Patrick Leahy "is expected to preside" over the political stunt!
 |
| Roberts will not preside over "impeachment" trial! |
We can bicker and argue over whether or not this was a decision by Democrats to not officially ask Roberts, or if Roberts had made it clear that he was not going to preside over this sham. But the truth is that the trial will be seen as notably less serious without the Chief Justice being involved.
Constitutionally the Chief Justice "must" be the person who oversees an impeachment trial of the President and for good reason. The appearance of a politician running things, making rulings, and such doesn't just "look" political, but it is is at the very core political. This is especially so when the Senator presiding is a member of the opposition party.
Obviously the fact is that Trump is a private citizen at this point in time and not a President. Obviously there is still a debate as to whether the political impeachment process (especially since it clearly no longer involves a requirement of actually breaking a law) should extend to a private citizen. Private citizens are subject to several constitutional rights laid out in the Bill of Rights.
Holding a trial of a private citizen without due process and for something that isn't a crime is very likely against pretty much everything the Bill of Rights stands for. It's clear why there will be no real "Judge" involved. No real judge would want anything to do with it.
42 comments:
Presided by a partisan democrat who is already on record saying that Trump broke the law.
History will look at these two impeachments and say WTF?
STUNT ONLY TO IDIOTS LIKE YOU LIL SCHITTY!!!!!!!! Roberts excuse is BULLSHIT.....but you give him a pass!!!! Sad Roberts doesn't have the time to do the correct thing....says a lot of the man!!!!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
The trial will continue, despite the opposition.
He incited an Insurrection.
If he gets away with it, the next Democratic President can become President for life.
Harris is only 54. She will be the President until she dies.
Sarcasm aside, Trump almost destroyed the American dream because he was inept he failed.
He should never be allowed to run for federal office again.
there is no better hack to preside over this clown show than Leaky Leahy.
LOL.
insurrection!
SQUAWK!
sedition!
SQUAWK!
LOL.
asshats.
There is no formal list of qualifications for the job; the Constitution’s only mention of the Chief Justice is as presiding officer of the Senate during an impeachment trial of the President. Chief Justice appointments occur infrequently, with only 16 individuals having served in that position since 1789 -- an average tenure of 13½ years per Chief Justice.
Well Rat...
When pushed on it, Roger will just give fake facts. Like suggesting that many of the Capital rioters have been charged with insurrection (when in fact none has) or when he decides to tell us that Newsom is lifting restrictions because things are getting better (when they are clearly at an all time worst).
There is no reasoning with people who have to "make up facts" to prove bad arguments. Donald Trump is a private citizen being "put on trial" by a bunch of opposition politicians.
How stupid is this trial?
They won't even have an actual "judge". Which of course is fine because they actually do not have an actual "charge" either. Which means that they are not actually having a real "trial". It's all an endless loop that ends with a bunch of people with no actual authority over a private citizens determining that he is "not guilty" of a "fake" charge.
S.Scott Johnson stated incorrectly.
"Constitutionally the Chief Justice "must" be the person who oversees an impeachment trial of the President and for good reason. "
Early alzheimers symptoms include the allegations that the Democratic party will build concentration camps and murder millions of Republicans.
The protesters have not been charged with Insurrection, but the ex President did incite Insurrection with his own words .
the alky has no familiarity with reality anymore. none.
and it's a good thing Lydia's not around anymore because when all is said and done they STILL won't be able to get to 67 votes to convict. she'd get her ass kicked straight into the ICU
you would think that after *Biden's installation and Trump's departure the TDS raging through the left would subside. in fact it's gotten exponentially WORSE.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
The protesters have not been charged with Insurrection, but the ex President did incite Insurrection with his own words .
so QUOTE THE WORDS, alky.
because every transcript, every social media post and every utterance by Trump related to Jan. 6 contains NO incitement to riot.
NONE.
so quote them alky.
In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called “managers,” acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal. Since 1789, about half of Senate impeachment trials have resulted in conviction and removal from office.
The ex President is under investigation for his attempt to get the Justice Department to appeal to the Supreme court.
If he had persisted we would have had another Saturday night massacre.
Every lifetime lawyer would have resigned.
He faces several, serious investigations leading to being indicted for election interference.
Federal and Georgia
Since when is appealing to the supreme
Court a crime?
This is a impeachment that had no hearings, no witnesses, no rebuttal witnesses, and now it will be presided over by a partisan democrat who had already said he thinks Trump broke the law.
Even the kangaroos are saying WTF?
Blogger Roger Amick said...
The ex President is under investigation for his attempt to get the Justice Department to appeal to the Supreme court.
QUOTE THE WORDS, alky.
don't change the subject.
