405
posted ago by Fringe--dweller ago by Fringe--dweller +405 / -0

I had a discussion with my buddy Fr. Ockham, who advised me as follows:

Impeachment is the process by which a legislative body addresses legal charges against a government official.

Draw strength, we don't know everything we know that Trump won, by a lot. The Politicians know more than the public about the true status of DJ Trump, he is still the legal President, not Biden.

Why else are they going down the impeachment route ?

If DJ Trump was now a civilian, they would be unable to impeach him.

Comments (21)
sorted by:
12
jubyeonin 12 points ago +12 / -0

Barnes and Dershowitz said they can't impeach private citizens, especially as a preventative measure. He shouldn't have been able to have been impeached near the end of his term.

We need to clean house. We needed to clean house years ago.

9
Fringe--dweller [S] 9 points ago +9 / -0

"Pre-crime" is a lefty bastardisation of natural law.

5
jubyeonin 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yeah. It's bullshit. They'll let criminals go, knowing their crimes because "disadvantage", but they'll chase down people who haven't committed crimes under the pretense of punishing a crime that hasn't happened. Clown World.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
4
Proda 4 points ago +4 / -0

Actually no, Barnes is adamant that the election was stolen , as was the one of JFK and (If I'm not mistaken) Rutherford B. Hayes.

3
jubyeonin 3 points ago +3 / -0

No. Barnes was talking about them stealing it before it was finalized and has given examples of it happening in the United States before this one.

He talks about the 1800 election and even said how the precedent would have allowed Pence to take back the proper electors.

I have no clue how you came up with that.

6
Barbs 6 points ago +6 / -0

Sigh... no, he is not still the President. Even when you play fast and loose with processes and language.

You’re missing the point of the impeachment, which is if he’s “removed” after the fact by the Senate, they then vote on whether or not he’s barred from ever holding office again.

I bet you can clearly see where this is going now, and their motivation isn’t because “he’s still the President.”

6
45GoldenEra 6 points ago +6 / -0

thats only a part, he is a former president, if removed/impeached he would lose SS protection and all other benefits he had, pelosi is serious about assasinating him.

4
Fringe--dweller [S] 4 points ago +5 / -1

Whatever your POV, I welcome your comment.

the Senate can not impeach a civilian.

So what is the legal status of DJT ?

I think we will discover that because of the "state of emergency" the Patriots done the paperwork and DJT retains power until it is resolved.

8
ChickNorris 8 points ago +9 / -1

have you not figured out that they are making up rules and laws as they go now? And all the courts will back them now?

Whatever precedent has been set in the past no longer matters.

1
Fringe--dweller [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

makin' up shit only takes you so far, but rarely to a closed deal.

2
TacticalKeyboard 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is interesting. I enjoy the thought.

4
DefundMedia45 4 points ago +4 / -0

If anything, it would have to be a criminal trial but they not doing that

2
Fringe--dweller [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Look at Fynn's situation, framed by crooked officials.

It would be easier to frame DJT with a felony to prevent him assuming any .gov jobs in the future.

They have chosen Impeachment, a process only applicable to those holding an official position. that's very telling.

They must know, what we don't know, that DJT is still holding a Government Title.

Impeachment is the process by which a legislative body addresses legal charges against a government official.

2
DefundMedia45 2 points ago +2 / -0

That would explain this bizarre shit but i dunno

3
47urOFH3d 3 points ago +3 / -0

How could he have been removed under the 25th? Same answer: just ignore that parts of the law that make it inapplicable. If you're not held to account for that, you succeed.

3
MetalRiddle 3 points ago +3 / -0

Next you'll be telling me the Democrats have to obey the constitution!

2
NullifyAndSecede 2 points ago +3 / -1

He's already been impeached (while in office), but not convicted.

They want to stick the insurrection charge on him (through political process) due to Section 3 the 14th amendment:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

They will never convict him in court, because he is innocent.

But if they convict him in congress they can (try to) point to the 14th amendment and prevent him from running or at least convince the public that it would be unconstitutional for him to run.

It's all very flimsy and manipulative like you would expect from Democrats and Republicans.

1
Kaisgrammy 1 point ago +1 / -0

It’s all about preventing him from running. They have to impeach then they can vote to ban him from running and holding ANY office. No impeachment no ban. They’ve admitted as much publicly.

1
Fringe--dweller [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

I know exactly why they are doing it,

my post is about how they are doing it.

cause & effect

1
Dallasguy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh hey, everybody. The people who stole a presidential election and turned 80 million Trump voters into domestic terrorists overnight can't be doing that stuff.

Go back to sleep, y'all.