Jump to content

LIkely the House will only CENSURE Trump...LIBS will Committ Suicide


Recommended Posts

When this happens, which LIB here

will be the first to blow their brains all over the ceiling?  I mean first the Muelly report is a dud...and THEN no impeachment.  Yikes

 

Best odds are Leftwinger.   Why? Any chick who sits on a chat site 24/7 and types "impeachment" 1,000x per day.....is clearly mentall ill.

 

Following psycho LW is......dontlookknow, Merrill, harrygaymar, olivespoil and slidefag

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 321
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, CrimeaRiver said:

When this happens, which LIB here

will be the first to blow their brains all over the ceiling?  I mean first the Muelly report is a dud...and THEN no impeachment.  Yikes

 

Best odds are Leftwinger.   Why? Any chick who sits on a chat site 24/7 and types "impeachment" 1,000x per day.....is clearly mentall ill.

 

Following psycho LW is......dontlookknow, Merrill, harrygaymar, olivespoil and slidefag

I want it all to go to the senate.....

And here is why.....

 

Kimberly Strassel at the Wall Street Journal notes: “Mr. Schiff claims the ignominious distinction of being the first congressman to use his official powers to spy on a fellow member and publish the details.” She adds, quoting former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, that Schiff’s subpoena may have broken the law. Phone carriers cannot divulge call records without an individual’s consent, except for a legitimate law enforcement purpose: this was not.

Schiff ordered the phone records on Sep. 30, but the House impeachment inquiry was not properly authorized until Oct. 31, so he cannot claim the subpoena was justified. Strassel adds, citing constitutional law expert David Rivkin, that anyone swept up in Schiff’s phone snooping might have the right to sue.

Shockingly, she adds, “The media is treating this [the phone records] as a victory, when it is a disgraceful breach of ethical and legal propriety.”

 

Instead of protesting Schiff’s abuse of the First and Sixth Amendments, journalists — many of whom are desperate to take Trump down — are pushing Schiff’s conspiracy theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Whitemajikman said:

I want it all to go to the senate.....

And here is why.....

 

Kimberly Strassel at the Wall Street Journal notes: “Mr. Schiff claims the ignominious distinction of being the first congressman to use his official powers to spy on a fellow member and publish the details.” She adds, quoting former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, that Schiff’s subpoena may have broken the law. Phone carriers cannot divulge call records without an individual’s consent, except for a legitimate law enforcement purpose: this was not.

Schiff ordered the phone records on Sep. 30, but the House impeachment inquiry was not properly authorized until Oct. 31, so he cannot claim the subpoena was justified. Strassel adds, citing constitutional law expert David Rivkin, that anyone swept up in Schiff’s phone snooping might have the right to sue.

Shockingly, she adds, “The media is treating this [the phone records] as a victory, when it is a disgraceful breach of ethical and legal propriety.”

 

Instead of protesting Schiff’s abuse of the First and Sixth Amendments, journalists — many of whom are desperate to take Trump down — are pushing Schiff’s conspiracy theory.

I agree with you bro.....  censure would still be hilarious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CrimeaRiver said:

I agree with you bro.....  censure would still be hilarious. 

I think at this point the Dems now have no choice but to send it to the Senate......

If they move to censure their false facade of solidarity will be fractured .....

These crazy bastards seem to think they can win with impropriety .....which is why they will send it to the Senate.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pile-on list of perceived wrongs 'requiring' articles include racism, having a mellow and beautiful wife, displaying bad hair style, enjoying legal protections from rabid Progs, telling jokes to French Presidents when questioned about their ISIS fighters, killing Japanese fish etc.

 

b5b799ccce70667802a010d88e154ca0.jpg

This year the tree is "racist" white.

 

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/06/562271753/dont-be-koi-theres-something-fishy-about-that-trump-abe-photo


 

Quote

 

In the photo above (below) taken by Agence France-Presse, the two leaders can be seen judiciously spooning out the fish food. But Trump soon appears to lose patience and summarily dumps the entire box of food into the pond, as can be seen in the next image taken by an Associated Press photographer:

 

ap_17310172434947-796a71082fd80b3d08e54a

 

The Japan Times writes:

"The incident triggered censure on Twitter, with many pointing out that fish cannot consume such a large amount of food at one time.

