The oath of office no longer applies to Republicans

[BWK]

I just posted it. The abuse of power was the factual based evidence of using a foreign power to collude and get political dirt on Trump's opponent in exchange for military aid Trump had no legal right to leverage with. It was already proven with zero defense from the Right.

Nope, you posted something that says breaking laws while in office is "an abuse of power." Name the laws that Trump broke. You can't say "abuse of power." You're in an infinite loop.

You can't debate anything. Remember, you're a pos quitter with a pussy. Why would you pretend to want to know? Factbox: Abuse of power, obstruction - the charges against Trump explained

Don't even read your own links, do ya? From the article:

Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

Ha flaming idiot, did you read the next sentence? You folks are so fucking dumb.
Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

But the founders of the United States intended the phrase” other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” to broadly encompass abuses of power, legal scholars said.

Yeah, I read that, leftist commie legal scholars. And it said "to broadly" meaning it can apply to anybody at any time. So when the next commie President is in the White House under Republican House leadership, we are going to do the exact same; use that weak generalization of high crimes.

You read it from the "Leftist commie scholars" and yet you posted your counter argument from the same "commie scholar" link? You're even more retarded than your buddy on here, who keeps running his argument around like a chicken with the head cut off. Just when I thought stupid had one definition, you made it into another.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

'Inconsistent': McConnell slammed for violating 'oath' as 'constitutional officer' Republicans like Mitch McConnell of kentucky no longer value the rule of law, the Constitution, honesty, and fairness, while Republican elected officials threw out their oath of office to country, the citizenry, and sent them straight into the garbage. Folks, we are watching history here. When Mitch McConnell and his criminal subordinates decide not honor their oath with a "real" trial, they will be judged harshly for decades. This is a much bigger deal than just putting Trump on trial. Pretend if you will Trump Sheep, but if a fair trial does not come about, the Republican party loses its soul and credibility as a representative party. With Trump, they have all but destroyed the party after 3 years, and if they push this stunt with no trial, where there is overwhelming evidence against Trump, that will finally finish them off.'Constitutional travesty': See Trump and McConnell block fair impeachment trial

if they were true why do democrats have a hard time with the second amendment?

 

[bripat9643]

Nope, you posted something that says breaking laws while in office is "an abuse of power." Name the laws that Trump broke. You can't say "abuse of power." You're in an infinite loop.

You can't debate anything. Remember, you're a pos quitter with a pussy. Why would you pretend to want to know? Factbox: Abuse of power, obstruction - the charges against Trump explained

Don't even read your own links, do ya? From the article:

Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

Ha flaming idiot, did you read the next sentence? You folks are so fucking dumb.
Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

But the founders of the United States intended the phrase” other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” to broadly encompass abuses of power, legal scholars said.

Yeah, I read that, leftist commie legal scholars. And it said "to broadly" meaning it can apply to anybody at any time. So when the next commie President is in the White House under Republican House leadership, we are going to do the exact same; use that weak generalization of high crimes.

You read it from the "Leftist commie scholars" and yet you posted your counter argument from the same "commie scholar" link? You're even more retarded than your buddy on here, who keeps running his argument around like a chicken with the head cut off. Just when I thought stupid had one definition, you made it into another.

You just shot to the top of the "Dumbest Member of the Forum" list.

 

[BWK]

Barbie logic:

1. Trump is guilty of abuse of power
2. Abuse of power is when you break a law while in office
3. What law did Trump break?
4. Abuse of power.

Factbox: Abuse of power, obstruction - the charges against Trump explained

Nope, you posted something that says breaking laws while in office is "an abuse of power." Name the laws that Trump broke. You can't say "abuse of power." You're in an infinite loop.

Factbox: Abuse of power, obstruction - the charges against Trump explained

Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

But the founders of the United States intended the phrase” other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” to broadly encompass abuses of power, legal scholars said.

You are not intellectually prepared to debate, because you aren't capable of manufacturing a coherent argument that makes sense.

You still haven't listed a law the Trump broke. "Abuse of power" is not a law.

Sure it is. I already presented it to you through Wikipedia. I can't force you to be intelligent enough to interpret basic words when you can't understand them.

Abuse of power or abuse of authority, in the form of "malfeasance in office" or "official misconduct", is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, which affects the performance of official duties. Malfeasance in office is often grounds for a for causeremoval of an elected official by statute or recall election.

Abuse of power is an unlawful act. Trump has been officially charged with that unlawful act. It's all that is needed to impeach. Which is exactly what the Dems did. Even most middle school kids understand that. Any other excuse by you just isn't worth shit for a counter argument.

