Stephen Miller: Democratic party set Constitution 'ablaze' this week

Fox Business News ^ | December 20,2019 | Trish Regan

[iontheball]

Ms. Regan interviews Miller regarding impeachment, Pelosi's Democrats, and the DNC's lust for power to destroy America. He delivers a warning to viewers that the only man standing in the breach keeping the Socialist/Communists from destroying America is Trump. I would add that it includes the American peoples' steadfast support and fervent prayer.

[iontheball]

I love Stephen Miller. He is a no holds bared, tireless, brass knuckle fighter for America. Attacks on him, like Trump, only fire him up. Watch for that signature slight head cant - his wind up before he lets go. His star is somewhere out there in the future Republican orbit, right now I'm not quite prepared to say the presidency. There are few who can beat 'The Donalds' sparing and counterpunching ability, but Miller has a place right there in the boxing ring with Trump. In addition to his verbal sparing ability, he is a gifted writer who has the ability to channel the President's thoughts perfectly. He likely is now working on the State of the Union speech.

[Sacajaweau]

IIRC, If a law is incomplete in a session, it has to be reintroduced in the next session.

Impeachment is part of a law to my thinking and the session has ended.

[duckman]

A must see video and Trish is soooo easy on the eyes!

[Sacajaweau]

Can I retract my last post?? I think it is based on the two Sessions of the Congress...

[ctdonath2]

Yes, this legislative session ends January 3, 2021.

Which leaves a really bizarre possibility:
1. Trump is re-elected next November.
2. Pelosi finally transmits Articles of Impeachment, and list of House Managers, to Senate.
3. The impossible happens and Senate promptly convicts Trump.
4. Trump leaves office.
5. Pence is promptly inaugurated.
6. Trump is inaugurated January 21, 2021.

Removal from office doesn’t mean he can’t come back.

[NonValueAdded]

A bar from holding public office can be part of the sentence imposed by the Senate.

[Savage Beast]

The Democrats don’t care if they destroy the Constitution, the rule of law, or the United States. In fact, that is their objective.

[allendale]

Anyone else wondering why Trump in his pre impeachment tweets did not openly and repeatedly accuse Pelosi and her son Paul of overt corruption. Paul Pelosi did exactly the same thing as Hunter Biden in the Ukraine. He like Hunter Biden was given a job for which he had absolutely no qualifications other than his relation to Nancy Pelosi and received a huge amount of money. If Trump had pointed out this corruption on a regular basis and argued that he had every right and obligation to investigate this corruption, that the impeachment fiasco was meant to blunt that righteous investigation and protect the criminals, then perhaps many more of those Democrats in swing districts would have backed off and the American people would have a better understanding of what was really happening. Most Americans do not know that Paul Pelosi also laundered corrupt funds.

[Lurkinanloomin]

They did that on Usurpation Day, January 20, 2009.

With the complete cooperation of the GOP.

[heshtesh]

Removal from office doesn’t mean he can’t come back.

Surprise,surprise, it appears the Democrats are willing to make subtle change as it appears if the Senate were to remove Trump the rats were sure to add the provision he can never hold elected office again. I’ll look it up and see if they authorized a stake be driven tru his heart also.

[Deplorable American1776]

The Dems are going to have an election that’ll make the UKLabour Party look like a mild loss...

[SkyDancer]

It’s been smoldering ever since 0bama.

[Cboldt]

Articles of impeachment are different from legislation and nominations in that they survive not only across session, but even across Congresses.

Clinton was impeached (and articles intro’d to the senate) in the 105th, trial began on the 106th. The only thing that did not survive the transition was naming of managers, so a second/new resolution was passed for that.

The Clinton case is not unique in this regard.

[Howie66]

For the sake of our Republic, I pray that you are right.

[Sacajaweau]

Thanks

[Jan_Sobieski]

If Miller is right, we need to arrest every law breaker immediately. Otherwise shut up and give in to the socialists.

[Uncle Sham]

Impeachment is a removal process designed to protect the nation from the actions of a criminal President. If not used in this fashion, it is a violation of the intent as designed by the founders. If someone is worth impeaching, they are NOT worth keeping in office any longer than than the impeachment and trial takes. Leaving them in office, in fact, subverts the supposed need to impeach and actually makes the case that the impeachment itself is a frivolous one. Holding articles of impeachment as a weapon to affect or blackmail a President is itself a violation of the concept of co-equal branches of government and thus unconstitutional. It is a removal process, not a blackmail process to hold someone or the Senate hostage to the whims of the House. We do not have to obey unconstitutional laws or acts and should the House decide to hold on to these articles to be used as a weapon against the President or to dictate to the Senate, then in my opinion, they would be acting in an unconstitutional manner.

I think their goal is two-fold. First, They want to tar him before the next election and in essence do themselves by colluding with the news media with the next election cycle what they falsely accused Trump and the Russians of doing in 2016, affect the election. Second, they want a way to keep Trump and the Senate from replacing RBG should the time come. They would then release the articles to the Senate, forcing a trial phase, after which, win or lose, they and their media darlings would peddle the argument that an impeached Trump should not be allowed to appoint a replacement justice. The Constitution does not give them the power to use the impeachment process in this fashion.

[ctdonath2]

Not Constitutional.
Simply says they can remove him from office.
There is no “...with conditions” clause.
The People can put him back.
Show me wrong.

[heshtesh]

Relax it’s an add on by the dems, nobody is arguing how legally sound it is.

[bigbob]

Or somewhat less convoluted, Pelosi sits on the articles, through some twist of fate the Dems win the Senate, then Trump is inaugurated for his 2nd term only to be removed shortly thereafter. I think some of them are so deluded that this is what they are counting on.