Page 17 of 25 FirstFirst ... 7131415161718192021 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 255 of 371

Thread: Robot roll call Impeachment

  1. #241 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,815
    Thanks
    301
    Thanked 943 Times in 675 Posts
    Groans
    20
    Groaned 10 Times in 10 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Darth,



    That is incorrect. When this impeachment goes to the Senate it will be in full compliance of the Constitution. And the proof of that is that Republicans will have no legal grounds to block it.
    Utter nonsense, a motion and vote by simple majority ends it.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Southern Chicken For This Post:

    Earl (12-15-2019)

  3. #242 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Chicken View Post
    Utter nonsense, a motion and vote by simple majority ends it.
    hope so,, the Articles are not founded on a Constitutional grounds of high crimes and misdemeanors.
    Obstruction of Congress was completely destroyed by the SCOTUS ruling they would take up Trumps appeal
    to subpoenas

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Earl (12-15-2019)

  5. #243 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,291
    Thanks
    77,752
    Thanked 23,568 Times in 17,849 Posts
    Groans
    38,677
    Groaned 3,238 Times in 3,042 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    “The Constitution does not by its express terms direct the Senate to try an impeachment. In fact, it confers on the Senate "the sole power to try,” which is a conferral of exclusive constitutional authority and not a procedural command. The Constitution couches the power to impeach in the same terms: it is the House’s “sole power.” The House may choose to impeach or not, and one can imagine an argument that the Senate is just as free, in the exercise of its own “sole power,” to decline to try any impeachment that the House elects to vote.”
    lawfareblog.com

  6. #244 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,291
    Thanks
    77,752
    Thanked 23,568 Times in 17,849 Posts
    Groans
    38,677
    Groaned 3,238 Times in 3,042 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    “The Senate has options for scuttling the impeachment process beyond a simple refusal to heed the House vote. The Constitution does not specify what constitutes a “trial,” and in a 1993 case involving a judicial impeachment, the Supreme Court affirmed that the Senate’s “sole power” to “try” means that it is not subject to any limitations on how it could conduct a proceeding. Senate leadership could engineer an early motion to dismiss and effectively moot the current rule’s call for the president or counsel to appear before the Senate. The rules in place provide at any rate only that “the Senate shall have power to compel the attendance of witnesses”: they do not require that any other than the president be called. Moreover, the Senate could adjourn at any time, terminating the proceedings and declining to take up the House articles. This is what happened in the trial of Andrew Johnson, in which the Senate voted on three articles and then adjourned without holding votes on the remaining eight.”
    lawfareblog.com

  7. #245 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,291
    Thanks
    77,752
    Thanked 23,568 Times in 17,849 Posts
    Groans
    38,677
    Groaned 3,238 Times in 3,042 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    An early vote to dismiss is merited for this abomination.

  8. #246 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Southern Chicken,

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Chicken View Post
    You know both can be accomplished at the same time? Show us factual proof(not accusations)of the Republicans not following the constitution. Please cite the articles in the constitution that the house Republicans failed in compliance.
    “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
    — U.S. Constitution, Article VI, clause 3

    Here is the actual Oath, as determined by the House, that they all took:

    “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

    US House of Representatives

    I draw your attention to the phrase:

    "without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion,"

    and the phrase:

    "will bear true faith and allegiance to" [the Constitution]

    So their job is to openly consider the evidence without any partisan consideration, not to defend the President from the get-go.

    What they did is showing allegiance to the Republican party, to President Trump, not the Constitution.

    Therefore, they have violated their oaths of office.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  9. The Following 2 Users Groan At PoliTalker For This Awful Post:

    Earl (12-15-2019), USFREEDOM911 (12-15-2019)

  10. #247 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,291
    Thanks
    77,752
    Thanked 23,568 Times in 17,849 Posts
    Groans
    38,677
    Groaned 3,238 Times in 3,042 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    hope so,, the Articles are not founded on a Constitutional grounds of high crimes and misdemeanors.
    Obstruction of Congress was completely destroyed by the SCOTUS ruling they would take up Trumps appeal
    to subpoenas
    Their case has crumbled.

