User Controls
THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty's
-
2021-01-13 at 2:15 PM UTCWow you retards are really still thinking there's a way for Trump to prevail. His only goal now to avoid prison and/or death.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2021-01-13 at 2:19 PM UTC
-
2021-01-13 at 4:42 PM UTCNo MAGAphone for diaper Don means Republicans are going to go along with impeachment without fear of his shit talking lolz
ByeDon -
2021-01-13 at 4:44 PM UTC
Originally posted by POLECAT 98% of our government is corrupt.
cooperate AMERICA is a joke
the left is a JOKE
IF TRUMP does not prevail you sad fucks will get what you have coming to you.
I will be here watching it all unfold.
better brush up on ur mandarin.
WOLVERIENS!!!!!!! WE WILL NOT BEND THE KNEE, PATRIOTS WILL NEVER ACCEPT BIDEN OR THE DEM'S WAY OF THINKING.
THIS IS WAR!!!
You've been on both knees for the last 4 years. Just the way you like it. -
2021-01-13 at 4:46 PM UTCIMPEACH AND CONVICT ! ! !
Grow some balls, Republicans. -
2021-01-13 at 4:47 PM UTC
-
2021-01-13 at 5:03 PM UTC
Originally posted by Solstice Wow you retards are really still thinking there's a way for Trump to prevail. His only goal now to avoid prison and/or death.
his only way to save himself from jail or death is to wind up president AGAIN.
I'll admit it looks bad and he looks like he is accepting the loss BUT I believe he is playing this way just to keep the left emboldened
and showing how corrupt they are.
only time will tell. -
2021-01-13 at 5:08 PM UTC
-
2021-01-13 at 6:23 PM UTC
Originally posted by POLECAT his only way to save himself from jail or death is to wind up president AGAIN.
I'll admit it looks bad and he looks like he is accepting the loss BUT I believe he is playing this way just to keep the left emboldened
and showing how corrupt they are.
only time will tell.
ONLY TIME WILL TELL IF TRUMP IS A MASTERFUL STABLE GENIUS OR A CHARLATAN STOOGE.
*riots, weakening of institutions, international influence wanes, world laughs, China grows rarger from tariffs that hurt Americans, america is by all accounts failing, division is sown from the highest office, democracy takes a blow and trump is due to be ranked as America's worst president ever by all historical records*
WE NEED MORE TIME SOME OF US ARE SLOW AND NEED HELP FROM THE TEACHER -
2021-01-13 at 6:40 PM UTCAs if he can’t be killed while President. I mean sure it’s more difficult but not impossible.
Also he keeps his secret service detail for life after leaving office...
Bc the 25 amendment is not getting invoked and I believe once he leaves office Senate can’t hold an impeachment trial. -
2021-01-13 at 6:46 PM UTCI believe the Senate can indeed finish and convict after having left office. If convicted, Trump loses his Secret Service detail, paid flights and, I believe, a few other perks.
-
2021-01-13 at 6:47 PM UTC
Originally posted by frala As if he can’t be killed while President. I mean sure it’s more difficult but not impossible.
Also he keeps his secret service detail for life after leaving office…
Bc the 25 amendment is not getting invoked and I believe once he leaves office Senate can’t hold an impeachment trial.
they can hold an impeachment trial but they would have to forego legislative duties to do so which is pretty reprehensible. I'm also not sure about the secret service security detail for life. Jimmy Carter doesn't have security with him at Sunday School. -
2021-01-13 at 6:47 PM UTCthis chick is full of viable info on the real shit going on.
she has video evidence of the guilty saying it themselves on every level of dirty deeds.
if you do not watch her ur a god damn dumb fuck and a waste of space in this great country
-
2021-01-13 at 7:04 PM UTCPostEverything
Congress can impeach Trump now and convict him when he’s gone
The Senate has conducted past trials after officials have resigned or left office
Brian C. Kalt and Frank Bowman
Jan. 11, 2021
It now seems likely that the House of Representatives will impeach President Trump this week but that there will be no Senate trial until after the Jan. 20 inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden. Trump’s defenders will surely contend that a president cannot be tried by the Senate after he has left office.
