Senate cannot try a private citizen !!!

[Faun]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

LOL

You're lying yet again, dumbfuck. Nowhere does the Constitution limit for whom the Senate can hold an impeachment trial. In fact, it says they have the power to try "ALL impeachments."

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

 

[Faun]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

LOLOL

Nowhere does the Constitution say that. You're fucking hallucinating again. Want proof...?

Quote the Constitution saying the Senate shall preside over impeaching the president.....

quit being anal retentive. Evryone knows what I meant. You pretend you don't because you know you've lost this argument.

You're a fucking moron... try quoting the part you "meant"... you'll still prove yourself to be the fucking moron the forum knows you to be....

 

[Skylar]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

LOLOL

Nowhere does the Constitution say that. You're fucking hallucinating again. Want proof...?

Quote the Constitution saying the Senate shall preside over impeaching the president.....

quit being anal retentive. Evryone knows what I meant. You pretend you don't because you know you've lost this argument.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT"

It says that the Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.

Remember, the Senate isn't bound to your imagination and made up pseudo-legal gibberish. But instead, the ACTUAL constitution. Which simply doesn't say what you do.

 

[bripat9643]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

You're lying again. The Constitution says there is...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Fawnboi is TILTING!

Laughing.....there is no exemption for private citizens. You've made that up. The constitution grants the Senate authority over ALL impeachment trials, with no exceptions.


"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

You ignore the constitution and imagine limits to the Senate's power that neither the Constitution nor history have ever recognized.

Good luck with that!

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

LOL

I like how you're trying to redefine the word, "ALL."

Never used the word “all”, Dumbfuck.

Keep TILTING, Fawnboi.

The Constitution certainly does.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

Not 'all impeachment trials except whatever Nostra makes up'. But all impeachment trials. If someone has been impeached, then the senate has the sole power over their impeachment trial.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment AND William Belknap.

Keep running, Troll. The constitution doesn't change just because you ignore it.

You're posting non sequiturs. William Belknap was not legally impeached. The only thing "impending" with rerad to Trump is a Democrat circus.

 

[bripat9643]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

LOLOL

Nowhere does the Constitution say that. You're fucking hallucinating again. Want proof...?

Quote the Constitution saying the Senate shall preside over impeaching the president.....

quit being anal retentive. Evryone knows what I meant. You pretend you don't because you know you've lost this argument.

You're a fucking moron... try quoting the part you "meant"... you'll still prove yourself to be the fucking moron the forum knows you to be....

You've already thoroughly embarassed yourself. There's no need for me to double down on your humiliation.

 

[bripat9643]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

LOL

You're lying yet again, dumbfuck. Nowhere does the Constitution limit for whom the Senate can hold an impeachment trial. In fact, it says they have the power to try "ALL impeachments."

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

Only someone suffering brain damage would believe your arguments are convincing.

 

[Skylar]

Then what are the consequences to me of being convicted by the Senate?

Have you been impeached by the House? Because that's the only way the Senate can try you.

I knew you were going to say that. You're just running away like a scared little girl.

If you've been impeached by the House, then a conviction in the Senate during your impeachment trial would mean that you can never hold federal elected office again. Its called 'disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States"

Which you'd know if you'd actually read the constitution rather than quoting your imagination.

 

[Faun]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

You're lying again. The Constitution says there is...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Fawnboi is TILTING!

Laughing.....there is no exemption for private citizens. You've made that up. The constitution grants the Senate authority over ALL impeachment trials, with no exceptions.


"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

You ignore the constitution and imagine limits to the Senate's power that neither the Constitution nor history have ever recognized.

Good luck with that!

There's no exemption for non Apple employees from being fired from Apple computer. That's what you're arguing.

You're arguing that being fired from Apple can forbid you from ever holding office again?

If no, then clearly you're not familiar with the potential consequences of an impeachment trial.

As always, your pseudo-legal gibberish obligates no one to do anything. As Trump's impending impeachment trial demonstrates elegantly.

I can always count on you to deliberately misconstrue what I said.

What is the consequence to me of being impeached by the Senate?

It means they can then vote to disqualify him from ever holding a federal office again. As opposed to your backyard circle jerk with your buddies only results in a mess you yourself will end up cleaning.

 

[bripat9643]

Then what are the consequences to me of being convicted by the Senate?

