Trump Impeachment Part Duex

[Ibanez]

You missed the point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, you did.

Nuh uh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AZGrizFan]

No, you did.

Nuh uh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah huh.

[HI54UNI]

Which would indicate the Founders never intended for impeachment to be for prior presidents..

He was impeached as a sitting President. The Senate conducts a trial and that's what they're doing.

The Constitution doesn't say the trial has to be done before he leaves office. Otherwise, a President could abuse his office in any way he chooses in the last few weeks of his Presidency. You argument is that is as the founders intended?

Is this the Democrat talking point of the day? I've seen this same argument on twitter 4 times in the last 30 minutes.

[BDKJMU]

He was impeached as a sitting President. The Senate conducts a trial and that's what they're doing.

The Constitution doesn't say the trial has to be done before he leaves office. Otherwise, a President could abuse his office in any way he chooses in the last few weeks of his Presidency. You argument is that is as the founders intended?

Is this the Democrat talking point of the day? I've seen this same argument on twitter 4 times in the last 30 minutes.

Of course it is..

[GannonFan]

Which would indicate the Founders never intended for impeachment to be for prior presidents..

He was impeached as a sitting President. The Senate conducts a trial and that's what they're doing.

The Constitution doesn't say the trial has to be done before he leaves office. Otherwise, a President could abuse his office in any way he chooses in the last few weeks of his Presidency. You argument is that is as the founders intended?

Agreed, I don't see anything unconstitutional about what they're doing. Potentially unwise politically - they could've stayed with just the impeachment as a higher level of censoring, and never passed it to the Senate, and it would've done what was important to be done.

[BDKJMU]

He was impeached as a sitting President. The Senate conducts a trial and that's what they're doing.

The Constitution doesn't say the trial has to be done before he leaves office. Otherwise, a President could abuse his office in any way he chooses in the last few weeks of his Presidency. You argument is that is as the founders intended?

Agreed, I don't see anything unconstitutional about what they're doing. Potentially unwise politically - they could've stayed with just the impeachment as a higher level of censoring, and never passed it to the Senate, and it would've done what was important to be done.

What was important to be done?

[SDHornet]

Rand Paul forced a vote last night on whether or not the Senate should proceed with the impeachment. Only 5 Republican senators voted yes. So Trump is not going to be convicted. Quit wasting time and get to work on real issues.

Are you sure you want that? Do you want the Senate working on impeaching Trump or the Green New Deal? A distracted Congress might be a good thing.

This. The only good that comes from this trial is that it wastes the Senate's time enacting more Leftist agenda. Therefore I hope this takes as long as possible.

[SDHornet]

He was impeached as a sitting President. The Senate conducts a trial and that's what they're doing.

The Constitution doesn't say the trial has to be done before he leaves office. Otherwise, a President could abuse his office in any way he chooses in the last few weeks of his Presidency. You argument is that is as the founders intended?

Is this the Democrat talking point of the day? I've seen this same argument on twitter 4 times in the last 30 minutes.

jelly has no original takes.

[Ibanez]

Agreed, I don't see anything unconstitutional about what they're doing. Potentially unwise politically - they could've stayed with just the impeachment as a higher level of censoring, and never passed it to the Senate, and it would've done what was important to be done.

What was important to be done?

To rebuke a sitting president for having sparking an insurrection?

[JoltinJoe]

He was impeached as a sitting President. The Senate conducts a trial and that's what they're doing.

The Constitution doesn't say the trial has to be done before he leaves office. Otherwise, a President could abuse his office in any way he chooses in the last few weeks of his Presidency. You argument is that is as the founders intended?

Agreed, I don't see anything unconstitutional about what they're doing. Potentially unwise politically - they could've stayed with just the impeachment as a higher level of censoring, and never passed it to the Senate, and it would've done what was important to be done.

Constitutionally permissible.

Politically stupid.

Right up the Democratic leadership's alley.

Congress will be red again in 2022.

[Pwns]

Don't want Trump to have a shot at the presidency again? Don't run a shitty campaign with a shitty candidate in 2024 if he runs. Barring Trump from running again is going to be perceived (understandably) as taking out someone who is a political threat to the political class. That's more "banana republic" than anything Trump has done.

