Impeachment Vote Completed - Trump Impeached

Of course there is preferential treatment based on race, it’s required by law.

How so? Everyone knows that racist white people are the biggest problem that America faces right now. Even in this thread, a racist white person was trying to make a joke about abusing EEO laws to her favor when white people become a minority, that’s not how it works. Don’t get mad at me. That’s the law. White people are not a protected class, nor should they be.

Please tell me how explaining the spirit and intent of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is dunking on myself.

I’m glad that your poor reading comprehension brings you joy.

Holy crap I know you are ignorant but I had no idea you are really this stupid, so I won’t even bother wasting my time with special needs people like you who are dealing with mental challenges!

Again, proof positive of the public school education at work here, Your ignorance is a new kind!

Yeah, I love when you project, its even more hilarious! Thanks you are the gift that keeps on giving here!

Your inability to refute exactly what I have said is astounding. Everyone can see right through your inability to engage and prove me wrong. As it stands right now I made valid and coherent points that are linked to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and you can’t refute them.

Let’s start with the basics, attorney.

Are white people a protected class? Yes or no.

Why do you think you are entitled to ask me questions and for me to answer them, when you are unwilling to afford me the same courtesy? Doesn’t seem like a fair exchange to me huh?

1 Like

You’re not required to answer any of my questions. You can just stand there and do nothing while I dunk on you.

Dunking on me? How old are you? Seriously I have to ask? You come here wanting to have discussions and you put forth such rhetoric? Do you think anybody here is going to take you serious when you make such statements? You sound more like a person who is seriously lacking any debating skills with very little friends when you resort to such childish retorts. Maybe “Redit” is more your speed Poncho!

2 Likes

Yes. All races are protected from discrimination according to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Typically, it’s the blacks and browns who abuse it and declare every inconvenience as a racist attack in the workplace. However, white people have been found to be the victims of discrimination and they should start filing more complaints.

3 Likes

Interesting as the senate has not announced the rules yet.

2 Likes

The topic:

Impeachment Vote Completed - Trump Impeached

Your off topic, try and stay on topic.

1 Like

I know! Pretty absurd what they are trying to do here, but its going to backfire on them!

Pelosi is holding back Trump’s articles of impeachment so they can add Pence’s at the same time!

This is a fucking coup!

Schiff announced he was going after Vice President Mike Pence next and may have “acquired evidence” that the Vice President is hiding information in the House Ukrainian investigation.

By Noah Feldman

According to the Constitution, impeachment is a process, not a vote.

Now that the House of Representatives has voted to impeach President Donald Trump, what is the constitutional status of the two articles of impeachment? Must they be transmitted to the Senate to trigger a trial, or could they be held back by the House until the Senate decides what the trial will look like, as Speaker Nancy Pelosi has hinted?

The Constitution doesn’t say how fast the articles must go to the Senate. Some modest delay is not inconsistent with the Constitution, or how both chambers usually work.

But an indefinite delay would pose a serious problem. Impeachment as contemplated by the Constitution does not consist merely of the vote by the House, but of the process of sending the articles to the Senate for trial. Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution: The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.

Once the articles are sent, the Senate has a constitutional duty to hold a trial on the impeachment charges presented. Failure for the Senate to hold a trial after impeachment would deviate from the Constitution’s clear expectation.

For the House to vote “to impeach” without ever sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate for trial would also deviate from the constitutional protocol. It would mean that the president had not genuinely been impeached under the Constitution; and it would also deny the president the chance to defend himself in the Senate that the Constitution provides.

If the House leadership does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn’t actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he was never truly impeached at all.

That’s because “impeachment” under the Constitution means the House sending its approved articles of to the Senate, with House managers standing up in the Senate and saying the president is impeached.

As for the headlines we saw after the House vote saying, “TRUMP IMPEACHED,” those are a media shorthand, not a technically correct legal statement. So far, the House has voted to impeach (future tense) Trump. He isn’t impeached (past tense) until the articles go to the Senate and the House members deliver the message.

The relevant constitutional provisions are brief. Article I gives the House “the sole power of impeachment.” And it gives the Senate “the sole power to try all impeachments.” Article II says that the president “shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

The framers drafted the constitutional provisions against the backdrop of impeachment as it had been practiced in England, where the House of Commons impeached and the House of Lords tried the impeachments. The whole point of impeachment by the Commons was for the charges of impeachment to be brought against the accused in the House of Lords.

A president who has been genuinely impeached must constitutionally have the opportunity to defend himself before the Senate. That’s built into the constitutional logic of impeachment, which demands a trial before removal.

But if the House never sends the articles, then Trump could say with strong justification that he was never actually impeached. And that’s probably not the message Congressional Democrats are hoping to send.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-19/trump-impeachment-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats

1 Like

DUH! :roll_eyes: :roll_eyes: The question is - should he have been impeached on spurious accusations?? (I suppose I’d better elucidate) For instance, if he did have those concerns, and knew they wouldn’t be properly investigated by those agencies charged with national security matters, is he not justified in trying to find out on his own initiative?

Kevin McCarthy mocks Rashida – Ilhan Omar gets triggered

I can understand that with your own issues to deal with across the pond that you never watched any of the hours and hours of testimony from the many people who were involved in the efforts to secure an investigation into the Biden’s before the security aid would be released. But if you think the charges are spurious, I suggest you read some transcripts.

Excellent OP-ED by Tucker Carlson

When you begin to see cracks in the evangelical ranks, watch out…

From Christianity Today:

In our founding documents, Billy Graham explains that Christianity Today will help evangelical Christians interpret the news in a manner that reflects their faith. The impeachment of Donald Trump is a significant event in the story of our republic. It requires commentary…

But the facts in this instance are unambiguous: The president of the United States attempted to use his political power to coerce a foreign leader to harass and discredit one of the president’s political opponents. That is not only a violation of the Constitution; more importantly, it is profoundly immoral.

The reason many are not shocked about this is that this president has dumbed down the idea of morality in his administration. He has hired and fired a number of people who are now convicted criminals. He himself has admitted to immoral actions in business and his relationship with women, about which he remains proud. His Twitter feed alone—with its habitual string of mischaracterizations, lies, and slanders—is a near perfect example of a human being who is morally lost and confused.

That he should be removed, we believe, is not a matter of partisan loyalties but loyalty to the Creator of the Ten Commandments,” the magazine’s editor-in-chief, Mark Galli, penned.

If you listen to the resident clown here throw around made up stuff which he always does and is known to do, then you truly will not know the exact true picture of what is really the true narrative here. Lets face it, you are getting an explanation from someone who regularly suffers from TDS and is hardly a moral arbiter of being impartial about any issue relating to Trump, in fact quite the contrary. If you are interested in learning more about this issue you certainly can do better than hearing the daily excrement that comes from Monte’s mouth and learn from other sources such as real lawyers who are subject matter experts on this issue, such as Johnathan Turley. Based on the article below turn about is fair play!

He’s in charge of those agencies and has never directed them to investigate. Instead he’s sending his personal attorney around the world to dig up dirt on his chief political rival, EVEN AS HES BEING IMPEACHED FOR THE SAME…:flushed::flushed::flushed::flushed:

Be careful what you wish for liberals. It’s a very very thin veil of security you hide behind.