JBB

JBB

Donald Trump Has Been Impeached, Again...

  
By:  JBB  •  Opinions  •  one week ago  •  136 comments

Donald Trump Has Been Impeached, Again...
A Bipartisan House Has Voted To Impeach Donald Trump For A Historic Second Time!

Ten Republicans joined Democrats to impeach Donald Trump for a second time this glorious afternoon. History will praise the bravery of those Big R Republicans who stood against the tyrant!

Is it any wonder that the once Grand Old Party of Abraham Lincoln is now known merely as the gop?

Tags

jrBlog - desc
[]
 
JBB
1  author  JBB    one week ago

This is a great day for Democracy and for America!

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JBB @1    one week ago

10 R's did the right thing.  The rest of them can go pound sand.  We are going to be watching them all very closely.  Now get a detail and escort the orange con man out of the People's House.  He has no further business being there.

 
 
 
JBB
1.1.1  author  JBB  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1    one week ago

The four gop no votes were spineless yeses!

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.2  1stwarrior  replied to  JBB @1    one week ago

The House approved Impeachment articles - only.

Only the Senate can try/approve the articles presented and then declare impeachment - and, the conviction has to be done by 2/3 of the members present - in the Senate, not the House.  

U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 3

Article 1 - The Legislative Branch
Section 3 - The Senate

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all  Impeachments . When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the  Concurrence  of two thirds of the Members present.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
1.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  JBB @1    one week ago

Notwithstanding the belief among the China-bashers that China censors everything, I woke up this morning to watch on CNN LIVE BROADCAST NEWS hosted by Wolf Blitzer as it was actually happening American history being made, watching Pelosi sign the Articles of Impeachment.  Although jbb may say it was spineless for GOP members to abstain, jbb may never have been nor ever have had his family threatened by radical right-wing terrorists who have proven that they carry out their intentions and seem to have no fear of retribution, but perhaps those terrorist right-wingers just put it down to their absolute right to "free speech" no matter what the consequence.  I am sure that a lot of the Republican lawmakers would have agreed with the Articles of Impeachment if they did not fear retribution by those criminals.  It was mentioned on the broadcast that a lot of the "nay" votes were cast because the lawmakers did not want to lose the votes of their base electorate when they are up for re-election, but that also casts doubt on what the result will be in the Senate when a vote is taken there for conviction. 

 
 
 
JBB
2  author  JBB    one week ago

384

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
2.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JBB @2    one week ago

LOL!  The Lincoln finger is hilarious.

 
 
 
JBB
2.1.1  author  JBB  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2.1    one week ago

384

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3  JohnRussell    one week ago

This is what Donald trump wrote AFTER he knew that the nation's capitol had been attacked by his supporters

“These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long,  Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!”

He is guilty. The only shame is he is not being removed from office today. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @3    one week ago

I heard this on the news.  The mama's boy wearing the paint and the horns is refusing to eat in jail because they don't serve organic food.  Let him starve and save us the money to keep him alive.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1    one week ago

He wants to be famous. Maybe he can become famous for starving himself to death. 

 
 
 
JBB
3.1.2  author  JBB  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1    one week ago

384

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1    one week ago

I heard they made sure mommy's little baby is getting his organic food.  

Mommy said her precious little domestic terrorist gets an upset tummy if he goes without eating for too long

 
 
 
JBB
3.1.4  author  JBB  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.3    one week ago

384

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.1.5  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.3    one week ago

I would have liked low carb food when I was in.  I didn't get it.  Let this mofo starve to death.  They will tell him it is organic, but it won't be.  I hope he gets the runs.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
3.1.6  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  JBB @3.1.4    one week ago

I don't care who ya are... that's some funny stuff. jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Kathleen
4  Kathleen    one week ago

The first time I did not agree with the impeachment, but now I agree with it. He needs to be gone so that the Republican Party can regroup. 

 
 
 
JBB
4.1  author  JBB  replied to  Kathleen @4    one week ago

Historically the perpetrators of failed coups have faced harsh judgment and swift justice, usually at the end if a rope or in front of a firing squad...

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  JBB @4.1    one week ago
"Historically the perpetrators of failed coups have faced harsh judgment and swift justice, usually at the end if a rope or in front of a firing squad..."

Stephen Colbert had some footage of someone there who was maced and crying and whining and sniveling about it -

'Why were you maced'

'I was trying to get into the Capitol building and someone pushed me and maced me'

'Why were you trying to get in?'

