• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding metals, finance, politics, government and many other topics"

Trump Impeachment 2

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
14,258
Likes
29,773
#1
@amuse

IMPEACHMENT TRIAL THREAD:

Democrats have been burning the midnight oil discussing what sort of defense they will allow Trump's legal team to present. Contrary to all traditions of jurisprudence Democrats will serve as judge, jury, witness, and victim in Trump’s ‘trial’ tomorrow.



2/ The consensus is that the president's guilt is so straightforward witnesses aren't necessary. The worst-case scenario for Democrats would be having Speaker Pelosi testifying under oath about her involvement with security planning. But the Democrats have a problem.



3/ After Trump was impeached in 2019 Rep Jamie Raskin demanded Democrats be allowed to call witnesses saying, “We want witnesses, we need witnesses." Now Raskin is the lead impeachment manager and adamantly rejects Trump's right to call witnesses.

https://www.fox6now.com/news/congressman-impeachment-articles-wont-go-to-senate-until-gop-promises-fair-trial



4/ Raskin fears that if Trump is allowed to call witnesses he'll be able to use his impeachment as a worldwide stage to call the election into question once again and turn the tables on the Democrat's desire to put a nail in the former president's political coffin.



5/ Each one of the current impeachment managers is on the record from 2019 explaining that without impeachment witnesses a fair trial in the senate cannot be held. The arguments were compelling:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/senate-impeachment-trial-call-witnesses-or-concede-facts



6/ Ironically, Republican Senators Susan Collins and Mitt Romney who voted to call witnesses during Trump's first impeachment are now signaling they don't want to give Trump a platform to relitigate the 2020 election by calling witnesses.



7/ To give Democrats some cover Rep Raskin sent the president's lawyer asking Trump to testify during the trial knowing the president's lawyers would refuse the request - this will give Democrats some cover to refuse Trump's witness requests.

7/ Sources tell me that @SenatorLeahy's plan is to refuse to let Trump call any witnesses that might undermine the objective of the trial to prevent Trump from running for office in the future or (perhaps more importantly) prevent any embarrassment for the Democrats.



8/ The impeachment managers are also wary about allowing the president to present video evidence. They're also reluctant to play video of Trump's speech prior to the riot at the Capitol given the fact that he called for peaceful protests.

@SenatorLeahy will likely ban all video.



9/ From a scheduling perspective, tomorrow Trump's lawyers will present his pretrial brief and on Tuesday the House managers will present their pretrial rebuttal brief and the trial will begin.



10/ #KangarooCourt



 

the_shootist

I identify as already vaccinated, bitches!
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
58,001
Likes
110,528
Location
Earth
#2
Congress is a clown show. The GOP are the Democrats
 

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
14,258
Likes
29,773
#3
Anyone else wonder where these pictures came from?

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/fact-checking-phony-fact-checkers-gateway-pundits-explosive-michigan-tcf-center-reporting-absolututely-shows-voter-fraud/

Fact-Checking the Phony Fact-Checkers: The Gateway Pundit’s Explosive Michigan, TCF Center Reporting ABSOLUTELY Shows Voter Fraud


On Friday The Gateway Pundit released newly discovered and explosive video from the TCF Center in Detroit, Michigan on election night November 4th. The video shows vehicles making late night ballot deliveries after the 8 PM deadline in the state.

1612755468898.png


Exclusive: The TCF Center Election Fraud – Newly Discovered Video Shows Late Night Deliveries of Tens of Thousands of Illegal Ballots 8 Hours After Deadline

Two outlets performed so-called “Fact Checks” of the Gateway Pundit video exclusive which shows the van performing the 3:30AM Biden Ballot Dump in Detroit on election night. According to The Detroit Free Press, Politifact, and Deadline Detroit (the “Three Stooges”) the videos we released on Friday do not show fraud.

Their flawed reasoning:

TRENDING: Breaking: Twitter Indefinitely Suspends Gateway Pundit Account After We Announce More Video of TCF Center Fraud Will Be Released in Coming Days

Even though the ballots are nearly eight (8) hours past the lawful election deadline, they *might* have been collected at 7:59PM. And since City of Detroit official Chris Thomas signed an affidavit stating as much, then suggestions of fraud are “false.”
But there’s no evidence there was a proper chain of custody on the 3:30AM Biden Ballot Dump. The stooges also refuse to consider several other eyewitness accounts showing these were highly suspicious and likely illegal ballots. And those eyewitnesses to voter fraud outnumber, and have better credibility, than Detroit Official Chris Thomas.

