts have that authority.

Your thoughts?

.

Not surprising at all, as it goes along with:
Supreme Court: Retirees Can Be Court-Martialed for Crimes Committed After Service
You ain't free and clear, with the piper paid, by getting out just in time.

Presidents can get impeached by Congress but Congress does not try criminal cases. Criminal trials and military court Marshalls are not impeachments and are not conducted by Congress. You can try an ex-president for a crime in criminal court but the Constitution states only Federal office holders can be impeached.

It was not written to allow a president to commit heinous crimes against the country and escape judgement in the Senate, simply because he committed the offenses on last week in office or by resigning to avoid punishment.

He committed no crimes heinous or otherwise. Your first idiotic impeachment established that. Your current impeachment is not only idiotic but meaningless and pathetic. Temper tantrums are unbecoming to adults.

So you agree with the coup at the capitol that Trump egged on, the 6 dead are ok, the 140 injured policemen, some beaten to a pulp with flag bearing flag poles, the gallows set up for Pence, the Senate and house chambers desecrated, the theft of computers and podiums etc, while the commander and chief Sat joyously, watching on tv, while doing nothing to send in help, not even a call to his most loyal vp and family....

If there ever in our history was a reason to impeach and convict, and barred from future office a president, it was this Jan 6th attempted insurrection.

To turn a blind eye, is unAmerican!

 

[Circe]

I don't see Cruz even considering such a thing. The poster you quoted is an idiot.

Well, it does seem unlikely Cruz would go that way to me, too. I guess we'll see as this progresses along its crazy way, as it is doing even today. I can't see how this is constitutional, and Justice Roberts agrees with that, I see from the paper today. But whether something is constitutional no longer matters, as we have seen with all the oppressive COVID rules.

Correct. The Nazis just impeached a US President for exercising his first amendment rights.

Nope. The 1st amendment right of freedom of speech bars congress from making a law that would limit such. However, that does not mean that a person can say whatever they chose and be immune from the legal consequences due to such speech, for example inciting insurrection or rioting or damages to property or persons due exercising those rights.

Also keep mind, articles of impeachment are not a criminal charge but a pollical charge that the office holder is not fit to hold office. The FBI is looking at the attack on the capitol to determine who will face criminal charges which could go much higher up than just those that broke into the capitol.

This entire thread is rather meaningless since there is essential no way 17 republicans are going to vote to convict. However, keep in mind this is a pollical process, not a legal process. Senate democrats will carry through with a trial for two reasons. First being it is their responsible to do so. Second, it lays out the entire case by both the prosecution and defense for the voters to deicide on whether Trump should be given a second go at the white house.

I still think the main reason is that the second impeachment validates (they suppose) the first one. The left picked up a lot of hate from conservatives for that malicious move.

I suppose there is some hope that a second impeachment will prevent him from running again, but it sure won't if they lose it, and they are going to lose it. And it may just make us all mad.

 

[OKTexas]

I don't see Cruz even considering such a thing. The poster you quoted is an idiot.

Well, it does seem unlikely Cruz would go that way to me, too. I guess we'll see as this progresses along its crazy way, as it is doing even today. I can't see how this is constitutional, and Justice Roberts agrees with that, I see from the paper today. But whether something is constitutional no longer matters, as we have seen with all the oppressive COVID rules.

Correct. The Nazis just impeached a US President for exercising his first amendment rights.

Nope. The 1st amendment right of freedom of speech bars congress from making a law that would limit such. However, that does not mean that a person can say whatever they chose and be immune from the legal consequences due to such speech, for example inciting insurrection or rioting or damages to property or persons due exercising those rights.

Also keep mind, articles of impeachment are not a criminal charge but a pollical charge that the office holder is not fit to hold office. The FBI is looking at the attack on the capitol to determine who will face criminal charges which could go much higher up than just those that broke into the capitol.

This entire thread is rather meaningless since there is essential no way 17 republicans are going to vote to convict. However, keep in mind this is a pollical process, not a legal process. Senate democrats will carry through with a trial for two reasons. First being it is their responsible to do so. Second, it lays out the entire case by both the prosecution and defense for the voters to deicide on whether Trump should be given a second go at the white house.

I still think the main reason is that the second impeachment validates (they suppose) the first one. The left picked up a lot of hate from conservatives for that malicious move.

I suppose there is some hope that a second impeachment will prevent him from running again, but it sure won't if they lose it, and they are going to lose it. And it may just make us all mad.

What kind of arrogance does it take to presume to speak for "us all"? No one speaks for "us all".

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I still think the main reason is that the second impeachment validates (they suppose) the first one. The left picked up a lot of hate from conservatives for that malicious move.

I suppose there is some hope that a second impeachment will prevent him from running again, but it sure won't if they lose it, and they are going to lose it. And it may just make us all mad.

Trump knows fully well why they are pulling this stunt. You know how Trump is. When you attack him, he gets even.

If they would have let things alone, perhaps in four years Trump might not consider running, but now???? He's going to do whatever possible to make them regret their commie little game they played.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So you agree with the coup at the capitol that Trump egged on, the 6 dead are ok, the 140 injured policemen, some beaten to a pulp with flag bearing flag poles, the gallows set up for Pence, the Senate and house chambers desecrated, the theft of computers and podiums etc, while the commander and chief Sat joyously, watching on tv, while doing nothing to send in help, not even a call to his most loyal vp and family....

If there ever in our history was a reason to impeach and convict, and barred from future office a president, it was this Jan 6th attempted insurrection.

To turn a blind eye, is unAmerican!

To blame President Trump for something he didn't do is what's un-American, and led by the biggest un-Americans we have in our government.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The States. Common law.

No, it was in the original version of the Constitution.