'We were storming the Capitol.  It's a revolution!'

Dumb bitch - in the past - you got your head cut off.

I think these morons seriously thought they would face no consequences because tRump told them todo this.  

 
 
 
MrFrost
4.1.2  MrFrost  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.1    one week ago

Yep... Stephen Colbert is fresh out of fucks...

 
 
 
JBB
4.1.3  author  JBB  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.1    one week ago

I saw it. How funny and sad at the same time. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @4.1    one week ago

Ooh, that is too bad, because some Democrats have been trying to halt federal executions.

Maybe they should have realized how much blood-lust that some Democrats have for Trump before doing that.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
5  Nerm_L    one week ago

Good deal.  But this won't save Democrats.

 
 
 
JBB
5.1  author  JBB  replied to  Nerm_L @5    one week ago

384

 
 
 
Nerm_L
5.1.1  Nerm_L  replied to  JBB @5.1    one week ago

That guy wouldn't attract any attention at a gay pride parade; he's too conventional.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
5.2  Greg Jones  replied to  Nerm_L @5    one week ago

Nope, and with the Senate gone until the 19th, I doubt if a guilty vote will be forthcoming.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
5.2.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @5.2    one week ago
Nope, and with the Senate gone until the 19th, I doubt if a guilty vote will be forthcoming.

You seem to be under the mistaken opinion that Trump can only be impeached while he is in office.

 
 
 
JBB
5.2.2  author  JBB  replied to  Greg Jones @5.2    one week ago

The new Congress began January 3rd. Once the Senate reconvenes Schumer is Majority Leader.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
5.2.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @5.2.1    one week ago

"It appears that even if the House of Representatives impeaches President Trump this week, the Senate trial on that impeachment will not begin until after Trump has left office and President-Elect Biden has become president on Jan. 20. That Senate trial would be unconstitutional."

The Constitution itself answers this question clearly: No, he cannot be. Once Trump’s term ends on Jan. 20, Congress loses its constitutional authority to continue impeachment proceedings against him — even if the House has already approved articles of impeachment.

Therefore, if the House of Representatives were to impeach the president before he leaves office, the Senate could not thereafter convict the former president and disqualify him under the Constitution from future public office.

 
 
 
JBB
5.2.4  author  JBB  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.2.3    one week ago

Constitutional scholars disagree with that...

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
5.2.5  Sean Treacy  replied to  JBB @5.2.4    one week ago
Constitutional scholars disagree with that...

Except the one's who don't.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
5.2.6  Bob Nelson  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.2.3    one week ago
The Constitution itself answers this question clearly

My copy of the Constitution doesn't say anything about this...

Could you link to the applicable article, please?

 
 
 
MrFrost
5.2.7  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @5.2    one week ago

Nope, and with the Senate gone until the 19th, I doubt if a guilty vote will be forthcoming.

Um... After the 20th, Dems will have a majority in the Senate. Which is the plan; hold off until the 21st. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
5.2.8  MrFrost  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.2.3    one week ago
Congress loses its constitutional authority to continue impeachment proceedings against him

Good luck with that. 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
5.2.9  Nerm_L  replied to  Greg Jones @5.2    one week ago
Nope, and with the Senate gone until the 19th, I doubt if a guilty vote will be forthcoming.

Doesn't matter.  Impeachment eliminates Trump and Republicans as an excuse.

Democrats can change the rules and prevent any sort of obstruction.  Democrats can blame Trump all they want but there isn't anything preventing Democrats from fixing everything they complain about.  Democrats don't have anywhere to hide now.

 
 
 
JBB
5.2.10  author  JBB  replied to  Nerm_L @5.2.9    one week ago

Yes, because Democrats control The House, The Senate and the Presidency. The gop lost all three in just the last two years thanks to Trump being The Worst President in History!

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.2.11  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @5.2.10    one week ago

Why did Democrats lose the House, Senate, and WH in the elections of 2016?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
5.2.12  Nerm_L  replied to  JBB @5.2.10    one week ago
Yes, because Democrats control The House, The Senate and the Presidency.

Precisely.

The gop lost all three in just the last two years thanks to Trump being The Worst President in History!

Which means Republicans are no longer relevant.  The only thing Republicans can do is use the filibuster and Senate rules to 'obstruct' the Democratic agenda..  The Democratic base won't tolerate Chuck Schumer allowing that to continue.