QUOTE THE WORDS
Tim Young
https://twitter.com/TimRunsHisMouth/status/1354108153848340480
Instead of a Chief Justice presiding over the impeachment trial, Democrats appointed Patrick Leahy as "Captain Kangaroo."
Well Leahy grew up before that classic so he may not get the reference. He probably already can't remember his 80th birthday.
Amazing how dem's manage to round up these youngsters like Mueller, Biden and now Leahy.
Guess they have no one younger who is capable.
and the alky is lying again when he changed the subject...
The story, which first appeared in the New York Times, is that Clark came to believe that the election had been stolen from Trump. He wanted his boss, acting AG Rosen, to pursue the matter and to hold a news conference to announce that the DOJ was investigating serious allegations of fraud. Rosen refused.
Clark, the story continues, got the ear of President Trump who, as a result of their discussion, considered replacing Rosen with Clark. This led to a showdown meeting at the White House. According to the Washington Post:
At the meeting were Trump, Clark and Rosen, along with Richard Donoghue, the acting deputy attorney general; Steven A. Engel, the head of the department’s Office of Legal Counsel; and Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel, the people familiar with the matter said. The people said Rosen, Donoghue, Engel and Cipollone pushed against the idea of replacing Rosen, and warned of a mass resignation.
Cipollone, one person said, pushed hard against a letter Clark wanted to send to Georgia state legislators, which wrongly asserted the department was investigating accusations of fraud in their state and Biden’s win should be voided, insisting it was based on a shoddy claim.
Trump decided not to replace Rosen and that was that.
Jeff Clark disputes much of the reporting about this matter. He states: “I categorically deny that I ‘devised a plan . . . to oust’ Jeff Rosen.” He also disputes claims that his view about the election was based on things he read on the internet:
Nor did I formulate recommendations for action based on factual inaccuracies gleaned from the Internet. My practice is to rely on sworn testimony to assess disputed factual claims.
Based on my interactions with Jeff Clark, I believe that his views about the election, whether correct or incorrect, were based on a reasoned analysis of sworn testimony, not internet jottings.
Jeff also says this:
There were no “maneuver[s].” There was a candid discussion of options and pros and cons with the President. It is unfortunate that those who were part of a privileged legal conversation would comment in public about such internal deliberations, while also distorting any discussions. . . . Observing legal privileges, which I will adhere to even if others will not, prevents me from divulging specifics regarding the conversation.
I agree with these sentiments. This dispute was resolved in favor of Jeffrey Rosen and those on his side. There was no need for the winners to go the media, especially to the New York Times, a thoroughgoing anti-conservative organ that consistently sided against the Trump DOJ. I don’t know who amongst this group did so, but he (or they) shouldn’t have.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2021/01/a-doj-coup-attempt-no-an-honest-disagreement-about-the-election.php
And I’ll point out the Alky simply posted the requirements to be Chief Justice which he stole here https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL32821.html and has nothing to do with the Chief Justice presiding over a presidential impeachment.
H. Res. 24
In the House of Representatives, U. S.,
January 13, 2021.
Resolved, That Donald John Trump, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors and that the following article of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:
Article of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.
ARTICLE I: INCITEMENT OF INSURRECTION
The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment” and that the President “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”. Further, section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution prohibits any person who has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the United States from “hold[ing] any office … under the United States”. In his conduct while President of the United States—and in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed—Donald John Trump engaged in high Crimes and Misdemeanors by inciting violence against the Government of the United States, in that:
On January 6, 2021, pursuant to the 12th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Vice President of the United States, the House of Representatives, and the Senate met at the United States Capitol for a Joint Session of Congress to count the votes of the Electoral College. In the months preceding the Joint Session, President Trump repeatedly issued false statements asserting that the Presidential election results were the product of widespread fraud and should not be accepted by the American people or certified by State or Federal officials. Shortly before the Joint Session commenced, President Trump, addressed a crowd at the Ellipse in Washington, DC. There, he reiterated false claims that “we won this election, and we won it by a landslide”. He also willfully made statements that, in context, encouraged—and foreseeably resulted in—lawless action at the Capitol, such as: “if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore” Thus incited by President Trump, members of the crowd he had addressed, in an attempt to, among other objectives, interfere with the Joint Session’s solemn constitutional duty to certify the results of the 2020 Presidential election, unlawfully breached and vandalized the Capitol, injured and killed law enforcement personnel, menaced Members of Congress, the Vice President, and Congressional personnel, and engaged in other violent, deadly, destructive, and seditious acts.
President Trump’s conduct on January 6, 2021, followed his prior efforts to subvert and obstruct the certification of the results of the 2020 Presidential election. Those prior efforts included a phone call on January 2, 2021, during which President Trump urged the secretary of state of Georgia, Brad Raffensperger, to “find” enough votes to overturn the Georgia Presidential election results and threatened Secretary Raffensperger if he failed to do so.
