Jump to content

GOP introduces resolution to condemn Pelosi for ripping up Trump’s State of the Union speech


Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, RollingRock said:

Hysterical!  :lol:   Trump is defecating all over the constitution and the rule of law on a regular basis......yet the Trumpanzees are mad because Nancy Pelosi tore up a copy of Cheeto's speech.

 

It's like we're living in some bizarro dark comedy.  

The trumpanzees consider the copy to be equivalent to the ten commandments

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 562
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 minutes ago, Arris said:

That's your own ass hole you smell

 

Iowa??  WTF ??

Do you damn fools know to count past 1000?

WTF is wrong???

Do you know that the whole nation is laughing at your state...…. in derision?

Do you need to borrow my $5 Walmart handheld calculator?

Heheheheheheheheheee...…………..😊

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Taipan said:

 

Iowa??  WTF ??

Do you damn fools know to count past 1000?

WTF is wrong???

Do you know that the whole nation is laughing at your state...…. in derision?

Do you need to borrow my $5 Walmart handheld calculator?

Heheheheheheheheheee...…………..😊

I am not a democrat so everything you posted makes no difference to me.

 

Also I heard your god trump said the sun rises in the west and all you pukes (that's you) agreed

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, skews13 said:

 

No. She didn't. So let me put this to rest for the perpetual butt hurt.

 

Code 2017 states, “Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

 

What Kirk, Higbie and Trump, Jr. are overlooking, Kalmbacher points out, is the “filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States” part.

 

“Trump handed Pelosi a copy of the speech,” Kalmbacher explains. “He didn’t file this copy with any official — clerk or otherwise — whose job it is to make sure such documents are collected, recorded and physically and legally protected. The president gave Pelosi a copy of his address as a memento of sorts.

 

This action wasn’t an official deposit. It was an act of theater.”

 

The piece of paper that Pelosi tore up, according to Kalmbacher, “is not covered by the statute at all…. Nothing official happened here one way or another, and certainly, no laws were broken by the speaker.”

 

Laurence Tribe, a Harvard Law School professor, has lambasted Pelosi’s detractors for being so clueless that they don’t even understand how Code 2017 works.

 

“Not even Bill Barr would fall for that ludicrous misapplication of the federal law criminalizing mutilation of government records,” Tribe asserted. “The copy was the speaker’s own. It wasn’t a government record to begin with, and her action was purely symbolic expression well within the protection of both the speech and debate clause and the First Amendment.”

 

Want some cheese to go with that whine clown?


in 1986 the national archives office issued a ruling that the copy the president gives to Congress is the “official copy“.

 

  The reason the ruling was made in the first place is a cause of the space shuttle Challenger disaster and when Reagan mentioned it he deviated from the script. You can look it up yourself if you don’t believe me

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Arris said:

I am not a democrat so everything you posted makes no difference to me.

 

Also I heard your god trump said the sun rises in the west and all you pukes (that's you) agreed

 

What do you boys have against a little prosperity?

We got this train cooking right on down the tracks.

Why can't y'all just get on, sit back, and enjoy the view?

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, skews13 said:

 

I sure do . You do know what's happened to your side in every election since Trumps appointment right?

 

And this is a Presidential election year. 

 

You know chuck, a year in which Democrats turn out in Obama size numbers.

 

This isn't going to be 2016.


I will be more than willing to wager with you on the presidential election.

 

The first election after Trump was president put my man Troy Balderson in the house of representative

 

And then the midterm, my side as the majority fared much better than the dems did in Obama’s

 

you guys have awoken a sleeping bear and mild mannered people who never talk politics are pretty pissed at the Democrats right now and political talk is dominating kitchen tables all across the heartland

 

If you wish to make a wager, state your bet

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, skews13 said:

 

No. She didn't. So let me put this to rest for the perpetual butt hurt.