Have you been impeached by the House? Because that's the only way the Senate can try you.

I knew you were going to say that. You're just running away like a scared little girl.

If you've been impeached by the House, then a conviction in the Senate during your impeachment trial would mean that you can never hold federal elected office again. Its called 'disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States"

Which you'd know if you'd actually read the constitution rather than quoting your imagination.

I have never held a federal office, so it means nothing. Impeaching Schumar and Piglosi in my backyard has just as much significance.

 

[Nostra]

Fawnboi thinks the Senate can hold an impeachment trial for anyone.

 

[Skylar]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

LOLOL

Nowhere does the Constitution say that. You're fucking hallucinating again. Want proof...?

Quote the Constitution saying the Senate shall preside over impeaching the president.....

quit being anal retentive. Evryone knows what I meant. You pretend you don't because you know you've lost this argument.

You're a fucking moron... try quoting the part you "meant"... you'll still prove yourself to be the fucking moron the forum knows you to be....

You've already thoroughly embarassed yourself. There's no need for me to double down on your humiliation.

Laughing...says the poor dip that made up a passage in the Constitution that doesn't exist to support his failed argument.....while ignoring that the constitution actually says.

Here's the ACTUAL constitution:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

There's no caveats or exemptions from that Senate's authority over impeachment trials. You imagined it.

 

[Faun]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

LOL

You're lying yet again, dumbfuck. Nowhere does the Constitution limit for whom the Senate can hold an impeachment trial. In fact, it says they have the power to try "ALL impeachments."

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

Only someone suffering brain damage would believe your arguments are convincing.

LOL

Yet you've failed miserably to demonstrate "ALL" excludes anyone, including private citizens.

 

[bripat9643]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

When the Constitution provides a list of the only people something applies to, all others are exempt, you raving lunatic.

Fawnboi is tilting hard now.

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

You're lying again. The Constitution says there is...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Fawnboi is TILTING!

Laughing.....there is no exemption for private citizens. You've made that up. The constitution grants the Senate authority over ALL impeachment trials, with no exceptions.


"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

You ignore the constitution and imagine limits to the Senate's power that neither the Constitution nor history have ever recognized.

Good luck with that!

There's no exemption for non Apple employees from being fired from Apple computer. That's what you're arguing.

You're arguing that being fired from Apple can forbid you from ever holding office again?

If no, then clearly you're not familiar with the potential consequences of an impeachment trial.

As always, your pseudo-legal gibberish obligates no one to do anything. As Trump's impending impeachment trial demonstrates elegantly.

I can always count on you to deliberately misconstrue what I said.

What is the consequence to me of being impeached by the Senate?

It means they can then vote to disqualify him from ever holding a federal office again. As opposed to your backyard circle jerk with your buddies only results in a mess you yourself will end up cleaning.

There's no such consequence to me because I'm not a federal office holder, and neither is Trump, you fucking moron.

 

[Faun]

Fawnboi thinks the Senate can hold an impeachment trial for anyone.

You're lying again as I never said that. I said they can hold an impeachment trial for anyone impeached by the U.S. House.

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.

 

[Nostra]

Conviction is DOA. Votes are not there.

Move on fuckwits.

 

[Skylar]

Then what are the consequences to me of being convicted by the Senate?

Have you been impeached by the House? Because that's the only way the Senate can try you.

I knew you were going to say that. You're just running away like a scared little girl.

If you've been impeached by the House, then a conviction in the Senate during your impeachment trial would mean that you can never hold federal elected office again. Its called 'disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States"

Which you'd know if you'd actually read the constitution rather than quoting your imagination.

I have never held a federal office, so it means nothing. Impeaching Schumar and Piglosi in my backyard has just as much significance.

If you've never held a federal office, you couldn't have been impeached in the House. Making you irrelevant to what we're discussing.

While Trump was impeached while President (FYI...that's a federal office) and has talked about running again. Impeachment would disqualify him from ever doing so.

Again, read the ACTUAL constitution. The pseudo-legal gibberish you make up has nothing to do with it.

 

[Nostra]

Poor Fawnboi. He is losing it today.

 

[Skylar]

Conviction is DOA. Votes are not there.

Move on fuckwits.

The votes are indeed not there. The impeachment trial will proceed anyway.

