Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
yes, it is a high crime and misdemeanor...the crimes do exist, but they are not criminal prosecutors, it's an impeachment...they, his abuses, all fall under an abuse of power, which is a ''high crime and misdemeanor'' at the time of our founders. FYI, there were no US Statutory Crimes when our founders wrote the Constitution and not for another 60 years after we became a Nation, so a statutory crime was obviously not what the founders intended by high crimes and misdemeanors....After impeaching Trump for crimes that do not exist, democrats are now threatening to not impeach him...
They did not think this all the way to the end, did they?
the actual crimes would be up to criminal prosecutors to charge the president with theses statutory crimes after removal from office...is my understanding???
"Obstruction of congress"
A crime?
Nah, it's actually one of the job descriptions.
in Nixon's articles of Impeachment,
Obstruction of Congress, was one of his Articles of Impeachment.
Why should she care that the FBI did not dot their eyes and cross their tees with Carter Page, as far as the House and her leadership, it does not affect them....???Pelosi has been using impeachment to muddy the IG report and so she will do the same when the Durham report is released....but it won't work like she thinks it will...the people don't need the media anymore and we are not as stupid as she thinks we are and unlike her we can walk and chew gum at the same time....we can follow the Durham report and watch her sideshow at the same time....
What part of this, do you not understand? :yes, it is a high crime and misdemeanor...the crimes do exist, but they are not criminal prosecutors, it's an impeachment...they, his abuses, all fall under an abuse of power, which is a ''high crime and misdemeanor'' at the time of our founders. FYI, there were no US Statutory Crimes when our founders wrote the Constitution and not for another 60 years after we became a Nation, so a statutory crime was obviously not what the founders intended by high crimes and misdemeanors....After impeaching Trump for crimes that do not exist, democrats are now threatening to not impeach him...
They did not think this all the way to the end, did they?
the actual crimes would be up to criminal prosecutors to charge the president with theses statutory crimes after removal from office...is my understanding???
"Obstruction of congress"
A crime?
Nah, it's actually one of the job descriptions.
in Nixon's articles of Impeachment,
Obstruction of Congress, was one of his Articles of Impeachment.
Sure... sure...
Well, I hope those articles are submitted soon so we can view all the evidence for the "crime".
But it's all good. If this won't get the president removed, they are already planning a second impeachment. Perhaps this time they remember to include the real crime which will remove any president.
- ORANGE MAN BAD.
Because it all began with Obama and Clinton....this will reflect badly on the DNC for a very long time....Why should she care that the FBI did not dot their eyes and cross their tees with Carter Page, as far as the House and her leadership, it does not affect them....???Pelosi has been using impeachment to muddy the IG report and so she will do the same when the Durham report is released....but it won't work like she thinks it will...the people don't need the media anymore and we are not as stupid as she thinks we are and unlike her we can walk and chew gum at the same time....we can follow the Durham report and watch her sideshow at the same time....
Sure, care in the sense that these loop holes and a carefree sloppiness need to be corrected by the FBI Director.... but there is no need that helps her and the House that would draw her to cover it up....????
What part of this, do you not understand? :yes, it is a high crime and misdemeanor...the crimes do exist, but they are not criminal prosecutors, it's an impeachment...they, his abuses, all fall under an abuse of power, which is a ''high crime and misdemeanor'' at the time of our founders. FYI, there were no US Statutory Crimes when our founders wrote the Constitution and not for another 60 years after we became a Nation, so a statutory crime was obviously not what the founders intended by high crimes and misdemeanors....After impeaching Trump for crimes that do not exist, democrats are now threatening to not impeach him...
They did not think this all the way to the end, did they?
the actual crimes would be up to criminal prosecutors to charge the president with theses statutory crimes after removal from office...is my understanding???
"Obstruction of congress"
A crime?
Nah, it's actually one of the job descriptions.
in Nixon's articles of Impeachment,
Obstruction of Congress, was one of his Articles of Impeachment.
Sure... sure...
Well, I hope those articles are submitted soon so we can view all the evidence for the "crime".
But it's all good. If this won't get the president removed, they are already planning a second impeachment. Perhaps this time they remember to include the real crime which will remove any president.
- ORANGE MAN BAD.
it does not have to be a statutory crime, what you call a ''real crime'', in order to impeach. Our founders, in the Federalist papers number 65 goes in to it, and explains a high crime and misdemeanor is an abuse of their power or basically, anything that loses the public trust
.
President Clinton was acquitted in the Senate - but he remains IMPEACHED. Trump* is also IMPEACHED.
Who cares? Clinton was the wunderkind who needed Perot to win. He was on his way to being a one termer and the Repub revolution in 1994 saved his azz. That was our last chance to make real cuts to the budget instead of smoke and mirrors to keep the deficits down. The baby boomers peak decade in spending came to an end during Clinton's last year. Clinton's dirty laundry was sanitized before he was elected. Trump was put through a wringer and still is. An impeachment may be a badge of honor at some point. We all laugh at you. Pelosi is like a woman scorned and seeking revenge. For what? She had her chance a decade ago and blew it.President Clinton was acquitted in the Senate - but he remains IMPEACHED. Trump* is also IMPEACHED.
there is no trial for the chief justice to reside over.... that does not mean the President was not indicted with articles of impeachment in the House, by a majority vote, because he was....nope.Its not an impeachment if she doesn't send it to the senate...congress has the sole power to impeach but she must send it to the senate or SCOTUS can declare the impeachment null and void....WRONG...look it up....SCOTUS can't force her to do anything.