I've already explained to you that "abuse of power" is not a law.

Barbie logic:

1. Trump is guilty of abuse of power
2. Abuse of power is when you break a law while in office
3. What law did Trump break?
4. Go back to 1.

They are experts of circular logic.

But in the end it all boils down to Orange Man Bad.

You aren't smart enough to make it a real argument because the Right has nothing to bargain with. The only "circular logic" is coming from those who can't debunk the actual facts of the case. That logic comes from people like you. There is no defense. It's tough to have to swallow, but at the end of the day, the Right only has their chicken with the head cut off defense.

 

[BWK]

You can't debate anything. Remember, you're a pos quitter with a pussy. Why would you pretend to want to know? Factbox: Abuse of power, obstruction - the charges against Trump explained

Don't even read your own links, do ya? From the article:

Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

Ha flaming idiot, did you read the next sentence? You folks are so fucking dumb.
Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

But the founders of the United States intended the phrase” other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” to broadly encompass abuses of power, legal scholars said.

Yeah, I read that, leftist commie legal scholars. And it said "to broadly" meaning it can apply to anybody at any time. So when the next commie President is in the White House under Republican House leadership, we are going to do the exact same; use that weak generalization of high crimes.

You read it from the "Leftist commie scholars" and yet you posted your counter argument from the same "commie scholar" link? You're even more retarded than your buddy on here, who keeps running his argument around like a chicken with the head cut off. Just when I thought stupid had one definition, you made it into another.

You just shot to the top of the "Dumbest Member of the Forum" list.

I accept your concession for defeat quitter.

 

[BWK]

'Inconsistent': McConnell slammed for violating 'oath' as 'constitutional officer' Republicans like Mitch McConnell of kentucky no longer value the rule of law, the Constitution, honesty, and fairness, while Republican elected officials threw out their oath of office to country, the citizenry, and sent them straight into the garbage. Folks, we are watching history here. When Mitch McConnell and his criminal subordinates decide not honor their oath with a "real" trial, they will be judged harshly for decades. This is a much bigger deal than just putting Trump on trial. Pretend if you will Trump Sheep, but if a fair trial does not come about, the Republican party loses its soul and credibility as a representative party. With Trump, they have all but destroyed the party after 3 years, and if they push this stunt with no trial, where there is overwhelming evidence against Trump, that will finally finish them off.'Constitutional travesty': See Trump and McConnell block fair impeachment trial

if they were true why do democrats have a hard time with the second amendment?

Do they? I support the second amendment and haven't had a hard time at all. Are you in need of a distraction from the argument?

 

[bripat9643]

Don't even read your own links, do ya? From the article:

Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

Ha flaming idiot, did you read the next sentence? You folks are so fucking dumb.
Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

But the founders of the United States intended the phrase” other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” to broadly encompass abuses of power, legal scholars said.

Yeah, I read that, leftist commie legal scholars. And it said "to broadly" meaning it can apply to anybody at any time. So when the next commie President is in the White House under Republican House leadership, we are going to do the exact same; use that weak generalization of high crimes.

You read it from the "Leftist commie scholars" and yet you posted your counter argument from the same "commie scholar" link? You're even more retarded than your buddy on here, who keeps running his argument around like a chicken with the head cut off. Just when I thought stupid had one definition, you made it into another.

You just shot to the top of the "Dumbest Member of the Forum" list.

I accept your concession for defeat quitter.

I don't get into gun fights with the mentally unarmed.

 

[okfine]

'Inconsistent': McConnell slammed for violating 'oath' as 'constitutional officer' Republicans like Mitch McConnell of kentucky no longer value the rule of law, the Constitution, honesty, and fairness, while Republican elected officials threw out their oath of office to country, the citizenry, and sent them straight into the garbage. Folks, we are watching history here. When Mitch McConnell and his criminal subordinates decide not honor their oath with a "real" trial, they will be judged harshly for decades. This is a much bigger deal than just putting Trump on trial. Pretend if you will Trump Sheep, but if a fair trial does not come about, the Republican party loses its soul and credibility as a representative party. With Trump, they have all but destroyed the party after 3 years, and if they push this stunt with no trial, where there is overwhelming evidence against Trump, that will finally finish them off.'Constitutional travesty': See Trump and McConnell block fair impeachment trial

Notice how things are worse since Trump became president.

