The congress should impeach Donald Trump

[JimBowie1958]

On what grounds can you impeach Trump when he's not been found guilty of a damn thing?

There are no reasons; it's Matthew!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The congress should impeach Donald Trump for screwing over thousands of people out of their life savings with Trump university and for being a sexual predator.


Do you agree?

They should impeach you...for being a whiney twat.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

One question, yes or no answer is all that required. Can the senate impose criminal sanctions such as fines or imprisonment?

NO, fool, as you should know! The Senate is not an Article III Court, and has circumscribed powers for a trial of impeachment and the punishment imposed. You know the extent of the punishment for a president being found guilty of "HIGH CRIMES and MISDEMEANORS", which are, by their very definition, CRIMES, is removal from office. That is the power granted to the Senate; to adjudicate whether or not the president committed a crime.

That makes the impeachment and trial a CRIMINAL PROCESS, you thick headed idiot! It sure as fuck is not a "civil process" as you claimed and for which I took you to task. If you disagree with that, take it up with the legal eagles who say you're wrong, too, which have already been cited!

Tex, you're being stupid. Get on your Shetland pony and ride into the fucking sunset you bloody imbecile!

Couldn't just give a simple answer to a simple question, you just had to go off on another irrational rant.

Now for simple yes/no question number 2.

Is the standard for a conviction for removal, "beyond a reasonable doubt", like a criminal trial, or is it a simple "preponderance of the evidence", like a civil trial? No need to rant, just a short answer, because I'll just ignore the rant anyways.

You ignorant fuck! You were wrong! You've been shown you were wrong! An impeachment and the subsequent trial are a criminal process and NOT a "civil process" as you erroneously claimed, Tex! Live with it! You've been proven wrong, but you are unwilling to cope with the fact that you are all hat and no cattle, Tex.

Fuck your 20 questions bullshit! I'm on to that ploy, slick!

 

[xyz]

On what grounds can you impeach Trump when he's not been found guilty of a damn thing?

There are no reasons; it's Matthew!

They impeached Bill Clinton for a blow job.

Impeachment is an accusation, it's not being guilty of anything.

Besides that:

"The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States" who may be impeached and removed only for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors"

Impeachment - Wikipedia

plus he has a long history of bribery and some of the things he is about to do can be considered as treason, if some are not already.

 

[OKTexas]

One question, yes or no answer is all that required. Can the senate impose criminal sanctions such as fines or imprisonment?

NO, fool, as you should know! The Senate is not an Article III Court, and has circumscribed powers for a trial of impeachment and the punishment imposed. You know the extent of the punishment for a president being found guilty of "HIGH CRIMES and MISDEMEANORS", which are, by their very definition, CRIMES, is removal from office. That is the power granted to the Senate; to adjudicate whether or not the president committed a crime.

That makes the impeachment and trial a CRIMINAL PROCESS, you thick headed idiot! It sure as fuck is not a "civil process" as you claimed and for which I took you to task. If you disagree with that, take it up with the legal eagles who say you're wrong, too, which have already been cited!

Tex, you're being stupid. Get on your Shetland pony and ride into the fucking sunset you bloody imbecile!

Couldn't just give a simple answer to a simple question, you just had to go off on another irrational rant.

Now for simple yes/no question number 2.

Is the standard for a conviction for removal, "beyond a reasonable doubt", like a criminal trial, or is it a simple "preponderance of the evidence", like a civil trial? No need to rant, just a short answer, because I'll just ignore the rant anyways.

You ignorant fuck! You were wrong! You've been shown you were wrong! An impeachment and the subsequent trial are a criminal process and NOT a "civil process" as you erroneously claimed, Tex! Live with it! You've been proven wrong, but you are unwilling to cope with the fact that you are all hat and no cattle, Tex.

Fuck your 20 questions bullshit! I'm on to that ploy, slick!

I'm sorry you can't seem to understand longer paragraphs so I was trying to walk you through it step by step. Evidently you lack the intellect to even do that. Now run along an play with your little friends and maybe your momma will fix you PB&J and a big glass of milk for lunch.