The media “fact checks” are carefully crafted hit-pieces used to discredit, and ultimately silence, the Gateway Pundit; and provide a basis for others to attack as well. Yesterday, Twitter permanently banned Gateway Pundit Publisher Jim Hoft likely because of these videos. Other entities like NewsGuard, Sleeping Giants, and others, use “fact check” propaganda like this to lobby the GP’s advertisers to abandon the Gateway Pundit. This is how totalitarians operate: crushing dissenting truth-tellers. This is how the ruling oligarchy in this country operates: Exposing the truth is a crime and must be punished.

But was the Gateway Pundit wrong in its claims or reporting?

No.

The Pundit was completely accurate. And Clara Hendrickson of the Free Press, as well as the authors of the cowardly unsigned article at Deadline Detroit, which relied solely on the Hendrickson/Free Press for its reporting, should be ashamed of themselves for such journalistic malpractice. Hendrickson’s reporting was copied and pasted into the Politifact fact check that was similarly wrong and relied entirely on Chris Thomas’ affidavit.

The Gateway Pundit has reported extensively on 2020 election fraud. Its TCF video and story showcases the uncovered evidence, documented and discussed in those stories. But the media when “fact-checking,” like to narrowly focus on one item and purposefully ignore the necessary context to properly consider whether or not the reporting is accurate.

The claim is rated “false” by left-wing reporters because Hendrickson takes all nuance and context away from the story, and sloppily patches two simple facts together: (1) we don’t know when the ballots showing up at 3:30AM were actually received by the City of Detroit; and (2) City of Detroit official Chris Thomas says nothing was wrong.

Detroit City Official Chris Thomas is lying in his Affidavit, here’s how we know:

RELATED: "Leaving Them In is a Death Sentence" - Activist asks Trump to Pardon Conservative Political Prisoners

  • Thomas claims there were only 45 boxes delivered, when the 3:30AM Biden Ballot Dump had 61 as observed by multiple witnesses and evident in the security camera footage. In the video you can observe and count 61 boxes, exactly as our witnesses described the week after the election!
  • Most explosively, we now know there was not just one, but TWO Biden Ballot Dumps by the City of Detroit “Vote Mobile” arriving at 3:30AM and 4:30AM. These ballots were extremely suspicious, were all for Biden, and took Trump’s commanding lead in Michigan to a significant defeat.
  • City of Detroit whistleblowers have come forward to say the City was pushing every ballot possible through and counting those ballots, regardless of whether they were valid or not, ignoring state law.
  • Thomas claims the process was legitimate and secured throughout, and we now know that the process was flawed at almost every step, and that there was no secure chain of custody.
Chris Thomas has the most serious and obvious motive to lie: he’s Detroit Clerk Janice Winfrey’s assistant. None of the whistleblowers have the motive to lie, many of whom are very scared of career, economic and physical threats.

But Hendrickson and others use Thomas’ affidavit to completely ignore any of these important witnesses. And she barely acknowledges at all that other witnesses and other evidence corroborates their statements.

Here’s the basic logic that Hendrickson lacks and the journalistic curiosity she never developed:

TCF election witness Jose Aliaga has repeatedly said that the 3:30AM Biden Ballot Dump was almost all absentee ballots from what he observed.

Advertisement - story continues below

Aliaga noted that all the ballots were done in exclusively black ink, whereas earlier in the day they were in both blue and black ink.

All the ballots, Aliaga says, were for Joe Biden and Democrat Senate incumbent Gary Peters.

All the ballots were ‘undervoting’ the rest of the ballot, meaning they inexplicably left every other race blank.

And Aliaga said he felt the ballot selection boxes were filled in almost perfectly, whereas normal ballots had a more unpredictable look.

Advertisement - story continues below

QR Code inventor Jovan Hutton Pulitzer has said perfectly-filled boxes is a major indication of fraud.

Absentees, as multiple TCF witnesses have said, were counted first on election day the day prior, not last as these ballots were counted. This means that this huge influx of absentees were way out of place, since they should have been the first and not last counted.