Democrats don't have any place to hide this time.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
5.2.13  1stwarrior  replied to  MrFrost @5.2.7    one week ago

You can't hold off Frostie - new administration can't/won't.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.2.14  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.2.3    one week ago

A legal opinion proffered by a constitutional lawyer on the CNN broadcast of the event indicated that there are historical precedents for the Senate trial to take place after the inauguration.  Personally I hope it does, because that way Pence would be unable to pardon him, it is questionable if Trump can pardon himself, and I would be really disappointed with Biden if he pardoned him.  

 
 
 
JBB
5.2.15  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.11    one week ago

As a result of rhe Russian interference in our election and the gop's disinformation. Duh...

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.2.16  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  MrFrost @5.2.7    one week ago

A simple majority, but  a 2/3 majority will be required.

(But why should a Canadian know that?)

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.2.17  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.11    one week ago

Isn't there a different aspect to a transition after a POTUS has served two terms and one who loses getting re-elected to a second term?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.2.18  JohnRussell  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.2.14    one week ago

Trump's impeachment lawyers are said to be Rudy Giuliani and Alan Dershowitz.

Remember the good old days Buzz when you told everyone how brilliant Dershowitz was. 

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
5.2.19  Bob Nelson  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.18    one week ago

Now, now John... There's no reason to dig up dead bodies...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.2.20  JohnRussell  replied to  Bob Nelson @5.2.19    one week ago

Inquiring minds want to know what sort of blackmail material Trump has on Dershowitz. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.2.21  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @5.2.15    one week ago

whoo boy!

still sticking with that crap, huh?

I find that highly amusing!

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.2.22  Texan1211  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.2.17    one week ago

yep!

 
 
 
Ozzwald
5.2.23  Ozzwald  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.18    one week ago
Trump's impeachment lawyers are said to be Rudy Giuliani and Alan Dershowitz.

And Trump has said that he's not going to pay Rudy now, so Dershowitz will be last man standing.

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.3  Tessylo  replied to  Nerm_L @5    one week ago

"Good deal.  But this won't save Democrats."

We're not worried about us

You need to worry about you

 
 
 
JBB
5.3.1  author  JBB  replied to  Tessylo @5.3    one week ago

384

 
 
 
MrFrost
5.4  MrFrost  replied to  Nerm_L @5    one week ago

Good deal.  But this won't save Democrats.

Nope, Trump supporters did that. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
5.4.1  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @5.4    one week ago
"Nope, Trump supporters did that."

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Nerm_L
5.4.2  Nerm_L  replied to  MrFrost @5.4    one week ago
Nope, Trump supporters did that. 

Trump supporters provided justification for Democrats to assume unilateral control and power.  You think the Democratic base will tolerate Democratic leaders allowing Republicans any means of obstruction?

Democrats don't have any excuses left.  And Democrats won't be able to point fingers at scapegoats.  If Pelosi or Schumer blame Republicans now, it means they haven't done their jobs.

I guess we'll find out if Democrats can grow a spine.  They'll need one.

 
 
 
JBB
5.4.3  author  JBB  replied to  Nerm_L @5.4.2    one week ago

The only Republicans in Congress with spines are the 10 who voted for impeachment today!

 
 
 
Ozzwald
5.4.4  Ozzwald  replied to  Nerm_L @5.4.2    6 days ago
Democrats don't have any excuses left.  And Democrats won't be able to point fingers at scapegoats.

The upcoming administration, and Congress, will have huge messes to clean up, and those messes will have been created by Trump and Congressional Republicans.  So they will be fully justified at pointing fingers at them for those messes.

Or else it will be like Republicans pointing their finger at Obama for a slow recovery from the recession, while at the same time blocking every effort Obama made to speed up that recovery.

I guess we'll find out if Democrats can grow a spine.

And on that, you may be asking for a miracle.  Democrats have never been known for boldly going where they need to go.  They're more Don Knotts than William Shatner, they know what needs to be done, but they're terrified to go there.

tenor.gif3fmO.gif

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
6  Right Down the Center    one week ago

Donald will be known as the first President to ever be impeached twice.  The Democrats will be the first party that ever spent four years focused on little else other than trying to convince people we have had 128 constitutional crisis and impeaching a President.  Pretty disappointing they could only get it done twice.