 

[bripat9643]

Chief Justice Roberts states he will not participate in this unconstitutional farce.

Should I go with his knowledge of the Constitution, or that of unhinged, single digit IQ Dimwinger fuckwits on an innerweb message board?

Hmmmmm......

Do you have a link to that?

Your ignorance of Roberts’ refusal to oversee the Shampeachment trial isn’t my concern.

Translation: You're citing yourself AS Roberts. As Roberts has never claimed that the impeachment is an 'unconstitutional farce'.

Color me shocked.

Then he must be impeached. Why isn’t Nazi impeaching him?

You can’t win this.

Who is 'nazi' in your little imagination?

Remember, you're not quoting Roberts. You're quoting yourself. The only one saying that Roberts must be impeached is you, citing yourself as a constitutional authority.

And your source doesn't know what he's talking about.

If this trial is Constitutional the Constitution requires Roberts to preside.
Either it is Constitutional, or he is violating his oath and needs to be impeached.

LOLOLOL

Dumbfuck, you're inability to comprehend even basic logic here is cracking me up!

Roberts presides over impeachment trials for the president.

Twice Impeached Trump is NOT the president.

Therefore, Roberts cannot preside over Twice Impeached Trump's impeachment trial.
Savvy?

Trump isn't president. Where does the Constitution say he non-president can be tried as the result of an impeachment? It doesn't.

They hate the Constitution, so they ignore it.

There's no 'private citizen' exemption for impeachment trials. You've imagined it.

And the Senate isn't bound to your imagination. As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial.

There is no provision in the Constitution for the Senate to hold a trial for a private citizen.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

There's no 'private citizen' exemption. The senate has authority over all impeachment trials. Trump was impeached. Thus, the Senate has the authority to try him.

You imagined the 'private citizen' exemption. And your imagination is irrelevant to the Senate's authority. The constitution, however....is not.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

It doesn't say 'The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.....except if someone has already left office and is a private citizen at the time of the trial.

The limit to senate authority you've imagined......is completely made up. It simply doesn't exist in the constitution

Only a handful of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS are subject to the impeachment process. Private citizens are not subject to the impeachment process.

Says you citing you. The constitution however says that the Senate has authority over ALL impeachment trials.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

There is no 'private citizen' exemption to the Senate's authority. You imagined it. And your imagination is legally irrelevant.

As demonstrated by Trump's impending impeachment trial....and the impeachment trial of William Belknap

Try again, Troll.

It says the Senate shall preside over impeaching "THE PRESIDENT," you fucking moron.

LOLOL

Nowhere does the Constitution say that. You're fucking hallucinating again. Want proof...?

Quote the Constitution saying the Senate shall preside over impeaching the president.....

quit being anal retentive. Evryone knows what I meant. You pretend you don't because you know you've lost this argument.

You're a fucking moron... try quoting the part you "meant"... you'll still prove yourself to be the fucking moron the forum knows you to be....

You've already thoroughly embarassed yourself. There's no need for me to double down on your humiliation.

Laughing...says the poor dip that made up a passage in the Constitution that doesn't exist to support his failed argument.....while ignoring that the constitution actually says.

Here's the ACTUAL constitution:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

There's no caveats or exemptions from that Senate's authority over impeachment trials. You imagined it.

I made up nothing:

"When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside"​

Try quoting the relevant passage.

 

[Nostra]

Then what are the consequences to me of being convicted by the Senate?

Have you been impeached by the House? Because that's the only way the Senate can try you.

I knew you were going to say that. You're just running away like a scared little girl.

If you've been impeached by the House, then a conviction in the Senate during your impeachment trial would mean that you can never hold federal elected office again. Its called 'disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States"

Which you'd know if you'd actually read the constitution rather than quoting your imagination.

I have never held a federal office, so it means nothing. Impeaching Schumar and Piglosi in my backyard has just as much significance.

If you've never held a federal office, you couldn't have been impeached in the House. Making you irrelevant to what we're discussing.

While Trump was impeached while President (FYI...that's a federal office) and has talked about running again. Impeachment would disqualify him from ever doing so.

Again, read the ACTUAL constitution. The pseudo-legal gibberish you make up has nothing to do with it.

You don’t have the votes TRUMP 2024!