As well, courageous City of Detroit whistleblower Jessy Jacob came forward, by affidavit and by testimony, to say that the Detroit Zuckerberg ballot boxes were checked and cleared every single hour and then were supposed to be locked promptly at 8:00PM. Meaning there should *not* have been 15,000, 150,000, or more absentee ballots left remaining to be checked until 3:30AM.

The ballot deadline was 8:00PM as set by state law, and reiterated through court cases. The Democrats wanted to count every ballot no matter when it arrived, even if days later, and that was their position in court. But the court said that no ballot received after 8:00PM could be accepted as valid, this is why that time is so important.

Advertisement - story continues below

Another credible City of Detroit whistleblower, afraid for repercussions and so not quoted on the record, has come forward to exclusively tell the Gateway Pundit that they personally witnessed people in Detroit stuffing the Zuckerberg boxes after the legal 8:00PM deadline and that the boxes were NOT locked as the City of Detroit has maintained in legal filings.

Hendrickson does not bother her readers with the relevant context that the courts had said, over Democrat objections, that late-arriving ballots after the 8:00PM deadline could not be counted. Thus there is a very strong incentive to claim that all ballots were received prior to the deadline, and we know that the preference of the clerks was to count and accept late ballots.

Jessy Jacob also said that virtually no controls were in place checking ballots for legal accuracy, primarily signature verification or checking addresses. She has maintained that they were told to push all the ballots through and not reject any. Indeed, the ‘rejection rate’ for ballots was at a record low, seeming to corroborate the substance of Jacob’s allegations.

Jacob says she was also told to backdate applications so that they would appear to have arrived earlier than the deadline for ballots.

Advertisement - story continues below

In the affidavit that every fact check is relying upon, the one from Chris Thomas, who is the assistant to Detroit Clerk Janice Winfrey, he says there was one delivery of 45 boxes, including 16,000 ballots, early in the morning. Even though the video shows 61 boxes for the 3:30AM Biden Ballot Drop. He is admitting that because the Pundit reported the 3:30AM Biden Ballot Dump within a week of it happening, and documented it by publishing video testimonials from other similar witnesses.

The problem for Thomas, Clara Hendrickson, and for the City of Detroit is that we now know they’re all lying, or they are part of the voter fraud cover-up.

Chris Thomas is certainly lying and should be prosecuted for perjury.

We found that there were more than 45 boxes in that delivery as Thomas has claimed. Eyewitnesses say the number was over 50 and many say they counted exactly 61. In the video, we count 61 boxes. This completely corroborates multiple eyewitness accounts.

Advertisement - story continues below

But we also found more ballot dumps that we didn’t previously know about.

We know this because the Gateway Pundit spent nearly ten thousand dollars ($10,000) buying all the security camera footage from 3:00-5:00AM and found the 3:30AM Biden Ballot Dump on camera and examined (and still is examining) more than 1,200 hours of video. There wasn’t just one, there were apparently two early morning ballot dumps by the same white City of Detroit van ironically labeled the “Vote Mobile” by its signage entering at 3:23AM, leaving at 3:53AM. And then the SECOND ballot dump was at 4:32AM, where the van leaves at 4:58AM according to the timestamp on the TCF Security Cameras.

The TCF Center loading dock that they came into at 3:30AM had the door open, so people like reporter Shane Trejo and others could see what was happening and ran to report it to the Michigan Republican Party attorneys who were on site. But the door was closed at the other times, so the witnesses did not see them. Chris Thomas only admitted to the one ballot dump that we knew about, apparently never expecting anyone to check the video footage.

The Pundit was the first to report on the 3:30AM Biden Ballot Dump because we talked to NUMEROUS actual witnesses who described their anger and shock at witnessing voter fraud in front of their eyes.

Advertisement - story continues below

The mainstream media avoids having to admit there are eyewitnesses to the 3:30AM Biden Ballot Dump, because then readers would want to hear from those witnesses and determine their credibility. And those witnesses have largely said the exact same thing for months, people who did not know one another prior, who describe the same people, time, details, and specific details of the suspicious ballots. And with their statements on video, you can determine their credibility for yourself.

What’s also interesting is that this tactic of suspicious late-night ballot dumps of supposed absentees used to flip an election where the preferred candidate was behind in election day votes is well-known, so well-known in fact that in Janice Winfrey’s last Democrat primary election she used it against now-Lieutenant Governor Garlin Gilchrist. Gilchrist called the 2016 election process administered by Winfrey “a complete catastrophe.”