They are wrong.
Both of us have studied and written about impeachment for many years. We each concluded long ago that the history, structure, rationale and application of the Constitution’s impeachment clauses provide powerful evidence for “late impeachability.” This evidence includes precedents: cases in which the House has impeached and the Senate has tried people who had already left office.
We also believe that, while impeaching someone who has left office is usually pointless, in some cases — perhaps including Trump’s — it may serve important national interests.
The text of the Constitution’s pardon clauses does not directly address late impeachability. Article II, Section 4 states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” On its face, this says only that officeholders are removed if in office when convicted; it does not say that an official must still be in office at the time of his or her impeachment and conviction. Congress has used this clause to limit impeachment to people who were officers at the time they committed their offenses, not to people who were officers at the time of their trial.
Article I, Section 3, provides another consequence besides removal: “disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.” The Framers were concerned not just with the risks of leaving a bad official in place, but also with the danger to constitutional order such a person might pose if readmitted to the government in the future. That fear is just as applicable to those who have just left office as to those still in it.
There is strong historical evidence for late impeachability. The Constitution’s Framers were conscious of late impeachment. In drafting the impeachment provisions of the federal constitution, the Framers were heavily influenced by the experience of the states they represented. Between 1776 and 1787, 10 of the newly independent states adopted constitutions that included impeachment provisions. Five specifically permitted late impeachment; no state explicitly forbade it.
English impeachment also had an influence, and during the constitutional convention, Parliament was in the process of impeaching Warren Hastings, who had already retired from the office of governor general of Bengal when Parliament impeached him. The Framers were acutely aware of the Hastings proceeding, with George Mason raising it as an example during debate on the impeachment clauses.
The first impeachment trial under the new Constitution, in 1798, was of an ex-official: Sen. William Blount had conspired to give the British control over then-Spanish Florida and parts of French Louisiana. As soon as the plot was exposed, the House impeached him. The Senate expelled him soon after. At his impeachment trial, Blount’s lawyers argued Blount could not be tried because he was no longer a senator. That argument failed. Blount was ultimately acquitted by a vote of 14-11, but on the basis that senators are not “officers” subject to impeachment in the first place.
An even stronger precedent is the 1876 case of ex-secretary of war William Belknap. After his corrupt scheme to sell a post as Indian agent was revealed to the House, Belknap quickly resigned before he could be impeached. But the House impeached the “late Secretary of War” anyway. The Senate debated late impeachability for over a month before voting 37-29 that it had the power to try an ex-officer. Belknap was nonetheless narrowly acquitted. Based on senators’ statements, there probably would have been enough votes to convict Belknap if he had not already left office. But the Senate did decide it had jurisdiction — in the end, it determined only that Belknap shouldn’t be convicted, not that he couldn’t be.
Subsequent precedents reinforced late impeachability. In 1926, federal judge George English resigned a few days after being impeached. The Senate dismissed the case after the House argued there was little point in proceeding — but the House managers also took pains to note that English’s resignation “in no way affect[ed] the right of the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, to hear and determine” the case. Other cases involving resignations ended with similar language (choosing not to proceed with the trial, despite having the power to do so) including most recently the case of Judge Samuel Kent in 2009.
In sum, Congress has repeatedly asserted its late-impeachment powers, but has rarely found late impeachment worth pursuing. -
2021-01-13 at 7:07 PM UTCdo not address
stl1 in this thread!
he is Banned from being recognized in this thread. -
2021-01-13 at 7:09 PM UTCHi, Skunk ! ! !
IMPEACH AND CONVICT ! ! !
Did those gubmint boys contact you yet about your activities of late? -
2021-01-13 at 7:26 PM UTCAnybody with half a brain will argue that none of this even applies after he’s left office - “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”
Just saying -
2021-01-13 at 7:56 PM UTCThe best President in US history gets labelled by the dummies as the worst President in US history. Makes sense, in a banana republic.
