evince
Truthmatters
You hate everything about America
WHY THE REPUBLICANS MUST OPEN AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IMMEDIATELY
- Thread starter Dachshund
- Start date
You hate everything about America
Whoa, haven’t seen the “deep state” bogeyman in quite awhile, always comical how the right always comes up with these undefined amoeban existential threats to serve as scapegoats
"These claims were false, and the Defendant knew that they were false. In fact, the Defendant was notified repeatedly that his claims were untrue—often by the people on whom he relied for candid advice on important matters, and who were best positioned to know the facts—and he deliberately disregarded the truth. For instance:
a. The Defendant's Vice President—who personally stood to gain by remaining in office as part of the Defendant's ticket and whom the Defendant asked to study fraud allegations—told the Defendant that he had
seen no evidence of outcome-determinative fraud.
b. The senior leaders of the Justice Department—appointed by the Defendant and responsible for investigating credible allegations of election crimes—told the Defendant on multiple occasions that various allegations of fraud were unsupported.
c. The Director of National Intelligence—the Defendant's principal advisor on intelligence matters related to national security—disabused the Defendant of the notion that the Intelligence Community's findings
regarding foreign interference would change the outcome of the election.
d. The Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency ("CISA")—whose existence the Defendant signed into law to protect the nation's cybersecurity infrastructure from attack—joined an official multi-agency statement that there was no evidence any voting system had been compromised and that declared the 2020 election "the most secure in American history." Days later, after the CISA Director—whom the Defendant had appointed—announced publicly that election security experts were in agreement that claims of computer-based election fraud were unsubstantiated, the Defendant fired him.
e. Senior White House attorneys—selected by the Defendant to provide him candid advice—informed the Defendant that there was no evidence of outcome-determinative election fraud, and told him that his presidency would end on Inauguration Day in 2021.
f. Senior staffers on the Defendant's 2020 re-election campaign ("Defendant's Campaign" or "Campaign")—whose sole mission was the Defendant's reelection—told the Defendant on November 7, 2020, that he had only a five to ten percent chance of prevailing in the election, and that success was contingent on the Defendant winning ongoing vote counts or litigation in Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. Within a week of that assessment, the Defendant lost in Arizona—meaning he had lost the election.
g. State legislators and officials—many of whom were the Defendant's political allies, had voted for him, and wanted him to be re-elected—repeatedly informed the Defendant that his claims of fraud in their states
were unsubstantiated or false and resisted his pressure to act based upon them.
h. State and federal courts—the neutral arbiters responsible for ensuring the fair and even-handed administration of election laws—rejected every outcome-determinative post-election lawsuit filed by the Defendant, his coconspirators, and allies, providing the Defendant real-time notice that his allegations were meritless. "
But hey, Weiner boy knows better.
a. The Defendant's Vice President—who personally stood to gain by remaining in office as part of the Defendant's ticket and whom the Defendant asked to study fraud allegations—told the Defendant that he had
seen no evidence of outcome-determinative fraud.
b. The senior leaders of the Justice Department—appointed by the Defendant and responsible for investigating credible allegations of election crimes—told the Defendant on multiple occasions that various allegations of fraud were unsupported.
c. The Director of National Intelligence—the Defendant's principal advisor on intelligence matters related to national security—disabused the Defendant of the notion that the Intelligence Community's findings
regarding foreign interference would change the outcome of the election.
d. The Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency ("CISA")—whose existence the Defendant signed into law to protect the nation's cybersecurity infrastructure from attack—joined an official multi-agency statement that there was no evidence any voting system had been compromised and that declared the 2020 election "the most secure in American history." Days later, after the CISA Director—whom the Defendant had appointed—announced publicly that election security experts were in agreement that claims of computer-based election fraud were unsubstantiated, the Defendant fired him.
e. Senior White House attorneys—selected by the Defendant to provide him candid advice—informed the Defendant that there was no evidence of outcome-determinative election fraud, and told him that his presidency would end on Inauguration Day in 2021.
f. Senior staffers on the Defendant's 2020 re-election campaign ("Defendant's Campaign" or "Campaign")—whose sole mission was the Defendant's reelection—told the Defendant on November 7, 2020, that he had only a five to ten percent chance of prevailing in the election, and that success was contingent on the Defendant winning ongoing vote counts or litigation in Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin. Within a week of that assessment, the Defendant lost in Arizona—meaning he had lost the election.
