1
« Last post by taxed on Today at 08:55:23 PM »
Actually, it was Governor Rod Blagojevich who was under investigation for selling Obama's Senate seat, and he was impeached, charged, tried, and convicted of federal corruption charges.
With regard to voter fraud, you are talking about Chicago after all. One of the most corrupt cities in the country. Of course there was massive voter fraud. There will always be massive voter fraud when it comes to electing Democrats. It is the only way they can win and keep their stranglehold on their shit-hole cities.
Fast & Furious was AG Holder's fiasco. AG Sessions should be providing all the documentation to Congress about Fast & Furious that AG Holder refused to do, but he isn't. Why is AG Sessions protecting AG Holder and AG Lynch?
Benghazi was Hillary's screw-up, and again AG Sessions does absolutely nothing with regard to the multiple investigations into Hillary.
Sounds to me like your complaint should be with AG Sessions, not me. It is AG Sessions who is protecting Obama, Hillary, Holder, and Lynch, not I.
I am actually very well informed. Which is how I know that you cannot impeach someone who is no longer in public office.
Wrong!
2
« Last post by |Glitch| on Today at 08:51:38 PM »
TO GLITCH; still new at this. Obama was under FBI investigation, (SELLING/BUYING SENATOR SEAT) when VOTER FRAUD, was used to get in Obama. SPAIN counted the votes by a co., held partly by SOROS. FRAUD. OBAMA ON CORRUPT LIST SINCE 2006, & EVER YEAR AFTER THAT. FAST & FURIOUS, BENGHAZI, & MORE. GLITCH,,,YOU ARE NOT INFORMED. Obama like CLINTOONS,,,ALSO HAS A KILL LIST.
Actually, it was Governor Rod Blagojevich who was under investigation for selling Obama's Senate seat, and he was impeached, charged, tried, and convicted of federal corruption charges. With regard to voter fraud, you are talking about Chicago after all. One of the most corrupt cities in the country. Of course there was massive voter fraud. There will always be massive voter fraud when it comes to electing Democrats. It is the only way they can win and keep their stranglehold on their shit-hole cities. Fast & Furious was AG Holder's fiasco. AG Sessions should be providing all the documentation to Congress about Fast & Furious that AG Holder refused to do, but he isn't. Why is AG Sessions protecting AG Holder and AG Lynch? Benghazi was Hillary's screw-up, and again AG Sessions does absolutely nothing with regard to the multiple investigations into Hillary. Sounds to me like your complaint should be with AG Sessions, not me. It is AG Sessions who is protecting Obama, Hillary, Holder, and Lynch, not I. I am actually very well informed, better than you it would appear. Which is how I know that you cannot impeach someone who is no longer in public office.
3
« Last post by Rotwang on Today at 08:50:32 PM »
But......... in the great fantasy in my mind........... the deep state goes overboard and takes a mis-aimed pot shot at somebody in Trump's family..........
Trump loses his mind and just whips out -
-Prosecution of every last democrat / obama hack that he has the goods on
-McCain and RINO pals too
-Blows out the JFK truth
-Goes full bore on Awans, Seth Rich, Sex Slush Fund, Clinton Foundation, Weiner Laptop, F & F, Benghazi, Iran Cash
-Drops the bomb on the false flag business and Arkanside industry
+ 20 other things just like this
A guy can dream .........
I'm dreaming of McCain's DEATH. Although I'll bet it is PAINFUL to linger, DIE - John - DIE.
4
« Last post by Rotwang on Today at 08:47:49 PM »
Hilarious ! The EU decides it is going to tell the Internet what to do. The result = NO INTERNET !! https://www.cnet.com/how-to/what-gdpr-means-for-facebook-google-the-eu-us-and-you/
5
Cool, now I can fudge my log book with no consequences..Keep on Truckin' and Drive on... 