[BDKJMU]

Don't want Trump to have a shot at the presidency again? Don't run a shitty campaign with a shitty candidate in 2024 if he runs. Barring Trump from running again is going to be perceived (understandably) as taking out someone who is a political threat to the political class. That's more "banana republic" than anything Trump has done.

Commiela will be running as the incumbent after she takes the reins from China Joe (from either 25th Amendment, resigns due to ill health, or croacks). So Commiela (couldn't get 1% in the donk primary) will get the donk nomination unopposed..

So the 2024 election will be Comiela versus ______?

[BDKJMU]

What was important to be done?

To rebuke a sitting president for having sparking an insurrection?

He didn't spark an insurrection.

[BDKJMU]

FBI: pipe bombs were planted the night before.
https://apnews.com/article/fbi-rnc-dnc- ... 1b26e0f193

Just like the storming of the Capital Building was planned days before..

[Ibanez]

To rebuke a sitting president for having sparking an insurrection?

He didn't spark an insurrection.

Sure. Clinton didn't have sexual relations with Monica and Anna Nicole Smith married for love.

[kalm]

FBI: pipe bombs were planted the night before.
https://apnews.com/article/fbi-rnc-dnc- ... 1b26e0f193

Just like the storming of the Capital Building was planned days before..

When was it planned?

[BDKJMU]

FBI: pipe bombs were planted the night before.
https://apnews.com/article/fbi-rnc-dnc- ... 1b26e0f193

Just like the storming of the Capital Building was planned days before..

When was it planned?

Ask the FBI..

[kalm]

When was it planned?

Ask the FBI..

I was asking you. If you don’t know, why did you post this?

[UNI88]

To rebuke a sitting president for having sparking an insurrection?

He couldn't spark an erection.

There's a little blue pill for that.

[BDKJMU]

FBI: pipe bombs were planted the night before.
https://apnews.com/article/fbi-rnc-dnc- ... 1b26e0f193

Just like the storming of the Capital Building was planned days before..

When was it planned?

Ask the FBI..

I was asking you. If you don’t know, why did you post this?

Why are you asking if the question has already been answered.
https://www.championshipsubdivision.com ... 8#p1347448

[kalm]

When was it planned?

I was asking you. If you don’t know, why did you post this?

Why are you asking if the question has already been answered.
https://www.championshipsubdivision.com ... 8#p1347448

So when was it planned? By whom? And does that mean that Trump didn’t incite it as well?

[BDKJMU]

Why are you asking if the question has already been answered.
https://www.championshipsubdivision.com ... 8#p1347448

So when was it planned? By whom? And does that mean that Trump didn’t incite it as well?

If you want to keep playing , I can't help you..Sorry.

[UNI88]

So when was it planned? By whom? And does that mean that Trump didn’t incite it as well?

If you want to keep playing , I can't help you..Sorry.

The riot being planned well ahead of time means that Trumps statements that day didn't incite it. It is not proof the his previous tweets and statements weren't catalysts.

[AZGrizFan]

If you want to keep playing , I can't help you..Sorry.

The riot being planned well ahead of time means that Trumps statements that day didn't incite it. It is not proof the his previous tweets and statements weren't catalysts.

Trump’s statements inciting the riot=video inciting Benghazi. Dems Lie Lie Lie....

[UNI88]

The riot being planned well ahead of time means that Trumps statements that day didn't incite it. It is not proof the his previous tweets and statements weren't catalysts.

Trump’s statements inciting the riot=video inciting Benghazi. Politicians Lie Lie Lie....

FYP and Trump's a politician.

I don't know if Trump's statement actually incited the riots. Those were adults and they're responsible for their own actions.

Trump did spout a bunch of exaggerated conspiracy BS that his ace legal team wouldn't present in court because it had more holes than cheesecloth and that BS riled up the MAGAts. He wanted an angry mob to try and intimidate people just like ctrl-lefters wanted an angry AnTiFa mob to intimidate people.