"U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, standing just behind Trump, appeared to break out in laughter at his boss's no-nonsense approach to koi feeding.

"But some uncharitable Twitter users were less forgiving, with several writing: 'Trump can't even feed fish right.' "

 

 

This was headline news for nearly a week.

 

Progs were apoplectic.

 

The truth however ...

 

 

cnn-fishfeeding-edits_1516223981.gif

 

 

Typical fake news brought to us by the seething, mindless hatred of the Prog TDS crowd.

 

 

 

 

 

kj

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Whitemajikman said:

I think at this point the Dems now have no choice but to send it to the Senate......

If they move to censure their false facade of solidarity will be fractured .....

These crazy bastards seem to think they can win with impropriety .....which is why they will send it to the Senate.

 

They will likely impeach.  And like Chomsky said...itll make Trump a victim of the DC ESTAB.  Very bad idea for 2020!  lol, dumbasses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CrimeaRiver said:

They will likely impeach.  And like Chomsky said...itll make Trump a victim of the DC ESTAB.  Very bad idea for 2020!  lol, dumbasses

 

I'd like to hope the term limits debate might be stirred up by these old 60' Prog lifers.

 

f338e709564db7f5cc5c44c23aafdbc9--mental

 

 

 

 

 

kj

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CrimeaRiver said:

When this happens, which LIB here

will be the first to blow their brains all over the ceiling?  I mean first the Muelly report is a dud...and THEN no impeachment.  Yikes

 

Best odds are Leftwinger.   Why? Any chick who sits on a chat site 24/7 and types "impeachment" 1,000x per day.....is clearly mentall ill.

 

Following psycho LW is......dontlookknow, Merrill, harrygaymar, olivespoil and slidefag


Thanks for the prediction and the honorable mention.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigga


 

Quote

 

Nigga (/ˈnɪɡə/) is a colloquial term used in African-American Vernacular English that began as an eye-dialect form of the word [African-American slur], an ethnic slur against black people. In dialects of English (including standard British English) that have non-rhotic speech, "[African-American slur]" and "nigga" are pronounced the same.

 

Usage

In practice, its use and meaning are heavily dependent on context.[1] Presently, the word "nigga" is used more liberally among younger members of all races and ethnicities in the United States.[2] In addition to African Americans, other ethnic groups have adopted the term as part of their vernacular, although this usage is controversial.[3][4]

There is conflicting popular opinion on whether there is any meaningful difference between "nigga" and "[African-American slur]" as a spoken term.[5] Many people consider the terms to be equally pejorative, and the use of "nigga" both in and outside black communities remains controversial.[6] H. Lewis Smith, author of Bury That Sucka: A Scandalous Affair with the N-word, believes that "replacing the 'er' with an 'a' changes nothing other than the pronunciation"[7] and the African American Registry notes, "Brother (Brotha) and Sister (Sistah or Sista) are terms of endearment. [African-American slur] was and still is a word of disrespect."[8] The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, a civil rights group, condemns use of both "nigga" and "[African-American slur]".[5]

Some African-Americans only consider "nigga" offensive when used by people of other races,[5] seeing its use outside a defined social group as an unwelcome cultural appropriation. Used by blacks, the term may indicate "solidarity or affection",[9] similar to the usage of the words "dude", "homeboy", and "bro". Others consider "nigga" non-offensive except when directed from a non-African-American towards an African-American. Yet others have derided this as hypocritical and harmful, enabling white racists to use the word and confusing the issue over [African-American slur].[3]

 

 

I don't approve.

 

 

 

 

 

kj

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the House of Representatives moves ever closer to doing the Constitutionally correct act of approving Articles of Impeachment and forwarding them to the Senate, the rightwingnut retards who still support President Evil are getting even more insane with their deranged defenses of the Trumpster's many crimes against the people of America. They have come up with a whole new set of fraudulent myths and lies for rightwingnut retards to live by.

