Santos Expelled from House

[Procrustes Stretched]

Is there really such a thing as an honest politician?

Yes.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why not just get rid of the two major poltical parties and start from scratch?

Imbecilic notion. What do you suggest, the government get rid of the parties?

think it through, how you trap yourself in your own bullshit.

 

[Blaster]

Yes.

You are living in an alternate universe.

 

[Blaster]

Imbecilic notion. What do you suggest, the government get rid of the parties?

What good do they do for the American people?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What good do they do for the American people?

Ask Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Oh wait!

never mind

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It's about House Rules. Read the US Constitution.

 

[Blaster]

Ask Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.

Do you talk to dead people?

 

[BackAgain]

BackAgain Democrat Rep: Republicans defending Trump "are getting dangerously close to criminal culpability" :CaughtAgain

“Lock her up” was a legitimate demand for an arrest based on criminal conduct." -- An arrest? Anything like an expulsion? What criminal conduct, if there was no warrant/filing/charges?

No alleged criminal conduct. You people only kid yourselves.

How stupid are you? Don’t bother trying to answer. Youre not up to the task

No. An arrest is not akin to an expulsion.

Arrests most often precede any filing of charges.

Destroying her phones and emails was criminal conduct. She should have been prosecuted.

 

[Toro]

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Do you talk to dead people?

You don't?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You can point out to BackAgain that people who at first were not onboard with expulsion, waited as until more evidence was in from the Ethics committee. You can point out there actually was anything but a rush to judgement. But to go back again to facts... wasting your time. Liability is like a dog with a bone he refuses to give up -- not knowing the bone is poisonous. Or like Trump ignoring legal advice to comply with a federal subpoena because 'They're mine!'

True.

And the blind partisan right is whining because Santos is a Republican.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

How stupid are you? Don’t bother trying to answer. Youre not up to the task

No. An arrest is not akin to an expulsion.

Arrests most often precede any filing of charges.

Destroying her phones and emails was criminal conduct. She should have been prosecuted.

You are unaware of things.

Lack of self-awareness.

There is a process when Congresspeople get expelled. There were investigations that preceded the expulsion hearing.

And your derangement syndrome when it comes to the Clintons exposes you.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

True.

And the blind partisan right is whining because Santos is a Republican.

a MAGA Republican at that.

 

[BackAgain]

It's about House Rules. Read the US Constitution.

Nope. Understand what you read.

Trust me. It would be better for all concerned.

Let me boil it down for you:

The Constitution permits each house to create its own rules. So far, so good.

The Constitution also explicitly allows each house to expel its own members (by 2/3 majority).

That doesn’t make the House rules necessarily Constitutional. And it doesn’t make its rules for expelling a member merely subject to a 2/3 vote.

I could explain it to you more succinctly if you were adept at listening. But you’re not.

However, I will provide you with a hint. Others will understand. You almost certainly will not:

If 2/3 of the House decided that they dislike a particular member’s mere expression of affiliation with some Palestinian types (given the Hamas atrocities of 10/7), in your baseless opinion you seem to believe that that alone (the 2/3 supermajority) would suffice to expel that member.

 

[hjmick]

Good. That fucker makes AOC look smart.

 

[BackAgain]

You are unaware of things.

Lack of self-awareness.

There is a process when Congresspeople get expelled. There were investigations that preceded the expulsion hearing.

And your derangement syndrome when it comes to the Clintons exposes you.

Your bloviation exposes you for the simpleton you are.

We know there is a process. Ffs, even a dope like you figured that much out.

Now answer the question:

Beyond the 2/3rds supermajority vote requirement, is the authority of each house to expel its own members unlimited?

This should require a simple yes or no. But I doubt you’re up to that, dainty.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

How does expelling a member of congress benefit the American people? It is just more political theater.

It takes a little bit of corruption out of the monkey cage that is Congress.

 

[Failzero]

If Santos was a democrat, they wouldn't have had the votes for removal.

But Gaetz wanted him to stay so he had to go

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Nope. Understand what you read.

Trust me. It would be better for all concerned.

Let me boil it down for you:

The Constitution permits each house to create its own rules. So far, so good.

The Constitution also explicitly allows each house to expel its own members (by 2/3 majority).

That doesn’t make the House rules necessarily Constitutional. And it doesn’t make its rules for expelling a member merely subject to a 2/3 vote.

I could explain it to you more succinctly if you were adept at listening. But you’re not.

However, I will provide you with a hint. Others will understand. You almost certainly will not:

If 2/3 of the House decided that they dislike a particular member’s mere expression of affiliation with some Palestinian types (given the Hamas atrocities of 10/7), in your baseless opinion you seem to believe that that alone (the 2/3 supermajority) would suffice to expel that member.

That doesn’t make the House rules necessarily Constitutional.

Who has ever challenged the constitutionality of the House rule on expulsion?

Section 5: Powers and Duties of Congress​

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

Dante believes you assume he supports the Squad or others merely because they're Left? He doesn't. And Dante doesn't even support members merely because they're Democrats. That out of the way, your example is waaay out there. The House rules do not support expulsion for stating opinions.

Not sure what kind of fallacy to assign your nonsense to, but...

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Your bloviation exposes you for the simpleton you are.

We know there is a process. Ffs, even a dope like you figured that much out.

Now answer the question:

Beyond the 2/3rds supermajority vote requirement, is the authority of each house to expel its own members unlimited?

This should require a simple yes or no. But I doubt you’re up to that, dainty.

Dante is not on trial.