It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Flatfish
OK, so you are basing your impeachment on the If's and buts. Got it.
Guilty, until we run out of things to charge him with, the American way.
Remember, If Comey sat on all that, he himself is guilty of a few things.
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Flatfish
OK, so you are basing your impeachment on the If's and buts. Got it.
Guilty, until we run out of things to charge him with, the American way.
Remember, If Comey sat on all that, he himself is guilty of a few things.
Do you understand what impeachment is?
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Flatfish
OK, so you are basing your impeachment on the If's and buts. Got it.
Guilty, until we run out of things to charge him with, the American way.
Remember, If Comey sat on all that, he himself is guilty of a few things.
Do you understand what impeachment is?
We do and that is why a lot of us, in the middle to all the way to the right are about 99.99% certain impeachment won't be happening. Simply put, there has to be a crime with charges, just like in the Nixon and Clinton cases, before you can even begin to impeach a duly elected official in the United States. This "aint" China, yet!
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Flatfish
I think I get it, but there needs to be some crime or wrong dooing in order to start the impeachment process, correct?
I just don't think, "I don't like him" is enough to bring those charges. If the Russia thing pans out, then sure, we might see it. But as I said elsewhere, if the Russia thing doesn't pan out, I doubt it will stop there. At some point, even those on the left might be able to recognize a witch hunt, at least one would hope.
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Flatfish
OK, so you are basing your impeachment on the If's and buts. Got it.
Guilty, until we run out of things to charge him with, the American way.
Remember, If Comey sat on all that, he himself is guilty of a few things.
Do you understand what impeachment is?
We do and that is why a lot of us, in the middle to all the way to the right are about 99.99% certain impeachment won't be happening. Simply put, there has to be a crime with charges, just like in the Nixon and Clinton cases, before you can even begin to impeach a duly elected official in the United States. This "aint" China, yet!
You can't indict a sitting POTUS, that's why you have impeachment proceedings.
They're the legislative equivalent of indicting or charging the POTUS with a crime.
The crime would be "obstruction of justice" as I explained in my earlier post.
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Flatfish
I think I get it, but there needs to be some crime or wrong dooing in order to start the impeachment process, correct?
I just don't think, "I don't like him" is enough to bring those charges. If the Russia thing pans out, then sure, we might see it. But as I said elsewhere, if the Russia thing doesn't pan out, I doubt it will stop there. At some point, even those on the left might be able to recognize a witch hunt, at least one would hope.
Actually, any person, (including the POTUS) can be charged with and found guilty of, "obstruction of justice" even when it turns out that there was no underlying crime.
The "obstruction " itself, is the crime.
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Flatfish
OK, so you are basing your impeachment on the If's and buts. Got it.
Guilty, until we run out of things to charge him with, the American way.
Remember, If Comey sat on all that, he himself is guilty of a few things.
Do you understand what impeachment is?
We do and that is why a lot of us, in the middle to all the way to the right are about 99.99% certain impeachment won't be happening. Simply put, there has to be a crime with charges, just like in the Nixon and Clinton cases, before you can even begin to impeach a duly elected official in the United States. This "aint" China, yet!
You can't indict a sitting POTUS, that's why you have impeachment proceedings.
They're the legislative equivalent of indicting or charging the POTUS with a crime.
The crime would be "obstruction of justice" as I explained in my earlier post.
Impeachment IS indictment by the Congress and there has to be a violation of SOMETHING, already in writing. NOT some thing they make up because they don't like someone, PERIOD.
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Flatfish
I think I get it, but there needs to be some crime or wrong dooing in order to start the impeachment process, correct?
I just don't think, "I don't like him" is enough to bring those charges. If the Russia thing pans out, then sure, we might see it. But as I said elsewhere, if the Russia thing doesn't pan out, I doubt it will stop there. At some point, even those on the left might be able to recognize a witch hunt, at least one would hope.
Actually, any person, (including the POTUS) can be charged with and found guilty of, "obstruction of justice" even when it turns out that there was no underlying crime.
The "obstruction " itself, is the crime.
But we already know that can't be it or Comey would have already had to tell us. Can't hold onto that information or you are complicit to the law too. Comey's memos need to be seized and see what he said about Bill Clinton on the tarmac too with the head of the DOJ after Hillary's server was news.
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Flatfish
OK, so you are basing your impeachment on the If's and buts. Got it.
Guilty, until we run out of things to charge him with, the American way.
Remember, If Comey sat on all that, he himself is guilty of a few things.
Do you understand what impeachment is?
We do and that is why a lot of us, in the middle to all the way to the right are about 99.99% certain impeachment won't be happening. Simply put, there has to be a crime with charges, just like in the Nixon and Clinton cases, before you can even begin to impeach a duly elected official in the United States. This "aint" China, yet!
You can't indict a sitting POTUS, that's why you have impeachment proceedings.
They're the legislative equivalent of indicting or charging the POTUS with a crime.
The crime would be "obstruction of justice" as I explained in my earlier post.
Impeachment IS indictment by the Congress and there has to be a violation of SOMETHING, already in writing. NOT some thing they make up because they don't like someone, PERIOD.
There is a violation of SOMETHING.
I assure you there are statues that strictly prohibit any person from obstructing law enforcement personnel who are in the process of investigating possible criminal activity.
The crime is called Obstruction of Justice.
It's quite an impeachable offense.
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Flatfish
OK, so you are basing your impeachment on the If's and buts. Got it.
Guilty, until we run out of things to charge him with, the American way.
Remember, If Comey sat on all that, he himself is guilty of a few things.
Do you understand what impeachment is?
We do and that is why a lot of us, in the middle to all the way to the right are about 99.99% certain impeachment won't be happening. Simply put, there has to be a crime with charges, just like in the Nixon and Clinton cases, before you can even begin to impeach a duly elected official in the United States. This "aint" China, yet!
You can't indict a sitting POTUS, that's why you have impeachment proceedings.
They're the legislative equivalent of indicting or charging the POTUS with a crime.
The crime would be "obstruction of justice" as I explained in my earlier post.
Impeachment IS indictment by the Congress and there has to be a violation of SOMETHING, already in writing. NOT some thing they make up because they don't like someone, PERIOD.
There is a violation of SOMETHING.
I assure you there are statues that strictly prohibit any person from obstructing law enforcement personnel who are in the process of investigating possible criminal activity.
The crime is called Obstruction of Justice.
It's quite an impeachable offense.
No there is not and the proof is Comey didn't do squat and basically said there was noting in his meeting with DJT. Hang on you lefties are in for a run through the ringer. The truth is prevailing and your Russia collusion story and whatever bs you try is falling on deaf ears due to the fact it is a solid lie.
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Flatfish
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Flatfish
OK, so you are basing your impeachment on the If's and buts. Got it.
Guilty, until we run out of things to charge him with, the American way.
Remember, If Comey sat on all that, he himself is guilty of a few things.
Do you understand what impeachment is?
We do and that is why a lot of us, in the middle to all the way to the right are about 99.99% certain impeachment won't be happening. Simply put, there has to be a crime with charges, just like in the Nixon and Clinton cases, before you can even begin to impeach a duly elected official in the United States. This "aint" China, yet!
originally posted by: Sublimecraft
Hey - these blokes thumped my HOT TUB meme I posted on twitter a few months back.