January 6 INQUISITION ‘Is Violating the Constitution’

[Truth Detector]

Where does the Const. talk about considering "only the facts of the case?" "High crimes and misdemeanors" has no current legal meaning. Which would imply that the President would be tried in a criminal court and convicted before you can even impeach him.

^More proof of a leftist babbling buffoon who doesn't have the slightest clue of what he is bloviating about.

 

[AProudLefty]

This inquisition is an unconstitutional attempt to smear and destroy a former president. There is no fidelity to the Constitution from Democrat leftists who do nothing but ignore the document, besmirch it and make a mockery of it.

Cry cry cry cry.

 

[Truth Detector]

Yes, that is you. Retard.

^Caricature of ignorance and stupidity doesn't think he's a retard.

 

[Truth Detector]

bye asshole

Kill yourself mental case.

 

[Truth Detector]

DOJ dumbass.

A dumbass on steroids like you should not be calling anyone a dumbass. You might want to read your bullshit before you hit the "send" button. Now run along thread trolling retard.

 

[Truth Detector]

Cry cry cry cry.

Yes, you do a lot of that, along with your thread trolling stupidity and mental issues.

 

[AProudLefty]

Yes, you do a lot of that, along with your thread trolling stupidity and mental issues.

Whaaaah whaaaaaaaaa

 

[Truth Detector]

Whaaaah whaaaaaaaaa

Keep crying. November is going to be harsh on you lying leftist mental cases.

 

[AProudLefty]

Keep crying. November is going to be harsh on you lying leftist mental cases.

Cry cry cry cry

 

[martin]

Where does the Const. talk about considering "only the facts of the case?" "High crimes and misdemeanors" has no current legal meaning. Which would imply that the President would be tried in a criminal court and convicted before you can even impeach him.

The words have their historical meaning. Members are expected to consider whether the charges are true and, if they are, whether the President’s guilty conduct rationally warrants removal. High crimes meant to the Founders and still does crimes by someone in high office that warrant removing him. A case calls for subjective judgments, unavoidably, it’s not supposed to be a political contest.

 

[BidenPresident]

The words have their historical meaning. Members are expected to consider whether the charges are true and, if they are, whether the President’s guilty conduct rationally warrants removal. High crimes meant to the Founders and still does crimes by someone in high office that warrant removing him. A case calls for subjective judgments, unavoidably, it’s not supposed to be a political contest.

The section on impeachment is too vague to be meaningful. Like I said, it implies a President has to be convicted of a crime before being impeached. Impeachment managers in first impeachment stated this. Their standard, which I concur with, is whether a President is fit to remain in office. In a parliamentary system the Prime Minister (President) is removed by a vote.

 

[Truth Detector]

The words have their historical meaning. Members are expected to consider whether the charges are true and, if they are, whether the President’s guilty conduct rationally warrants removal. High crimes meant to the Founders and still does crimes by someone in high office that warrant removing him. A case calls for subjective judgments, unavoidably, it’s not supposed to be a political contest.

The section on impeachment is too vague to be meaningful. Like I said, it implies a President has to be convicted of a crime before being impeached. Impeachment managers in first impeachment stated this. Their standard, which I concur with, is whether a President is fit to remain in office. In a parliamentary system the Prime Minister (President) is removed by a vote.

^Twits think this about impeachment. It's like watching Dumb and Dumber.

 

[Truth Detector]

Whaaaah whaaaaaaaaa

Cry cry cry cry

You can stop now. We get it. You have zero to offer other than removing any doubt what a thread trolling moron you are. We got it. Run along little infant.

 

[AProudLefty]

You can stop now. We get it. You have zero to offer other than removing any doubt what a thread trolling moron you are. We got it. Run along little infant.

Cry cry cry

 

[Truth Detector]

Cry cry cry

Projection.

 

[AProudLefty]

Projection.

Cry cry cry

 

[Joe Capitalist]

Pretty funny, it is unConstitutional because Mark Levin, basically a nobody Fox and AM radio gave a microphone to, says “it is a plan to get Trump”

It’s just too funny how wingers as “copy” swallows everything and anything anyone tells them cause they want to believe it is true

All this bashing of the J6 committee sure makes them look guilty. You'd think they'd WANT the truth to come out but because of their aggressive campaign to discredit the committee, seems like they fear the truth will expose their criminal behavior.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Do you have anything specific to back that up? That video talked about due process.



Well, it would have been hard not to after the massive killing that took place in Vegas. You do agree that bump stocks turn AR15s into nearly fully automatic weapons, right?

At least he's not banning guns.

so you're going to defend confiscation before due process and 2nd Amendment infringements because it's TRUMP?????

 

[AProudLefty]

so you're going to defend confiscation before due process and 2nd Amendment infringements because it's TRUMP?????

Yep. He sucks Trump's balls.

 

[Geeko Sportivo]

The brilliant Mark Levin hit's the nail on the proverbial head.

NOT at all STUPID TROLL!

The idiot Mark Levin just filled your empty head with a load of HORSE SHIT!