In all this, President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of Government. He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of Government. He thereby betrayed his trust as President, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore, Donald John Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security, democracy, and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law. Donald John Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States
Starring Patrick Leahy as "Captain Kangaroo."
ROFLMFAO !!!
Banana Republic
btw Where's the day one checks ???
Anonymous Caliphate4vr said...
And I’ll point out the Alky simply posted the requirements to be Chief Justice which he stole here https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL32821.html and has nothing to do with the Chief Justice presiding over a presidential impeachment.
you almost have to feel sorry for him, not having Lydia to slam up against the wall 50 times a day.
he's left to pass the time posting meaningless drivel.
11:17 seems clear to me.
But just keep cuddling up to Trump, Republicans.
Do.
Keep the lies alive as long as you can. The majority of Americans have had all they want of him, and more.
But let him keep pulling down the GOP.
Do.
More lies from the left
Operation Warp Speed Staffers Refute Claim Biden Is Starting from Scratch on Vaccines
We provided the Biden team over 300 transition meetings, including the very first one on Warp Speed which I kicked off myself,” former Health and Human Services chief of staff Brian Harrison told National Review. “The idea that they’re walking in, having no clue what was going on, is absolutely preposterous.”
Another former senior administration official noted the difference between the distribution of vaccines – the logistical efforts to transport the vaccines to the proper locations – and the actual administration of the vaccines, or actually getting needles into arms.
The former official described the distribution plan, which is being managed by U.S. Army general Gustave Perna, as “extraordinarily detailed” and “comprehensive.”
“It’s gone flawlessly,” the former official said. “Like, out of tens of thousands of deliveries under extreme cold storage conditions, I think three out of like 30,000 didn’t make it to the right place at the right time. So, it’s a 99.99 percent success rate of shipping to the right place at the right time in the right quantity, under the right conditions.”
Here’s The Full List Of Every Lie Joe Biden Has Told As President
https://thefederalist.com/2021/01/22/heres-the-full-list-of-every-lie-joe-biden-has-told-as-president/
doing the job the WaPo just won't do anymore.
The protesters have not been charged with Insurrection, but the ex President did incite Insurrection with his own words
Then who committed the insurrection that the President "incited".
Obviously not the protesters who have been charged. There is no allegations from actual law enforcement that any of them were planning a violent coup to take over the Government.
I hope you realize that you cannot charge someone with "incitement" of a crime that has not been charged against anyone. You need to first have to prove the "crime" before you can prove "incitement". Hard to prove something when it hasn't even been charged.
And no, Roger... before you go there. The fact that someone, somewhere decided that they wanted to "hang Mike Pence" while completely different people rioted, trespassed, and attempted to disrupt business on Capital grounds... has absolutely ZERO weight as it pertains to proving an insurrection.
Because I "know" where your feeble mind is going here already.
Despite the fact that the demonstrators are not charged with Insurrection is meaningless because he incited Insurrection.
You would have been a terrible lawyer.
Inciting violence is a crime.
They have been charged for crimes.
Geez. Alzheimers symptoms include irritability and irrational behavior
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Despite the fact that the demonstrators are not charged with Insurrection is meaningless because he incited Insurrection.
ladies and gentlemen, feast your eyes upon the stupidity that is the alky's latest utterance.
no one was charged with ACTUAL insurrection, yet Trump should be impeached for inciting a, yep, you guessed it, an insurrection.
They have been charged for crimes.
yup. mostly criminal trespass and disorderly conduct.
Geez. Alzheimers symptoms include irritability and irrational behavior
no such thing as a day off for your psychological projection, eh alky?
LOL.
Threatening the lives of the next three successor to the Presidency, the vice President, the Speaker of the house and the pro tem Senator. I might not have the exact word, but the Senator is the third in line to be the President, if the electoral college votes were not counted.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Threatening the lives of the next three successor to the Presidency, the vice President, the Speaker of the house and the pro tem Senator.
some fuckstick yelling "Hang Mike Pence!" doesn't count alky.
stay in your Sec. 320 lane, dude.
LOL.
Despite the fact that the demonstrators are not charged with Insurrection is meaningless because he incited Insurrection.
Okay genius...
If you charged someone with inciting murder.
Wouldn't you have needed an actual murder to have happened?
Kind of hard to charge someone with incitement of a specific crime, without that crime taking place.
I mean... you do understand that the term "incitement" stands by itself and then is always followed by the crime that the person supposedly "incited". "Incitement of an insurrection" is not it's own crime. This is really two separate issues put together into one phrase.
But if that is too complicated for you to understand.
I get it.
Okay genius...
If you charged someone with inciting murder.
