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.

 

Legal scholars, including at Federalist Society, say Trump can be convicted

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:10 PM
link   


“We differ from one another in our politics, and we also differ from one another on issues of constitutional interpretation,” wrote the signatories, which include the co-founder and other members of the conservative Federalist Society legal group. “But despite our differences, our carefully considered views of the law lead all of us to agree that the Constitution permits the impeachment, conviction, and disqualification of former officers, including presidents.”


Source


So what does this mean for Don? Seems before he left office he sent secret service for all of his kids and such. Does that go away if he gets convicted in the senate?

What else could go away? The pension perhaps? Anything else?

In short, if Don is convicted, what does it mean materially for him and his family?

On another note... McConnel said they should wait until February to do the senate trial... we are close to feb, but why would he say that?



posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:13 PM
link   
a reply to: HunkaHunka

Yeah,

I would like to see how they are going to do that when they have done the same thing or worse.

Watch the video.

twitter.com...





www.foxnews.com...


edit on 21-1-2021 by infolurker because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-1-2021 by infolurker because: (no reason given)


+12 more 
posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:16 PM
link   
a reply to: HunkaHunka
Too bad he is no longer an elected official.
The senate has no jurisdiction over private citizens.

Not even a nice try.



posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:17 PM
link   
a reply to: HunkaHunka

I think I am tired of
eating bologna sandwiches.

2nd line.


+14 more 
posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:17 PM
link   
a reply to: HunkaHunka

It clearly states in the constitution....


The United States Constitution provides that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" ( Article I, section 2 ) and that "the Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments…[but] no person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present" ( Article I, section 3 ). The president, vice president, and all civil officers of the United States are subject to impeachment.


He is no longer a “civic Officer “ therefore they cannot “extend” it to him any longer

BUT HEY! WHO FOLLOWS THE CONSTITUTION


I mean the 14th was broken by Biden even running as a candidate....

Also, the stolen election, changing laws while bypassing legislators, etc

F### it right?


You are the greatest conservative ever by the way


+8 more 
posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: HunkaHunka

It's getting to the point I know you've authored a thread even before I open it.

Like all legal arguments, there are always opposing view points.

Most of your questions are really just you wanting to get your thrills by seeing someone you don't like politically get hounded into oblivion.

But I'll answer your last question. McConnell bought time so he could stick his finger in the air and determine how much support he really has to turn on Trump.
edit on 21-1-2021 by loam because: (no reason given)


+5 more 
posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:21 PM
link   
a reply to: HunkaHunka

It is the Federalist Society, FFS.

Legal scholars, my ass. A tired appeal to authority there, since someone can round up 1,000 "legal scholars" tomorrow to dispute it.

The Constitution is pretty clear that impeachment of a President means that it removes him from office.

It doesn't state that a private citizen who was formerly a President can be impeached.

Although if you RRhheeeTards want to push that particular boundary, I would be quite happy when they go on to impeach Obama, Bush and Clinton for their offenses.

But keep pushing it!!!



edit on 21-1-2021 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:23 PM
link   
False

Next you’re going to lie and say “his wife his going to divorce him”

Leftists grasping again

The fraud was successful, how about look to the celebrated racist Joe Biden for what he’s going to do now?



posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: HunkaHunka

Yeah,

I would like to see how they are going to do that when they have done the same thing or worse.





www.foxnews.com...


I'm fairly sure they aren't trying to impeach Trump on the grounds of him suggesting that the vote was rigged.

I'm fairly sure that the impeachment was for Trump ignoring and trying to negate the process laid out in the Constitution.

That, and being the primary cause of a private revolt against the Constitutional process by a minority group, by force.

Also, I am fairly sure that each of those quotes in the inset pictures are taken out of context. Definitely, none of them were spoken in front of some sort of major conflagration. The placing of things obviously way out of context is one of the most obvious ways to lie with propaganda. This sort of stuff only works on the supremely gullible.



edit on 21/1/2021 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Asking people to protest “peacefully and patriotically” IS CONSTITUTIONAL - fact

Wasn’t it a leftist POS (cuomo- a racist) who said “who said a protest has to be peaceful”?

Yes. It was

To leftist applause
edit on 21 1 2021 by Breakthestreak because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:31 PM
link   
You should read the article... it’s the exact opposite of what you say, and they are the experts


originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: HunkaHunka
Too bad he is no longer an elected official.
The senate has no jurisdiction over private citizens.

