|
Post by bobloblaw on Nov 15, 2017 13:44:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 15, 2017 13:46:57 GMT -5
The purpose of impeaching Clinton would be to prevent her from holding public office again. That ISN’T entirely unreasonable.
Her actions re: her emails were patently illegal, and her collusion with the Russians in the most recent election needs to be investigated.
|
|
|
Post by bobloblaw on Nov 15, 2017 14:12:49 GMT -5
LOL Shrilary Cankles ruined my Life. Because of that Horrible Old Hag, I have Ugandan Blutards chasing me around all night instead of sleeping.
|
|
|
Post by bobloblaw on Nov 15, 2017 16:04:28 GMT -5
LOL Shrilary Cankles ruined my Life. Because of that Horrible Old Hag, I have Ugandan Blutards chasing me around all night instead of sleeping. You have to blame somebody for being your age and being unemployed/unemployable.
|
|
|
Post by bobloblaw on Nov 15, 2017 17:24:44 GMT -5
LOL Shrilary Cankles ruined my Life. Because of that Horrible Old Hag, I have Ugandan Blutards chasing me around all night instead of sleeping. You have to blame somebody for being your age and being unemployed/unemployable. Blame that Ol'Whitey Fugly Mommy VoicesInMyHead. She never wanted your Stupid Ass around in the first place...
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Nov 16, 2017 13:11:09 GMT -5
The purpose of impeaching Clinton would be to prevent her from holding public office again. That ISN’T entirely unreasonable. Her actions re: her emails were patently illegal, and her collusion with the Russians in the most recent election needs to be investigated. I can't believe you posted this, RJ. First of all, what would be the basis for any impeachment? Secondly, how could she be impeached, since she's not holding any public office? I thought you understood the Constitution.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Nov 16, 2017 13:25:37 GMT -5
The purpose of impeaching Clinton would be to prevent her from holding public office again. That ISN’T entirely unreasonable. Her actions re: her emails were patently illegal, and her collusion with the Russians in the most recent election needs to be investigated. I can't believe you posted this, RJ. First of all, what would be the basis for any impeachment? Secondly, how could she be impeached, since she's not holding any public office? I thought you understood the Constitution. She is already prohibited from ever holding an elected office by virtue of her having misused and been grossly negligent with, classified information. The paperwork she signed as Sec State, allowing her to handle classified information, states that.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 16, 2017 14:50:11 GMT -5
The purpose of impeaching Clinton would be to prevent her from holding public office again. That ISN’T entirely unreasonable. Her actions re: her emails were patently illegal, and her collusion with the Russians in the most recent election needs to be investigated. I can't believe you posted this, RJ. First of all, what would be the basis for any impeachment? Secondly, how could she be impeached, since she's not holding any public office? I thought you understood the Constitution. She can be impeached for her actions as Secretary of State. An impeachment and conviction would preclude her from running for office again.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Nov 16, 2017 16:07:03 GMT -5
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
ARTICLE II, SECTION 4
I have to disagree with you, RJ. Since the purpose of impeachment is removal from office, and since Mrs. Clinton is no longer in office, she can't be impeached. Again, I'm surprised that you'd even bring it up.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 17, 2017 9:11:32 GMT -5
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. ARTICLE II, SECTION 4 I have to disagree with you, RJ. Since the purpose of impeachment is removal from office, and since Mrs. Clinton is no longer in office, she can't be impeached. Again, I'm surprised that you'd even bring it up. I know you haven't studied. Here: history.house.gov/Institution/Origins-Development/Impeachment/The Dems ought to be jumping at this. Just to finally put the Clintons behind you.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Nov 17, 2017 9:35:14 GMT -5
But then Clinton was not "removed FROM office"... therefore she is NOT a "removed officer"... (you can't "REMOVE" her when she isn't there)... one must be impeached and removed FROM the office they hold while they are IN that office before that "disqualification" measure can apply...
