28
Comments (17)
sorted by:
10
tronada 10 points ago +10 / -0

This is what I'm saying, everyone on here needs to contact his office and stop relying on him to do the right thing. No politician seems to do that without calls and emails.

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
6
tronada 6 points ago +6 / -0

This is not true. Calls and emails worked to stop amnesty and would work now. Would you rather take 5 minutes to send an email or regret on the 6th that you didn't?

5
BonerJam99 5 points ago +5 / -0

Not necessarily. Pence has stated that making him defendant is wrong and that Gohmert should sue the house. His lawyers repeat that and state that Congress/Senate should be sued not Pence. In and of itself I don’t think this tells us anything of value.

The Vice President is not the proper defendant to this lawsuit.... To the extent any of these particular plaintiffs have a judicially cognizable claim, it would be against the Senate and the House of Representatives. After all, it is the role prescribed for the Senate and the House of Representatives in the Electoral Count Act to which plaintiffs object, not any actions that Vice President Pence has taken.”

4
thunderstorm 4 points ago +4 / -0

No

3
golinveaux 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm not trying to be an ass but why the fuk can't you people read the Constitution and do some very basic research to educate yourselves. It's really disgusting how people want to be spoonfed information from total strangers. WAKE UP & GROW UP CHILDREN.

1
LibertarianWalkz 1 point ago +1 / -0

Noooo

1
MakeAmericaLegendary 1 point ago +1 / -0

No; they just don't want to be sued.

1
Malkiar 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not true. By dismissing the case it prevents the courts from creating a limit on his power.

1
golinveaux 1 point ago +1 / -0

No

-1
Chainsaw -1 points ago +1 / -2

Looks that way. Pence doesn’t have the power everyone thinks he does. He’s only there to count.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
Lamech_Slade 4 points ago +4 / -0

Only because these traitors put laws like the ECA and judicial precedent ahead of the plain language of the constitution. They are incapable of stepping outside the "traditions" that have been used to enslave us.

If the ECA differs from the constitution, then it is unconstitutional. Nowhere in the constitution is the authority to overturn laws/precedents limited to only SCOTUS. If the President believes something is unconstitutional then he should strike it down as such and ignore it.

1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
1
Chainsaw 1 point ago +1 / -0

Prove it

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
-2
NeverGiveUp1 -2 points ago +1 / -3

Yup. Game over.