Advertisement - story continues below

We were even concerned that perhaps reporter Shane Trejo and Jose Aliaga saw a different van, or perhaps different people coming out of the van, so we went back to them and asked them the same questions and showed them still pictures and video from the TCF security cameras, and both told the exact same stories they told in November and both said this was the 3:30AM Biden Ballot Dump they remember. Both of them feel completely confident that what they witnessed was the great steal that took Michigan away from Trump, and ultimately the systemic voter fraud that the mainstream media refuses to investigate and illogically (and maliciously) claims does not exist.

By declaring the Pundit’s coverage false these outlets take the question of whether the ballots were legal, an unknown, and declare it safe with no evidence to support that position other than a self-interested statement from one official.

There’s no credible chain of custody on those ballots presented anywhere. The witnesses who saw and ultimately counted those ballots expressed concern about their legitimacy and complained to officials on-site. They knew something was wrong with this late-night ballot delivery and wanted someone to credibly investigate. Now, reporters like Hendrickson are declaring everything false, but the depth of their reporting is to solely rely on one affidavit, talk to no one, and ignore the LEGIONS of witnesses.

Statements by self-interested government officials should be viewed with extreme skepticism. This is especially important when the alternative is an admission of voter fraud. With whistleblowers like Jessy Jacob risking their careers to tell the truth, they should be given at least a fair review and not arrogantly dismissed out of hand. Instead, The Stooge “fact checkers” serve as the rubber stamp propagandists for Detroit – one of the most corrupt and mismanaged cities in the Western Hemisphere. Say the Stooges to an doubting public: “nothing to see here, move along.”

Advertisement - story continues below

The Thomas affidavit comes from the court hearing held before Wayne County Judge Tim Kenny, who weighed the various affidavits submitted and said that he found the Wayne County ones “more credible.”

Judge Kenny did not have a hearing, hear testimony, and take evidence. He merely disposed of the case based on the documents provided to him. He did such poor legal work, that the Michigan Supreme Court reprimanded him in this case and ordered him to have a real, substantive, hearing. None of the primary reporting that uses the hearing to dismiss witnesses, including Hendrickson’s, provides this important, relevant, and necessary context.

…the trial court should meaningfully assess plaintiffs’ allegations by an evidentiary hearing, particularly with respect to the credibility of the competing affiants, as well as resolve necessary legal issues…
Judge Kenny has never held that substantive hearing.

Advertisement - story continues below

These reporting oversights and mistakes are not minor or insignificant, and they are not facts that a reporter seeking to ‘debunk’ a story of this magnitude should do with one affidavit and one assumption that all government officials are ethical and honest. With so little context offered by Hendrickson, almost her entire article is lacking important context by virtue of the lazy work she provided.

Let’s examine how bad Clara Hendrickson is at journalism. Her article ‘debunking’ the Pundit was completely unbalanced and without context. She completely ignored the important testimonies of reporter Shane Trejo, Jose Aliaga, and Jessy Jacob. She never bothered emailing or calling these important witnesses. She didn’t bother reaching out to any author of these articles from the Pundit. And she engaged in premature conclusions and wrongly assuming bad faith on behalf of the Pundit, ultimately defaming the Pundit for reporting accurately.

Her piece is so superficial and misleading. She provides her readers with no context or meaningful examination of the evidence. She pontificates that the Pundit article is false by nitpicking what should otherwise be obvious: ballots eight (8) hours legally late are presumptively suspicious!

And in what should be considered the cardinal sin of these presumptuous, arrogant mainstream media fact-checkers – who don’t even deign to call reporters, publishers, witnesses or even to bring new facts to the situation – she declares something ‘false’ which is, using only the facts she cherry-picks, at best ambiguous. There is no way to know whether those ballots were legal unless she called as a journalist and found a valid, credible, chain of custody on those ballots. Instead, she relies on an affidavit from a source obviously motivated to lie: Chris Thomas from the City of Detroit. She ignored all of the evidence, documentation and actual journalism performed by the Gateway Pundit.

