Dan Warnick

U.S. Presidential Elections Status - Electoral Votes

Recommended Posts

We'll have to wait for the clip that shows the Trump lawyers showing loads of clips of Democrats calling for the people to fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, well, you get the idea.  I watched it live just before the recessed the Senate a few minutes ago, so we'll have to wait for someone to post a clip of that portion of the proceedings.

Meanwhile, here is a clip of Trump's lawyers calling out the fact that he has been denied due process of law, as if that was ever a question, and how the Democrat leaders, leaders, openly manipulated tweets and emails to falsely portray the former President's words and actions.  One in question showed the date being in January, 2020, in their rush.  Another falsely shows a user's tweet and on and on.

 

  • Great Response! 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the first clip of the session about the use of the word "fight" in politics, or, as the Democrats say, the basis for their impeachment movement.  Political theatre by the Democrat Party.

 

  • Great Response! 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here's one that's even better:

 

  • Like 3
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And you've got to love the next one, where the chorus is to impeach the President, and worse, starting even before the election was final.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

We'll have to wait for the clip that shows the Trump lawyers showing loads of clips of Democrats calling for the people to fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, fight, well, you get the idea.  I watched it live just before the recessed the Senate a few minutes ago, so we'll have to wait for someone to post a clip of that portion of the proceedings.

Meanwhile, here is a clip of Trump's lawyers calling out the fact that he has been denied due process of law, as if that was ever a question, and how the Democrat leaders, leaders, openly manipulated tweets and emails to falsely portray the former President's words and actions.  One in question showed the date being in January, 2020, in their rush.  Another falsely shows a user's tweet and on and on.

 

Why do the defence lawyers keep going on about due process? Correct me if I'm wrong, that is a constitutional protection against the power of law when someone's life and liberty are at stake in an actual criminal case. I.e. if you might lock someone up or even kill them, there needs to be a very high standard of procedures and proof to convict, and due process is one of the means of achieving that.

Impeachment, on the other hand, is really a glorified employment disciplinary hearing to determine if someone should be fired and, potentially, never re-employed again. He's not in a court. Senators act as jurors, but in a real trial literally all of them would not be allowed to be jurors due to bias, the outcome is by vote and the 'judge' has almost no power. This isn't a criminal trial, his life and liberty is not at stake. How can due process be relevant?

Is it just lawyers being lawyers and forgetting they're not in court?

Edited by LiamP
  • Upvote 3
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, LiamP said:

Why do the defence lawyers keep going on about due process? Correct me if I'm wrong, that is a constitutional protection against the power of law when someone's life and liberty are at stake in an actual criminal case. I.e. if you might lock someone up or even kill them, there needs to be a very high standard of procedures and proof to convict, and due process is one of the means of achieving that.

Impeachment, on the other hand, is really a glorified employment disciplinary hearing to determine if someone should be fired and, potentially, never re-employed again. He's not in a court. Senators act as jurors, but in a real trial literally all of them would not be allowed to be jurors due to bias, the outcome is by vote and the 'judge' has almost no power. This isn't a criminal trial, his life and liberty is not at stake. How can due process be relevant?

Is it just lawyers being lawyers and forgetting they're not in court?

The entire concept of impeachment is written into the constitution, while i do not completely grasp the congress's role below is the role of the senate which i think goes to your question. Have a read, is it your perception the Senate is following the constitution or skirting the constitution. The very fact the sitting US Supreme ct justice is not presiding over this spectacle would illuminate the constitutionality of the entire debacle.

In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called “managers,” acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal. Since 1789, about half of Senate impeachment trials have resulted in conviction and removal from office.

https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Senate_Impeachment_Role.htm#:~:text=The Senate sits as a,or convict the impeached official.&text=The Constitution requires a two,conviction is removal from office.

As of now the Democratic Party has yet to provide evidence allowable in a court of law.

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LiamP said:

Why do the defence lawyers keep going on about due process?

The concept of due process lies at the heart of the American system of law.  Due Process has many ramifications, including a spin-off component in civil trials.  At its core, the concept has that a defendant has the right to have the aggrievement against him conducted in conformance with principles of equity, a "fair play" concept that is missing in say Belarus. 

Is the Senate impeachment hearing a demonstration of due process?  Of course not.  But they do it anyway.

