Only In A Democrat Kangaroo Court Can A Democrat Be A Witness, Judge, & Jurer

[Flash]

Capitol Building To Be Decorated As Giant Circus Tent For Duration Of Impeachment Hearingshttps://t.co/EJP1NOaZzw

 

[Pogo]

Banana Republic: Impartial Impeachment
“Judge” Votes With Democrats in Vote to
Impeach Private Citizen



"This is what happens in banana republics and Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union. The Senate impeachment “judge” voted on Tuesday to proceed with the impeachment of private citizen Donald Trump."

"Far-left Senator Patrick Leahy is acting as witness, juror and judge in this sham proceeding."


This whole thing would be funny if it was not both Un-Constitutional & Criminaly treasonous.

Banana Republic: Impartial Impeachment "Judge" Votes With Democrats in Vote to Impeach Private Citizen

This is what happens in banana republics and Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union. Democrats don’t care. The Senate impeachment “judge” voted on Tuesday to proceed with the impeachment of private citizen Donald Trump. Far-left Senator Patrick Leahy is acting as witness, juror and judge in this sham...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

For those whose "Civics" class dealt with how to change the muffler on a Honda, it's standard procedure for some Senator to preside in the Chamber, and standard for the President Pro Tempore or the Vice President to preside in an impeachment of other than a sitting POTUS. That standard procedure includes voting, always did, from Daniel Inouye at the impeachment of Porteus to Thomas Jefferson at the impeachment of Blount in the eighteenth century. NONE of which has a goddam thing to do with political parties.

Perhaps news travels slow to the OP's home garbage can.

The fact that you are attempting to defend the Democrats running a kangaroo Court with a Trump-hating Democrat as witness, judge, and juror only proves my point. The Un-Constitutionality and ridiculousness of this whole thing is why Roberts wants no part in it.

It's a sham. Onlysnowflakes can and will try to defend such a joke.

If your teacher ever succeeds in teaching you how to read, you'll notice that not only does the quoted post have no need to "defend" jack friggety, being a simple Cliff's Notes primer for the uninterested on How The Senate Works, but you'll also discover --- oh happy day - discovery --- that I specifically pointed out that it has NOTHING to do with political parties anyway.

I posted a simple outline of how the Senate routinely works. Go find a flaw in any of what I put down. And when you realize you can't do it, that's your cue to come back and kiss my ass. Think you can handle that? I know that'll take you a while so imma go ahead and have a bowl of chili.

Well hell, why don't we just allow plaintiffs serve as witnesses, jury members, and Judges in ever trial in the US?! What a gerat fu@king idea, snowflake!

It's the fairest plan Democrat TDS-suffering twats can come up with tho finally overcome 4 years of failure and finallyexact their revenge.

Bwuhahahaha

Looks like you're ready to osculate some ass.

Whelp, here's why we don't do that. A Senate impeachment trial is not a CRIMINAL trial. It isn't proving a crime occurred nor can it administer judicial penalty for it. That's a whole separate process. An impeachment trial determines whether the article(s) cited warrant removal and/or disqualification from office, and the Senate, again .... ROUTINELY ..... rotates some Senator. or the VP, to preside over ANY business. The sole exception is the impeachment trial of a SITTING POTUS, in which the SCOTUS Chief presides. And he could have had it if he wanted it but he begged off.

 

[B. Kidd]

"Far-left Senator Patrick Leahy is acting as witness, juror and judge in this sham proceeding."

Bullshit.
Leahy cannot overturn the vote of the Senate.

In a real jury trial, the judge can over ride the decision.

Can a Judge Overturn a Jury Verdict?

Brien Roche
In any trial the judge is the ultimate decision maker and has the power to overturn a jury verdict if there is insufficient evidence to support that verdict or if the decision granted inadequate compensatory damages. The term used to describe this action is judgement notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) or judgement of acquittal in a criminal case.

Leahy is on record prior to this Shampeachment stating many times that Trump should be impeached. If this was a criminal trial, Leahy would have been removed for conflict of interest before this began, grasshopper!

 

[Flash]

I hope this drags on for months. Less time these Democrat turds can screw us over in other ways.

 

[Flash]

 

[Pogo]

Banana Republic: Impartial Impeachment
“Judge” Votes With Democrats in Vote to
Impeach Private Citizen



"This is what happens in banana republics and Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union. The Senate impeachment “judge” voted on Tuesday to proceed with the impeachment of private citizen Donald Trump."

"Far-left Senator Patrick Leahy is acting as witness, juror and judge in this sham proceeding."


This whole thing would be funny if it was not both Un-Constitutional & Criminaly treasonous.