 

In the real world.....this explains the case against the Trumpster very clearly.....

A US supreme court lawyer, writing with Sam Koppelman, makes a highly persuasive case for Trump’s impeachment

 

The Guardian 

Sarah Churchwell

Fri 6 Dec 2019 02.30 EST

 

One of the most contentious issues during the 1787 debates about the US constitution was the subject of presidential impeachment. A Virginian named George Mason ultimately swayed the room: “No point is of more importance than that the right of impeachment should be continued. Shall any man be above Justice? Above all shall that man be above it, who can commit the most extensive injustice?” It was precisely the extensive power of the presidency that necessitated impeachment as the final remedy against a corrupt executive. “Shall the man who has practised corruption and by that means procured his appointment in the first instance,” Mason added, “be suffered to escape punishment, by repeating his guilt?

 

Neal Katyal, a law professor and former acting US solicitor general, has set out “the case against Donald Trump” in his book Impeach. An experienced trial attorney who has argued before the US supreme court, Katyal knows how to present evidence and convince a jury. The result is essentially a primer for impeachment: first its basic rules and logic, and then why he considers the publicly available evidence to be so damning.

 

He begins with a brief history, extending back to the revolutionary arguments against monarchy and for an accountable executive. Some framers were less certain, arguing that a corrupt executive would be removed by democratic elections; Benjamin Franklin memorably retorted that before there was impeachment, there was assassination. Katyal then takes the reader on a brief tour of the previous three presidents against whom impeachment proceedings began, primarily in order to judge them against Trump, whose actions he considers to be considerably more egregious than those of Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton – because Trump’s alleged offences are precisely those specified by the constitution as impeachable. And that in turn, presumably, is why Nancy Pelosi’s House decided to take action: because the constitution says the president should be impeached for bribery, and here was the president on the telephone appearing to solicit foreign bribes, a charge he has denied.

 

To make his case Katyal carefully takes the reader through the language of Article II, Section 4 of the constitution, which states that the president and other public officials should be removed from office for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” – arguably the most widely misunderstood aspect of impeachment. The concept of “high crimes” comes from English common law, widely understood at the time to mean not an especially severe crime, but rather a different category of wrongdoing: namely, abuse of public trust. 

 

Only a public official can be guilty of a “high crime” by definition – it has nothing to do with criminal statutes. Indeed, the original language of the clause was “high Crimes and Misdemeanors against the United States”, but the framers decided the last three words were redundant. In fact, Kaytal considers that Trump’s apparent offer to sell discounted weapons to Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskiy in exchange for dirt on Joe Biden constitutes not merely an impeachable abuse of office, but arguably breaks criminal law: the Hobbs Act of 1946 prohibits actual or attempted extortion affecting foreign commerce “in any way or degree” – it’s a racketeering offence, often used in public corruption cases.

 

 

Katyal believes that the survival of American democracy depends on holding this president accountable

 

Finally Katyal provides an extremely useful synopsis of the evidence against Trump that has come to light since September 2019. The book covers events from the summer of 2019 to 8 October, meaning it was written and published very hastily indeed. That is one obvious reason for its brevity and simplicity, but it’s also the best way to make a case, breaking it down into the most basic possible terms. Katyal concludes, persuasively, that the House is likely to confirm three articles of impeachment: for soliciting foreign interference, bribery and obstruction of justice – the crime that brought down Nixon.

 

One of Katyal’s favourite techniques is to quote the words of Trump’s apologists against them. He takes a quotation from Mike Pence when he was a Congressman about putting public service above personal interests and turns it into the “Pence rule”; he quotes Senator Lindsey Graham urging impeachment against Bill Clinton in terms that thoroughly indict Trump; he notes that Trump’s former White House Counsel Don McGahn previously confirmed laws against a president receiving “things of value” from foreign nationals. The problem with this line of argument is obvious, however, and Katyal even quotes it later: quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who will guard the guards themselves? Earlier he observes: “This Trump gambit – do it in public so no one cares – can be successful only for as long as our elected officials let it be.” But that also works the other way around: it will be successful for as long as they let it be.

