The case for impeachment

PostmodernProphet said:
yes.....they came up with something that isn't a Muslim ban.......its a shame you have to keep making things up to criticize him......
Click to expand...

Sorry alt net guy, but you take a Muslim nation ban that country and specify a Christian carve out, that's a Muslim ban. Or do you contend there is a massive zoroastrian contingent?
 
Micawber said:
Sorry alt net guy, but you take a Muslim nation ban that country and specify a Christian carve out, that's a Muslim ban. Or do you contend there is a massive zoroastrian contingent?
Click to expand...

tell me alt brains guy.....if an atheist from syria applies for a visa, what will he be told?.....
 
tsuke said:
theoretically do you even need a case? Its a political process. As long as you have the votes go for it.
Click to expand...

Of course you need a case moron.
It isn't a popularity contest.
High crimes and misdemeanors.

Fucking idiot have your mommy explain it to you after I pull my dick from her mouth.
 
From the Article:

"While the 14th Amendment refers to states’ denial of liberty and equal protection, the Supreme Court has long held that equal protection and the liberty clause apply against the federal government as well."

It's all very simple. The president urges the SC to stop the fucking overreach and stick to what the 14th Amendment actually says. Not what they think it should say.
 
" The case for impeachment "

Has the emoluments clause been mentioned in this thread yet.

Generally members occupying the executive branch, Richard Cheney for example, have shifted their assets to a blind trust, to spare themselves violating the emoluments clause.

Trump has not.

How long will it be before Trump snags this one (if he hasn't already)?

"....there are no constitutional protections for people seeking visas to enter the country..... " #28

The Constitution is not crystal clear on that.

BUT !!

While the equal protection clause does not apply to everyone everywhere, there are Constitutional issues raised by having one immigration standard for one group of nations, and a separate and unequal legal standard for a separate group of nations.

You and I may have the latest word on it.

But it's SCOTUS that gets the last word on it. And SCOTUS has yet to rule on it, though there are already reports of court challenges to it.
 
PS G #29

No thanks button there, but thanks.

"The Constitution is a limitation of federal powers" R #30

I suspect most of it is not.
Arts 1 - 3 simply describe the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.

It's rather more the Bill of Rights that limits government power: "shall not be infringed" etc.
 
sear said:
PS G #29

No thanks button there, but thanks.

"The Constitution is a limitation of federal powers" R #30

I suspect most of it is not.
Arts 1 - 3 simply describe the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.

It's rather more the Bill of Rights that limits government power: "shall not be infringed" etc.
Click to expand...

Wrong.
All power not delegated to the Federal government....shal be left to the states or the people.
The entire document is a limitation of federal powers.
 
Too early, the spineless Republicans in congress will do nothing until/unless his poll numbers drop significantly.


I still prefer Trump to Pence BTW.
 
Jarod said:
Too early, the spineless Republicans in congress will do nothing until/unless his poll numbers drop significantly.


I still prefer Trump to Pence BTW.
Click to expand...

Pense is a dangerous piece of shit but does acknowledge the Constitution
 
Thing1 said:
People keep saying it isn't a Muslim ban - but Giuliani is all over the airwaves saying that Trump asked him how he could ban Muslims "legally," and this is what they came up with.

Trump supporters have the biggest set of blinders on.
Click to expand...

It's a Muslim ban except when it's not a Muslim ban lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top