 

[OKTexas]

On what grounds can you impeach Trump when he's not been found guilty of a damn thing?

There are no reasons; it's Matthew!

They impeached Bill Clinton for a blow job.

Impeachment is an accusation, it's not being guilty of anything.

Besides that:

"The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States" who may be impeached and removed only for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors"

Impeachment - Wikipedia

plus he has a long history of bribery and some of the things he is about to do can be considered as treason, if some are not already.

Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction. Not a blow job. Why do you regressives feel the need to lie all the time?

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

One question, yes or no answer is all that required. Can the senate impose criminal sanctions such as fines or imprisonment?

NO, fool, as you should know! The Senate is not an Article III Court, and has circumscribed powers for a trial of impeachment and the punishment imposed. You know the extent of the punishment for a president being found guilty of "HIGH CRIMES and MISDEMEANORS", which are, by their very definition, CRIMES, is removal from office. That is the power granted to the Senate; to adjudicate whether or not the president committed a crime.

That makes the impeachment and trial a CRIMINAL PROCESS, you thick headed idiot! It sure as fuck is not a "civil process" as you claimed and for which I took you to task. If you disagree with that, take it up with the legal eagles who say you're wrong, too, which have already been cited!

Tex, you're being stupid. Get on your Shetland pony and ride into the fucking sunset you bloody imbecile!

Couldn't just give a simple answer to a simple question, you just had to go off on another irrational rant.

Now for simple yes/no question number 2.

Is the standard for a conviction for removal, "beyond a reasonable doubt", like a criminal trial, or is it a simple "preponderance of the evidence", like a civil trial? No need to rant, just a short answer, because I'll just ignore the rant anyways.

You ignorant fuck! You were wrong! You've been shown you were wrong! An impeachment and the subsequent trial are a criminal process and NOT a "civil process" as you erroneously claimed, Tex! Live with it! You've been proven wrong, but you are unwilling to cope with the fact that you are all hat and no cattle, Tex.

Fuck your 20 questions bullshit! I'm on to that ploy, slick!

I'm sorry you can't seem to understand longer paragraphs so I was trying to walk you through it step by step. Evidently you lack the intellect to even do that. Now run along an play with your little friends and maybe your momma will fix you PB&J and a big glass of milk for lunch.

Finally you got the message that I'm on to your games of trying to change the narrative to avoid the topics of your errors.

I doubt that you ever understood that "high crimes and misdemeanors" implicitly implies unlawful and/or improper conduct with consequences and that the Senate's responsibilities for impeachment trials are implicitly a check on the Executive for any malfeasance and/or misfeasance in office. That check written into the Constitution is certainly NOT a "civil process" as you have clung to in your misbelief of things Constitutional!

You opened your post to which I'm now responding with, "I'm sorry..." Finally, that is something upon which we can find common ground and agree! You are sorry, Tex! Ya'all have a nice day now, Tex, and try to keep your powder out of the water next time, drugstore cowboy!

 

[blastoff]

The congress should impeach Donald Trump for screwing over thousands of people out of their life savings with Trump university and for being a sexual predator.


Do you agree?

Settle down, Matt. In eight short years you'll have some other Republican president-elect to get your shorts in a knot over.

 

[kaz]

The congress should impeach Donald Trump for screwing over thousands of people out of their life savings with Trump university and for being a sexual predator.


Do you agree?

It's always charming to get your hysterical screaming high school girl contributions

 

[OKTexas]

One question, yes or no answer is all that required. Can the senate impose criminal sanctions such as fines or imprisonment?

NO, fool, as you should know! The Senate is not an Article III Court, and has circumscribed powers for a trial of impeachment and the punishment imposed. You know the extent of the punishment for a president being found guilty of "HIGH CRIMES and MISDEMEANORS", which are, by their very definition, CRIMES, is removal from office. That is the power granted to the Senate; to adjudicate whether or not the president committed a crime.

That makes the impeachment and trial a CRIMINAL PROCESS, you thick headed idiot! It sure as fuck is not a "civil process" as you claimed and for which I took you to task. If you disagree with that, take it up with the legal eagles who say you're wrong, too, which have already been cited!