I am buying extra popcorn for when Joe sniffs someone and he gets impeached for being a sexual predator.  That should happen about a week after the 2022 elections where the Republicans take back the house.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1  Tessylo  replied to  Right Down the Center @6    one week ago

The sexual predator is leaving the White House on 1/19/21

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
6.1.1  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tessylo @6.1    one week ago

And another one is going in on the 20th

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Right Down the Center @6.1.1    one week ago

No. but you admit tRump is a sexual predator.  PROGRESS!

 
 
 
MrFrost
6.1.3  MrFrost  replied to  Right Down the Center @6.1.1    one week ago

And another one is going in on the 20th

Trump has been credibly accused of sexual assault over 30 times.. 

Biden? 0. 

Oh yea, and there is  this...

Trump is refusing to give a DNA sample in a rape case. If he was innocent, why wouldn't he give a DNA sample if it would completely exonerate him? Because he's fucking guilty, that's why. 

But sure, Joe smelled someone's hair.. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  MrFrost @6.1.3    one week ago
Trump has been credibly accused of sexual assault over 30 times.. 

Besides accusing Trump, what makes the allegations credible to you?

Trump is refusing to give a DNA sample in a rape case. If he was innocent, why wouldn't he give a DNA sample if it would completely exonerate him? Because he's fucking guilty, that's why. 

So, now all you have to do is actually prove it. In a court of law. Good luck!

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.1.5  Kathleen  replied to  MrFrost @6.1.3    one week ago

I think that’s creepy, smelling someone’s hair. Too close for comfort in my opinion. 

 
 
 
JBB
6.1.6  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.4    one week ago

Trump just got impeached by Congress, including ten Republicans, for inciting a godforsaken insurrection against The United States of America! Is that not enough?

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @6.1.6    one week ago

Are you reading any of these comments?

Any of them at all?

It certainly doesn't look like it, because your post had nothing to do with a thing I have written here.

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @6.1.6    one week ago
Trump just got impeached by Congress, including ten Republicans, for inciting a godforsaken insurrection against The United States of America! Is that not enough?

NO, IT ISN'T ENOUGH.

Impeachment didn't have ONE single thing to do with sexual allegations.

Try again.

 
 
 
JBB
6.1.9  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.8    one week ago

You just admitted to derailing and off topic!

The topic, in case you forgot, is Trump getting his lousy lying ass impeached, again...

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @6.1.9    one week ago

Well, in that case---flag my comments as off topic.

Also, you will need to flag every single comment I have responded to, because you have allowed them to stand, which makes them on topic, and you have even commented on some of them yourself.

 
 
 
Dragon
6.1.11  Dragon  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.4    one week ago

Republicans did not prove voter fraud in any court, although they tried 60+ times...does not stop them from ranting and wailing about voter fraud. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
6.1.12  MrFrost  replied to  Kathleen @6.1.5    one week ago

I think that’s creepy, smelling someone’s hair. Too close for comfort in my opinion. 

Simple question... Would you rather have Biden smell your hair or be groped by trump, (and possibly raped)?

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  Dragon @6.1.11    one week ago
Republicans did not prove voter fraud in any court, although they tried 60+ times...does not stop them from ranting and wailing about voter fraud. 

Please explain what your post has to do with anything I have written, especially the post you replied to.

Unless you are just agreeing with me that it needs to be proven in a court of law--just like charges of voter fraud needed to be proven in court.

If that is the case--EXCELLENT!

 
 
 
JBB
6.1.14  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.13    one week ago

384

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @6.1.14    one week ago

Oh, dude, now you will have to go on the hunt for another little picture!

Now, Trump has twice been impeached, so you need to update!

 
 
 
JBB
6.1.16  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.15    one week ago

384

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1.17  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @6.1.16    one week ago

Mmmm...nice try, but it is missing the twice-impeached thingie!

Keep trying!

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1.18  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @6.1.14    one week ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Kathleen
6.1.19  Kathleen  replied to  MrFrost @6.1.12    one week ago

Neither.

 
 
 
MrFrost
6.2  MrFrost  replied to  Right Down the Center @6    one week ago

512

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
6.2.1  Bob Nelson  replied to  MrFrost @6.2    one week ago

original

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
7  Bob Nelson    one week ago

C'mon people!

Trump is clearly trying to make up for his previous failures. Obviously!

That's why he's all over the media, calling on his followers to stay calm and respectful for the inauguration.

Right?

 
 
 
TᵢG
7.1  TᵢG  replied to  Bob Nelson @7    one week ago

I would say he found Jesus a tad too late.

