What the hell are you talking about? Don't amount to a convictalbe offense?? You need 68 of the 101 present to vote to convict and I would think you need to name the crime.
As numerous people have noted, an impeachable offense is whatever congress decides it is. The constitution was a little sloppy on that point, or maybe the founders meant for the congress to decide. barfo
No barf. It seems very precise, Treason is specifically defined and limited as to when it can occur. High Crime is, as you say what ever the House says it is. But I am quite sure you are going to need to name it, define it and prove it, to get 68 of the people present in the Senate to convict the President of doing. Seem tight as a bugs ear to me, you need 68 of the 101 present to vote for conviction. The part that piss me off is, we all know it can't happen, so the whole mess is specifically intended to disrupt the functioning of the government. We need to fix this crap and enforce sedition laws, therefore we need some. This bullshit of losing elections and disrupting the government of the winner needs to end unless the Constitution is not adhered to by the new government.
Had you objected to that during the prior 8 years, I'd be more inclined to take you seriously now. barfo
Ha! Well pay attention! I pointed out several times the dude failed to adhere to the Constitution. I also complained loudly about his failing in Commander in Chief's responsibility to protect the American people, his first duty under the Constitution. I know you know this to be true.
Conviction has different meanings at different times. Yes, 68 need to vote to convict but the bar for reaching that vote isn't what would be a conviction in the court of law. Rather, as barfo pointed out, it's whatever those 68 agreed was sufficient to agree on. It could be a crime, or incompetence, or mental malfunction, or a anything that those 68 agreed matched high crimes or misdemeanors.
Apparently people don't think for themselves. The media is working to drive down Trump's poll numbers. CNN does have people on who tell the truth. It's funny to watch when their guests don't say what they're expected to say (like Don Lemon and two FBI agents one night). Those are the guests that don't get invited back (while many others are on over and over again).
Enough said. See how cherry picking works? That's what the press is doing, and you're repeating it. This is what Trump said: "As far as I'm concerned, I want that thing to be absolutely done properly," Trump said. "Maybe I'll expand that, you know, lengthen the time (of the Russia probe) because it should be over with, in my opinion, should have been over with a long time ago. 'Cause all it is, is an excuse but I said to myself, I might even lengthen out the investigation, but I have to do the right thing for the American people." Do tell where he says he fired Comey to squash the investigation, as you suggest.
True. Now, can you articulate the crime that Trump did, that would come even remotely close to convincing those 68 Senators to explain their actions to the people that voted them into office, when these same guys need the same voters to vote for them one more time?
Good luck to that one. barfo had it pretty much correct - they'll investigate without good reason until maybe they find something.
They've lost 1000 seats in various state houses since Obama. They'll continue to be scratching their heads after another beating.
68 is a hell of a big number. Dems had 60 for awhile when they stuff the dumb ass Obama Care on us. Can't remember when they ever had that before. Hard to think they ever will again.
You want the opposite, for us to overlook statements because Trump also said something to the contrary. Of course he will try to course correct when he realizes he said something fucked, or when he stays on script he'll be coherent till he ad libs and let's some truth shine through. If I say barfo is a patriot over and over and then in a momentary laps say barfo is a commie, that's actually something important to note when discussing how I view barfo. What Trump said? A) the Holt response and next is reported and not disputed but also not verified -> B) from NYT : WASHINGTON — President Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office this month that firing the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, had relieved “great pressure” on him, according to a document summarizing the meeting. “I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”
Impeach this black guy since Obama is already gone. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...ff-and-slapped-a-white-woman-in-the-face/amp/