Tex, you're being stupid. Get on your Shetland pony and ride into the fucking sunset you bloody imbecile!

Couldn't just give a simple answer to a simple question, you just had to go off on another irrational rant.

Now for simple yes/no question number 2.

Is the standard for a conviction for removal, "beyond a reasonable doubt", like a criminal trial, or is it a simple "preponderance of the evidence", like a civil trial? No need to rant, just a short answer, because I'll just ignore the rant anyways.

You ignorant fuck! You were wrong! You've been shown you were wrong! An impeachment and the subsequent trial are a criminal process and NOT a "civil process" as you erroneously claimed, Tex! Live with it! You've been proven wrong, but you are unwilling to cope with the fact that you are all hat and no cattle, Tex.

Fuck your 20 questions bullshit! I'm on to that ploy, slick!

I'm sorry you can't seem to understand longer paragraphs so I was trying to walk you through it step by step. Evidently you lack the intellect to even do that. Now run along an play with your little friends and maybe your momma will fix you PB&J and a big glass of milk for lunch.

Finally you got the message that I'm on to your games of trying to change the narrative to avoid the topics of your errors.

I doubt that you ever understood that "high crimes and misdemeanors" implicitly implies unlawful and/or improper conduct with consequences and that the Senate's responsibilities for impeachment trials are implicitly a check on the Executive for any malfeasance and/or misfeasance in office. That check written into the Constitution is certainly NOT a "civil process" as you have clung to in your misbelief of things Constitutional!

You opened your post to which I'm now responding with, "I'm sorry..." Finally, that is something upon which we can find common ground and agree! You are sorry, Tex! Ya'all have a nice day now, Tex, and try to keep your powder out of the water next time, drugstore cowboy!

I guess you didn't get the PB&J for lunch, did you piss your mommy off?

Impeachment is a constitutional civil administrative process conducted by the peoples elected representatives. SCOTUS is only involved when the impeachment is of the president. Even then the CJ is only there to maintain order and has no involvement in the decision. Now run along and play with your little friends, you're dismissed.

 

[Harry Dresden]

On what grounds can you impeach Trump when he's not been found guilty of a damn thing?

On what grounds do you have to arrest Hillary clinton when she's not been found guilty of a damn thing?

First you indict. Then you arrest. Then you have a trial. THEN, and only then, do they get to spend time at the gray bar Hilton.

LOL after 30+ years of investigations when the fuck are they going to indict her. How many millions more are they going to spend on useless investigations?

it took them a while to get Capone.....just sayin....

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

NO, fool, as you should know! The Senate is not an Article III Court, and has circumscribed powers for a trial of impeachment and the punishment imposed. You know the extent of the punishment for a president being found guilty of "HIGH CRIMES and MISDEMEANORS", which are, by their very definition, CRIMES, is removal from office. That is the power granted to the Senate; to adjudicate whether or not the president committed a crime.

That makes the impeachment and trial a CRIMINAL PROCESS, you thick headed idiot! It sure as fuck is not a "civil process" as you claimed and for which I took you to task. If you disagree with that, take it up with the legal eagles who say you're wrong, too, which have already been cited!

Tex, you're being stupid. Get on your Shetland pony and ride into the fucking sunset you bloody imbecile!

Couldn't just give a simple answer to a simple question, you just had to go off on another irrational rant.

Now for simple yes/no question number 2.

Is the standard for a conviction for removal, "beyond a reasonable doubt", like a criminal trial, or is it a simple "preponderance of the evidence", like a civil trial? No need to rant, just a short answer, because I'll just ignore the rant anyways.

You ignorant fuck! You were wrong! You've been shown you were wrong! An impeachment and the subsequent trial are a criminal process and NOT a "civil process" as you erroneously claimed, Tex! Live with it! You've been proven wrong, but you are unwilling to cope with the fact that you are all hat and no cattle, Tex.

Fuck your 20 questions bullshit! I'm on to that ploy, slick!