 

Code 2017 states, “Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

 

What Kirk, Higbie and Trump, Jr. are overlooking, Kalmbacher points out, is the “filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States” part.

 

“Trump handed Pelosi a copy of the speech,” Kalmbacher explains. “He didn’t file this copy with any official — clerk or otherwise — whose job it is to make sure such documents are collected, recorded and physically and legally protected. The president gave Pelosi a copy of his address as a memento of sorts.

 

Carefully re-read the law again, skews.    

 

Kalmbacher conveniently left off the last half of it ... highlighted in red below ...

 

Quote

Code 2017 states, “Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

 

Pelosi is a "public officer of the United States", her position is a "public office" and she even works in a "public office" .  

 

Regarding the last two points, Pelosi, in remarking on Trumps' presentation of Rush with the Medal of Freedom in the House chambers, said "Do it in your own office.   We don’t come into your office and do congressional business. Why are you doing that here?”   The fact is that Trump handed her the document in her office (the House Chambers) because she holds a PUBLIC OFFICE.   And as I proved on another thread, the National Archives itself views that copy as a official document of the United States which they keep.   So she violated Code 2017.

 

Furthermore, regarding the term "public officer of the United States", do you know who General Bellnap was, skews?  He was the Secretary of War under President Grant.  He was impeached.   The term "public officer" was a factor in the trial.   And document of the ruling of the Senate trial, published by the Senate, states that the Senate concluded that, as Secretary of War, he was a "public officer of the United States".  

 

Public officers are not solely officers of the court, skews.     Indeed, Webster's Third New International Dictionary (unabridged ed.2002) defines "public officer" as "a person holding a post to which he has been legally elected or appointed and exercising governmental functions" and that definition has been used in many trials.   That definition clearly applies to Pelosi.  

 

As proof, here's another source defining the term's legal meaning ...  

 

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Officer

 

Quote

 

An individual with the responsibility of performing the duties and functions of an office, that is a duty or charge, a position oftrust, or a right to exercise a public or private employment.

 

A public officer is ordinarily defined as an individual who has been elected or appointed to exercise the functions of an office for the benefit of the public. Executive officers, such as the president or state governors, are public officers charged with the duty to ascertain that the law is enforced and obeyed. A legislative officer, such as a member of Congress, has the duty of making the laws. A public officer whose duties include administering justice, adjudicating controversies, and interpreting the laws is called a judicial officer. A de jure officer is one who is legally appointed and qualified to exercise the office. A de facto officer is an individual who appears to be legally qualified and appointed to an office but is not due to some legal technicality, such as failure to file a financial disclosure statement within the time prescribed by statute.

 

A public office must be created either by statute or by constitutional provision. Public officers are distinguishable from employees in that they are required to take an oath of office and are appointed or elected to specified terms of office. The eligibility, duties, and compensation of public officers are defined by statute.

 

 

Again, as much as you and Snopes may not like it, skews, Pelosi is a "public officer".

 

Therefore she is subject to the law she clearly broke in pulling that childish silly stunt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, NeoConvict said:

 

18 US Code, Section 2071(b):  "(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States."

be sure to let me know when the indictment is written...

 

Hey... it's the clown's DoJ... his lap dog Barr RUNS the fucking department.... that means it should happen rather quickly, eh?

 

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahhaahahahaha

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, maineman said:

be sure to let me know when the indictment is written...

 

NeoConvict, since COWARDLY maineman is pretending that he has me on ignore, please ask him if he agrees with Skews and Snopes that Pelosi didn't violate the law.  B)

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 

NeoConvict, since COWARDLY maineman is pretending that he has me on ignore, please ask him if he agrees with Skews and Snopes that Pelosi didn't violate the law.  B)

Maineman, did the bitch break the law or not?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Chuck! said:


I will be more than willing to wager with you on the presidential election.