Advertisement - story continues below

When the entire weight of social media, big tech, multinational corporations, among others, are punishing, threatening, deplatforming those who dare to discuss FACTS and WITNESSES to the official narrative, you would think Clara Hendrickson would do more than rely on one affidavit from someone as compromised as Chris Thomas and summarily dismiss everyone else. But you’d be wrong, because that’s sufficient for her to label it all ‘false’ and tell readers to simply move on.

Clara Hendrickson is smarter than her story. Her strategy was to frame the story for people whose confirmation bias would allow them to write-off the obvious missing context in her story.

We rate her fact check as: journalistic malpractice, and complete disgrace to the field of journalism.

We exposed the fraud at the TCF Center. These suspicious illicit ballots should NEVER have been allowed into the center and counted for Joe Biden for a number of legal reasons!
 

Alton

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
7,180
Likes
15,044
Location
Michiana
#5
IMPEACHMENT TRIAL THREAD:
Good idea Uglytruth!

This will be a short thread.
Trump team will NOT be allowed to produce ANY evidence.
Trump WILL BE impeached.
And the shit-show continues.......
 

Oldmansmith

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,088
Likes
5,654
Location
Taxachusetts
#7
When the Republicans get control, they should Impeach Roosevelt and take him off the dime. I mean, if putting US citizens into internnmet camps without due process isnt impeachable, I dont know what is
 

Casey Jones

Ridin' that train
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 4, 2020
Messages
3,563
Likes
5,426
Location
Down the road from the Kaczynski ranch
#8
He has already been impeached, it's a matter of whether or not he will be convicted.
"Convicted" is not the term. Impeachment is not a criminal trial.

The choice here is to remove him from office, or not.

...oh...wait. He's already out of office.

See how asinine this is?

But...but...but...we can't have Orange Man running AGAIN! Gotta prevent THAT!....

To that I have two words:

Alcee

Hastings.

Hastings was a corrupt Federal judge, removed by Impeachment.

THEN...RAN FOR CONGRESS.

NO ONE...EVER....questioned his legal ability to serve in office.

These Dumbo c Rats are just making rules up as they go along. Just as they make up their own facts.
 

the_shootist

I identify as already vaccinated, bitches!
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
58,001
Likes
110,528
Location
Earth
#10
When the Republicans get control...
It's cute that you think any of that matters. The Uniparty just has two different divisions...the Blue and the Red!
 

tigerwillow1

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,407
Likes
2,544
#11
US Constitution Section 3 excerpt:

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

And from Section 4:

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.

I have to reluctantly say that, as I interpret this, the Senate is able to hold the trial even though Trump is out of office.
 

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
14,258
Likes
29,773
#12
Lets go back & impeach Wilson & undue the federal reserve that destroyed freedom & ushered in slavery for all.
 

Casey Jones

Ridin' that train
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 4, 2020
Messages
3,563
Likes
5,426
Location
Down the road from the Kaczynski ranch
#13
Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
Well, then...if it's a CONVICTION, then that's that.

Because to try him again would be double-jeopardy.

I believe it was a poor choice of words there. Just as the Convention would **CHUSE** some different spellings.

The Constitution was inspired; but it is not without flaws.

Since the trial is not by a jury but by the Senate, and since the only "punishment" out of this "trial" is removal from office..."conviction" is not the proper term.

And since the man they seek to remove from office IS out of office, this is as moot as trying a dead man for a crime.

ALSO...since the Constitution stipulates that the Chief Justice **SHALL** preside over the Impeachment, and the Chief Justice has refused...this is not a lawful trial. This is a kangaroo kourt.
 

Ensoniq

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
9,432
Likes
19,853
Location
North Carolina
#14
Lol

The judge is highly partisan leaky leahey

He says he can be impartial but last week he said trump was guilty and will be convicted
7C19216D-5B98-43DE-8B80-988F702A3A19.jpeg
 

Casey Jones

Ridin' that train
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 4, 2020
Messages
3,563
Likes
5,426
Location
Down the road from the Kaczynski ranch
#15
That's one MORE bit of evidence Trump can use to bring suit (not "Appeal" but bring a suit in a court of LAW) after this circus.

A judge saying what Leaky said, would be obligated to recuse.

In any event, Leaky has no authority to preside over this.

In additon to these two, I think a logical reading of the Constitution shows that this is a moot action since the object is out of office.