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2  Texan1211  replied to  Bob Nelson @7    one week ago

Trump says nothing----people complain.

Trump says something---people complain.

If it is Trump, some will forever complain.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
7.2.1  Bob Nelson  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2    one week ago

What do you think he should be doing and saying, after the attack on Congress and leading up to the inauguration?

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.2  Texan1211  replied to  Bob Nelson @7.2.1    one week ago

I feel the people who complain when Trump speaks and when he doesn't should explain their thoughts first.

Go!

 
 
 
JBB
7.2.3  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.2    one week ago

I think Trump is a twice impeached, thrice married, four time bankrupt one term loser!

I also bet you probably voted for him twice!

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.4  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @7.2.3    one week ago

And Nancy Pelosi will be the only House Speaker to impeach a President twice and not see him removed from office.

Bang-up job.

 
 
 
JBB
7.2.5  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.4    one week ago

Except, the American Voters removed Trump from office and Pelosi definitely sees that...

The bullshit you come up with is so whack!

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @7.2.5    one week ago
Most of the shit you come up with is whack!

I prefer that over someone who posts whack stuff exclusively.

Is there a single thing in my post that you dispute is the truth?

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
7.2.7  Bob Nelson  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.2    one week ago

I think he should be on Fox, saying he lost the election and that his followers must accept that fact. And that therefore they must remain calm as the new Administration takes over.

 
 
 
JBB
7.2.8  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.6    one week ago

Yes, that Pelosi will not see Trump removed from office. He get removed next week!

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.9  Texan1211  replied to  Bob Nelson @7.2.7    one week ago

jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.10  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @7.2.8    one week ago

When Obama's term was up, was he removed?

Was Carter removed from office?

 
 
 
JBB
7.2.11  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.10    one week ago

Obama was a two term President so no he was not removed from office by voters...

Yes, Carter was removed as was GHW Bush, although neither man was ever impeached.

You should know this if you're an American.

 
 
 
TᵢG
7.2.12  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.10    one week ago

There was no need for the system to take action to remove these men;  there was never any question as to whether these men (or any PotUS that I am aware of) would graciously leave office.   They did not buck the system ... they accepted the results of the election (and term limits).

Trump furiously attempted to steal a second term but the system prevented him.

It seems appropriate to view this as the system removing him from office since he sought to dishonestly retain his power.

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.13  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @7.2.12    one week ago

He lost an election like many have lost elections.

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.14  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @7.2.11    one week ago
Obama was a two term President so no he was not removed from office by voters...

I didn't say removed by voters.

Carter lost an election. I don't consider that being removed from office.

So did Bush.

I am an American, so stuff that childish crap.

 
 
 
TᵢG
7.2.15  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.13    one week ago
He lost an election like many have lost elections.

Indeed he did. Too bad he did not accept it with the clarity you just illustrated and instead tried to con the entire world on a foundation made entirely of bullshit.

In fact, I predict he will continue to insist he is the legitimate winner for the rest of his life.    Unlike ever other PotUS of whom I am aware, Trump has refused to comply with the system and thus must vacate the premises under the most graceless circumstances in history.


256

How wonderful to have this show for the entertainment of the entire planet.

 
 
 
JBB
7.2.16  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.14    one week ago

Quit asking dumb questions 5th graders know!

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.17  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @7.2.16    one week ago
Quit asking dumb questions 5th graders know!

Here is the entire post you just responded to:

Obama was a two term President so no he was not removed from office by voters...

I didn't say removed by voters.

Carter lost an election. I don't consider that being removed from office.

So did Bush.

I am an American, so stuff that childish crap.

Please point out the alleged question you are bitching about.

Just paste it in your response and highlight it for me.

Thanks!!

 
 
 
Dragon
7.2.18  Dragon  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.13    one week ago

Trump doesn't think he lost the election, so he is not going willingly, so he is being removed.

If someone is kicking and screaming as they are being taken away you don't say they are leaving, you say they are being removed. Trump is doing the equivalent of kicking and screaming, and therefore he is being removed.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.19  Texan1211  replied to  Dragon @7.2.18    one week ago

We will see next week if he leaves peacefully or not.

Until then, it is all mere speculation.

He lost the election. As I explained earlier, I don't consider that being removed from office. I consider that losing an election.

Your opinion may differ.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
7.2.20  Bob Nelson  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.9    one week ago

I'm glad you liked my answer.