 

Katyal believes that the survival of American democracy depends on holding this president accountable, ensuring that no American is above the law. He is not alone in this belief. Trump’s supporters, meanwhile, are reduced to insisting that impeachment is unconstitutional; Section II Article 4 says otherwise.

 

But this is where Katyal’s constitutional literacy hits the hard malice of political reality: a Senate controlled by Mitch McConnell’s majority. The constitution leaves the Senate with enormous latitude in how – or even whether – it should conduct the impeachment trial. Current Senate rules say McConnell must hold the trial, but he could change those rules; and even if he decided that was politically unwise, nothing stops him from running a kangaroo court. Katyal’s only remedy is to hope for the best. “For Senator McConnell to try to block the evidence from being carefully heard and considered would be a profound dereliction of his job,” he writes. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KneeJerk said:

 

The truth however ...

 

 

cnn-fishfeeding-edits_1516223981.gif

 

 

Typical fake news brought to us by the seething, mindless hatred of the Prog TDS crowd.

 

Here’s a great example of the blatant dishonesty of the TDS infected Trump hating media …


https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/politics/donald-trump-koi-pond-japan/index.html

 

Quote

 

Trump feeds fish, winds up pouring entire box of food into koi pond

 

by Veronica Rocha


… snip video …

 

(CNN)President Donald Trump took a moment out of his whirlwind Japanese trip to connect with nature and feed some fish, but after a few delicate scoops, he resorted to a grand gesture met with some laughter.

 


Now anyone who watched the snipped video would see that Trump only dumped the fish food that AFTER Abe dumped the contents of his box into the pond.   And while the article later notes that Abe “appeared to dump out his box of food ahead of Trump”, the headline and opening paragraph give no clue of that.   I think the reason is that CNN knows that most democRATS are too lazy to read beyond the headline and they hoped this concocted story would hurt Trump with koi lovers.

 

I also think the CNN article and video in the link above are not what CNN originally published.    Go to the twitter account of the author (Veronica Rocha) 

 

 


… and you find her posting a video that was deliberately edited to make it look like Trump dumped his box and Abe did not.   I would bet that was the original video on the CNN website.   And likely the original CNN article didn’t mention Abe dumping his box first.   In fact, even now, the article only says that Abe “appear”s to dump his first.


The leftists working at CNN are PATHETIC.    Veronica is the sort of biased *journalist* that the California State College system is turning out to staff MSM.   And note … CNN has her helping to put out articles about the impeachment: https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/impeachment-hearing-11-13-19/h_60c659a3125fd19e66c0308c50730f03 , https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/james-comey-town-hall-2019/h_794b24cc797fa2319325472d0a3d1014?ref=hvper.com&utm_source=hvper.com&utm_medium=website .  

That's not likely to turn out well.   Staying tuned ... :lol:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CrimeaRiver said:

When this happens, which LIB here

will be the first to blow their brains all over the ceiling?  I mean first the Muelly report is a dud...and THEN no impeachment.  Yikes

 

Best odds are Leftwinger.   Why? Any chick who sits on a chat site 24/7 and types "impeachment" 1,000x per day.....is clearly mentall ill.

 

Following psycho LW is......dontlookknow, Merrill, harrygaymar, olivespoil and slidefag

Left-winger posted for 2 years that Trump colluded with Russia and a soon as it was proven he never colluded? He said that was never the issue. It was always obstruction . 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, kfools said:

I also think censure is likely. I would be phucking blown away if they actually hand thier power of the process to the Senate.

 

I think they are trying to get a bi-partisan censure.

Cool.  The question was which faggot with slit their whore throat first?  :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, DeepBreath said:

We don't consider hearsay and speculation as evidence. Neither does a court. 🤡

 

Good for you, DeeplyInsane. 

 

However, since that is not what President Evil is getting his worthless azz Impeached for, your comment just further demonstrates your clueless insanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...