Can the Senate conduct such a trial without the Chief Justice presiding?  Of course not  (but they are dong it anyway). 

Is there a real aggrievement that would sustain the proceedings?  Of course not.  The defendant is no longer in office, thus negating the rationale for the entire proceeding.  (But they do it anyway). 

When you have legal proceedings being done without "due process," then the proceedings become a charade: a caricature of what the justice system is supposed to be.  That cheapens us all.   Personally, I think this has turned into a witch hunt, a politicized process that is a national disgrace.  Can you argue that Mr. Trump did bad things, that he incited a mob, etc etc?  Well, ,maybe, but that would be up to historians to argue over.  With him out of office, the entire "impeachment" concept falls on its face.  These guys are turning a grave and somber Constitutional process into a joke, a sham proceeding.  Shame on them. 

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

The concept of due process lies at the heart of the American system of law.  Due Process has many ramifications, including a spin-off component in civil trials.  At its core, the concept has that a defendant has the right to have the aggrievement against him conducted in conformance with principles of equity, a "fair play" concept that is missing in say Belarus. 

Is the Senate impeachment hearing a demonstration of due process?  Of course not.  But they do it anyway.

Can the Senate conduct such a trial without the Chief Justice presiding?  Of course not  (but they are dong it anyway). 

Is there a real aggrievement that would sustain the proceedings?  Of course not.  The defendant is no longer in office, thus negating the rationale for the entire proceeding.  (But they do it anyway). 

When you have legal proceedings being done without "due process," then the proceedings become a charade: a caricature of what the justice system is supposed to be.  That cheapens us all.   Personally, I think this has turned into a witch hunt, a politicized process that is a national disgrace.  Can you argue that Mr. Trump did bad things, that he incited a mob, etc etc?  Well, ,maybe, but that would be up to historians to argue over.  With him out of office, the entire "impeachment" concept falls on its face.  These guys are turning a grave and somber Constitutional process into a joke, a sham proceeding.  Shame on them. 

The Dems have turned any number of grave and somber proceedings into vendettas over the last 12 years, with the forceful push for their agenda and their party above all, all jurisprudence be damned.  To your point, the Dems have screamed "impeach the bastard" since before Donald Trump was sworn into office right through to after he was/is out of office, and they lay open the reality of now both parties screaming "impeach" at the drop of the smallest of disagreements in the top of our government.  Talk about dangerous and incredibly wasteful precedents!

Playground arguments turned into legal spectacles, highlighting the inability of the Dem Party to rule or preside in an adult fashion.  This is more like the mock "trials" our high school class held, and in my opinion this Dem Party is simply that: the high school class government that never grew up.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, when talking of vendettas, agendas, jurisprudence being damned and, well, outright lies, let's not leave out their co-conspirators, the media and the Big Tech moguls that own and run them!

Here is an article by Glenn Greenwald, one of the few real journalists left in this world of ours, which talks about that same high school ruling class.  It is a very long article, but if you have the time it is well worth the read.

The Journalistic Tattletale and Censorship Industry Suffers Several Well-Deserved Blows

(Excerpt)

The Journalistic Tattletale and Censorship Industry Suffers Several Well-Deserved Blows

The NYT's Taylor Lorenz falsely accuses a tech investor of using a slur after spending months trying to infiltrate and monitor a new app that allows free conversation.

https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-43
 
https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-43 New York Times reporter Taylor Lorenz and Silicon Valley investor Marc Andreessen

A new and rapidly growing journalistic “beat” has arisen over the last several years that can best be described as an unholy mix of junior high hall-monitor tattling and Stasi-like citizen surveillance. It is half adolescent and half malevolent. Its primary objectives are control, censorship, and the destruction of reputations for fun and power. Though its epicenter is the largest corporate media outlets, it is the very antithesis of journalism.

I’ve written before about one particularly toxic strain of this authoritarian “reporting.” Teams of journalists at three of the most influential corporate media outlets — CNN’s “media reporters” (Brian Stelter and Oliver Darcy), NBC’s “disinformation space unit” (Ben Collins and Brandy Zadrozny), and the tech reporters of The New York Times (Mike Isaac, Kevin Roose, Sheera Frenkel) — devote the bulk of their “journalism” to searching for online spaces where they believe speech and conduct rules are being violated, flagging them, and then pleading that punitive action be taken (banning, censorship, content regulation, after-school detention). These hall-monitor reporters are a major factor explaining why tech monopolies, which (for reasons of self-interest and ideology) never wanted the responsibility to censor, now do so with abandon and seemingly arbitrary blunt force: they are shamed by the world’s loudest media companies when they do not.