Wouldn't you have needed an actual murder to have happened?
the alky's invincible ignorance is about to be turned up to 11, and he's REALLY going to dig his heels in now.
CHT Public Service Announcement!:
Jon Miller
@MillerStream
If you see anybody from Biden’s Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere.
4:12 PM · Jan 25, 2021·Twitter for iPhone
17.5K
Retweets
1.7K
Quote Tweets
58.6K
Likes
https://twitter.com/MillerStream/status/1353813092321222659
Rat...
Is it possible that Roger is under the impression that there is such a thing as "attempted incitement of an insurrection" and that he is confused as to how the law works?
Perhaps he quite literally doesn't understand that the "crime" that was incited actually has to take place. Perhaps he believes that the argument is that Trump "intended" to incite an insurrection, even though there was no insurrection. So therefor he must be guilty (even if nobody followed through with attempting to stage an armed coup and take over the United States Government).
Someday history will look back at a guy wearing a horn hat standing in the chambers of Congress with three other people in the room (one being a cop explaining to them why they should move along) and wonder out loud how we had a politicians and media members who quite literally believed this was an actual attempt to seize control of the U.S. Government.
'You Can Reopen Now!' Governor Newsom Shouts At Row Of Abandoned, Dilapidated Buildings
LOS ANGELES, CA—In a stunning reversal of almost a full year of devastating lockdowns that decimated California businesses, California Governor Gavin Newsom has decided to reverse them all and finally allow businesses to get back to work.
He was last seen shouting at a row of abandoned businesses, telling them it was time to reopen.
"I'm not sure why everyone left," said Newsom, hanging his head. "We followed the dictates of SCIENCE and saved billions of lives. Everyone should be thanking me!"
When asked if Newsom's sudden and drastic reversal of lockdowns had anything to do with his declining popularity and efforts to recall him as Governor, he dismissed the accusations as "absurd."
"This has nothing to do with politics," said the politician. "This is what SCIENCE told me to do! I'm serious-- SCIENCE was standing at the foot of my bed last night and clearly told me it was time to end the lockdowns! I mean-- it took me a while to understand him because he was speaking a mixture of ancient Latin and Sumerian in 12 different voices, but once I finally translated SCIENCE's message, I knew it was time to open businesses in California once again!
"Hey, all you little people with your quaint little businesses! You can reopen now!" said Newsom to a deserted and dilapidated row of storefronts in L.A. "Hey-- where is everybody? Why isn't everyone celebrating?"
Unbeknownst to him, everyone had already left to live in Texas.
Rat...
Is it possible that Roger is under the impression that there is such a thing as "attempted incitement of an insurrection" and that he is confused as to how the law works?
Perhaps he quite literally doesn't understand that the "crime" that was incited actually has to take place.
well, then I would submit that the alky needs to be charged with "attempted incitement to beat the living shit out of Lydia, violently and repeatedly."
Someday history will look back at a guy wearing a horn hat standing in the chambers of Congress with three other people in the room (one being a cop explaining to them why they should move along) and wonder out loud how we had a politicians and media members who quite literally believed this was an actual attempt to seize control of the U.S. Government.
well, that's probably only possible if we recover from our current trajectory. considering the fact that we've just turned over both house of congress and the presidency to the biggest pack of fucktards to ever walk the earth, it's likely we're on the path to Idiocracy and we don't recover from this.
Orwell called it. the only thing he got wrong was the year.
It’s Weekend at Bernie’s combined with 1984
It’s Weekend at Bernie’s combined with 1984
Good call!
the living shit out of Lydia, violently and repeatedly."
Will see you in court
All but five Republican senators backed former president Donald Trump Tuesday in a key test vote Tuesday ahead of his forthcoming impeachment trial, signaling that the proceedings are likely to end with Trump’s acquittal on the charge that he incited the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.
Trump’s trial is not scheduled to begin until Feb. 9, but senators were sworn in for the proceedings Tuesday and immediately voted on an objection raised by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) questioning the constitutional basis for the impeachment and removal of a former president.
“Impeachment is for removal from office, and the accused here has already left office,” he argued on the floor earlier in the day, adding that the trial would “drag our great country down into the gutter of rancor and vitriol, the likes of which has never been seen in our nation’s history.”
Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) immediately moved to kill Paul’s objection, prompting a vote. Five Republican traitors voted against Paul — Sens. Susan M. Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Mitt Romney (Utah), Ben Sasse (Neb.) and Patrick J. Toomey (Pa.).
Seems to me only 5 R senators have a working brain.....Not trying trump is the same as exonerating trumps behavior which is exactly what you all want!!!!!!!! The thief in charge once again gets away with it setting up the precedent that any leader can do what ever he wants!!!!!!!
Post a Comment