Banana Republic: Impartial Impeachment "Judge" Votes With Democrats in Vote to Impeach Private Citizen

This is what happens in banana republics and Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union. Democrats don’t care. The Senate impeachment “judge” voted on Tuesday to proceed with the impeachment of private citizen Donald Trump. Far-left Senator Patrick Leahy is acting as witness, juror and judge in this sham...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

For those whose "Civics" class dealt with how to change the muffler on a Honda, it's standard procedure for some Senator to preside in the Chamber, and standard for the President Pro Tempore or the Vice President to preside in an impeachment of other than a sitting POTUS. That standard procedure includes voting, always did, from Daniel Inouye at the impeachment of Porteus to Thomas Jefferson at the impeachment of Blount in the eighteenth century. NONE of which has a goddam thing to do with political parties.

Perhaps news travels slow to the OP's home garbage can.

Bull. Spare us the sophistry. Leahy is a partisan leftist hack. That's all.

Actually he's the President Pro Tempore as the longest-serving Senator. That's all there is to it.

As was Inouye in the Porteus impeachment. And so on.

For those of you completely oblivious to Robert's Rules of Order, all the chair does is keep order, declare the session open or adjourned, etc. Partisanship" doesn't even enter into that.

 

[postman]

Nonsense.
It's unconstitutional to apply an impeachment process to a private citizen.

That isn't provided in the Constitution, correct. It's moot in this case though, as Rump was impeached while he was in office. Both times.

Half an impeachment does not a TOTAL impeachment make! Idiot.

You talk of an impeachment process. Which would be the impeachment, and the trial. Once the ball starts rolling, why should a change of status, especially one caused by intentional delays, change anything.

You are making a case that someone impeached could wait for the senators to vote guilty / not guilty, and if it looks like he would be convicted, he resign effective immediately, thus becoming a private citizen. Making the trial moot, and any judgement unconstitutional.

An impeachment get out of jail free clause.

 

[Pogo]

Banana Republic: Impartial Impeachment
“Judge” Votes With Democrats in Vote to
Impeach Private Citizen



"This is what happens in banana republics and Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union. The Senate impeachment “judge” voted on Tuesday to proceed with the impeachment of private citizen Donald Trump."

"Far-left Senator Patrick Leahy is acting as witness, juror and judge in this sham proceeding."


This whole thing would be funny if it was not both Un-Constitutional & Criminaly treasonous.

Banana Republic: Impartial Impeachment "Judge" Votes With Democrats in Vote to Impeach Private Citizen

This is what happens in banana republics and Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union. Democrats don’t care. The Senate impeachment “judge” voted on Tuesday to proceed with the impeachment of private citizen Donald Trump. Far-left Senator Patrick Leahy is acting as witness, juror and judge in this sham...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

When republicans get control, they will preemptively impeach every Dem they can so that none can ever hold office.

If "every Dem" sends a mob to sack the Capitol, prevent Constitutional government from operating, kill cops, build gallowses, run around with Molotov cocktails and plant bombs, as well as shit on the floor, then by all means "every Dem" should be impeached and barred from office as well.

You be sure to let us all know when that happens, Dingo.

 

[postman]

Leahy is on record prior to this Shampeachment stating many times that Trump should be impeached. If this was a criminal trial, Leahy would have been removed for conflict of interest before this began, grasshopper!

And every republican save Mitt Romney is on record stating many times that Trump should NOT be impeached.
If this was a criminal trial, every republican would have been removed for having a predisposed judgement.

 

[B. Kidd]

Nonsense.
It's unconstitutional to apply an impeachment process to a private citizen.

That isn't provided in the Constitution, correct. It's moot in this case though, as Rump was impeached while he was in office. Both times.

Half an impeachment does not a TOTAL impeachment make! Idiot.

You talk of an impeachment process. Which would be the impeachment, and the trial. Once the ball starts rolling, why should a change of status, especially one caused by intentional delays, change anything.

You are making a case that someone impeached could wait for the senators to vote guilty / not guilty, and if it looks like he would be convicted, he resign effective immediately, thus becoming a private citizen. Making the trial moot, and any judgement unconstitutional.

An impeachment get out of jail free clause.

Get out of jail?
Impeachment is NOT a criminal process as it's purely political. No time served even if a crime. Just removal from office.
You don't understand the impeachment process!

 

[Pogo]

Nonsense.
It's unconstitutional to apply an impeachment process to a private citizen.

That isn't provided in the Constitution, correct. It's moot in this case though, as Rump was impeached while he was in office. Both times.

Half an impeachment does not a TOTAL impeachment make! Idiot.

You talk of an impeachment process. Which would be the impeachment, and the trial. Once the ball starts rolling, why should a change of status, especially one caused by intentional delays, change anything.

You are making a case that someone impeached could wait for the senators to vote guilty / not guilty, and if it looks like he would be convicted, he resign effective immediately, thus becoming a private citizen. Making the trial moot, and any judgement unconstitutional.

