Posted on 01/17/2021 12:02:31 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
Way too late for ‘would’ ‘should’ Al. Rubber is about to meet the road. Go back to your Rat party.
We all know the GOP is contemplating the better ally — us or the Rats.
Pelosi and the entire swamp detritus team need to all be impeached after Trump is de-impeached:
The send the SWAMP TO GITMO for having Antifa/BLM pawns break into congressional chamber!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJfMZWNrwqU
Life, Liberty & Levin 1/17/21 FULL | FOX BREAKING TRUMP NEWS January 17,21
Impeachment blatantly is for removal from office when you’re out of office you can’t be impeached. If this where constitutional then congress can basically impeach any private citizen they want
Aren’t we lucky that those lawyer guys go to school for so many years, so that they all know so clearly what the law means?
Why don’t they impeach Bill Clinton?
I believe he’s still alive.
The Demon-crats and RINOs don’t care about the Constitution. They believe they have unlimited power.
If the House did something that is unconstitutional those reps should be recalled! Their oath of office is a joke! Words that are meaningless
That’s the voters job.
Most voters can’t spell Constitution, have never read any of it. I have no knowledge of or understanding of what it says.
What does Pence do? Instead of consulting the rules in the Constitution he asks the parliamentarian how to proceed.
Yeah, Our Founders believed that if you don't like what they wrote in the Constitution, you just consult Robert's Rules of Order.
Right?
Including GWB, Clinton, and Zero.
“Aren’t we lucky that those lawyer guys go to school for so many years, so that they all know so clearly what the law means?”
No luck about it.
Consider how many lawyers are demonkkkrap members of Congress. Do they not know the law and can call off the snarling non-lawyer demonkkkrap members? Little secret.
They were taught in law school how to look at words and come up with unique and novel arguments, no matter how bad the case, no matter how illogical, to “stretch” the law into areas not contemplated by statutory intent or constitutional meaning. That’s why the left support the “living-breathing Constitution” approach, change the meaning of words, etc. Ends justifies the means. They only take a strict constructionist position when it blocks their political opposition from undermining the left. Judges and justices learned the same.
That part also seems to be left out by those referencing the 1876 precedent.
I know all that. It just cracks me up how often I hear that someone shouldn’t comment because he or she is not a lawyer - as if being one means the opinion presented is sacrosanct.
In post-constitutional America they know that they don't need us anymore. As long as they play their role as pretend opposition their dem master will pat them on the head and pull the election lever to allow just enough of them to keep their cushy jobs to make it look like we aren't run by a single party politburo. For now. As Churchill said, feeding your friends to the crocodile hoping it will eat you last is a poor plan.
Dershowitz may be a liberal but when it comes to the law he seems to be a straight shooter. Refreshing.
“They were taught in law school how to look at words and come up with unique and novel arguments”
That is a bug/feature of the relatively new English language. Older languages have fewer words and expressions with ambiguous interpretations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.