Not even a nice try.





posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: HunkaHunka

Yeah,

I would like to see how they are going to do that when they have done the same thing or worse.





www.foxnews.com...


I'm fairly sure they aren't trying to impeach Trump on the grounds of him suggesting that the vote was rigged.

I'm fairly sure that the impeachment was for Trump ignoring and trying to negate the process laid out in the Constitution.

That, and being the primary cause of a private revolt against the Constitutional process by a minority group, by force.


Please link for me where Trump was ignoring or trying to negate the process laid out in the Constitution.

You know... just for fun.

I know you have no idea what you are talking about, but your backtracking might be actually hilarious to read.

Waiting...




posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: HunkaHunka
You should read the article... it’s the exact opposite of what you say, and they are the experts


originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: HunkaHunka
Too bad he is no longer an elected official.
The senate has no jurisdiction over private citizens.

Not even a nice try.




So "political hacks" are "experts" now?

This explains a lot about how you post.




posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:34 PM
link   
I did Mock Trial in high school. You’re wrong.

Did I get the gist here?



posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:34 PM
link   
That makes sense... that’s probably it right there. Thanks.


originally posted by: loam
a reply to: HunkaHunka

McConnell bought time so he could stick his finger in the air and determine how much support he really has to turn on Trump.



posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:35 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Dude,

The vote was rigged immediately when they sent out millions of "mail in ballots". There is an absentee ballot process for a reason.

Everyone knows that as fact.

Now.

www.nbcnews.com...

Democrats objected 11 times, citing a variety of issues, including “Russian interference,” “massive voter suppression” and the “violation of the Voting Rights Act.”

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said she was not encouraging objections but that she would “support” them.

“I think people don’t want the day to pass without registering concerns,” she told reporters Friday. “In some cases, members are concerned about voter suppression, in some cases they are concerned about Russian influence on our election. There are a number of concerns. But it’s not going to have an impact at the end of the day.”


www.cnn.com...


“The electors were not lawfully certified, especially given the confirmed and illegal activities engaged by the government of Russia,” McGovern said.

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland rose to object to 10 of Florida’s 29 electoral votes.

“They violated Florida’s prohibition against dual office holders,” Raskin said.

Rep. Barbara Lee of California brought up voting machines and Russian hacking when she objected following the counting of Michigan’s votes.

“People are horrified by the overwhelming evidence of Russian interference in our election,” Lee said.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas stood up to object.

“I object on the massive voter suppression that included –” Jackson Lee began.



posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: HunkaHunka
You should read the article... it’s the exact opposite of what you say, and they are the experts


originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: HunkaHunka
Too bad he is no longer an elected official.
The senate has no jurisdiction over private citizens.

Not even a nice try.



No thanks
Mr Trump is no longer an elected official.
They are in no way experts.
They are partisan hacks at best.
You enjoy yourself with that bs tho.



posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:36 PM
link   
The “RINO” posts utter rubbish once again.
I think you better stop worrying about Trump and start worrying about your “saviors” that just stole an election.
There is smoke on Pennsylvania Ave........it’s coming from the Dem dumpster fire behind the White House.



posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
Asking people to protest “peacefully and patriotically” IS CONSTITUTIONAL - fact

Wasn’t it a leftist POS (cuomo- a racist) who said “who said a protest has to be peaceful”?

Yes. It was

To leftist applause


Honestly, the label "Leftist" loses any sort of meaning if you apply it to almost everyone.

In truth, the current government is actually fairly centrist. But when you stand on the far right, everyone is to your left.




posted on Jan, 21 2021 @ 11:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
Asking people to protest “peacefully and patriotically” IS CONSTITUTIONAL - fact

Wasn’t it a leftist POS (cuomo- a racist) who said “who said a protest has to be peaceful”?

Yes. It was

To leftist applause


Honestly, the label "Leftist" loses any sort of meaning if you apply it to almost everyone.

In truth, the current government is actually fairly centrist. But when you stand on the far right, everyone is to your left.




Emoji

But it WAS a leftist who said it’s ok to violently protest

You don’t dispute that

Cuomo is a leftists and a racist, HE said violence is ok President Trump said “protest peacefully”

YOU know that

Leftist

Emoji




top topics



 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join