Just as the NSA is obsessed with ensuring there be no place on earth where humans can communicate free of their spying eyes and ears, these journalistic hall monitors cannot abide the idea that there can be any place on the internet where people are free to speak in ways they do not approve. Like some creepy informant for a state security apparatus, they spend their days trolling the depths of chat rooms and 4Chan bulletin boards and sub-Reddit threads and private communications apps to find anyone — influential or obscure — who is saying something they believe should be forbidden, and then use the corporate megaphones they did not build and could not have built but have been handed in order to silence and destroy anyone who dissents from the orthodoxies of their corporate managers or challenges their information hegemony.

Oliver Darcy has built his CNN career by sitting around with Brian Stelter petulantly pointing to people breaking the rules on social media and demanding tech executives make the rule-breakers disappear. The little crew of tattletale millennials assembled by NBC — who refer to their twerpy work with the self-glorifying title of “working in the disinformation space”: as intrepid and hazardous as exposing corruption by repressive regimes or reporting from war zones — spend their dreary days scrolling through 4Chan boards to expose the offensive memes and bad words used by transgressive adolescents; they then pat themselves on the back for confronting dangerous power centers, even when it is nothing more trivial and bullying than doxxing the identities of powerless, obscure citizens.

(The rest can be found at the link above)

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The above videos are vivid examples of just how far the House impeachment managers were willing to go in the engineering of "evidence" to influence opinions and convict Mr. Trump of flagrant incitement of an insurrection. They have been largely successful . . . if you watch only CNN, or read The New York Times or the Washington Post. Weaker minds--Mitt Romney, for example--were influenced because they mostly already held strong opinions about the former president as "Never-Trumpers." However, previously fair columnists like Peggy Noonan, who is read by millions in The Wall Street Journal, have jumped on, apparently accepting the "evidence" prepared by devious House impeachment managers at face value. The above videos--reality side-by-side with doctored copies--will unfortunately be seen by only a few. 

Something so brazenly engineered is more akin to the agitprop of Bolshevism and Maoism than democracy. Those of us who have worried that socialism, and socialism-with-violence (Bolshevism), were on the rise have now seen vivid examples of it. A sea-change is occurring, and faster than anything we've witnessed before. Everything in modern life (the stock market, EV's) has been speeded up and telescoped incredibly by the fear and loathing of the pandemic . . . and we've even been manipulated by false data about it. 

For example, no one has looked carefully, firsthand, at the data re' sick lab workers in the Wuhan Institute of Virology as early as November 2019. No one has mentioned that Dr. Fauci aided the WIV in "gain of function" studies, even after President Obama got cold feet about it. And Dr. Fauci was the one who advised us all on national TV that wearing a mask was unnecessary. How many thousands of deaths did that cause--if indeed you believe the mask-prevents-spread theory. We have been fed data by Dr. Fauci, who has listened intently to the WHO (which is, amazingly, not led by a physician or a virologist or even an epidemiologist). The WHO has a long history of corruption, being in bed with the CCP. Instead of listening to the very clear (but un-charismatically presented) warnings by former Sec of State Pompeo that he had good evidence to the contrary, we have recently been assured--millions of us--that the virus came from the wild, not the lab. We've not only bought into it, but Dr. Fauci has become the Norman Rockwell portrait of the caring physician at the bedside.  

The point I'm trying to make is that false, occasionally maliciously-engineered data is being promulgated on a regular basis. We're buying it because many of us grew up believing the news of Walter Cronkite and other truth-sayers. Today, however, the news is filtered, manipulated, parsed and subjected to all sorts of perversion of truth, leading much of what we're being fed--some of it on this site--to be nothing more than agitation/propaganda. Along those lines, most of us have no idea whether the person posting these things is a real person or a bot, whether he or she is a patriot or a sworn enemy of the United States. 