What is your answer? The question was

What do you think he (Trump) should be doing and saying, after the attack on Congress and leading up to the inauguration?
 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.21  Texan1211  replied to  Bob Nelson @7.2.20    one week ago

I applauded your comment, Bob.

I think he should keep his mouth shut.

But then again, I am not bitching when he talks and when he doesn't talk.

 
 
 
JBB
7.2.22  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.17    one week ago

384

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.23  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @7.2.22    one week ago

Oh, dude, now you will have to go on the hunt for another little picture!

Now, Trump has twice been impeached, so you need to update!

 
 
 
JBB
7.2.24  author  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @7.2.23    one week ago

That one still works and Trump will be gone!

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.2.25  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @7.2.24    one week ago

Well, only works if you aren't a stickler for accuracy.

What will liberals talk about 2 years from now?

Still Trump, I will bet.

Rent free living--ah!

 
 
 
Tessylo
7.2.26  Tessylo  replied to  TᵢG @7.2.15    one week ago

It's quite the shitshow.  We expect nothing less from tRump and his supporters.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
7.2.27  Tessylo  replied to  JBB @7.2.5    one week ago

Whack!

That reminds me of another poster who hasn't been seen in a while.  He made a lot of whack pronouncements, like tRump winning in a landslide.

CheersjrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
charger 383
8  charger 383    one week ago

I just read McConnell will not bring the matter before this session of the Senate 

 
 
 
JBB
8.1  author  JBB  replied to  charger 383 @8    one week ago

Schumer will lead Democrats in Trump's Senate trial with Vice President Kamala Harris presiding...

 
 
 
Snuffy
8.1.1  Snuffy  replied to  JBB @8.1    one week ago
with Vice President Kamala Harris presiding.

No, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over the trial in the Senate.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.1.2  1stwarrior  replied to  JBB @8.1    one week ago

Guess your neighbors never taught you how to read the Constitution - did they?  Read

U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 3

The Impeachment Process in a Nutshell

  1. The House Judiciary Committee deliberates over whether to initiate an impeachment inquiry.
  2. The Judiciary Committee adopts a resolution seeking authority from the entire House of Representatives to conduct an inquiry. Before voting, the House debates and considers the resolution. Approval requires a majority vote.
  3. The Judiciary Committee conducts an impeachment inquiry, possibly through public hearings. At the conclusion of the inquiry, articles of impeachment are prepared. They must be approved by a majority of the Committee.
  4. The House of Representatives considers and debates the articles of impeachment. A majority vote of the entire House is required to pass each article. Once an article is approved, the President is, technically speaking, "impeached" -- that is subject to trial in the Senate.
  5. The Senate holds trial on the articles of impeachment approved by the House. The Senate sits as a jury while the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over the trial.
  6. At the conclusion of the trial, the Senate votes on whether to remove the President from office. A two-thirds vote by the Members present in the Senate is required for removal.
  7. If the President is removed, the Vice-President assumes the Presidency under the chain of succession established by   Amendment XXV .

Neither Schumer nor Harris is SCOTUS, so neither of them will preside.

Simple Government 101.

 
 
 
JBB
8.1.3  author  JBB  replied to  Snuffy @8.1.1    one week ago

That is fine just as long as Trump get tried by a Democratic Senate this time. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
8.1.4  Snuffy  replied to  JBB @8.1.3    one week ago

Conviction still requires a 2/3rd's vote regardless of which party is majority in the Senate. And VP Harris only votes if there is a 50/50 tie so that vote would be meaningless in the requirements for conviction as a 51/49 % vote does not convict. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  JBB @8.1.3    one week ago

True, his first impeachment was such a farce.  No witnesses.  No nothing.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  1stwarrior @8.1.2    one week ago

I don't go to tRump supporters for any type of education, much less Simple Government 101.

LOL!

 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.1.7  1stwarrior  replied to  Tessylo @8.1.6    one week ago

We all know the truth doesn't matter to some, eh?

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  1stwarrior @8.1.7    one week ago
"We all know the truth doesn't matter to some, eh?"

Indeed, We do

[1st, this comment stands.  If tessy's comment agreeing with you is a violation, then so is YOUR comment with which she agreed.]

 
 
 
Snuffy
9  Snuffy    one week ago

Well it's gonna be an interesting next month or so.  Will a Senate trial occur?  Opinion seems split by constitutional experts,  some say it can happen after he leaves office and others say it cannot. I wager the question will go to SCOTUS to determine. 

Then there has been talk of the House holding the article of impeachment for now to allow Biden's administration to get confirmed and the first 100 days business concluded.  There has also been talk of the Senate splitting their day, with half day on the impeachment trial and half day on other business.  I do know the Senate would have to change their rules on impeachment to do that, the sent rules as I understand them 

The Senate impeachment rules provide that the chamber must suspend its legislative and executive business while the trial is under way. 

The piece I don't know if if these rules can be changed by simple majority or if they require the same 2/3'rds vote as conviction? 

Anyway I look at it, I still don't believe this impeachment is in the best interests of the country. I would rather have seen him resign with a deal, I think that would have been quieter and easier for the country to move forward. I am concerned this trial will further deepen the divide.  

 
 
 
1stwarrior
9.1  1stwarrior  replied to  Snuffy @9    one week ago
U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 3

Article 1 - The Legislative Branch Section 3 - The Senate

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all  Impeachments . When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the  Concurrence  of two thirds of the Members present.

It's going to require the 2/3rd's vote of the members present - which could be good and it could be bad.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
9.1.1  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  1stwarrior @9.1    one week ago
of the members present and there lies the crux. 

It would be hard to imagine any member of the senate not being present , but with recent accusations of congress member being complicent with what happened on the 6th , i expect some censures and expulsion votes for some members of congress, and if they be from those opposed to conviction , well i think one can see. less votes needed to convict.

The senate is in less of a precarious situation than the house , only 1/3rd come up for re election in 2 years, that gives the rest time to get with their states voting base.

The house does not have that luxury , they have about a year and a half before they hit the primary trail for re election as a whole body. in this case , time and distance will help most of the senate members where the house members likely have no chance to help themselves.

 McConnel as the head of the party in the legislature after trump leaves is likely going to be walking a razor thin line in a minefield surrounded by eggshells. he may want to get rid of the PITA albatross of trump from around the parties neck , but he will want to keep the base that voted  voting for the party, neat trick if he can do it.

I think i am more likely to see joe biden astride a flying unicorn thats farting out rainbow skittles raining from the heavens getting struck by a bolt of lightning.

( for buzz my acronym challenged associate, in case you didnt know , PITA= Pain In The Ass).

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
9.1.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @9.1.1    one week ago

LOL.  Thanks Mark.

 
 
 
Snuffy
9.1.3  Snuffy  replied to  1stwarrior @9.1    one week ago

No, you misunderstood my question.  I was not asking about the votes required to convict in an impeachment trial.  In the rules for the Senate for impeachment, the rules state that the chamber must suspend it's legislative and executive business while the trial is underway. According to that rule, they cannot do half-days to move along Biden's agenda or confirm his nominations while the impeachment trial is running. Schumer cannot do that change on his own, even as majority leader. It requires the Senate change their rules. So the question is basically this.

Can the Senate change their rules for the impeachment trial on a simple majority or does that require the same 2/3'rds vote?  From what I read I think a rule change requires a 2/3rds vote unless the Democrats employ the nuclear option on this as well. I really hope they are not that short-sighted as to invoke that as to allow a simple majority to then change the rules going forward. That action, IMO, would greatly damage the Senate going forward and move this country down to the same footing as any banana republic.

But if the Senate does not change their rules then they cannot do any other business and the business of President elect Biden's first 100 days would sit and wait. No confirmations for cabinet nominations or any of the other nominations a President makes for his administration,  no movement on coronavirus business or those $2000 checks so many people want, nothing allowed but the business of the impeachment trial. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @9.1.3    one week ago

What do you care anyway snuffy?  You think tRump should make a deal and get away with everything he's done including after his 'presidency' with the SDNY. RIDICULOUS!  Inciting his mob on the VP plus everyone who was in the Capitol.  He and everyone else who wanted to overturn a fair and valid election, have so much blood on their hands, including your 'president'  They beat that cop to death and also trampled and seriously injured others.  Although if they were in the Capitol and got trampled, too bad, so sad, a domestic terrorist MOB.  

With tRump gone, we are no longer on the same footing as a banana republic.

Ridiculous.

 
 
 
Snuffy
9.1.5  Snuffy  replied to  Tessylo @9.1.4    one week ago
You think tRump should make a deal and get away with everything he's done including after his 'presidency' with the SDNY. RIDICULOUS! 