 

[fncceo]

'Inconsistent': McConnell slammed for violating 'oath' as 'constitutional officer' Republicans like Mitch McConnell of kentucky no longer value the rule of law, the Constitution, honesty, and fairness, while Republican elected officials threw out their oath of office to country, the citizenry, and sent them straight into the garbage. Folks, we are watching history here. When Mitch McConnell and his criminal subordinates decide not honor their oath with a "real" trial, they will be judged harshly for decades. This is a much bigger deal than just putting Trump on trial. Pretend if you will Trump Sheep, but if a fair trial does not come about, the Republican party loses its soul and credibility as a representative party. With Trump, they have all but destroyed the party after 3 years, and if they push this stunt with no trial, where there is overwhelming evidence against Trump, that will finally finish them off.'Constitutional travesty': See Trump and McConnell block fair impeachment trial

Notice how things are worse since Trump became president.

Actually, I've noticed just the opposite.

 

[BWK]

'Inconsistent': McConnell slammed for violating 'oath' as 'constitutional officer' Republicans like Mitch McConnell of kentucky no longer value the rule of law, the Constitution, honesty, and fairness, while Republican elected officials threw out their oath of office to country, the citizenry, and sent them straight into the garbage. Folks, we are watching history here. When Mitch McConnell and his criminal subordinates decide not honor their oath with a "real" trial, they will be judged harshly for decades. This is a much bigger deal than just putting Trump on trial. Pretend if you will Trump Sheep, but if a fair trial does not come about, the Republican party loses its soul and credibility as a representative party. With Trump, they have all but destroyed the party after 3 years, and if they push this stunt with no trial, where there is overwhelming evidence against Trump, that will finally finish them off.'Constitutional travesty': See Trump and McConnell block fair impeachment trial

Notice how things are worse since Trump became president.

Much worse. These folks turned into monsters who are leaning towards mob rule amd lawlessness since Trump came around. And they bring out the worst in others too.

 

[jknowgood]

'Inconsistent': McConnell slammed for violating 'oath' as 'constitutional officer' Republicans like Mitch McConnell of kentucky no longer value the rule of law, the Constitution, honesty, and fairness, while Republican elected officials threw out their oath of office to country, the citizenry, and sent them straight into the garbage. Folks, we are watching history here. When Mitch McConnell and his criminal subordinates decide not honor their oath with a "real" trial, they will be judged harshly for decades. This is a much bigger deal than just putting Trump on trial. Pretend if you will Trump Sheep, but if a fair trial does not come about, the Republican party loses its soul and credibility as a representative party. With Trump, they have all but destroyed the party after 3 years, and if they push this stunt with no trial, where there is overwhelming evidence against Trump, that will finally finish them off.'Constitutional travesty': See Trump and McConnell block fair impeachment trial

View attachment 296890

So, a fair trial means the prosecution isn't allowed to present damning evidence against the defense? Who knew?

Trump is innocent till proven guilty, not the other way around. I'm sure the Senate will let them have their witnesses. But they are also going to want to get some democrats under oath. Like the Biden's.

 

[jknowgood]

So, a fair trial means the prosecution isn't allowed to present damning evidence against the defense? Who knew?

It only has to be fair to the defendant. Who gives a shit about those boot licking Stasi Dims? They tossed our fairness and due process. Why should anyone give a shit now?

Really? Where in any legal description of a trial is that written?

And where was the due process and fairness tossed exactly by the Dems?

not worth explaining, you missed it. some information kids will never understand.

I know, because you are too unprepared and lazy to defend the indefensible. You are no fighter here. Surrender is your signature like the rest of these Trump humping losers. Fight or get fucking lost.

so, if you really wish to go there, then name us the statute that allows a whistle blower to be anonymous? now you run along and find your barbie.

Don't forget to let hearsay be evidence or opinions to be facts.

 

[BWK]

'Inconsistent': McConnell slammed for violating 'oath' as 'constitutional officer' Republicans like Mitch McConnell of kentucky no longer value the rule of law, the Constitution, honesty, and fairness, while Republican elected officials threw out their oath of office to country, the citizenry, and sent them straight into the garbage. Folks, we are watching history here. When Mitch McConnell and his criminal subordinates decide not honor their oath with a "real" trial, they will be judged harshly for decades. This is a much bigger deal than just putting Trump on trial. Pretend if you will Trump Sheep, but if a fair trial does not come about, the Republican party loses its soul and credibility as a representative party. With Trump, they have all but destroyed the party after 3 years, and if they push this stunt with no trial, where there is overwhelming evidence against Trump, that will finally finish them off.'Constitutional travesty': See Trump and McConnell block fair impeachment trial

View attachment 296890

So, a fair trial means the prosecution isn't allowed to present damning evidence against the defense? Who knew?