Finally, the OBVIOUS EVIDENCE shows NO incitement, support, or advocacy of any uprising - the text of his speech is reasonable, and Horn-Helmet and the other miscreants were already in place. The FBI in NYC had heard chatter of a planned action days before - but it was not forwarded to Capitol Police or the Secret Service.

Compare Trump's reasonable speech to Mad Maxine's hate-filled screamfests, or Botox Nan's advocacy; or The Vice President raising bail for Antifa arsonists.

Good GAWD. There is no case here except for the completely deranged.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
8,521
Likes
14,555
#16

Casey Jones

Ridin' that train
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 4, 2020
Messages
3,563
Likes
5,426
Location
Down the road from the Kaczynski ranch
#17
The Constitution specifies it.

They didn't specify not Impeaching non-officeholders; they never thought the officeholders would be so stupid and so corrupt.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
8,521
Likes
14,555
#18
Well that's fun, but they can't impeach private citizens and everyone knows it. So they either pretend as though he's the president or they shut up and go home.

Impeachment literally means "a charge of misconduct made against the holder of a public office."

1612848369108.png


Now if Robinette wishes to have his attack dogs at the department of just-us charge the president with a crime...then they should do that. Since they're not doing that, I suggest there's a reason they're not doing that. ...I mean aside from the obvious fact that he's not guilty of doing what they claim and they'd get their asses kicked in a courtroom.
 
Last edited:

Casey Jones

Ridin' that train
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 4, 2020
Messages
3,563
Likes
5,426
Location
Down the road from the Kaczynski ranch
#19
There doesn't seem any grownup about to tell them to stop it.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
8,521
Likes
14,555
#20
There doesn't seem any grownup about to tell them to stop it.
Clearly. The people's alleged representatives allegedly impeached the president twice, and the state's alleged representatives are allegedly going to fake convict the president...except they're not the state's representatives, they're the people's representatives...redux. The states have no representation in DeeCee.

Some kind of Republic we have here...

I think I saw another, just as legitimate trial...on a batman movie.


...and millions of Amerikans will no doubt go right on paying their federal taxes like good little doobies. LOL
 

tigerwillow1

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,407
Likes
2,544
#22
Well that's fun, but they can't impeach private citizens and everyone knows it.
My interpretation is that a person has to be in office to be impeached, but not for the trial. Besides removal from office, the trial can optionally prevent the impeached person from holding future office. The dems must really be scared of Trump being able to win again, OR they're just plain stupid. Probably both.

Trump was in office when impeached. I don't see anything in the constitution that he has to be in office for the trial.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
8,521
Likes
14,555
#23
The Constitution specifies it.

They didn't specify not Impeaching non-officeholders; they never thought the officeholders would be so stupid and so corrupt.
It kinda does actually.

1612850270423.png

1612849791281.png

My interpretation is that a person has to be in office to be impeached, but not for the trial. Besides removal from office, the trial can optionally prevent the impeached person from holding future office. The dems must really be scared of Trump being able to win again, OR they're just plain stupid. Probably both.

Trump was in office when impeached. I don't see anything in the constitution that he has to be in office for the trial.
Impeachment is for removal from office...that's not going to happen. If they simply wish to impeach the president, then they need to follow the rules set forth at the time of impeachment. Have a trial with the chief just-us present, have witnesses, testimony, etc. That's what a trial is.

They wish to pretend they're following the law, when clearly they're not. ...and if not, what would stop Trump from challenging it as invalid...which clearly it is.

https://constitution.congress.gov/b...Section 4:,other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
 

Casey Jones

Ridin' that train
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 4, 2020
Messages
3,563
Likes
5,426
Location
Down the road from the Kaczynski ranch
#24
It kinda does actually.

Don't misconstru. I agree with your premise.

But there isn't the language specifically forbidding it.

Which means to these dullards...they take it as a green light.

I wonder if the Stuporemes are gonna give Trump the bum's rush again, when he brings a lawsuit in a REAL court? Roberts' recusal is a good sign; but Roberts is a puppet and compromised. He'll do what the dark figures holding the pics or whatever they have, tell him to do.
 

Casey Jones

Ridin' that train
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 4, 2020
Messages
3,563
Likes
5,426
Location
Down the road from the Kaczynski ranch
#25
My interpretation is that a person has to be in office to be impeached, but not for the trial. Besides removal from office, the trial can optionally prevent the impeached person from holding future office. The dems must really be scared of Trump being able to win again, OR they're just plain stupid. Probably both.