"The power of impeachment is limited to removal from office but also provides for a REMOVED OFFICER to be disqualified from holding future office."
|
|
|
Post by bobloblaw on Nov 17, 2017 12:49:37 GMT -5
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. ARTICLE II, SECTION 4 I have to disagree with you, RJ. Since the purpose of impeachment is removal from office, and since Mrs. Clinton is no longer in office, she can't be impeached. Again, I'm surprised that you'd even bring it up. I know you haven't studied. Here: history.house.gov/Institution/Origins-Development/Impeachment/The Dems ought to be jumping at this. Just to finally put the Clintons behind you. The Neocons always need something to be afraid of. Fear keeps them alive. They will be fearing the Clintons until they are long gone.
|
|
|
Post by bobloblaw on Nov 17, 2017 13:09:34 GMT -5
The Neocons always need something to be afraid of. Fear keeps them alive. They will be fearing the Clintons until they are long gone. Translation: I have nothing to do with my Pathetic Life and I just took a Giant Shìt in my Diaper again...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Nov 17, 2017 13:40:08 GMT -5
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. ARTICLE II, SECTION 4 I have to disagree with you, RJ. Since the purpose of impeachment is removal from office, and since Mrs. Clinton is no longer in office, she can't be impeached. Again, I'm surprised that you'd even bring it up. Other than you, who, exactly, is talking about impeaching her?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Nov 17, 2017 13:41:39 GMT -5
But then Clinton was not "removed FROM office"... therefore she is NOT a "removed officer"... (you can't "REMOVE" her when she isn't there)... one must be impeached and removed FROM the office they hold while they are IN that office before that "disqualification" measure can apply... "The power of impeachment is limited to removal from office but also provides for a REMOVED OFFICER to be disqualified from holding future office." Then why were Democrats discussing impeaching Trump before he took the oath? I saw several of them on the gab fests talking about how it could be done, thereby preventing him from even taking the oath of office. Why would it be okay to do it to Trump, but not The Felon?
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 17, 2017 14:39:52 GMT -5
The Neocons always need something to be afraid of. Fear keeps them alive. They will be fearing the Clintons until they are long gone. The way they conspired to take over the Democrat Party should scare anyone who thinks the primaries have a purpose. As for the conservatives, she couldn’t even beat Trump. And if she isn’t disqualified between now and 2020, there’s a pretty good chance she won’t beat him again
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Nov 17, 2017 18:31:14 GMT -5
RJ, there have been 2 tries to impeach someone removed from office. In both cases, the verdict was to acquit because the person was no longer in office. While I realize that the right has been after Mrs. Clinton for the last 30 or so years, generally without any solid reason, I don't see much hope in any impeachment attempt against her.
And I understand what you mean by taking over the party. What wrrries me even more is the way Bannon and the Alt-right took over the Republican Party to impose their alt-right, totalitarian agenda. . . and with Trump in office they have the perfect patsy to impose it on us all.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 17, 2017 18:55:12 GMT -5
RJ, there have been 2 tries to impeach someone removed from office. In both cases, the verdict was to acquit because the person was no longer in office. While I realize that the right has been after Mrs. Clinton for the last 30 or so years, generally without any solid reason, I don't see much hope in any impeachment attempt against her. And I understand what you mean by taking over the party. What wrrries me even more is the way Bannon and the Alt-right took over the Republican Party to impose their alt-right, totalitarian agenda. . . and with Trump in office they have the perfect patsy to impose it on us all. There are tons of excellent reasons Hillary Clinton should spend the rest of her life locked up in a maximum security federal penitentiary. James Comey got on TV last fall and explained them in-depth, and then told everyone he wasn't going to do anything about it. So you need to get over this idea that the GOP is just out to get her. That is a load of crap. While impeachment is probably beside the point, and unnecessary anymore, my point is merely that it isn't entirely ridiculous, and there would be a valid reason for it.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Nov 17, 2017 20:56:09 GMT -5
It's not that that the GOP (what a misnomer!) is out to get Mrs. Clinton. It's that they have been out to get her for the last 30 or more years. Whitewater, pork bellies, health care reform to name just a few. She's been a marked person since the late 80s.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 17, 2017 21:42:31 GMT -5
It's not that that the GOP (what a misnomer!) is out to get Mrs. Clinton. It's that they have been out to get her for the last 30 or more years. Whitewater, pork bellies, health care reform to name just a few. She's been a marked person since the late 80s. She's been living above the law since the late 1980s. It's why she thinks she can get away rigging the dem primaries.
