And how is that working for you by the way.You've never heard of liberal Republicans and never Trumpers like McCain and McConnell?
They don't want non politicians in office and they are trying to show everyone else what happens if a non politician actually wins.
You've never heard of liberal Republicans and never Trumpers like McCain and McConnell?
They don't want non politicians in office and they are trying to show everyone else what happens if a non politician actually wins.
Impeachment would necessarily precede any prosecution & that's dependent on the special counsel's report & the actions of Congress.
I've seen how the Dems handled the Iraq War. They didn't. Their apologists talked about black Presidential images, about how the Republicans would say bad things as if they didn't already. The names at the top of the forum? After all this time I think it would better honor them by removing the thread. Thousands of dead, tens of thousands of deprived families in countless ways. But it wasn't worth standing up and demanding something which could at least offer some closure.Meanwhile, you continue to condemn Dems for making choices they may never get.
To what end, other than to discredit them & discourage people from voting for them?
This, btw. is nothing but innuendo-
On your first part, there is no absolute on the ability to prosecute for crimes while in office. Currently the DOJ has two opinions of three that Trump is immune while in office. That leaves doubt on an issue that may bear reevaluation. If Trump is impeached and removed there is no immunity. That will be in the hands of the DOJ and exactly what actions of Congress are you suggesting to interfere with lawful prosecution?
I've seen how the Dems handled the Iraq War. They didn't. Their apologists talked about black Presidential images, about how the Republicans would say bad things as if they didn't already. The names at the top of the forum? After all this time I think it would better honor them by removing the thread. Thousands of dead, tens of thousands of deprived families in countless ways. But it wasn't worth standing up and demanding something which could at least offer some closure.
The dishonored dead, and you and yours excused yourself for it.
What has that to do with anything? Those who remained silent are all about their party at all costs. I'd love every single one of you face a child that lost a parent to that war and look them in the eye and tell them how image and politics mean more than they ever will.
So we come to another possible confrontation of the rule of law and justice. Dems could regain some measure of meaningful honor by not repeating their actions, and if the DOJ announces that criminality is discovered that they will draw that Red Line and say "Never again, and we support the DOJ and however they lawfully proceed. We stand with justice and our Nation and let those who think they will get away with acts of such enormity we've seen? They are on notice by our acts, not just our words".
Something akin to that. If they act as leaders and not spinless lifeforms in office then I will congratulate them heartily. This is not MY justice, but the law of the land applied to the powers in office, not just everyone else. If not then there is no curse fitting.
I do no such thing. Dems will discredit or elevate themselves. People will be encouraged or discouraged to vote for them based on how the Dems comport themselves. What I am saying is watch their hands more than their lips. You know what that means.
This is you laying down a defense for the worst outcome Dems could choose. My statements are based on 21st-century history.
Let's see if you and yours are worthy or not and the proof of the pudding will be in the eating as it were.
We shall see.
you make the claim, you provide the proof. that's how it works. and infowars does not count.There is plenty of proof of Hillary colluding with Russians to gain control of American uranium, military secrets and all other sorts of crimes.
Look it up. Then lock her up.
I wonder what "all sorts of crimes" includes.you make the claim, you provide the proof. that's how it works. and infowars does not count.
I wonder what "all sorts of crimes" includes.
Gish galloping as well, I see.
Scenario #1- the special counsel report indicates no grounds for impeachment or prosecution.
Scenario #2- the report indicates that such grounds exist.
If that happens, Congress will necessarily have to impeach Trump for the DoJ to prosecute because
A- Trump can fire the DoJ if they try to prosecute ahead of that because he's their boss.
B- Even if such an absurdity came to pass Trump could still be president while in prison.
The most likely result in the event of scenario #2 is that Trump would resign in the face of certain impeachment to receive a pardon from President Pence & there's not a damned thing Dems could do about it other than howl.
There is plenty of proof of Hillary colluding with Russians to gain control of American uranium, military secrets and all other sorts of crimes.
Look it up. Then lock her up.