Trump was in office when impeached. I don't see anything in the constitution that he has to be in office for the trial.
The penalty for Impeachment is removal from office.

That has already happened. This would be what's called a "moot issue." A litigant or defendant dies; or is no longer interested in collecting damages or restitution; or whatever else would change the basic facts or demands.
 

tigerwillow1

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,407
Likes
2,544
#26
"Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States"

I guess the lawyers could argue over the definition of "and" until the cows come home. Did we ever decide what the definition if "is" is?
 

the_shootist

I identify as already vaccinated, bitches!
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
58,001
Likes
110,528
Location
Earth
#27
1612883441520.png
 

Thecrensh

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
10,358
Likes
15,967
#28
When the Republicans get control, they should Impeach Roosevelt and take him off the dime. I mean, if putting US citizens into internnmet camps without due process isnt impeachable, I dont know what is
HA! That's cute. You really think after Trump the deep state is going to slip up and allow someone on the "outside" to gain control again? Klobacher is on a committee and they are looking to expand the use of unsolicited mail in ballots. They're never going to be caught off guard again...and IF a Republican manages to win the Presidency in the future, it will be because he/she is controlled opposition.
 

Casey Jones

Ridin' that train
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 4, 2020
Messages
3,563
Likes
5,426
Location
Down the road from the Kaczynski ranch
#29
HA! That's cute. You really think after Trump the deep state is going to slip up and allow someone on the "outside" to gain control again? Klobacher is on a committee and they are looking to expand the use of unsolicited mail in ballots. They're never going to be caught off guard again...and IF a Republican manages to win the Presidency in the future, it will be because he/she is controlled opposition.
When a peaceful change in government is impossible, a violent change is inevitable.

You're right...until things are forcibly set right, elections don't matter. And these moronic tyrants know that.

So they'll just push their Hard-Left agenda, until we come to what Venezuela and Cuba came to.

Will we have enough not-beaten-down citizens to do something forcible, yet strategic and organized? I don't know.
 

chieftain

Too much pawpcorn
Joined
Jan 4, 2020
Messages
2,900
Likes
4,194
#31
Has the clown show released the impeachment trial episode already?
 

the_shootist

I identify as already vaccinated, bitches!
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
58,001
Likes
110,528
Location
Earth
#32

itsamess

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
1,673
Likes
3,564
#33
Wonder what the lefties are going to do when nothing happens? Had to laugh at Huffpo article about new evidence that the managers will introduce. Sound familiar?

"The House impeachment managers will introduce previously unseen evidence against President Donald Trump during the trial this week, their senior aides told reporters on a call Tuesday morning.

The aides declined to go into detail about the new evidence during the call, instructing reporters to “stay tuned” and saying there would be “more to come.”

Those funny politicians. At least they are equal opportunity.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
17,500
Likes
25,862
#36
I have to reluctantly say that, as I interpret this, the Senate is able to hold the trial even though Trump is out of office.
The House can do what they want but Impeachment in the Senate takes Two-Thirds of the Senators to convict. That ain't gonna happen unless a shitload more than 15 GOP Senators change their vote from Sen. Paul's question & vote. Highly unlikely.
 

newmisty

Transcending the 5 Elements
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
35,349
Likes
56,188
Location
Qmerica
#37
President Trump Impeachment Trial LIVE- Day 1
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
17,500
Likes
25,862
#39
It is a Demoncratic Clown Show already. "POPCORN" :popcorn: ""COLD BEER" :refer: :finger:DEMS
 

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
14,258
Likes
29,773
#40
And it just keeps getting better. Wonder if they have any idea how close they are all to being canceled?

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article249077830.html

Democrats have a back-up plan in case the Senate doesn’t convict Trump on impeachment
BY MICHAEL WILNER
FEBRUARY 08, 2021 02:38 PM,
UPDATED FEBRUARY 08, 2021 11:32 PM
Play Video
Duration 2:57

A timeline: The insurrection at the Capitol


On Jan. 6, 2021 the U.S Capitol was breached for the first time since 1812. Here are the most pivotal moments of one of the darkest days in American history. BY TREVIN SMITH


WASHINGTON
House and Senate Democrats may push ahead this week with a censure resolution to bar former President Donald Trump from holding future office over his role in the U.S. Capitol riot, anticipating acquittal in the Senate impeachment trial, several sources familiar with the matter told McClatchy.

