impeachment scenario

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

You may think it is not relevant but my statement stands, a felony conviction does not disqualify someone from holding or being elected to office.

unless they put it in writing.


there was a black federal judge (forgot who) who was impeached and convicted, they forgot to put legalese that he couldn't run for office. He ran for a House seat and won.

[dilbert firestorm]

https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-...ld-care-today/


old article from 2011 about johnson's impeachment.

the tenure act was passed as a set up for Johnson's removal. it helps to have both houses having veto proof majorities.

whens' the last time both houses had veto proof majorities. makes passing legislation lots easier eh?

[lickidyclit]

Interesting thread, are you trumpies getting a bit nervous?

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by lickidyclit

Interesting thread, are you trumpies getting a bit nervous?

No.

[rexdutchman]

Its very funny to think the liberal retards will try some think well that stupid

[oeb11]

JBC - I agree with you - felony conviction does not disqualify a candidate from the office of POTUS - ( see qualifiers in the Constitution) however, States can put that qualifier for State office - but not House, Senate, or POTUS.
Effectively - it would be very difficult for an individual with a felony conviction to win POTUS.

[bb1961]

Originally Posted by lickidyclit

Interesting thread, are you trumpies getting a bit nervous?

You're confusing this with the Bullosey bunch...The RIDICULOUS party!!
This shit is priceless...you can't make it up!!
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/13/polit...ing/index.html

[eccielover]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

unless they put it in writing.

This is the key. As we saw earlier in the thread.

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.

ARTICLE I, SECTION 3, CLAUSE 7

The impeachment shall extend no further than disqualification. But the disqualification is not a given. It would depend on the Senate during sentencing.

[rexdutchman]

Well they have NOTHING for Impeachment , Kinda like the Russian thing Ridiculous at best. I would want them (Bullosey's bunch) to try that would be over the top stupid.

[eccieuser9500]

REPUBLICAN JUSTIN AMASH DECLARES 'PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS ENGAGED IN IMPEACHABLE CONDUCT'


https://www.newsweek.com/republican-...onduct-1429655

While the congressman from Michigan does not appear to directly call for Trump to be impeached, Amash does make the argument that the president could be impeached and removed from office based on what he read in the report.

Distancing himself

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

REPUBLICAN JUSTIN AMASH DECLARES 'PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS ENGAGED IN IMPEACHABLE CONDUCT'


https://www.newsweek.com/republican-...onduct-1429655

Distancing himself

"Congressman Justin Amash of Michigan penned a lengthy Twitter thread on Saturday afternoon, concluding that — after having read the full (public) report from Special Counsel Robert Mueller.."


hey sparky. hope uterus don't mind that i corrected your article? Great! because this guy has not seen the nearly unredacted report. he's not high enough in the food chain to be allowed.

so he can't see anymore than i can. Or uterus either. Do uterus see Justin Amash's name in this list of the Republicans that can see the nearly unredacted report?

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/10/polit...ort/index.html


"Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr and Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham have read it, along with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Rep. Doug Collins, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, have seen it, according to the source, while House Intelligence ranking member Devin Nunes has not."


So what do uterus see in the public version that i don't?

[dilbert firestorm]

amash is a never trumper.


his comment about his fellow republicans being too partisan says it all.

[eccieuser9500]

You're getting desperate. Now CNN is credible. First its fake, then it's real news?

Asking Mr. Magoo to unrecuse himself was enough for obstruction. I've always said there is enough in the original release of the report to impeach.

But somebody doesn't want to prosecute. The Attorney General is his majesty's lackey.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

You're getting desperate. Now CNN is credible. First its fake, then it's real news?

Asking Mr. Magoo to unrecuse himself was enough for obstruction. I've always said there is enough in the original release of the report to impeach.

But somebody doesn't want to prosecute. The Attorney General is his majesty's lackey.

So uterus claim Fox is fake news. I say CNN is biased news, not fake, same as Fox. So do uterus believe CNN? i certainly hope uterus do!


thank uterus valued poster!


BAHHAHAHAAAAAAA

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

So what do uterus see in the public version that i don't?