 

The first election after Trump was president put my man Troy Balderson in the house of representative

 

And then the midterm, my side as the majority fared much better than the dems did in Obama’s

 

you guys have awoken a sleeping bear and mild mannered people who never talk politics are pretty pissed at the Democrats right now and political talk is dominating kitchen tables all across the heartland

 

If you wish to make a wager, state your bet

 

 

^^^^^^^

White dog whislte

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2020 at 8:00 PM, drvoke said:

 

 

Image result for Kay Granger pelosi

 

 

This resolution isn't worth the paper its written on. Why don't you just physically slap Nancy's wrist, it would be as effective.

 

And I have a resolution for you right here, Kay. Get to work.

 

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gop-introduces-resolution-to-condemn-pelosi-for-ripping-up-trumps-state-of-the-union-speech/ar-BBZHuiX?ocid=spartanntp

(Full article at above link)

 

Just hours after their colleagues in the Senate voted to acquit President Trump on the two articles of impeachment brought against him, Republican lawmakers in the House introduced a resolution to condemn House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for ripping up a copy of Trump’s State of the Union address Tuesday night.

The privileged resolution, which was introduced Wednesday by Texas Republican Rep. Kay Granger, blasted Pelosi’s public shredding of the text of the address as “a breach of decorum” and said it brought “discredit on the House.”

After sparring with Republicans on the floor, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said he will move to table, or set aside the resolution, but since the measure is privileged the House must consider the resolution between now and Friday.

Pelosi’s action on Tuesday evening has stolen much of the spotlight from Trump’s State of the Union address.

As Trump finished his address -- and with television cameras focused on him, Pelosi and Vice President Mike Pence -- the speaker ripped in two the paper the speech was printed on. As Trump stepped down from the pulpit, she ripped papers again. Then a third time. And a fourth. 

Pelosi told reporters as she left the ripping was not planned and added “I felt very liberated last night."

Pelosi’s action led to widespread Republican condemnation that spilled over onto the House floor when Granger introduced the privileged resolution.

On Wednesday evening, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Hoyer had a feisty exchange in which the Republican leader called the copy of Trump’s address a "document of the House," arguing that it should not have been destroyed.

 

 

 

 

It would have been nice if she could have acted like an adult. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, drvoke said:

 

You mean like shaking someone's hand when it's offered?

Yes. That was childish too. Is there a reason why you wont address Nancy's childishness and deflect by talking about another topic?

Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone else ever notice the common practice of all people playing divide and conquer mind games from every interpretation of life larger than the moment here always isolate the person making the mistake on their side but blaming the whole group of every other side but their own.

 

Its that "we said so and you better" psychology of mob rule making individuals feel smaller than equally here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Redoctober said:

Yes. That was childish too. Is there a reason why you wont address Nancy's childishness and deflect by talking about another topic?

 

Did you read Loserthink by Scott Adams or what?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2020 at 11:00 PM, drvoke said:

This resolution isn't worth the paper its written on. Why don't you just physically slap Nancy's wrist, it would be as effective.

 

drjoke...I don't know if this is true since I heard it on Fox news BUT the guy said the copy of the speech was the United States GOVs and she had no right to tear it up. That sounds like something someone made up.

 

Honest question. Have you ever seen a more punchable face than this (Sandmann) kid’s?

 

Reza Aslan 1/ 20 /19

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Old Mack said:

 

drjoke...I don't know if this is true since I heard it on Fox news BUT the guy said the copy of the speech was the United States GOVs and she had no right to tear it up. That sounds like something someone made up.

 

Honest question. Have you ever seen a more punchable face than this (Sandmann) kid’s?

 

Reza Aslan 1/ 20 /19

 

 

Image result for Honest question. Have you ever seen a more punchable face than this (Sandmann) kid’s?

 

It looked pretty smart alecky at the time, but it was out of context. Plus, as a personal rule, I never agree with Reza Aslan. I hate his guts.

 

The govt. document business is fake news. Everyone in the House had a copy.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...