g. State legislators and officials—many of whom were the Defendant's political allies, had voted for him, and wanted him to be re-elected—repeatedly informed the Defendant that his claims of fraud in their states
were unsubstantiated or false and resisted his pressure to act based upon them.
h. State and federal courts—the neutral arbiters responsible for ensuring the fair and even-handed administration of election laws—rejected every outcome-determinative post-election lawsuit filed by the Defendant, his coconspirators, and allies, providing the Defendant real-time notice that his allegations were meritless. "
But hey, Weiner boy knows better.
Joe Capitalist
Racism is a disease
Wow! Dachshund is a fucking loon. I can't believe he still thinks the 2020 election was stolen. Even Trump admitted it wasn't stolen. .
Trump: "I can't believe I lost to that son-of-a-bitch"
Yakuda
Verified User
That's all true.
You said "anti" American, idiot. You should back peddle. What's un American is using the legal system as a weapon against political rival, Che.
How is prosecuting a criminal anti-American?
They are also anti-American lies, you are nitpicking to avoid the issue, I don’t blame you!
Yakuda
Verified User
There's only allegations. He's not a criminal until you convict. What IS America is innocent until proven guilty. All you maoist think he's already guilty. Nice try Che.
YOU changed the words not me dipshit. Oops.
gfm7175
Jesus is LORD!
What do you mean "undefined"?
The Intelligence Branch ("4th branch of government") would be a good start.
Now your turn: Define "climate change"... or is THAT an "undefined ameoban existential threat"?
Joe Capitalist
Racism is a disease
Yeah, and DummyKrats are all over the place like a mad woman's shit !
Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha !!......Good one Dachshsie !
Dachshund - the WONDER HOUND
DLM...Dachshund LivesMatter !!
I can't really make any sense of your gibberish, Evince, though you do mention the Presidential power of pre-emptive pardon.
So let me clarify that for you...
The Presidential power of pre-emptive pardon was confirmed by the US Supreme Court in 1866, as follows...
US Supreme Court, Ex Parte Garland, 71 U.S. (4 Wall) 334...
9. "The Power of pardon conferred by the Constitution upon the President is UNLIMITED except in cases of impeachment. It extends to EVERY offence known to the law, and may be exerised at any time after its commission either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pending, or after conviction and judgement. The power is not subject to legal control."
This pre-emptive power of pardon is what Biden will be using to allow himself and his slime ball son and family to walk away from their disgusting, treasonous, crime free as birds
Do you geddit, Evince, or should I draw some pictures for you ?
Dachshund - the WONDER HOUND
DLM...Dachshund Lives Matter !!
He didn't commit any serious crimes.
Dachshund - the WONDER HOUND
DLM....Dachshund Lives Matter !!
Why are the overwhelming amount of your posts composed late at night or in the wee morning hours in Australia?
Are you setting an alarm to get up in the wee hours of the night to post on an obscure American message board during normal daytime working hours in North America?
Matt Dillon
Retardium User
I don't think impeachment is a good idea at this time.
Is it more warranted than the last 3? Certainly!
However, the last 3 were total bullshit, (thereby reducing the integrity and validity of the process) the Senate will not convict, and there's only 18 months left in his term.
I think Congress would better serve America by representing their constituents in their home states and getting things done for them for 18 months,
(which is really their job)
versus spending a bunch of taxpayer dollars on another impeachment that goes nowhere, and even if it did, Harris would be president and nothing would change.
Harris will rubber stamp everything the handlers put in front of her just like Biden does.
Is it more warranted than the last 3? Certainly!
However, the last 3 were total bullshit, (thereby reducing the integrity and validity of the process) the Senate will not convict, and there's only 18 months left in his term.
I think Congress would better serve America by representing their constituents in their home states and getting things done for them for 18 months,
(which is really their job)
versus spending a bunch of taxpayer dollars on another impeachment that goes nowhere, and even if it did, Harris would be president and nothing would change.
Harris will rubber stamp everything the handlers put in front of her just like Biden does.