As Mr. Warnick has shown above, our own people, dully elected to the United States House of Representatives, under oath to obey the rules and guidelines inherent in the Constitution of the United States, have become so overwhelmed by partisan politics and hatred of Mr. Trump, and so falsely protected by the "dome" of Congress, that they've been allowed to present falsified data to a kangaroo court whereby one senator is both judge and a member of the jury. One has to suspect that if a true judge--say the one mandated by the Constitution, the Chief Justice of the highest court in the land, Justice Roberts--were presiding over this august body, he would have sharply reprimanded the House impeachment managers for their nefarious, somewhat seditious intent. In a real court of law, for instance, these guys would probably be behind bars or at least severely sanctioned, and also subjected to an argument for disbarment. That didn't happen because we had an eighty-year-old, frail, (very likely cognitively-challenged) partisan Senate president pro tempore presiding--so very frail and likely scared pootless that he had to be hospitalized when he was being sworn in. This false judge is also a member of the jury, and had reached a decision before the trial began. YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS UP! 

This has, of course, turned into a travesty so obvious that even the most rabid Democrats have to be embarrassed by this point. At times I was embarrassed by Mr. Trump . . . but never so awfully as if I were a Democrat today. The Constitution, the rule of law, veracity and the sanctity of the courtroom, the fairness of an impeachment trial have all been so egregiously violated by these House impeachment managers that it will take decades for our government to recover from the onslaught. 

  • Great Response! 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

The above videos are vivid examples of just how far the House impeachment managers were willing to go in the engineering of "evidence" to influence opinions and convict Mr. Trump of flagrant incitement of an insurrection. They have been largely successful . . . if you watch only CNN, or read The New York Times or the Washington Post. Weaker minds--Mitt Romney, for example--were influenced because they mostly already held strong opinions about the former president as "Never-Trumpers." However, previously fair columnists like Peggy Noonan, who is read by millions in The Wall Street Journal, have jumped on, apparently accepting the "evidence" prepared by devious House impeachment managers at face value. The above videos--reality side-by-side with doctored copies--will unfortunately be seen by only a few. 

Something so brazenly engineered is more akin to the agitprop of Bolshevism and Maoism than democracy. Those of us who have worried that socialism, and socialism-with-violence (Bolshevism), were on the rise have now seen vivid examples of it. A sea-change is occurring, and faster than anything we've witnessed before. Everything in modern life (the stock market, EV's) has been speeded up and telescoped incredibly by the fear and loathing of the pandemic . . . and we've even been manipulated by false data about it. 

For example, no one has looked carefully, firsthand, at the data re' sick lab workers in the Wuhan Institute of Virology as early as November 2019. No one has mentioned that Dr. Fauci aided the WIV in "gain of function" studies, even after President Obama got cold feet about it. And Dr. Fauci was the one who advised us all on national TV that wearing a mask was unnecessary. How many thousands of deaths did that cause--if indeed you believe the mask-prevents-spread theory. We have been fed data by Dr. Fauci, who has listened intently to the WHO (which is, amazingly, not led by a physician or a virologist or even an epidemiologist). The WHO has a long history of corruption, being in bed with the CCP. Instead of listening to the very clear (but un-charismatically presented) warnings by former Sec of State Pompeo that he had good evidence to the contrary, we have recently been assured--millions of us--that the virus came from the wild, not the lab. We've not only bought into it, but Dr. Fauci has become the Norman Rockwell portrait of the caring physician at the bedside.  

The point I'm trying to make is that false, occasionally maliciously-engineered data is being promulgated on a regular basis. We're buying it because many of us grew up believing the news of Walter Cronkite and other truth-sayers. Today, however, the news is filtered, manipulated, parsed and subjected to all sorts of perversion of truth, leading much of what we're being fed--some of it on this site--to be nothing more than agitation/propaganda. Along those lines, most of us have no idea whether the person posting these things is a real person or a bot, whether he or she is a patriot or a sworn enemy of the United States. 

As Mr. Warnick has shown above, our own people, dully elected to the United States House of Representatives, under oath to obey the rules and guidelines inherent in the Constitution of the United States, have become so overwhelmed by partisan politics and hatred of Mr. Trump, and so falsely protected by the "dome" of Congress, that they've been allowed to present falsified data to a kangaroo court whereby one senator is both judge and a member of the jury. One has to suspect that if a true judge--say the one mandated by the Constitution, the Chief Justice of the highest court in the land, Justice Roberts--were presiding over this august body, he would have sharply reprimanded the House impeachment managers for their nefarious, somewhat seditious intent. In a real court of law, for instance, these guys would probably be behind bars or at least severely sanctioned, and also subjected to an argument for disbarment. That didn't happen because we had an eighty-year-old, frail, (very likely cognitively-challenged) partisan Senate president pro tempore presiding--so very frail and likely scared pootless that he had to be hospitalized when he was being sworn in. This false judge is also a member of the jury, and had reached a decision before the trial began. YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS UP! 