Why oh why won't they give us a list of the convictions.Gawd damn it's just amazing how much right-wing conspiratards sound like anti-vaxxers.
Wrong on every fact and so sure of themselves. A stunning example of dunning kruger.
Why oh why won't they give us a list of the convictions.
You know your words are still here for people to read right?
Pence pardoning for the purpose of criminal obstruction gets himself impeached and removed.
but he was never elected to the presidency (or as vice-president for that fact) and one reason was because of the pardon.The power of presidential pardon is absolute. President Pence exercising it would in no way be an impeachable offense. They didn't impeach Jerry Ford.
The power of presidential pardon is absolute. President Pence exercising it would in no way be an impeachable offense. They didn't impeach Jerry Ford.
Scenario #1. Then you can dry your brow.
Scenario #2. Fear mongering. Trump wants to fire everyone yesterday, or last year probably. Dems win big and impeach and removal for criminal obstruction of justice. Then the DOJ continues. Pence pardoning for the purpose of criminal obstruction gets himself impeached and removed. The Dems could have hearings and refer to the DOJ, but your apologist stance suggests this isn't likely. If Trump is found guilty of overt criminal acts while in office then he will be removed from office as well.
Of all the possibilities the worst is that Dems might have to take a public and moral stand. I understand why you fear that.
But you don't matter and neither does anyone here. I'll watch and see who does what when things are settled. I just wanted to know who carried who's water and get a sense of their worth when it comes to the moral aspects of the rule of law. You leave me with serious doubts on that issue.
To borrow a scenario- If Trump shot someone in the street and the Dems refused to openly condemn and act as leaders and not politicians, you and yours would let everyone involved get away with it.
Trump is right to think as he does. You won't hold anyone accountable if justice, legal and proper justice, isn't done. Perhaps that the worst case scenario indeed. Eventually, your party might do something which demands justice and apologists wouldn't stand for that.
So bluster and flounder away. We may find out what mettle if any you and yours possess.
We shall see.
Pence can pardon anyone he pleases. Note there is no protection for consequences due to intent. Then there's the question of whether Pence want to stand up for Trump or bury his party. Pick one.
I don't think the Dems would have the balls to prosecute Trump if he got impeached unless it was high treason. And even then. Something like 'it will divide the country too much' or something..... really 'we could come across as looking too vindictive' would be the case or something political. I say who cares, the deplorables are so far off the reservation just prosecute the fucking traitor and fuck what a 1/3 of the country feels or cares. They are goners already without a shred of integrity left in them.
I don't think the Dems would have the balls to prosecute Trump if he got impeached unless it was high treason. And even then. Something like 'it will divide the country too much' or something..... really 'we could come across as looking too vindictive' would be the case or something political. I say who cares, the deplorables are so far off the reservation just prosecute the fucking traitor and fuck what a 1/3 of the country feels or cares. They are goners already without a shred of integrity left in them.
The question comes down to whether you want another politician knowing the worst that can happen for using the Office for gain and abusing others like DACA people is that you are asked to leave. No harm done and maybe some money made too.
I'm not a fan.
Dumb ass.
Beaten back |= Beaten
I said:
"He has beaten back the ISIS Caliphate to a mere shadow."
I'll spell it out more for you since you are retarded.
Their current presence is a mere shadow of their former status.
To describe something as being a shadow of its former self is to intend to describe something that can no longer perform on the same level that it used to. Furthermore, the imagery intended by those honestly using the expression is that shadows of people are not able to interact with the world in the way that its owner could. In the context of describing a fighting force at war, that means they've been beaten. A force used to wage war at a certain level that is now no longer able to wage war at that level therefore has been beaten in that war.
Describing a person as a shadow of their former selves is intended to mean that they've fallen so far that they're barely recognisable as their former selves, like say someone who achieved notoriety for a particular physical or mental feat and has since fallen into alcoholism and so that feat is beyond them let alone the other obstacles that are now in their path.
If you're not trying to describe a similar effect, then you're using the wrong expression.
Really?
That is what you have?
Sad, just sad.