    They should stop while they are behind.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Earl For This Post:

    Bigdog (12-15-2019), USFREEDOM911 (12-15-2019)

  12. #248 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Southern Chicken,

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Chicken View Post
    Utter nonsense, a motion and vote by simple majority ends it.
    I would be OK if Senate Republicans show how prejudiced they are by not even bothering to conduct a trial. But I bet Democrats would not vote for that.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  13. The Following 2 Users Groan At PoliTalker For This Awful Post:

    Earl (12-15-2019), USFREEDOM911 (12-15-2019)

  14. #249 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,291
    Thanks
    77,752
    Thanked 23,568 Times in 17,849 Posts
    Groans
    38,677
    Groaned 3,238 Times in 3,042 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Southern Chicken,



    “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
    — U.S. Constitution, Article VI, clause 3

    Here is the actual Oath, as determined by the House, that they all took:

    “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

    US House of Representatives

    I draw your attention to the phrase:

    "without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion,"

    and the phrase:

    "will bear true faith and allegiance to" [the Constitution]

    So their job is to openly consider the evidence without any partisan consideration, not to defend the President from the get-go.

    What they did is showing allegiance to the Republican party, to President Trump, not the Constitution.

    Therefore, they have violated their oaths of office.
    Um...no...um...horse mierda.

    Um...see posts 243 and 244.

  15. #250 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello dukkha,

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    hope so,, the Articles are not founded on a Constitutional grounds of high crimes and misdemeanors.
    Obstruction of Congress was completely destroyed by the SCOTUS ruling they would take up Trumps appeal
    to subpoenas
    The SCOTUS has made no such decision.

    Unlike some Republicans the SCOTUS will actually hear and consider the evidence before deciding.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  16. The Following User Groans At PoliTalker For This Awful Post:

    USFREEDOM911 (12-15-2019)

  17. #251 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,815
    Thanks
    301
    Thanked 943 Times in 675 Posts
    Groans
    20
    Groaned 10 Times in 10 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Southern Chicken,



    “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
    — U.S. Constitution, Article VI, clause 3

    Here is the actual Oath, as determined by the House, that they all took:

    “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

    US House of Representatives

    I draw your attention to the phrase:

    "without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion,"

    and the phrase:

    "will bear true faith and allegiance to" [the Constitution]

    So their job is to openly consider the evidence without any partisan consideration, not to defend the President from the get-go.

    What they did is showing allegiance to the Republican party, to President Trump, not the Constitution.

    Therefore, they have violated their oaths of office.

    Nothing posted above is proof(not your accusation) of Constitutional violation by the Republican party.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Southern Chicken For This Post:

    Earl (12-15-2019), USFREEDOM911 (12-15-2019)

  19. #252 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,815
    Thanks
    301
    Thanked 943 Times in 675 Posts
    Groans
    20
    Groaned 10 Times in 10 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Earl View Post
    Um...no...um...horse mierda.

    Um...see posts 243 and 244.
    Politalker will omit your posts. It doesn't support his/her opinion

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Southern Chicken For This Post:

    Earl (12-15-2019)

  21. #253 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Central New Jersey
    Posts
    23,253
    Thanks
    13,544
    Thanked 12,185 Times in 7,629 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 1,051 Times in 998 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Chicken View Post
    Then there was no need to assert the former federal prosecutor's opinions.
    There was ample reason for it being offered. You had said there was no "proof."

    In fact, let me repeat it:

    I've heard a half-dozen former federal prosecutors say that most of the convictions in their courts for extortion...were obtained with less "proof."

  22. #254 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,291
    Thanks
    77,752
    Thanked 23,568 Times in 17,849 Posts
    Groans
    38,677
    Groaned 3,238 Times in 3,042 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Chicken View Post
    Politalker will omit your posts. It doesn't support his/her opinion
    Indeed.

    His opinion is just an opinion.

    The Senate can do the equivalent of a summary judgement.

  23. #255 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Southern Chicken,

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Chicken View Post
    Nothing posted above is proof(not your accusation) of Constitutional violation by the Republican party.
    Doesn't matter. Even if it was proven, prejudiced closed minds would not admit it.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  24. The Following 2 Users Groan At PoliTalker For This Awful Post:

    Earl (12-15-2019), USFREEDOM911 (12-15-2019)

Similar Threads

  1. Prominent Conservatives Call for Swift Impeachment
    By reagansghost in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-10-2019, 08:16 AM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-24-2019, 10:20 AM
  3. Roll Call...New Member On The Floor
    By Felex Sanders in forum Introductions, User Announcements, Suggestions and General Board Discussion
    Replies: 223
    Last Post: 02-05-2019, 11:42 AM
  4. Dem-controlled House to call for IMPEACHMENT today Jan 3
    By Text Drivers are Killers in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-03-2019, 12:55 PM
  5. Texas roll call
    By SmarterthanYou in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 12-18-2008, 11:59 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •