Criminal indictments coming for Trump.

[h.h.]

Nobody is trying to take your right to vote. Now we have the gerymandering edge on our side due to the last election, but you can't gerrymander a presidential election.

You know who has been trying to take my rights? Democrats for as long as I remember. Always voting to destroy my right to own firearms. More recently my right to freedom of speech. And as long as that continues, why should I care about your rights if you don't care about mine?

Yet you still speak. Hmmm. Good reason for selfishness. Don’t forget. It’s all about you.

 

[h.h.]

Don’t ask what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you. That’s what has made America great. Catering to a bunch of heroic citizens cheering in their beds. ‘Me, me, me.” “It’s all about me.”

 

['Boogieman']

Don’t ask what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you. That’s what has made America great. Catering to a bunch of heroic citizens cheering in their beds. ‘Me, me, me.” “It’s all about me.”

 

[h.h.]

Me, me, me will never get old. Good luck.

 

[BadTicket]

 

[Amynamous]

Looks like y'all have no choice again in 2024
with a Biden Harris ticket....if they dont get impeached next year....
that would put speaker McCarthy in as pres to finish off Joe's term with Trump taking over in 2024



I wuv you kamaltoe....


Biden goes over the top praising Kamala Harris: 'I love you' https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-goes-over-the-top-praising-kamala-harris-i-love-you

Once again, you clearly demonstrate your lack of understanding of how our government works.
As we clearly witnessed twice with LOSER45, impeachment in the House does not equate to removal in the Senate.
Removal by the Senate requires 2/3 vote. That means 67 Senators would have to vote to remove Joe.
That would be extremely unlikely. But even if that did happen, That would mean that Harris would become president. At that point, President Harris would nominate someone to become VP, subject to majority votes by both the House and the Senate.
Were you home schooled? Just curious.

 

[St. Phatty]

Buy a Property, declare its value as 5 or 50 times higher in some bank loan application.

Got to admire Trump's Pyramid Scheme technique. It only works because it's real estate.

Might not work with Beanie Babies.

 

[Amynamous]

damn little POTUS can do with the Senate split 50-50, and 2 of his 50 refusing to help on anything that might piss the other side off. Manchin should leave the Ds (or they should throw him out) and i still don't know how Sinema got elected in Arizona. i'd sure as hell quit worrying about McTurtles threats RE the filibuster after HE did away with it to get The Chumps pics onto the courts. what is good for the goose will work for the gander...

Personally, i believe getting rid of the filibuster is a really, really bad idea, especially now.
The average age of the Senate must be somewhere in the neighborhood of 120 years of age(sarcasm) and with the a pandemic that targets old people, the balance of power in the Senate could flip anytime.
Also, i believe the House and Senate should work on things that both sides could find a middle ground, like strengthening the electoral count act and decriminalizing cannabis. Just my

 

[bigtacofarmer]

Nobody is trying to take your right to vote. Now we have the gerymandering edge on our side due to the last election, but you can't gerrymander a presidential election.

You know who has been trying to take my rights? Democrats for as long as I remember. Always voting to destroy my right to own firearms. More recently my right to freedom of speech. And as long as that continues, why should I care about your rights if you don't care about mine?

Without gerrymandering and the electoral college you would never have a chance. Both are cheating in my opinion.

 

[Three Berries]

The Dems are so dumb they don't know a set up when they see it. Trump has nothing that they will find but the purpose of getting his records is so there is plenty of precedent to get the Dems records too.

And i hope they put Trump in as speaker when they take control of the house. Oh the PAIN that would bring.......

 

[bigtacofarmer]

The Dems are so dumb they don't know a set up when they see it. Trump has nothing that they will find but the purpose of getting his records is so there is plenty of precedent to get the Dems records too.

And i hope they put Trump in as speaker when they take control of the house. Oh the PAIN that would bring.......

How is trying to overthrow a legitimate election a setup?


Personally,. I think they will find evidence of him being aware of and possibly behind the financing of January 6.

Why? Because Guliani, Flynn and Chump are all that stupid. It's just too bad we no longer hang traitors.

 

[Amynamous]

The Dems are so dumb they don't know a set up when they see it. Trump has nothing that they will find but the purpose of getting his records is so there is plenty of precedent to get the Dems records too.

And i hope they put Trump in as speaker when they take control of the house. Oh the PAIN that would bring.......

The US Government would completely shut down, and since he’d probably never allow the debt ceiling to continue, lead to America’s not paying it’s debts for the first time in history, leading to a default, causing a global depression. Yeah, sounds like a great time. lol
China, Russia and Iran thank you in advance.

 

[Three Berries]

The US Government would completely shut down, and since he’d probably never allow the debt ceiling to continue, lead to America’s not paying it’s debts for the first time in history, leading to a default, causing a global depression. Yeah, sounds like a great time. lol
China, Russia and Iran thank you in advance.

I think that IS THE PLAN! Gold will kill the FED.

 

[GOT_BUD?]

The Dems are so dumb they don't know a set up when they see it. Trump has nothing that they will find but the purpose of getting his records is so there is plenty of precedent to get the Dems records too.

And i hope they put Trump in as speaker when they take control of the house. Oh the PAIN that would bring.......

This where I point out that former President confidential papers become public knowledge after 5 years.

All that dirt you know Obama is hiding in there you can go look at now (As of 3 days ago, interestingly enough). Nobody is denying the request and no exemptions have been made (to my knowledge).

The PRA states that the public can request Presidential records “in accordance” with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) beginning five years after the President leaves office. In addition to the exemptions under FOIA in which documents can be withheld (except, wisely, for FOIA’s Exemption Five), the PRA defines six additional exemptions through which Presidential documents can be withheld for 12 years after the President leaves office. After this 12-year limit, both the former President and current President also retain the ability to invoke executive privilege and stop the release of information, though this privilege has rarely been used.

from https://unredacted.com/2017/01/09/h...l-library-records-are-released-to-the-public/

 

[med4u]

Once again, you clearly demonstrate your lack of understanding of how our government works.
As we clearly witnessed twice with LOSER45, impeachment in the House does not equate to removal in the Senate.
Removal by the Senate requires 2/3 vote. That means 67 Senators would have to vote to remove Joe.
That would be extremely unlikely. But even if that did happen, That would mean that Harris would become president. At that point, President Harris would nominate someone to become VP, subject to majority votes by both the House and the Senate.
Were you home schooled? Just curious.

US Constitution
Article 2 section 1 para 6


In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

Also there is no wording in the constitution
Regarding the 2/3 vote for removal...
Rather In Senate impeachment rules that are drawn up and ratified prior to all impeachment proceedings and subject to
change with a simple majority vote

The Convention came to its choice of words describing the grounds for impeachment after much deliberation, but the phrasing derived directly from the English practice. On June 2, 1787, the framers adopted a provision that the executive should “be removable on impeachment & conviction of mal-practice or neglect of duty.”

Never say never...

 

[Amynamous]

US Constitution
Article 2 section 1 para 6


In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

Also there is no wording in the constitution
Regarding the 2/3 vote for removal...
Rather In Senate impeachment rules that are drawn up and ratified prior to all impeachment proceedings and subject to
change with a simple majority vote

The Convention came to its choice of words describing the grounds for impeachment after much deliberation, but the phrasing derived directly from the English practice. On June 2, 1787, the framers adopted a provision that the executive should “be removable on impeachment & conviction of mal-practice or neglect of duty.”

Never say never...

Article One, Section 3 Clause 6

Section. 3.


The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Year; and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies.

No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

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.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

 

['Boogieman']

Me, me, me will never get old. Good luck.

Meanwhile you think I should only care about the rights you deem important.

 

[HempKat]

Nobody is trying to take your right to vote. Now we have the gerymandering edge on our side due to the last election, but you can't gerrymander a presidential election.

You know who has been trying to take my rights? Democrats for as long as I remember. Always voting to destroy my right to own firearms. More recently my right to freedom of speech. And as long as that continues, why should I care about your rights if you don't care about mine?

Well first off if that's your attitude why should anyone give a damn about anybody's rights? Here's the thing though all that BS about taking your gun rights or your freedom of speech rights is pure bs. Sure there are some extremists on the far left that might want to see everyone's guns taken away but whether you realize it or not there are more then just a few Democrats that own guns. The vast majority of the Democrats are Centrists and they have no delusions about taking peoples guns. All they want to do is make it harder for nut jobs that go into schools and shopping malls to shoot up innocent people and that is a legislative change that is supported by a majority of Americans both on the right and the left. As for your freedom of speech I've yet to see any politician put forth legislation that denies people their freedom to speech you're probably getting that twisted with Freedom to do whatever you please and call it free speech which it isn't. That would be freedom of expression at best and freedom of expression is not a constitutionally protected right. If it is then Republicans are just as guilty when they talk about police and national guard forcibly stopping people from rioting or looting. Now mind you I'm not saying that is a right but I bet if we took a close look at how you feel Democrats are taking your right to free speech we could then make the same case against Republicans.

As for taking people's right to vote, 19 Republican states have now passed in the last year new legislation that does just that, mostly from people of color.

 

['Boogieman']

Well first off if that's your attitude why should anyone give a damn about anybody's rights? Here's the thing though all that BS about taking your gun rights or your freedom of speech rights is pure bs. Sure there are some extremists on the far left that might want to see everyone's guns taken away but whether you realize it or not there are more then just a few Democrats that own guns. The vast majority of the Democrats are Centrists and they have no delusions about taking peoples guns. All they want to do is make it harder for nut jobs that go into schools and shopping malls to shoot up innocent people and that is a legislative change that is supported by a majority of Americans both on the right and the left. As for your freedom of speech I've yet to see any politician put forth legislation that denies people their freedom to speech you're probably getting that twisted with Freedom to do whatever you please and call it free speech which it isn't. That would be freedom of expression at best and freedom of expression is not a constitutionally protected right. If it is then Republicans are just as guilty when they talk about police and national guard forcibly stopping people from rioting or looting. Now mind you I'm not saying that is a right but I bet if we took a close look at how you feel Democrats are taking your right to free speech we could then make the same case against Republicans.

As for taking people's right to vote, 19 Republican states have now passed in the last year new legislation that does just that, mostly from people of color.

How exactly have people of color lost their right to vote? Do you have any details or is it the typical voting ID argument?

 

[Amynamous]

How exactly have people of color lost their right to vote? Do you have any details or is it the typical voting ID argument?

Certainly, you are familiar with how the ability to vote is being restricted for Native Americans living on tribal lands.