Jump to content

Midterm Election Gameday Thread


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

You are a stupid fu c c 

 

Go back and read what I wrote, idiot. Do it now! I order you. 

 

If you are not drunk you will see your mistake. 

 

Okay, let's see...Yep, you still list things you don't know as reasons for impeachment.

 

You now owe me $9 million.  I don't know the reasons why yet, but they exist and I'll find them eventually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

Okay, let's see...Yep, you still list things you don't know as reasons for impeachment.

 

You now owe me $9 million.  I don't know the reasons why yet, but they exist and I'll find them eventually.

Oops, my mistake, thinking you were capable of seeing your mistake. That's right, you are not normal enough to admit you are wrong. But hey, B-Man, a fellow cultist of yours, thinks you are correct. 

 

Trumptards happen! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Remember, impeachment has always been part of The Process®.  The Constitutional Process.  It's NOT just your vote.  Our vote can be questioned. Congressional Districts, Constitutionally are more "dialed in" than say: Electoral College>Popular Vote & then...( >Congressional Districts.)

 

No laws need to be broken.

 

I know it's the HuffPost... But please read.  It's pretty straightforward:

 

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5c15302ee4b05d7e5d827572/amp?ncid=NEWSSTAND0001

 

Glean the X's & O's, if nothing else:

 

"...It’s Not A Criminal Prosecution

First off, the president doesn’t need to have violated a federal law ― or any other law ― for the House to file impeachment charges and for the Senate to convict him.

This has been further confused by ongoing media discussion about whether a sitting president can be indicted while in office, something about which there is considerable debate among legal scholars, because the Constitution doesn’t address it. The Justice Department has issued several memorandums on the subject over a period of decades, including the last one almost 20 years ago, which concluded that a sitting president cannot be indicted because it would “unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch.”

Incoming House intelligence committee Chairman Adam Schiff recently said he believes it is constitutional to indict a sitting president and that the Justice Department should “re-examine” its guidance. (Ultimately, it might take the Supreme Court to decide.)..."

 

"...But again, criminal charges are a separate matter from impeachment. Presidents can be impeached for actions that are in fact a violation of the law, though it doesn’t mean they always should be impeached in those instances. And they can also be impeached because they’re believed to have abused their power, even if a criminal charge doesn’t apply. It’s up to Congress to decide what rises to an impeachable offense, defined by a term in the Constitution, “high crimes and misdemeanors,” that has always been up for grabs.

 

It’s Up To Congress

So, President Bill Clinton was impeached by the GOP-controlled House on two charges: perjury (lying to the FBI) and obstruction of justice. Both are also violations of U.S. law, but because the charges surrounded his lying about a private sexual matter, the Senate failed to meet the two-thirds threshold required to convict him on the charges and remove him from office. As Gerhardt notes, a substantial number of senators later explained their not-guilty vote by saying that the actions didn’t rise to an impeachable offense — punishment for which can only be removal from office, nothing less — and many pointed to the partisan agenda of House Republicans.

 

Conversely, impeachment charges can be brought for actions that aren’t illegal. President Richard Nixon resigned before he could be impeached, after the House Judiciary Committee had drawn up articles of impeachment. One of those articles charged that Nixon ordered the FBI and the IRS to torment his political enemies. A president directing the heads of agencies to take various actions is not illegal, but ― like Trump calling for investigations of his political enemies ― it was certainly an abuse of power, which the House Judiciary Committee at the time believed to be an impeachable offense..."

Is this the game the left wants to play? Your candidate lost, so lets impeach him. This is seen by anyone with a brain purely political. They have absolutely no chance of impeaching him. The left is acting like a bunch of babies with a diaper rash. 

I wish they would go in and try to fix healthcare, schools, infrastructure. Instead they want to impeach the president and end the electoral college. 

 

No political agenda there!

1 hour ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

I think they (the righties here, AKA: "The Timmy's) are having a hard time with reading comprehension.  They simple are living in their "Timmy Bubble" NOT fully understanding the power built into the U.S. Constitution to handle dangerous, authoritative demagogues.

 

We fought a Revolution to remove a King... NOT to brings one back!

Timmy??

Grow up. You're just living up to the stereotype of the leftwing emotionally challenged Democrat.

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DC Tom said:

 

That's funny.  In two lines, you argue that the Senate is a break on the House, but abdicates their responsibility if they act as a break on the House. 

 

If you want to know why people criticize you as blindly partisan...welp, there it is.  :doh:

 

 

It depends what comes out of the Mueller investigation.

 

I am a lib.   I hope that Muthaph...er really committed something!

 

He's immoral and the people that voted for him are equally culpable.

1 hour ago, westside said:

Is this the game the left wants to play? Your candidate lost, so lets impeach him. This is seen by anyone with a brain purely political. They have absolutely no chance of impeaching him. The left is acting like a bunch of babies with a diaper rash. 

I wish they would go in and try to fix healthcare, schools, infrastructure. Instead they want to impeach the president and end the electoral college. 

 

No political agenda there!

Timmy??

Grow up. You're just living up to the stereotype of the leftwing emotionally challenged Democrat.

 

Yes.  He's immoral, a dangerous demagogue... Then nail him.  That's what our system is suppose to do.

 

Sorry you were duped.  Get over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

Nothing sizes up the left better than this...

 

Four hours of work. Time for a break. And oh, you rich people that actually work for a living...we want 70% of what you make so we can continue to sit on our asses.

 

 

 

They've done their job, why stick around?  They passed the spending bill, now it's up to the Senate and White House to approve it.  

 

Because there is no compromise, on either side.  Because this isn't about policy, or morality, or what's good for the country, or anything other than partisan dominance.  Because let's face it: if the good of the country were at all involved, they'd recognize that a $5B wall is pretty much an irrelevancy.  This is about nothing more than power.

 

And it's being led by Trump and Pelosi - two of the dumbest, most emotionally stunted, most unreasonable people in the world, one of whom - Pelosi - has a history of throwing the country under the bus for partisanship, and the other who's a delusional narcissist with a history of "deal making" includes three bankruptcies.

 

The House may as well go to Disney World, for all it matters.  This isn't getting resolved soon, unless someone shoots both Trump and Pelosi.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

This isn't getting resolved soon, unless someone shoots both Trump and Pelosi.

 

Of course you mean this in a vague rhetorical sense, not in a Secret-Service-Knocking-At-Your-Door sense, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Koko78 said:

 

Of course you mean this in a vague rhetorical sense, not in a Secret-Service-Knocking-At-Your-Door sense, right?

 

No, I mean it in a literal, but conditional and third-person general sense: if you want this resolved soon, then you will have to quickly get rid of both Trump and Pelosi, which implementation of "quickly" is limited to assassination.

 

I am not advocating for such, because I'm okay with this shutdown dragging out.  The hypothesis does not apply to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

It depends what comes out of the Mueller investigation.

 

I am a lib.   I hope that Muthaph...er really committed something!

 

He's immoral and the people that voted for him are equally culpable.

Yes.  He's immoral, a dangerous demagogue... Then nail him.  That's what our system is suppose to do.

 

Sorry you were duped.  Get over it.

I'm sorry you're an immature flake. Grow up traitor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

"I hope the president really is a traitor because I believe (without evidence) he's immoral". 

 

That's Exiled's logic... and all you really need to know about anything he posts. 

 

He's a waste of time.

 

Exhiled and Logic in the same sentence.

 

You guys are killing me today with the comedy.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

Hank Johnson missed the boat. He forgot to mention all of those Trump supporters that died when Guam tipped over.


Yeah, he's not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer. But he does keep getting reelected, and people invite him to say his stupidity,  soooo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...