What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

VIDEO: Watch Larry Elder Brilliantly Turn the Tables on "The Big Lie"

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
16,968
Reaction score
5,194
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
Why say it then? Trump is and will always be (so far) the only twice impeached president in U.S. history. It's as true today as it was in January.


An impeachment vote in the House doesn't throw the president out of office. I honestly can't tell if you know this or not.


No, the trial is. The impeachment is over after the House votes.

Ok.


You can impeach a former president and since he's no longer the current office holder it doesn't require the chief justice to preside.

You guys really are this dumb.

Wrong.
The ONLY legal point of impeachment is the temporary removal from office, so that there can be a trial over permanent removal from office.
Impeachment of one no longer in office already, is totally and completely illegal.
Impeachment is NOT and can NOT be used as a punishment.
And if the person is no longer in office, that is the ONLY possible purpose of impeachment proceedings.
So Trump being impeached twice says NOTHING about Trump, since there was no conviction AFTER the impeachment.
What 2 impeachments that failed to prove anything shows, is total disregard for law by Congress.
They are an indictment of Congress, as the single most partisan and corrupt congress in all of US history.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
16,968
Reaction score
5,194
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
Mueller found five clear cases of obstruction of justice and laid out a roadmap for impeachment.

There was no equivocation as to whether Trump committed crimes or not. Mueller was clear that he would not accuse the president of committing crimes while he was in the office, but he based on the evidence, could not and would not exonerate him.

Your interpretation of Mueller’s refusal or inability to prosecute, as vindication and proof of Trump’s innocence is simply a desperate ploy to deny that Trump is a criminal.

WRONG!
I never said that Mueller should have or could have prosecuted.
The point is he NEVER said there was evidence of any crime.
Not exonerating is not equivalent to saying he found evidence of a crime.
Mueller never said he found evidence of a crime.
Obstruction is a suspicion, not proof.
Like when Reagan claimed he did not remember trading jet parts to Iran for cash given to Contras, that was just suspicion of a crime, not proof.

There is no such thing as a "clear case" of obstruction.
Each person remembers the same event differently, or maybe not at all.
The most Mueller could have done was to find contradictions between different testimony, not hard proof.
That would have required something like a tape of a meeting to deliberately conspire, and there was never anything like that.

Point being that there was never any quid pro quo.
The Russians never did anything that benefited Trump or show Trump did anything to benefit the Russians.
There was never even any evidence to indicate the Russians were the ones to hack the DNC emails.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
16,968
Reaction score
5,194
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
What the hell does temporarily impeached mean? He was impeached, twice. It happened in the house. I saw it with my own eyes.

The trial that took place in the senate started on February 9th. Guess who wasn't president.




The chief justice is only required to sit in on impeachment trials of the current president. Period. End of story.

You people are so annoying in how uninformed you are.

What is so obviously wrong with that statement is that ONLY a sitting president (or any office holder), can be impeached.
The point of an impeachment is just to temporarily remove the person from office, so they can have a trial.
A person no longer in office, can be tried without an impeachment.
So then clearly impeaching one out of office is illegally trying to use impeachment to punish.
That is a serious crime all by itself.
Impeachment can not legally be used to punish or establish guilt.
So the impeachments of Trump were totally and completely illegal.
The trials they led to found no evidence of any guilt, and impeaching someone out of office is totally illegal.
 

HappyJoy

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
31,097
Reaction score
5,485
Points
1,140
What is so obviously wrong with that statement is that ONLY a sitting president (or any office holder), can be impeached.
The point of an impeachment is just to temporarily remove the person from office, so they can have a trial.

You've clearly done your home work. :alcoholic:

A person no longer in office, can be tried without an impeachment.

In the senate? Hmm. I'm learning so much.

So then clearly impeaching one out of office is illegally trying to use impeachment to punish.
That is a serious crime all by itself.

Show me the law or you know...anything that demonstrates impeaching someone out of office is illegal.
Impeachment can not legally be used to punish or establish guilt.

OK. It doesn't do either.

So the impeachments of Trump were totally and completely illegal.

Based on your interesting understanding of what an impeachment actually is.

The trials they led to found no evidence of any guilt,

That's not true. There was a lot of evidence and the 2nd impeachment trial led to quite a few Republicans finding TFG guilty. Far more bipartisan than any impeachment for a sitting president ever was.

and impeaching someone out of office is totally illegal.

Oh, but that didn't happen.

I don't think you have even an elementary school level of understanding on this topic.
 

HappyJoy

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
31,097
Reaction score
5,485
Points
1,140
Impeachment is ONLY for a sitting president, you dumb Nazi twat.

That's obviously not true since it happened. If you'd like to point out in the Constitution where you find that little bit of info that would be great, it'd almost be like you're debating or somethin'.
 