What part of "Sole" power is confusing to you?
I don't have to look anything up fool.
Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 provides: The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
End of discussion. Pelosi will let the Republicans know when they have her permission to start the trial.
The constitution does not state such. Which makes it not a matter the SC can even take up and rule on.
Article I, section 3 of the U.S. Constitution stipulates that the chief justice shall preside over impeachment trials of the President of the United States in the U.S. Senate. If there is not an article of impeachment delivered to the senate there is no impeachment.....
Nancy is sitting on the articles of impeachment. Can you imagine the odor? No wonder McConnel is in no hurry to get them!Will Pelosi send the Impeachment proceedings over to the Senate ?
Will she do nothing with it, and just let it stay a House thing, and nothing more ?
t
it's actually not autistic, it's called being anal! Or maybe in a nice way, stubborn!What part of this, do you not understand? :yes, it is a high crime and misdemeanor...the crimes do exist, but they are not criminal prosecutors, it's an impeachment...they, his abuses, all fall under an abuse of power, which is a ''high crime and misdemeanor'' at the time of our founders. FYI, there were no US Statutory Crimes when our founders wrote the Constitution and not for another 60 years after we became a Nation, so a statutory crime was obviously not what the founders intended by high crimes and misdemeanors....
the actual crimes would be up to criminal prosecutors to charge the president with theses statutory crimes after removal from office...is my understanding???
"Obstruction of congress"
A crime?
Nah, it's actually one of the job descriptions.
in Nixon's articles of Impeachment,
Obstruction of Congress, was one of his Articles of Impeachment.
Sure... sure...
Well, I hope those articles are submitted soon so we can view all the evidence for the "crime".
But it's all good. If this won't get the president removed, they are already planning a second impeachment. Perhaps this time they remember to include the real crime which will remove any president.
- ORANGE MAN BAD.
it does not have to be a statutory crime, what you call a ''real crime'', in order to impeach. Our founders, in the Federalist papers number 65 goes in to it, and explains a high crime and misdemeanor is an abuse of their power or basically, anything that loses the public trust
Care4all no need to be autistic. The accusation is ridiculous is what I am saying. You know it too
Damn, Chief, PLEASE throw that peace pipe AWAY. Pronto, Tonto!PLEASE put down that peace pipe, Chief!Can anyone cite any laws that Speaker Pelosi is violating by withholding the articles of impeachment until she has some assurance of a fair trial in the Senate? She is certainly not violating the Constitution.
Just answer my question and stop the racial shit.
Thanks, Chief. It couldn't have come any sooner. And PLEASE lay off the peace pipe before making any future posts. You're welcome, as always.Damn, Chief, PLEASE throw that peace pipe AWAY. Pronto, Tonto!PLEASE put down that peace pipe, Chief!Can anyone cite any laws that Speaker Pelosi is violating by withholding the articles of impeachment until she has some assurance of a fair trial in the Senate? She is certainly not violating the Constitution.
Just answer my question and stop the racial shit.
Welcome to permanent ignore. Bye...
it's actually not autistic, it's called being anal! Or maybe in a nice way, stubborn!What part of this, do you not understand? :yes, it is a high crime and misdemeanor..."Obstruction of congress"
A crime?
Nah, it's actually one of the job descriptions.
in Nixon's articles of Impeachment,
Obstruction of Congress, was one of his Articles of Impeachment.
Sure... sure...
Well, I hope those articles are submitted soon so we can view all the evidence for the "crime".
But it's all good. If this won't get the president removed, they are already planning a second impeachment. Perhaps this time they remember to include the real crime which will remove any president.
- ORANGE MAN BAD.
it does not have to be a statutory crime, what you call a ''real crime'', in order to impeach. Our founders, in the Federalist papers number 65 goes in to it, and explains a high crime and misdemeanor is an abuse of their power or basically, anything that loses the public trust
Care4all no need to be autistic. The accusation is ridiculous is what I am saying. You know it too
I'll bet she never brings it foward.it's not a campaign stunt, it is a maneuver to get the Senate to have an impartial trial with witnesses, and NOT a SHAM trial as Moscow Mitch, proposed and guaranteed on FOX news....They know that they do not have voted in the Senate Coolio it is an obvious political campaign stunt
and her plan is working... looks like they have the Alaskan Senator willing to vote with Dems on witnesses, just two more needed or maybe three more, to guarantee, witnesses and evidence, can be brought forward in the trial.
That doesn't make it a "crime".yes, it is a high crime and misdemeanor...the crimes do exist, but they are not criminal prosecutors, it's an impeachment...they, his abuses, all fall under an abuse of power, which is a ''high crime and misdemeanor'' at the time of our founders. FYI, there were no US Statutory Crimes when our founders wrote the Constitution and not for another 60 years after we became a Nation, so a statutory crime was obviously not what the founders intended by high crimes and misdemeanors....After impeaching Trump for crimes that do not exist, democrats are now threatening to not impeach him...
They did not think this all the way to the end, did they?
the actual crimes would be up to criminal prosecutors to charge the president with theses statutory crimes after removal from office...is my understanding???
"Obstruction of congress"
A crime?
Nah, it's actually one of the job descriptions.
in Nixon's articles of Impeachment,
Obstruction of Congress, was one of his Articles of Impeachment.
