Sorry to burst your bubble, but...: In Re: Judicial Impeachment

[TemplarKormac]

I'll put it plainly. The founders had greater faith in the judiciary when they crafted Article III than we do today. So, in Article 1, Section 3 they set a two-thirds threshold by the Senate to impeach a judge (or the president, vice president, and all other civil officers.) That's 67 votes. And by my tally, Republicans don't have the votes, nor will Democrats cooperate.

So, may it behoove my conservative friends to stop wasting their breath on something that will never happen? At this point, it's an impossibility. Don't waste your breath. Leave all these TROs and injunctions in the hands of the Supreme Court. If the administration's case is sound, these judges will be left with egg on their faces.

 

[Auld Phart]

I'll put it plainly. The founders had greater faith in the judiciary when they crafted Article III than we do today. So, in Article 1, Section 3 they set a two-thirds threshold by the Senate to impeach a judge (or the president, vice president, and all other civil officers.) That's 67 votes. And by my tally, Republicans don't have the votes, nor will Democrats cooperate.

So, may it behoove my conservative friends to stop wasting their breath on something that will never happen? At this point, it's an impossibility. Don't waste your breath. Leave all these TRO's and injunctions in the hands of the Supreme Court. If the administration's case is sound, these judges will be left with egg on their faces.

dems knew they didn't have the votes to remove Trump from office, but that didn't stop them from trying.

 

[Edgetho]

I'll put it plainly. The founders had greater faith in the judiciary when they crafted Article III than we do today. So, in Article 1, Section 3 they set a two-thirds threshold by the Senate to impeach a judge (or the president, vice president, and all other civil officers.) That's 67 votes. And by my tally, Republicans don't have the votes, nor will Democrats cooperate.

So, may it behoove my conservative friends to stop wasting their breath on something that will never happen? At this point, it's an impossibility. Don't waste your breath. Leave all these TRO's and injunctions in the hands of the Supreme Court. If the administration's case is sound, these judges will be left with egg on their faces.

Impeachment takes a simple majority of the House. Conviction takes 2/3 of the Senate.

It doesn't matter anyway. Just impeaching a Judge, even without a conviction, will cause him/her/it to step down.

 

[rightwinger]

The courts are the only body capable of standing up to Trump
Trump is ignoring them

 

[OKTexas]

I'll put it plainly. The founders had greater faith in the judiciary when they crafted Article III than we do today. So, in Article 1, Section 3 they set a two-thirds threshold by the Senate to impeach a judge (or the president, vice president, and all other civil officers.) That's 67 votes. And by my tally, Republicans don't have the votes, nor will Democrats cooperate.

So, may it behoove my conservative friends to stop wasting their breath on something that will never happen? At this point, it's an impossibility. Don't waste your breath. Leave all these TRO's and injunctions in the hands of the Supreme Court. If the administration's case is sound, these judges will be left with egg on their faces.

In today's highly charged political environment, impeachment in any case is effectively moot.

.

 

[22lcidw]

Make the location of where these judges live and what they do and make it nice and loud. Everything they do broadcast it to the masses. Progs have done this. Nothing happened to them. So, we have precedence. When Progs come to power again, they will weaponize the D.C. goons as before. I believe we will become much more regionalized and localized, and it may take the citizens to stand up to the goons coming into their territories to destroy and kill them. The local police will then have a decision to make as to who they will stand with.

 

[22lcidw]

Has reality ever had any impact on tRumplings and their rhetoric?

Trump has experienced a weaponized court and judicial system firsthand.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I'll put it plainly. The founders had greater faith in the judiciary when they crafted Article III than we do today. So, in Article 1, Section 3 they set a two-thirds threshold by the Senate to impeach a judge (or the president, vice president, and all other civil officers.) That's 67 votes. And by my tally, Republicans don't have the votes, nor will Democrats cooperate.

So, may it behoove my conservative friends to stop wasting their breath on something that will never happen? At this point, it's an impossibility. Don't waste your breath. Leave all these TRO's and injunctions in the hands of the Supreme Court. If the administration's case is sound, these judges will be left with egg on their faces.

Don’t worry, we are keeping track. After the disaster for Democrats, that’s going to happen in 2026. We will have more than enough senators.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

dems knew they didn't have the votes to remove Trump from office, but that didn't stop them from trying.

.

And wasting a ton of stolen taxpayer money in the process.


.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The courts are the only body capable of standing up to Trump
Trump is ignoring them

You won't be saying that if the Supreme Court rules in his favor.

 

[martybegan]

Impeachment takes a simple majority of the House. Conviction takes 2/3 of the Senate.

It doesn't matter anyway. Just impeaching a Judge, even without a conviction, will cause him/her/it to step down.

They won't step down.

The type of Judges that let politics direct their decisions won't care that they got impeached.

 

[martybegan]

dems knew they didn't have the votes to remove Trump from office, but that didn't stop them from trying.

And look what it got them. Trump Round 2.

 

[Kondor3]

The courts are the only body capable of standing up to Trump
Trump is ignoring them

When Trump does something to harm the Rule-of-Law, then, yes, the Courts should stand up to him.

When Trump does something within the boundaries of his Constitutional powers, the Courts can safely be ignored.

The Administration should double-down and send MORE plane-loads of Illegal Alien gang members to El Salvador.

The Administration is rightfully declaring that the Courts have overstepped their jurisdictional boundaries in such cases.

Let the Ignored Court itself file an appeal further up the judicial food chain.

 

[Blaster]

John Roberts says judges should not be impeached but remained silent when Democrats tried to impeach Trump.

 

[rightwinger]

You won't be saying that if the Supreme Court rules in his favor.

That does not create the Constitutional crisis that ignoring a court order would

 

[22lcidw]

You won't be saying that if the Supreme Court rules in his favor.

We know that most of the courts rule in the Progs favor. For all of their judges think alike. Not so from Republican judges. Our RINO shills make sure of that.

 

[Mac1958]

The courts are the only body capable of standing up to Trump
Trump is ignoring them

Their own Pinochet, their own Orban. That's how these guys roll.

Now it's here. Go figure.

 

[TemplarKormac]

When Trump does something within the boundaries of his Constitutional powers, the Courts can safely be ignored.

Biden has already set in motion a precedent by which presidents can ignore the courts. Look at how he behaved when SCOTUS struck his student loan initiative down. If Trump starts ignoring the courts, he will further a precedent where presidents can effectively ignore the courts and impose their will on the public, irrespective of their sentiment on the matter.

Not wise to go down that road.

 

[TemplarKormac]

That does not create the Constitutional crisis that ignoring a court order would

Actually, when the Supreme Court rules against the progressive left, they have a bad habit of claiming there's a Constitutional crisis.

You can't escape your own circular logic here.

 

[rightwinger]

Actually, when the Supreme Court rules against the progressive left, they have a bad habit of claiming there's a Constitutional crisis.

You can't escape your own circular logic here.

OK
Give me an example so we can discuss