This has, of course, turned into a travesty so obvious that even the most rabid Democrats have to be embarrassed by this point. At times I was embarrassed by Mr. Trump . . . but never so awfully as if I were a Democrat today. The Constitution, the rule of law, veracity and the sanctity of the courtroom, the fairness of an impeachment trial have all been so egregiously violated by these House impeachment managers that it will take decades for our government to recover from the onslaught. 

Once again I thank you for taking your time and resources to articulate on this debacle. Intelligent and well reasoned commentary are sorely in needed in today's world.

My morning coffee time was rather disturbing today, the Senate is now about to vote on Witeness's to substantiate testimony given by the Democratic impeachment leaders.Now ask anyone with a high school education how could that even be conceived?

A witness testifying to the veracity of a prosecutors's statement? Admittedly i have little or no educational background in a communist state court system,so i will ask. Is this how a court operates in a communist system?

If so and the US survives this debacle, our entire educational systems need a impeachment trial is the word I'll use.

A little tounge in cheek and hyperbole? It is being played right in front of us all.

https://www.abc27.com/news/us-world/politics/senate-votes-to-allow-witnesses-in-trump-impeachment-extending-trial/

Senate votes to allow witnesses in Trump impeachment, extending trial

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 2/12/2021 at 3:12 PM, Jan van Eck said:

The concept of due process lies at the heart of the American system of law.  Due Process has many ramifications, including a spin-off component in civil trials.  At its core, the concept has that a defendant has the right to have the aggrievement against him conducted in conformance with principles of equity, a "fair play" concept that is missing in say Belarus. 

Is the Senate impeachment hearing a demonstration of due process?  Of course not.  But they do it anyway.

Can the Senate conduct such a trial without the Chief Justice presiding?  Of course not  (but they are dong it anyway). 

Is there a real aggrievement that would sustain the proceedings?  Of course not.  The defendant is no longer in office, thus negating the rationale for the entire proceeding.  (But they do it anyway). 

When you have legal proceedings being done without "due process," then the proceedings become a charade: a caricature of what the justice system is supposed to be.  That cheapens us all.   Personally, I think this has turned into a witch hunt, a politicized process that is a national disgrace.  Can you argue that Mr. Trump did bad things, that he incited a mob, etc etc?  Well, ,maybe, but that would be up to historians to argue over.  With him out of office, the entire "impeachment" concept falls on its face.  These guys are turning a grave and somber Constitutional process into a joke, a sham proceeding.  Shame on them. 

Let's just add a few more "witless witnesses" to act like they were terrified by the reality they never "witnessed" just like the parade of witless witnesses in the Ukrainian phone call Peachmint. Weren't there, didn't see anything, don't know anything, doesn't matter kangaroo court and fictional justice

 

36F13181-461D-4E44-8279-31315835F0CE.jpeg

Edit: Once the defense announced they only wanted One witness, but her name was Pelosi, the trial was quickly wrapped. Talk about a perjury trap, Nancy having to answer questions under what passes for oath? No way Jose! 

Edited by Ward Smith
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lest we forget Why this charade is happening. Powell is not at all concerned about the lawsuits. An actual lawyer, not the armchair variety who infest this place is completely unconcerned. Then why are the media companies who have ample case Law behind them and 1st Amendment rights? Because they've given into the fascism the Left is pulling over this country right now. Corporations are completely in favor of this fascism, since by joining they're guaranteed supremacy with no competition. Just like Bosch in 1935…

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprise Sham wow guy isn't on Trumps team would fit right in after pillow man. 

Trump committed a crime, just because he left office doesn't mean his actions should be ignored.

Enforcing the law can be an ugly pain in the ass, doesn't mean crimes should be ignored.

  • Downvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

image.png.1d444dba490d9d89d7c7bd2f80058413.png

Now the above was an erudite discussion of the ramifications of the impeachment trial, and my opinions on it, which trial has led to an Acquittal in the Senate.  Nonetheless, after the announcement of Acquittal, our chum "Symmetry," who is actually "Enthalpic" in drag, decided to append his customary "red arrow" to express his Canadian sentiment of disapproval on anything American. It is my view that "Symmetry," a/k/a "Enthalpic," should go home and get off the Community Forum. 

  • Great Response! 4
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Quote
  1.  

Opps not ready for prime time

 

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/12/2021 at 4:12 PM, Jan van Eck said:

Can you argue that Mr. Trump did bad things, that he incited a mob, etc etc?  Well, maybe, but that would be up to historians to argue over. 

Nonsense.

The law says laws must be enforced, otherwise why bother writing laws?   While certain crimes may get more attention, law enforcement does not get to choose to ignore laws as they please. 

Nothing about this is a sham, it is exactly what it purported to be, nor bogus (he was, in fact, impeached). Look up the definition people... 

  • Haha 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

20 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

image.png.1d444dba490d9d89d7c7bd2f80058413.png

Now the above was an erudite discussion of the ramifications of the impeachment trial, and my opinions on it, which trial has led to an Acquittal in the Senate.  Nonetheless, after the announcement of Acquittal, our chum "Symmetry," who is actually "Enthalpic" in drag, decided to append his customary "red arrow" to express his Canadian sentiment of disapproval on anything American.  To say that this guy is an asshole is putting it politely.  It is my view that "Symmetry," a/k/a "Enthalpic," should go home and get off the Community Forum. 

Down voted because it was wrong.  Trial is not a sham, no shame on them.

Law is not "for the historians."

 

 

Edited by Symmetry
  • Like 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

image.png.1d444dba490d9d89d7c7bd2f80058413.png

Now the above was an erudite discussion of the ramifications of the impeachment trial, and my opinions on it, which trial has led to an Acquittal in the Senate.  Nonetheless, after the announcement of Acquittal, our chum "Symmetry," who is actually "Enthalpic" in drag, decided to append his customary "red arrow" to express his Canadian sentiment of disapproval on anything American. It is my view that "Symmetry," a/k/a "Enthalpic," should go home and get off the Community Forum. 

our chum "Symmetry," who is actually "Enthalpic" in drag,........dude what is your problem, you are acting like a 2 year old. I hope you are kicked off this site as you clearly are not capable of policing your own posts.

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

16 hours ago, Symmetry said:

Nonsense.

The law says laws must be enforced, otherwise why bother writing laws?   While certain crimes may get more attention, law enforcement does not get to choose to ignore laws as they please. 

Nothing about this is a sham, it is exactly what it purported to be, nor bogus (he was, in fact, impeached). Look up the definition people... 

There you go leading with your chin, The Sitting supreme Ct Chief Justice will not preside on this impeachment due to its unconstitutional nature. And Left hand Louie is quoting US law and the constitution being corrupted.

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Great Response! 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

13 minutes ago, Symmetry said:

The law says laws must be enforced, otherwise why bother writing laws?   While certain crimes may get more attention, law enforcement does not get to choose to ignore laws as they please. 

Readers here should recognize that this clown "Symmetry" has no idea what he is talking about.  There is no "laws" nor "crimes" involved, as respects the (now ex-) President.  The US President is beyond the reach of so-called "laws."  What you have here is a set of internal Rules of the US Senate, and those are not "laws."  The Senate has never before confronted a Bill of Impeachment from the House after the President has left Office, so the Senate made up its management rules as it went along.  

Edited by Jan van Eck
  • Great Response! 5
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Symmetry said:

Down voted because it was wrong.  Trial is not a sham, no shame on them.

Law is not "for the historians."

 

 

As usual, Symmetry has it wrong.  That is no surprise.  There is no "law."  The trial was a made-up procedure without any foundation.

  • Great Response! 2
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, notsonice said:

our chum "Symmetry," who is actually "Enthalpic" in drag,........dude what is your problem, you are acting like a 2 year old. I hope you are kicked off this site as you clearly are not capable of policing your own posts.

Too bad, chum.  I tell it as I see it.  You have not had to suffer under the indignities of this clown over the last year.  I call him out. 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

image.png.79a438817411e4cd15a9c1173b177fb7.png

More red arrows. This really is getting tiresome.  He actually thinks he is the fount of all knowledge as respects the government of the United States. 

  • Great Response! 1
  • Haha 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.