|
|
|
Post by bobloblaw on Nov 18, 2017 13:54:28 GMT -5
It's not that that the GOP (what a misnomer!) is out to get Mrs. Clinton. It's that they have been out to get her for the last 30 or more years. Whitewater, pork bellies, health care reform to name just a few. She's been a marked person since the late 80s. She's teflon coated. None of the Alt-Right's conspiracy theories can stick. The latest Uranium One conspiracy theory has already died.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Nov 18, 2017 15:35:17 GMT -5
RJ, there have been 2 tries to impeach someone removed from office. In both cases, the verdict was to acquit because the person was no longer in office. While I realize that the right has been after Mrs. Clinton for the last 30 or so years, generally without any solid reason, I don't see much hope in any impeachment attempt against her. And I understand what you mean by taking over the party. What wrrries me even more is the way Bannon and the Alt-right took over the Republican Party to impose their alt-right, totalitarian agenda. . . and with Trump in office they have the perfect patsy to impose it on us all. There are tons of excellent reasons Hillary Clinton should spend the rest of her life locked up in a maximum security federal penitentiary. James Comey got on TV last fall and explained them in-depth, and then told everyone he wasn't going to do anything about it. So you need to get over this idea that the GOP is just out to get her. That is a load of crap. While impeachment is probably beside the point, and unnecessary anymore, my point is merely that it isn't entirely ridiculous, and there would be a valid reason for it. ONE word describes your comments, Ranger John... BULL... Clinton hasn't come even close to breaking any law... only in your hate-filled mind...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Nov 18, 2017 15:38:01 GMT -5
The Neocons always need something to be afraid of. Fear keeps them alive. They will be fearing the Clintons until they are long gone. The way they conspired to take over the Democrat Party should scare anyone who thinks the primaries have a purpose. As for the conservatives, she couldn’t even beat Trump. And if she isn’t disqualified between now and 2020, there’s a pretty good chance she won’t beat him again "They" didn't conspire to take over the Democrat Party, Ranger John... "she" bailed out the DNC, financially... and the nominee does most often have "control" of the Party after being declared the nominee...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Nov 18, 2017 15:38:51 GMT -5
But then Clinton was not "removed FROM office"... therefore she is NOT a "removed officer"... (you can't "REMOVE" her when she isn't there)... one must be impeached and removed FROM the office they hold while they are IN that office before that "disqualification" measure can apply... "The power of impeachment is limited to removal from office but also provides for a REMOVED OFFICER to be disqualified from holding future office." Then why were Democrats discussing impeaching Trump before he took the oath? I saw several of them on the gab fests talking about how it could be done, thereby preventing him from even taking the oath of office. Why would it be okay to do it to Trump, but not The Felon? Anticipation, Redleg... anticipation... some are STILL talking about it...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Nov 20, 2017 9:54:20 GMT -5
It's not that that the GOP (what a misnomer!) is out to get Mrs. Clinton. It's that they have been out to get her for the last 30 or more years. Whitewater, pork bellies, health care reform to name just a few. She's been a marked person since the late 80s. Little longer than that, Paleman... they've been after her since 1974 when Bill Clinton recommended her... (Hillary Rodham at the time)... to serve on John Doar's committee to impeach Richard Nixon... Hillary wrote up the procedure for Nixon's impeachment... it was ironclad... he would have been convicted and removed from office... he became the ONLY President to resign from the Presidency... a Republican at that... and the Republicans have never forgotten that... Check out "The Hunting of the President: The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton" written by Gene Lyons and Joe Conason...
|
|