An impeachment get out of jail free clause.

Exactly. What if McTurtle had allowed the trial to start during Rump's term, then paused for the inauguration, then what? Would it just shut down because its target left office? That would mean all McTurtle or the party on defense in general, would have to do, would be to stall until the subject was out of office, and get off scot free without a trial at all.

If some clown is arrested for embezzlement, then gets fired from his job, does he not still go on trial for what he did before he was fired?

Obviously this is a pointless evasion tactic for a case they can't win.

 

[easyt65]

If you don't like it, then amend the constitution. Or suggest that everybody witness to what happened on 1-6 recuse themselves from the jury.

The Constitution states an Impeachment mustbe presided by the Chief justice, who refuses to participate in an Un-Constitutional abuse of power intended to protect the Democratic party from a perceived future political Threat.



I would welcome witnesses. I would love to see called as witnesses:

1. FBI Members
They could testify how the events of 6 jan were Pre-planned on BigTech Twitter and facebook without the President's knowledge, participation, or encouragement / incitement.

The FBVI could answer why they knew abot the Pending violence and did nothing to stop it.

2. Capitol Police
Theycould alsoanswer the question about how theyknew of the pending violence and did nothing to prevent it or beef up to be ready for it. They could testify / answer to why their members moved barriers to give the tioters access to the Capitol, why they stood down and allowed windows to be broken and entry into ther Capitol, why they guided rioters throughthe Capitol...WHO paid them / ordered them to do so....

3. Maxine Waters
She could testify about how she incited illegal public harassment and confrontateion / assault og GOP Reps and Trump Team Members

4. Nancy Pelosi
She could testify how she and other Democfrats incited the attempted assassination of GOP Politicians, how immediatelyafterwards Democrats apologized for their violent rhetoric that contributed to the attempted murder of fellow Republicn politicians...she couls also testify about her own threats against the President. UYse the videotape of Pelosi's interview in whichshe declres this is a Democrat Shhap Impeachment to protect the Party by finally taking out Trump - use it againsther and the Democrats

5. Chuck Schumer
He could answer for his threat of violence against USSC justices

6 The current VP, Harris
She could answer for helping bail out terrorists during riots that caused BILLIONS of dollars in damage throughout Democrat-run communities to put these terrorists back on the streets to perpetrate more crime / damage...she could answer for inciting Antifa / BLM to continue committing acts of terrorism and violence after the election

7. Feinstein, Swalwell
They can answer for their CCP-espionage facilitation and answer the question if the CCP funded, supported, or incited Antifa's / BLM's participation in ther 6 Jan violence, since it is already proven these groups are partially funded bythe CCP.

I would welcome putting Democrats on trial as well.

 

[easyt65]

Whelp, here's why we don't do that. A Senate impeachment trial is not a CRIMINAL trial. It isn't proving a crime occurred nor can it administer judicial penalty for it.

Nancy Pelosi already confessed the Impeachment is a sham, an abuse of power being carried out to protect the Democratic Partyfrpm a perceived future political threat.

The FBI has already proved that the events of 6 Jan was the result of pre-planning that did not include the knowledge or participation of the President.

The President's speech Transcripts prove he did not call for violence - just the opposite.

The reason the Democrats have had to put a Trump-hating Democrat as witness, juror, and Judge is because al the evidence - and Pelosi's confession - dstroys their case, whelp.

 

[BlindBoo]

Nonsense.
It's unconstitutional to apply an impeachment process to a private citizen.

Trump wasn't a private citizen when he incited violence.
Trump wasn't a private citizen when they impeached him
Trump wasn't a private citizen when they delivered the articles of impeachment to the senate for trial.
But Mitch McConnell sat on his hands to give Trump time to become a private citizen.
But that doesn't fly.

If the republican delay made the trial unconstitutional, then the republican delay would be unconstitutional.

This whole shitshow infomercial is unconstitutional!
The penalty for impeachment is removal from office. He is not in office dimwit!

Removal from office is not the only penalty of being convicted.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Banana Republic: Impartial Impeachment
“Judge” Votes With Democrats in Vote to
Impeach Private Citizen



"This is what happens in banana republics and Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union. The Senate impeachment “judge” voted on Tuesday to proceed with the impeachment of private citizen Donald Trump."

"Far-left Senator Patrick Leahy is acting as witness, juror and judge in this sham proceeding."


This whole thing would be funny if it was not both Un-Constitutional & Criminaly treasonous.