The effort to draft the resolution that would invoke a provision of the 14th Amendment began quietly in January and gained momentum over the weekend, as Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia and Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine gauge whether the measure could attract bipartisan support.

The reception has been lukewarm so far from Democrats, who would prefer to see the former president convicted in the impeachment trial, and from Republicans, who fear political consequences in barring Trump from office.


But a group of Democratic lawmakers may still proceed with the censure resolution this week, hoping to build public support and political momentum for the alternative as the trial proceeds, two sources said.

Some Democratic lawyers warn the strategy could backfire if taken to court and provide Trump with a rallying cry to run again for president in 2024, while others see it as the last, best chance to hold him accountable for attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential results and disrupt Congress’ certification of his loss.



Ten Republican congressmen joined House Democrats last month to impeach Trump for a second time over “incitement of insurrection” on Jan. 6, when a violent mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol building and interrupted Congress’ certification procedure.

Trump’s impeachment trial begins on Tuesday in the Senate, where he is widely expected to be acquitted because conviction would require 17 Republican senators to join all Democrats.

As the likelihood of Trump’s acquittal has grown, so too have calls within the Democratic caucus for an alternative path to prevent Trump from holding office again.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida first raised the idea of a dual-track process that would reserve a second constitutional pathway. Kaine then began exploring the idea on the Senate side.

Their attention has focused on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, a rarely cited Civil War-era provision which allows Congress to bar individuals from holding office if they have “engaged in insurrection.” A resolution to censure Trump would require a simple majority vote to pass in the House and Senate.



Constitutional scholars including Michael Gerhardt, Lawrence Tribe, Bruce Ackerman and Erwin Chemerinsky have advised lawmakers on the plan.

Ackerman, a professor of constitutional law and political science at Yale University, told McClatchy that President Joe Biden would not be required to sign the resolution — but that nothing would stop him from voluntarily endorsing the effort, “vindicating the Constitution’s continuing importance.”

“The decisive precedent was established by Congress in 1869 when it implemented Section 3 through a Joint Resolution to disqualify all Confederate officials from service,” Ackerman said.

The three conservative justices appointed to the Supreme Court by Trump would likely read this statute as it was originally intended and support that the Congress is on sound legal footing, Ackerman said.

Some of the scholars, including Ackerman, have helped draft the resolution, engaging in late-night calls with congressional staff from the offices of Democratic Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Dick Durbin of Illinois and Kaine, as well as Reps. Steve Cohen of Tennessee and Wasserman Schultz, among others.


“I’ve been working on it independently for a long time — we’ve done research, we’ve talked to some scholars on how it could be used,” Cohen said.

Cohen said he was not aware whether the proposal has the support of either of the top congressional Democrats, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi or Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a prerequisite for the process to move forward.

Durbin, the second highest-ranking Democrat in the Senate and chair of the Judiciary Committee, suggested in late January that a resolution of some kind could follow an acquittal.

“I hope enough Republicans join us to impeach this president,” Durbin said on Jan. 27. “If they don’t, perhaps we’ll consider some alternatives.”

But some Democratic lawyers have raised concerns that the strategy could come back to haunt the party.


The Constitution does not allow Congress to punish an individual over a crime without due process or a trial — a process referred to in the founding document as a “bill of attainder.” Democratic lawyers have warned members of Congress that any move to bar Trump from holding office without conviction at an impeachment trial could provide him with a strong constitutional argument in any future court challenge.

“I know there was some concern about it being a bill of attainder, but I’m not concerned about that,” said Cohen, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, “because what he did was the most horrific thing that a president of the United States has ever done to this country.”

The debate among members of Congress is now whether to push for the resolution early this week — as the impeachment trial is first starting — or towards the end, once evidence against the former president has been presented and acquittal is still assured.

Speaking with reporters on Capitol Hill last week, Kaine said his censure proposal was still on the table despite the resistance he and Collins have faced from their colleagues in both parties.

“We’re not going to file it unless we see a path to success. So we’ll get into the trial,” Kaine said. “The idea is out on the table. They understand it. They understand what it will do. Right now there’s not enough support on either side.”