TO GLITCH; still new at this. Obama was under FBI investigation, (SELLING/BUYING SENATOR SEAT) when VOTER FRAUD, was used to get in Obama. SPAIN counted the votes by a co., held partly by SOROS. FRAUD. OBAMA ON CORRUPT LIST SINCE 2006, & EVER YEAR AFTER THAT. FAST & FURIOUS, BENGHAZI, & MORE. GLITCH,,,YOU ARE NOT INFORMED. Obama like CLINTOONS,,,ALSO HAS A KILL LIST.
6
« Last post by zewazir on Today at 07:34:48 PM »
7
« Last post by zewazir on Today at 07:26:11 PM »
That is the primary function of Congress. However, the House brings impeachment charges against federal officials as part of its oversight and investigatory responsibilities. (Keyword, (Responsibilities)
It is the House of Representative's duty to present the charges, and the Senate's duty to try the case. Another Keyword, (DUTY)
You missed the part "...that is no longer in office." No, they do not have a responsibility, nor duty to impeach a president who is no longer in office. Again, the ONLY purpose of impeachment under our Constitution is to remove an elected official from federal office. It is spelled out VERY clearly, even to the point of mentioning that the DOJ has the duty of actually prosecuting any crime after the impeachment/conviction process has removed the accused from office. Obama no longer holds office. So impeachment is an empty gesture even if it could be done. Impeachment would be an absolutely ASININE way of going after him for the crimes he committed while in office. Let Session wake up from his hibernation and use the DOJ to prosecute. It would also serve no practical purpose to go after him for any non-criminal abuses of presidential authority. Especially since conviction by the senate simply would never happen. Leave the bread-and-circuses crap to the progs. (BTW: Clinton was NOT barred from ever practicing law as an outcome of his impeachment. He was not convicted by the Senate. He WAS, however, barred from practicing law for a period of five years because a CRIMINAL court found him guilty of perjury - AFTER he left office.)
8
« Last post by Solar on Today at 06:52:21 PM »
You can only impeach someone who holds a public office at the time.
Say What? Did you not read my earlier post on precedence? Since Obama no longer holds a public office, he can't be impeached. I repeat, there is precedence! An impeached President is also not barred from holding public office. That depends on the outcome of the Impeachment. Bill Clinton was barred from ever practicing law. Only a President who has been impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate (in other words, removed from office) is barred from holding public office again. Clinton is barred from running for President again because the 22nd Amendment only allows a President to serve two terms, not because he was impeached. If Clinton wanted, he could run for Congress because he is not barred from holding a public office. He would not be the first former President to join Congress, if he did choose to run. That would depend completely on the outcome of an Impeachment. Since the President is a civilian, according to the Supreme Court, they cannot be tried by military tribunal. Strawman much? No one ever said such a thing.
9
« Last post by Solar on Today at 06:24:45 PM »
Ummmm, no....
We elect Congress to WRITE the law.
Besides, though we disagree, I still say there is no "duty" to impeach a president that is no longer in office. Far better (and far more possible) to convict him as a citizen.
That is the primary function of Congress. However, the House brings impeachment charges against federal officials as part of its oversight and investigatory responsibilities. (Keyword, ( Responsibilities) It is the House of Representative's duty to present the charges, and the Senate's duty to try the case. Another Keyword, ( DUTY)
10
« Last post by |Glitch| on Today at 05:37:09 PM »
I'm thinking his crimes will go the military tribunal route.
No it isn't. Impeach him so he can't run for office, and can't pretend he practices law anymore, and give him a big 'ol fat asterisk next to his name in the history books.
Who cares what libs think?
I thought it was meaningless?
It's not meaningless. To be an impeached President has to be embarrassing.
You can only impeach someone who holds a public office at the time. Since Obama no longer holds a public office, he can't be impeached. An impeached President is also not barred from holding public office. Only a President who has been impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate (in other words, removed from office) is barred from holding public office again. Clinton is barred from running for President again because the 22nd Amendment only allows a President to serve two terms, not because he was impeached. If Clinton wanted, he could run for Congress because he is not barred from holding a public office. He would not be the first former President to join Congress, if he did choose to run. Since the President is a civilian, according to the Supreme Court, they cannot be tried by military tribunal.
|
Recent Posts