-
2021-01-13 at 7:58 PM UTC
Originally posted by stl1 PostEverything
Congress can impeach Trump now and convict him when he’s gone
The Senate has conducted past trials after officials have resigned or left office
Brian C. Kalt and Frank Bowman
Jan. 11, 2021
It now seems likely that the House of Representatives will impeach President Trump this week but that there will be no Senate trial until after the Jan. 20 inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden. Trump’s defenders will surely contend that a president cannot be tried by the Senate after he has left office.
They are wrong.
Both of us have studied and written about impeachment for many years. We each concluded long ago that the history, structure, rationale and application of the Constitution’s impeachment clauses provide powerful evidence for “late impeachability.” This evidence includes precedents: cases in which the House has impeached and the Senate has tried people who had already left office.
We also believe that, while impeaching someone who has left office is usually pointless, in some cases — perhaps including Trump’s — it may serve important national interests.
The text of the Constitution’s pardon clauses does not directly address late impeachability. Article II, Section 4 states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” On its face, this says only that officeholders are removed if in office when convicted; it does not say that an official must still be in office at the time of his or her impeachment and conviction. Congress has used this clause to limit impeachment to people who were officers at the time they committed their offenses, not to people who were officers at the time of their trial.
Article I, Section 3, provides another consequence besides removal: “disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.” The Framers were concerned not just with the risks of leaving a bad official in place, but also with the danger to constitutional order such a person might pose if readmitted to the government in the future. That fear is just as applicable to those who have just left office as to those still in it.
There is strong historical evidence for late impeachability. The Constitution’s Framers were conscious of late impeachment. In drafting the impeachment provisions of the federal constitution, the Framers were heavily influenced by the experience of the states they represented. Between 1776 and 1787, 10 of the newly independent states adopted constitutions that included impeachment provisions. Five specifically permitted late impeachment; no state explicitly forbade it.
English impeachment also had an influence, and during the constitutional convention, Parliament was in the process of impeaching Warren Hastings, who had already retired from the office of governor general of Bengal when Parliament impeached him. The Framers were acutely aware of the Hastings proceeding, with George Mason raising it as an example during debate on the impeachment clauses.
The first impeachment trial under the new Constitution, in 1798, was of an ex-official: Sen. William Blount had conspired to give the British control over then-Spanish Florida and parts of French Louisiana. As soon as the plot was exposed, the House impeached him. The Senate expelled him soon after. At his impeachment trial, Blount’s lawyers argued Blount could not be tried because he was no longer a senator. That argument failed. Blount was ultimately acquitted by a vote of 14-11, but on the basis that senators are not “officers” subject to impeachment in the first place.
An even stronger precedent is the 1876 case of ex-secretary of war William Belknap. After his corrupt scheme to sell a post as Indian agent was revealed to the House, Belknap quickly resigned before he could be impeached. But the House impeached the “late Secretary of War” anyway. The Senate debated late impeachability for over a month before voting 37-29 that it had the power to try an ex-officer. Belknap was nonetheless narrowly acquitted. Based on senators’ statements, there probably would have been enough votes to convict Belknap if he had not already left office. But the Senate did decide it had jurisdiction — in the end, it determined only that Belknap shouldn’t be convicted, not that he couldn’t be.
Subsequent precedents reinforced late impeachability. In 1926, federal judge George English resigned a few days after being impeached. The Senate dismissed the case after the House argued there was little point in proceeding — but the House managers also took pains to note that English’s resignation “in no way affect[ed] the right of the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, to hear and determine” the case. Other cases involving resignations ended with similar language (choosing not to proceed with the trial, despite having the power to do so) including most recently the case of Judge Samuel Kent in 2009.
In sum, Congress has repeatedly asserted its late-impeachment powers, but has rarely found late impeachment worth pursuing.
We'll just go ahead and take Brain and Frank's word for it. Good as gold, that word. -
2021-01-13 at 7:59 PM UTCUPDATE: Biden supporters (most likely BLM) have surrounded The Capitol to protest law enforcement
