General Discussion

GulfCoast66

(11,949 posts)

44. To this mid level manager...

Tue May 21, 2019, 08:23 PM

May 2019

Applying a penalty with no conviction goes against our entire system.

Not that I don’t want trump penalized in every way possible!

Thanks for the discussion. Have a nice evening.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

49 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Impeachment means Trump can be disqualified from election in 2020 by a simple majority Senate vote. [View all] FreepFryer May 2019 OP

truly interesting LEW May 2019 #1

I don't believe we do. It's more a matter of timing. But thank you for new info. emmaverybo May 2019 #2

You're welcome! I'm relieved to hear you don't see a similar volume of blanket dismissals... FreepFryer May 2019 #3

Same! emmaverybo May 2019 #9

Also if the evidence can get out there the pukes can't pretend that crimes were not committed. nt UniteFightBack May 2019 #4

True that! (n/t) FreepFryer May 2019 #5

Here are some citations to back up my OP. Feel free to provide dissenting sources, lets discuss! FreepFryer May 2019 #6

Here's US Law Justia making the same argument. FreepFryer May 2019 #7

Just a couple of questions Andy823 May 2019 #8

4 votes, no? davekriss May 2019 #10

This (nt) FreepFryer May 2019 #12

I didn't write that, it's from US Law Justia., but here's my take on your q's FreepFryer May 2019 #11

OK my bad Andy823 May 2019 #13

Lol. I'm a FreepFryer, not a soothsayer. Whatever the spread, buckle up for a wild ride! (n/t) FreepFryer May 2019 #15

Romney is counting on this malaise May 2019 #14

Wow that's an interesting comment! I hadn't even applied it to Mitt's posture. Thanks! (nt) FreepFryer May 2019 #16

Someone should ask him how he'd vote malaise May 2019 #18

He said he disagrees with Amash so I'm guessing that's a no. gldstwmn May 2019 #25

VERY interesting Vidal May 2019 #17

I don't think this is correct, although I'll have to do some research to be sure StarfishSaver May 2019 #19

Did you read the Senate Overview (6) and Us Law Justia articles (7), citing Archbald and Ritter? FreepFryer May 2019 #22

Yes, I did StarfishSaver May 2019 #28

Yes you are right! I found very simple language stating such. FreepFryer May 2019 #31

Exactly! StarfishSaver May 2019 #34

No worries and I have no problem w a heap of shit being tossed on my head - FreepFryer May 2019 #37

Respectfully, that is incorrect. GulfCoast66 May 2019 #20

Respectfully, you're completely wrong. Please cite your argument as I have (twice). FreepFryer May 2019 #21

You sighted senate overview which is not constitutional. GulfCoast66 May 2019 #26

You haven't shown a citation backing your opinion, I've shown two, one from the Senate itself FreepFryer May 2019 #27

You make my point... GulfCoast66 May 2019 #29

I do appreciate the collegiality - and you were on the right side of this one. this time! :) FreepFryer May 2019 #42

To this mid level manager... GulfCoast66 May 2019 #44

I don't think this works StarfishSaver May 2019 #23

Thx - Can you cite your last statement? And can you respond to the cited text re Archbald/Ritter? FreepFryer May 2019 #24

I don't have a cite at my fingertips at the moment StarfishSaver May 2019 #30

You are right, as I mentioned above a moment ago. FreepFryer May 2019 #33

Hold the phone... cynatnite May 2019 #32

Yes indeed. options r removal or removal and disqualification, not disqualification without removal. FreepFryer May 2019 #35

Which makes sense StarfishSaver May 2019 #39

Impeachment would happen at most inaugurations and we'd have only one-term presidents FreepFryer May 2019 #40

LOL - so true! StarfishSaver May 2019 #41

I don't know shite about this. But isn't impeachment separate from conviction? boston bean May 2019 #43

They'd have to vote to impeach and then again to convict. n/t cynatnite May 2019 #45

Yup! Vote to impeach by the House, vote to convict in Senate. Disqualification vote there possible, FreepFryer May 2019 #46

Sorry, but the legal term for this is "obvious drafting error" unblock May 2019 #36

I don't know about the question of the framers intent etc etc but yeah FreepFryer May 2019 #38

From senate . Gov - freepfryer is no constitutional law genius. FreepFryer May 2019 #47

Here's a more clear explanation/source and sorry, the o.p. is wrong: unblock May 2019 #48

This is really helpful. Thank you! I've been disavowed of this notion a few different ways now, FreepFryer May 2019 #49