Banana Republic: Impartial Impeachment "Judge" Votes With Democrats in Vote to Impeach Private Citizen

This is what happens in banana republics and Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union. Democrats don’t care. The Senate impeachment “judge” voted on Tuesday to proceed with the impeachment of private citizen Donald Trump. Far-left Senator Patrick Leahy is acting as witness, juror and judge in this sham...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

For those whose "Civics" class dealt with how to change the muffler on a Honda, it's standard procedure for some Senator to preside in the Chamber, and standard for the President Pro Tempore or the Vice President to preside in an impeachment of other than a sitting POTUS. That standard procedure includes voting, always did, from Daniel Inouye at the impeachment of Porteus to Thomas Jefferson at the impeachment of Blount in the eighteenth century. NONE of which has a goddam thing to do with political parties.

Perhaps news travels slow to the OP's home garbage can.

Bull. Spare us the sophistry. Leahy is a partisan leftist hack. That's all.

Actually he's the President Pro Tempore as the longest-serving Senator. That's all there is to it.

As was Inouye in the Porteus impeachment. And so on.

For those of you completely oblivious to Robert's Rules of Order, all the chair does is keep order, declare the session open or adjourned, etc. Partisanship" doesn't even enter into that.

He has no vote but he is a partisan hack. Anyway, this is kabuki theatre of the ages. It's all a show based on propaganda and partisan hackery. Nothing else.

 

[B. Kidd]

Nonsense.
It's unconstitutional to apply an impeachment process to a private citizen.

Trump wasn't a private citizen when he incited violence.
Trump wasn't a private citizen when they impeached him
Trump wasn't a private citizen when they delivered the articles of impeachment to the senate for trial.
But Mitch McConnell sat on his hands to give Trump time to become a private citizen.
But that doesn't fly.

If the republican delay made the trial unconstitutional, then the republican delay would be unconstitutional.

This whole shitshow infomercial is unconstitutional!
The penalty for impeachment is removal from office. He is not in office dimwit!

Removal from office is not the only penalty of being convicted.

It's the primary one and the Constitution uses the word 'Shall' meaning that it has to be applied! It cannot be applied because he is not sitting in office. Therefore, one more reason this Shampeachment IS unconstitutional!

 

[BlindBoo]

Nonsense.
It's unconstitutional to apply an impeachment process to a private citizen.

Trump wasn't a private citizen when he incited violence.
Trump wasn't a private citizen when they impeached him
Trump wasn't a private citizen when they delivered the articles of impeachment to the senate for trial.
But Mitch McConnell sat on his hands to give Trump time to become a private citizen.
But that doesn't fly.

If the republican delay made the trial unconstitutional, then the republican delay would be unconstitutional.

This whole shitshow infomercial is unconstitutional!
The penalty for impeachment is removal from office. He is not in office dimwit!

Removal from office is not the only penalty of being convicted.

It's the primary one and the Constitution uses the word 'Shall' meaning that it has to be applied! It cannot be applied because he is not sitting in office. Therefore, one more reason this Shampeachment IS unconstitutional!

There is nothing in that 'shall' that prohibits the Senate trying him for acts he committed as President.

 

[postman]

You are making a case that someone impeached could wait for the senators to vote guilty / not guilty, and if it looks like he would be convicted, he resign effective immediately, thus becoming a private citizen. Making the trial moot, and any judgement unconstitutional.

An impeachment get out of jail free clause.

Get out of jail?
Impeachment is NOT a criminal process as it's purely political. No time served even if a crime. Just removal from office.
You don't understand the impeachment process!

Get out of jail is an American idiom. Saying the senate can't render judgement because the person became a private citizen partway through the process would mean even just seconds before he was declared guilty, the impeached resigns from office. He would escape being removed from office, and escape being prevented from future office.

For the president, it means he keeps his pension and other perks of office.

 

[B. Kidd]

Nonsense.
It's unconstitutional to apply an impeachment process to a private citizen.

Trump wasn't a private citizen when he incited violence.
Trump wasn't a private citizen when they impeached him
Trump wasn't a private citizen when they delivered the articles of impeachment to the senate for trial.
But Mitch McConnell sat on his hands to give Trump time to become a private citizen.
But that doesn't fly.

If the republican delay made the trial unconstitutional, then the republican delay would be unconstitutional.

This whole shitshow infomercial is unconstitutional!
The penalty for impeachment is removal from office. He is not in office dimwit!

Removal from office is not the only penalty of being convicted.

It's the primary one and the Constitution uses the word 'Shall' meaning that it has to be applied! It cannot be applied because he is not sitting in office. Therefore, one more reason this Shampeachment IS unconstitutional!

There is nothing in that 'shall' that prohibits the Senate trying him for acts he committed as President.

Why do you and your ilk continue to shit on our Constitution?

 

[postman]

There is nothing in that 'shall' that prohibits the Senate trying him for acts he committed as President.

Why do you and your ilk continue to shit on our Constitution?

Secretary of War Belknap though he could get away from impeachment by secretly resigning. The house impeached him anyway, and the senate tried him. The senate even debated if they could try a private citizen, and they agreed they had that power.