No, I felt that Trump resigning immediately would have been in the better interest of the country. As I said before, as Trump considers himself to be such a great deal maker, that congressional leadership, VP Pence and President Elect Biden should have made him a deal where he resigns immediately and once Pence is sworn in as president his first act would be to issue a pardon for Trump and the leadership & Biden would agree not to investigate for federal actions to that point.  That would have gotten him out of office immediately.  Yes the deal would have gotten him out of the investigations by the SDNY, but not any investigations underway by the State of New York. But I felt that would be a better path for the country overall. 

Answer the question if you are willing. If Trump is such a danger according to Pelosi that his impeachment and removal couldn't wait another day then why has she not run the article of impeachment over to the Senate yet? Why is she holding back? Didn't she say that they needed to act with urgency because President Trump represents an imminent threat and the horror of the ongoing assault on our democracy by this President is intensified and so is the immediate need for action?  If the need is so immediate than why has she not immediately taken the article of impeachment over to the Senate?  if she plans on holding on to it for now to wait for either Schumer to become majority leader or wait for Biden's initial business to be completed then where is the urgency of the threat?  The longer she delays the more this looks like partisan theater which further divides the country and does nothing to heal and move forward.

If the urgency was so great then impeachment should immediately move to the Senate. If the entire process is to insure that he never runs for high office again then I think they should use the 14th Amendment. I do believe that Trump betrayed his office with that last rally on Wednesday, but in reviewing the actual text of the speech I can definitely see where it would be extremely difficult to win a civil case against him for it. While impeachment is political rather than civil, IMO it does nothing to attempt to heal the country. 

What I had proposed was what I thought would be better for the country. With impeachment the extreme left will call it retribution and the extreme right will call it persecution and the rest of us get torn apart in the middle. 

With tRump gone, we are no longer on the same footing as a banana republic.

And you completely misunderstood what I said.  I believe if the Democrat majority Senate goes down the path to change the requirement for rule change to a simple majority then we are in danger of becoming just like any banana republic.  That is because the Senate would then completely move to majority rule. And the next time the balance in the Senate changed the new majority would make their own rules. The US Senate is billed as the most deliberative body in the world but if it changes to majority rule then it can no longer support it's primary duty as a necessary fence to protect the people from their rulers and as a protector of states rights and minority rights. If that goes away then the US becomes a majority rule country. 

So  you ask why do I care anyway.  I care because I am a citizen of this country,  a veteran of the US Military and despite all the problems we have I believe this is still the best country in the world to live in and I do want it to heal and get back to it's path. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @9.1.5    one week ago

I'm not wasting my time reading all your justifications of your ridiculous ideas.

You think he and his family should just get away with all their crimes, ridiculous. 

I get it.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
9.1.7  1stwarrior  replied to  Snuffy @9.1.3    one week ago

The 2/3rd's majority of members present is stated in the Constitution.  Congress can not change that rule without amending the Constitution.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
9.1.8  1stwarrior  replied to  Tessylo @9.1.6    one week ago

Obviously you don't get it - you're just blocking it.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
9.1.9  1stwarrior  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @9.1.1    one week ago

Good read Mark.

 
 
 
Snuffy
9.1.10  Snuffy  replied to  Tessylo @9.1.6    one week ago

If you are not going to read what I write, then why did  you ask me and I quote   

What do you care anyway snuffy?

I know it doesn't happen often on this chat board, but isn't the underlying purpose of these to exchange thoughts and ideas and get other perspectives to help broaden our own outlook?

If you don't want to discuss topics why are you even here?  Is your only reason for being here to attack people?  

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
9.1.11  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  Tessylo @9.1.6    one week ago

The bad thing here though Tess, is that he actually agrees that Trump should've simply resigned. Sometimes reading the details of someone's reply will show that they're in agreement.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
9.1.12  1stwarrior  replied to  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka) @9.1.11    one week ago

MsAubrey, as you know, some folks don't actually believe you need to read what's been said/written to continually argue/comment.

Of course, sometimes that can make the discussion quite interesting, eh?

 
 
 
1stwarrior
10  1stwarrior    one week ago

The "Impeachment Process".

 
 
 
Sunshine
10.1  Sunshine  replied to  1stwarrior @10    one week ago
Who wrote the Gettysburg Address?
I don't know the exact address.

LOL

 
 
 
1stwarrior
10.1.1  1stwarrior  replied to  Sunshine @10.1    one week ago

What does the D.C. stand for in Washington?

Da Capitol.

Yup

And the "beat" goes on.