I'm sorry you can't seem to understand longer paragraphs so I was trying to walk you through it step by step. Evidently you lack the intellect to even do that. Now run along an play with your little friends and maybe your momma will fix you PB&J and a big glass of milk for lunch.

Finally you got the message that I'm on to your games of trying to change the narrative to avoid the topics of your errors.

I doubt that you ever understood that "high crimes and misdemeanors" implicitly implies unlawful and/or improper conduct with consequences and that the Senate's responsibilities for impeachment trials are implicitly a check on the Executive for any malfeasance and/or misfeasance in office. That check written into the Constitution is certainly NOT a "civil process" as you have clung to in your misbelief of things Constitutional!

You opened your post to which I'm now responding with, "I'm sorry..." Finally, that is something upon which we can find common ground and agree! You are sorry, Tex! Ya'all have a nice day now, Tex, and try to keep your powder out of the water next time, drugstore cowboy!

I guess you didn't get the PB&J for lunch, did you piss your mommy off?

Impeachment is a constitutional civil administrative process conducted by the peoples elected representatives. SCOTUS is only involved when the impeachment is of the president. Even then the CJ is only there to maintain order and has no involvement in the decision. Now run along and play with your little friends, you're dismissed.

Your blather is full of shit, Tex, and your playground taunts are simply petty drivel from a small mind!

Impeachment trials for malfeasance and misfeasance emanating from the WH are criminal in their aspect. You can claim all fucking day that they are a "civil process" and ignore the citations I have provided displaying your stubborn, stupid wrongheadedness, but that will never change the fact that you are wrong!

You have become a waste of oxygen, Tex, and a fruitcake not worth a candle!

 

[OKTexas]

Couldn't just give a simple answer to a simple question, you just had to go off on another irrational rant.

Now for simple yes/no question number 2.

Is the standard for a conviction for removal, "beyond a reasonable doubt", like a criminal trial, or is it a simple "preponderance of the evidence", like a civil trial? No need to rant, just a short answer, because I'll just ignore the rant anyways.

You ignorant fuck! You were wrong! You've been shown you were wrong! An impeachment and the subsequent trial are a criminal process and NOT a "civil process" as you erroneously claimed, Tex! Live with it! You've been proven wrong, but you are unwilling to cope with the fact that you are all hat and no cattle, Tex.

Fuck your 20 questions bullshit! I'm on to that ploy, slick!

I'm sorry you can't seem to understand longer paragraphs so I was trying to walk you through it step by step. Evidently you lack the intellect to even do that. Now run along an play with your little friends and maybe your momma will fix you PB&J and a big glass of milk for lunch.

Finally you got the message that I'm on to your games of trying to change the narrative to avoid the topics of your errors.

I doubt that you ever understood that "high crimes and misdemeanors" implicitly implies unlawful and/or improper conduct with consequences and that the Senate's responsibilities for impeachment trials are implicitly a check on the Executive for any malfeasance and/or misfeasance in office. That check written into the Constitution is certainly NOT a "civil process" as you have clung to in your misbelief of things Constitutional!

You opened your post to which I'm now responding with, "I'm sorry..." Finally, that is something upon which we can find common ground and agree! You are sorry, Tex! Ya'all have a nice day now, Tex, and try to keep your powder out of the water next time, drugstore cowboy!

I guess you didn't get the PB&J for lunch, did you piss your mommy off?

Impeachment is a constitutional civil administrative process conducted by the peoples elected representatives. SCOTUS is only involved when the impeachment is of the president. Even then the CJ is only there to maintain order and has no involvement in the decision. Now run along and play with your little friends, you're dismissed.

Your blather is full of shit, Tex, and your playground taunts are simply petty drivel from a small mind!

Impeachment trials for malfeasance and misfeasance emanating from the WH are criminal in their aspect. You can claim all fucking day that they are a "civil process" and ignore the citations I have provided displaying your stubborn, stupid wrongheadedness, but that will never change the fact that you are wrong!

You have become a waste of oxygen, Tex, and a fruitcake not worth a candle!

Keep on try to rationalize your irrational bullshit. As far as the playground taunts, take a peak in the mirror, hypocrite.