HappyJoy

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
31,097
Reaction score
5,485
Points
1,140
You claimed colluding with the Russians was illegal if Trump did it. Now that it's proven you fucking Nazis colluded with Russia to try and overthrow the Trump presidency, you claim it isn't illegal?

You fucking Nazis are such pathetic hypocrites - as well as being traitors to this nation.
Colluding with Russia is illegal. However I was talking about the Trump impeachments specifically.
 

HappyJoy

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
31,097
Reaction score
5,485
Points
1,140
Are you denying that Peter Strzok filed a false FISA application, felony perjury, in order to engage in espionage against the president of the United States for the purpose of overthrowing the executive branch of the United States Government?


This is established fact



Ohhh, we have an internet tough guy...

View attachment 569385

So, we don't know what treason means then? I'm not sure why you're replying with links that are very non-specific to the point you're making. I simply replied to a post stating someone doesn't understand the meaning of treason as it related to our Constitution.
 

Uncensored2008

Libertarian Radical
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
95,796
Reaction score
26,120
Points
2,180
Location
Behind the Orange Curtain
That's obviously not true since it happened.

All sorts of things happen at the hands of you Nazis that have no place in the Constitution of the Republic you wage war against.

If you'd like to point out in the Constitution where you find that little bit of info that would be great, it'd almost be like you're debating or somethin'.

So, can you impeach any citizen?

Why or why not?

It was a fucking clown show and so absurd the Chief Justice refused to sully himself with your treason.
 

Dragonlady

Designing Woman
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
34,213
Reaction score
15,511
Points
1,600
Location
Niagara Escarpment
Note the two different and very important words in your post, "recommend" and "file". Now note what is different about them. Now tell me where anyone said there is a law that a special prosecutor could not state that the president broke a law. Remember, NOT "file charges".


In the summary of his report, Mueller said:

“Second, while the OLC opinion concludes that a sitting president may not be prosecuted, it recognizes that a criminal investigation during the president’s term is permissible. The OLC opinion also recognizes that a president does not have immunity after he leaves office. And if individuals other than the president committed an obstruction offense, they may be prosecuted at this time. Given those considerations, the facts known to us and the strong public Interest interest in safeguarding the integrity of the criminal justice system, we conducted a thorough factual investigation in order to preserve the evidence when memories were fresh and documentary materials were available.”

Mueller refused to even opine if the president committed a crime or not and he stated that clearly in his report.

But then he also went on to say that if he was sure that the president hadn’t committed a crime, he could have and would have exonerated him. He did not do that. So well lol I didn’t accuse trump of a crime he did collect the evidence and left it to others to make the decision as to whether he would be charged for the crimes that were found, after Trump left office.

Trump should be down on his hands and knees kissing Joe Biden’s feet for not proceeding with charges against him considering his entire administration was a four-year crime spree of graft, corruption, pay for play, and outright dishonesty.
 

Dragonlady

Designing Woman
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
34,213
Reaction score
15,511
Points
1,600
Location
Niagara Escarpment
Are you denying that Peter Strzok filed a false FISA application, felony perjury, in order to engage in espionage against the president of the United States for the purpose of overthrowing the executive branch of the United States Government?


This is established fact



Ohhh, we have an internet tough guy...

View attachment 569385

Peter Stroz did no such thing. Carter Page was not even a part of the Trump campaign when the FISA application was filed. The FBI had Page under surveillance for years prior to him being hired by the Trump campaign and ceased that surveillance while he with the Trump campaign.

The FISA application with the changed document was filed AFTER Carter page had left the campaign, so it couldn’t possibly have been done in order to spy on the campaign.

You stupid fools never ever mention that part. That Carter Page had left the Trump campaign when the FISA application was filed. I guess they didn’t have it on Fox news for you.
 

Uncensored2008

Libertarian Radical
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
95,796
Reaction score
26,120
Points
2,180
Location
Behind the Orange Curtain
Peter Stroz did no such thing. Carter Page was not even a part of the Trump campaign when the FISA application was filed. The FBI had Page under surveillance for years prior to him being hired by the Trump campaign and ceased that surveillance while he with the Trump campaign.

The FISA application with the changed document was filed AFTER Carter page had left the campaign, so it couldn’t possibly have been done in order to spy on the campaign.

You stupid fools never ever mention that part. That Carter Page had left the Trump campaign when the FISA application was filed. I guess they didn’t have it on Fox news for you.

Read the source material provided, stupid fuck.

God you Nazis are tiresome - you don't deal with the facts at all.
 

HappyJoy

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
31,097
Reaction score
5,485
Points
1,140
All sorts of things happen at the hands of you Nazis that have no place in the Constitution of the Republic you wage war against.



So, can you impeach any citizen?

Why or why not?

It was a fucking clown show and so absurd the Chief Justice refused to sully himself with your treason.
The chief justice wasn't asked since he was not required to be there.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$95.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top