Trump is innocent till proven guilty, not the other way around. I'm sure the Senate will let them have their witnesses. But they are also going to want to get some democrats under oath. Like the Biden's.

What do the Biden's have to do with Trump's abuse of power to conspire with a foreign power to get dirt on a candidate in return for military aid? How would putting Biden on the stand for something he had nothing to do with be relevant?

 

[BWK]

It only has to be fair to the defendant. Who gives a shit about those boot licking Stasi Dims? They tossed our fairness and due process. Why should anyone give a shit now?

Really? Where in any legal description of a trial is that written?

And where was the due process and fairness tossed exactly by the Dems?

not worth explaining, you missed it. some information kids will never understand.

I know, because you are too unprepared and lazy to defend the indefensible. You are no fighter here. Surrender is your signature like the rest of these Trump humping losers. Fight or get fucking lost.

so, if you really wish to go there, then name us the statute that allows a whistle blower to be anonymous? now you run along and find your barbie.

Don't forget to let hearsay be evidence or opinions to be facts.

17 witnesses is hardly hearsay.

 

[fncceo]

Really? Where in any legal description of a trial is that written?

And where was the due process and fairness tossed exactly by the Dems?

not worth explaining, you missed it. some information kids will never understand.

I know, because you are too unprepared and lazy to defend the indefensible. You are no fighter here. Surrender is your signature like the rest of these Trump humping losers. Fight or get fucking lost.

so, if you really wish to go there, then name us the statute that allows a whistle blower to be anonymous? now you run along and find your barbie.

Don't forget to let hearsay be evidence or opinions to be facts.

17 witnesses is hardly hearsay.

And yet, the Senate will never vote to convict The President.

Doesn't that just burn your muffin?

 

[bripat9643]

'Inconsistent': McConnell slammed for violating 'oath' as 'constitutional officer' Republicans like Mitch McConnell of kentucky no longer value the rule of law, the Constitution, honesty, and fairness, while Republican elected officials threw out their oath of office to country, the citizenry, and sent them straight into the garbage. Folks, we are watching history here. When Mitch McConnell and his criminal subordinates decide not honor their oath with a "real" trial, they will be judged harshly for decades. This is a much bigger deal than just putting Trump on trial. Pretend if you will Trump Sheep, but if a fair trial does not come about, the Republican party loses its soul and credibility as a representative party. With Trump, they have all but destroyed the party after 3 years, and if they push this stunt with no trial, where there is overwhelming evidence against Trump, that will finally finish them off.'Constitutional travesty': See Trump and McConnell block fair impeachment trial

View attachment 296890

So, a fair trial means the prosecution isn't allowed to present damning evidence against the defense? Who knew?

Trump is innocent till proven guilty, not the other way around. I'm sure the Senate will let them have their witnesses. But they are also going to want to get some democrats under oath. Like the Biden's.

What do the Biden's have to do with Trump's abuse of power to conspire with a foreign power to get dirt on a candidate in return for military aid? How would putting Biden on the stand for something he had nothing to do with be relevant?

Biden had nothing to do with it? ROFL! I can't believe the things you post.

Dumbest Members of USMB

1. BWK
2. Edward37
3. FAUX
4. Lakhota
5. RightWinger.

 

[bripat9643]

Really? Where in any legal description of a trial is that written?

And where was the due process and fairness tossed exactly by the Dems?

not worth explaining, you missed it. some information kids will never understand.

I know, because you are too unprepared and lazy to defend the indefensible. You are no fighter here. Surrender is your signature like the rest of these Trump humping losers. Fight or get fucking lost.

so, if you really wish to go there, then name us the statute that allows a whistle blower to be anonymous? now you run along and find your barbie.

Don't forget to let hearsay be evidence or opinions to be facts.

17 witnesses is hardly hearsay.

How does the number make it not hearsay?

 

[jc456]

Between Barbi, Ken, and Tarzan, this poster forgot he, she, it had a pussy and what the debate was about. Or just decided the distraction of being a pos quitter and loser was its best option.

A woman hater reveals through Barbie here. Wow Barbie you really stepped up. Now just post the crime you keep going on about

Barbie logic:

1. Trump is guilty of abuse of power
2. Abuse of power is when you break a law while in office
3. What law did Trump break?
4. Abuse of power.

