Jump to content

A Revolt If Trump Is Impeached?


Tiberius

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, TH3 said:

 

I got to hand it to you knuckleheads....nobody sees things the way they want to like this crew....

 

Impeachment is solely a political process - nothing else - 100 percent political - you can look it up! The reasons for impeachment can be anything but the process is purely political...

 

If HC were in office and managed the same deeds as DT....you would be asking for revolt if she wasn't impeached....

 

BTW - DT may have won the election - but he lost the vote - your revolt gonna be in the minority....good luck....should be fun!

 

 

You have articulated a fundamental misunderstanding of our Constitution.

 

Impeachment is the Constitutional remedy for removing a President for committing "high crimes or misdemeanors" while in office.

 

It was never intended to be used as a political tool for removing a duly elected President from office over political differences, which would fly against more than 230 years of Constitutional norms, and completely subvert our electoral process.

 

There is no logical or moral argument to be made that this is proper in a system constructed on the principles of self-determination, designed to enshrine and protect the peaceful transition of power; and once a side has decided to whole sale strip the other of it's fundamental rights, it's time to start digging mass graves.

 

You cannot, and should not, try to live peacefully with those who would systemically deny your natural rights.

 

As to your final point, the side that I support, the side of freedom and rights, is the side that's armed and industrious.

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

12 minutes ago, peace out said:

 

He has already submitted written "answers" to Mueller.

Probably written in a way that would offer any sort of interpretation of an answer. The fact Mueller settled for letting the idiot submit written answers shows he doesn't need to get him on perjury. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TPS said:

Yes, I'm sure vetted. A little different than being questioned under oath.  It wouldn't take much to trip him up. 

Every part of this process is "vetted", including the selection on the special counsel, the selection of individuals to the team, the approach to the process, the questions raised, the sequence of the questions asked, which special interrogator asks the questions, the location where interrogations take place, the climate of the room, intimate knowledge of the subject's life, family ties and the financial/personal situations of each family member who can be squeezed and for what reason. 

 

Why should the President be held to a different standard? 

 

This is a war, albeit a political one. It always is, and the SC process is a cancer on our system. It was for Clinton, its infinitely worse in a society with unfettered access to technology and surveillance. 

 

1 hour ago, TH3 said:

 

 

BTW - DT may have won the election - but he lost the vote - your revolt gonna be in the minority....good luck....should be fun!

 

Jesus, the teenage angst argument about the popular vote rears its dopey head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

It's pretty obvious he was tied to Russia and worked with them. 

 

Here's why NOBODY cares: Who the ***** were the Clintons not in bed with? Isn't it weird how the Clinton Foundation is suddenly no longer a thing? 

I'm not a Trumper...but this whole thing has been a damn witch hunt by the savage liberals because their demagogue didn't win and they've politicized the Justice Department. So yes, I will lock-and-load, and there will be hell to pay if Trump is indicted, and I hate draft dodgers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TPS said:

Which is why trump should never and will never testify, otherwise he will perjure himself about something completely unrelated to the investigation. If he did though,  then the investigation would no longer be a political witch hunt, as he would be lying under oath and all here would agree....

 

 

Trump would manage to find a way to perjure himself stating his name.

1 hour ago, peace out said:

 

He has already submitted written "answers" to Mueller.

 

Which is precisely why he submitted written answers - to avoid the perjury trap that they no doubtwanted to set.  Harder to give conflicting answers to the same question asked two different ways when you answer them in writing.

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

14 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

Here's why NOBODY cares: Who the ***** were the Clintons not in bed with? Isn't it weird how the Clinton Foundation is suddenly no longer a thing? 

I'm not a Trumper...but this whole thing has been a damn witch hunt by the savage liberals because their demagogue didn't win and they've politicized the Justice Department. So yes, I will lock-and-load, and there will be hell to pay if Trump is indicted, and I hate draft dodgers. 

No, people do care that the President of our Republic is in bed with a murderous dictator. 

 

What no one cares about is loud mouth gun thugs trying to influence how we run our Republic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

Harder to give conflicting answers to the same question asked two different ways when you answer them in writing.

 

Unless another witness answers the same question differently and has corroborating evidence (tapes, emails, etc) to back them up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

You have articulated a fundamental misunderstanding of our Constitution.

 

Impeachment is the Constitutional remedy for removing a President for committing "high crimes or misdemeanors" while in office.

 

It was never intended to be used as a political tool for removing a duly elected President from office over political differences, which would fly against more than 230 years of Constitutional norms, and completely subvert our electoral process.

 

There is no logical or moral argument to be made that this is proper in a system constructed on the principles of self-determination, designed to enshrine and protect the peaceful transition of power; and once a side has decided to whole sale strip the other of it's fundamental rights, it's time to start digging mass graves.

 

You cannot, and should not, try to live peacefully with those who would systemically deny your natural rights.

 

As to your final point, the side that I support, the side of freedom and rights, is the side that's armed and industrious.

I wonder who would win the battle between the 47% with AR-15's et al or the 53% in their pajamas holding a hot chocolate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...