Factbox: Abuse of power, obstruction - the charges against Trump explained

What "unlawful act?"

I just posted it. The abuse of power was the factual based evidence of using a foreign power to collude and get political dirt on Trump's opponent in exchange for military aid Trump had no legal right to leverage with. It was already proven with zero defense from the Right.

Nope, you posted something that says breaking laws while in office is "an abuse of power." Name the laws that Trump broke. You can't say "abuse of power." You're in an infinite loop.

Factbox: Abuse of power, obstruction - the charges against Trump explained

Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

But the founders of the United States intended the phrase” other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” to broadly encompass abuses of power, legal scholars said.

You are not intellectually prepared to debate, because you aren't capable of manufacturing a coherent argument that makes sense.

You still haven't listed a law the Trump broke. "Abuse of power" is not a law.

Sure it is. I already presented it to you through Wikipedia. I can't force you to be intelligent enough to interpret basic words when you can't understand them.

Abuse of power or abuse of authority, in the form of "malfeasance in office" or "official misconduct", is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, which affects the performance of official duties. Malfeasance in office is often grounds for a for causeremoval of an elected official by statute or recall election.

Abuse of power is an unlawful act. Trump has been officially charged with that unlawful act. It's all that is needed to impeach. Which is exactly what the Dems did. Even most middle school kids understand that. Any other excuse by you just isn't worth shit for a counter argument.

And that unlawful act is? Beating hitlery

 

[bripat9643]

'Inconsistent': McConnell slammed for violating 'oath' as 'constitutional officer' Republicans like Mitch McConnell of kentucky no longer value the rule of law, the Constitution, honesty, and fairness, while Republican elected officials threw out their oath of office to country, the citizenry, and sent them straight into the garbage. Folks, we are watching history here. When Mitch McConnell and his criminal subordinates decide not honor their oath with a "real" trial, they will be judged harshly for decades. This is a much bigger deal than just putting Trump on trial. Pretend if you will Trump Sheep, but if a fair trial does not come about, the Republican party loses its soul and credibility as a representative party. With Trump, they have all but destroyed the party after 3 years, and if they push this stunt with no trial, where there is overwhelming evidence against Trump, that will finally finish them off.'Constitutional travesty': See Trump and McConnell block fair impeachment trial

View attachment 296890

So, a fair trial means the prosecution isn't allowed to present damning evidence against the defense? Who knew?

When did you suddenly become concerned about "fairness?" Was that the second the House passed the impeachment resolution?

 

[bripat9643]

A woman hater reveals through Barbie here. Wow Barbie you really stepped up. Now just post the crime you keep going on about

Barbie logic:

1. Trump is guilty of abuse of power
2. Abuse of power is when you break a law while in office
3. What law did Trump break?
4. Abuse of power.

Factbox: Abuse of power, obstruction - the charges against Trump explained

I just posted it. The abuse of power was the factual based evidence of using a foreign power to collude and get political dirt on Trump's opponent in exchange for military aid Trump had no legal right to leverage with. It was already proven with zero defense from the Right.

Nope, you posted something that says breaking laws while in office is "an abuse of power." Name the laws that Trump broke. You can't say "abuse of power." You're in an infinite loop.

Factbox: Abuse of power, obstruction - the charges against Trump explained

Abuse of power is not specifically referred to as an impeachable offense in the U.S. Constitution, which states that a president can be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

But the founders of the United States intended the phrase” other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” to broadly encompass abuses of power, legal scholars said.

You are not intellectually prepared to debate, because you aren't capable of manufacturing a coherent argument that makes sense.

You still haven't listed a law the Trump broke. "Abuse of power" is not a law.

Sure it is. I already presented it to you through Wikipedia. I can't force you to be intelligent enough to interpret basic words when you can't understand them.

Abuse of power or abuse of authority, in the form of "malfeasance in office" or "official misconduct", is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, which affects the performance of official duties. Malfeasance in office is often grounds for a for causeremoval of an elected official by statute or recall election.

Abuse of power is an unlawful act. Trump has been officially charged with that unlawful act. It's all that is needed to impeach. Which is exactly what the Dems did. Even most middle school kids understand that. Any other excuse by you just isn't worth shit for a counter argument.

And that unlawful act is? Beating hitlery

Barbie logic:

1. Trump is guilty of abuse of power
2. Abuse of power is when you break a law while in office
3. What law did Trump break?
4. Go back to step #1