Fire Up the Impeachment Proceedings...
Comments
-
Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution. Could it be more simple?PurpleThrobber said:
Educate them. Or just keep running the belly option to the fullback. Same old shit.CirrhosisDawg said:
You sound assured impeachment should be off the table but you have no clue what it means, what it implies or how it is rendered.SFGbob said:
El Monte is now throwing any shit he can come up with against the wall hoping something sticks in a desperate attempt to have people forget that he is dodging like a Kunt the initial question he was asked.CirrhosisDawg said:
You should provide Congress your legal guidance on impeachment standards. Sanctuary state laws too while you’re at it.SFGbob said:
Seriously, this is as bad as any Hondo level bullshit I've seen here. Why even bother? And it comes on the heels of his "it's not a transcript" Kunt act.CirrhosisDawg said:
“An opinion on legal grounds for impeachment?”PurpleThrobber said:I’ll rephrase for typhus boy.
Give us your opinion on the legal grounds for impeachment based on the words written on a piece of paper detailing the conversation between Trump and the president of the Ukraine.
Most normal English speaking people would call that a transcript but you don’t seem to want to answer that question.
Or are we going to play the ‘depends on what your definition of the word is is’ game?
You don’t know what impeachment means nor what a transcript is. Start there. -
Expand on that. How is the contents of the transcript evidence of violation of the constitution and US law?CirrhosisDawg said:
Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution. Could it be more simple?PurpleThrobber said:
Educate them. Or just keep running the belly option to the fullback. Same old shit.CirrhosisDawg said:
You sound assured impeachment should be off the table but you have no clue what it means, what it implies or how it is rendered.SFGbob said:
El Monte is now throwing any shit he can come up with against the wall hoping something sticks in a desperate attempt to have people forget that he is dodging like a Kunt the initial question he was asked.CirrhosisDawg said:
You should provide Congress your legal guidance on impeachment standards. Sanctuary state laws too while you’re at it.SFGbob said:
Seriously, this is as bad as any Hondo level bullshit I've seen here. Why even bother? And it comes on the heels of his "it's not a transcript" Kunt act.CirrhosisDawg said:
“An opinion on legal grounds for impeachment?”PurpleThrobber said:I’ll rephrase for typhus boy.
Give us your opinion on the legal grounds for impeachment based on the words written on a piece of paper detailing the conversation between Trump and the president of the Ukraine.
Most normal English speaking people would call that a transcript but you don’t seem to want to answer that question.
Or are we going to play the ‘depends on what your definition of the word is is’ game?
You don’t know what impeachment means nor what a transcript is. Start there.
-
So you didn’t read article 2 section 4 of the constitution or you don’t understand it?PurpleThrobber said:
Expand on that. How is the contents of the transcript evidence of violation of the constitution and US law?CirrhosisDawg said:
Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution. Could it be more simple?PurpleThrobber said:
Educate them. Or just keep running the belly option to the fullback. Same old shit.CirrhosisDawg said:
You sound assured impeachment should be off the table but you have no clue what it means, what it implies or how it is rendered.SFGbob said:
El Monte is now throwing any shit he can come up with against the wall hoping something sticks in a desperate attempt to have people forget that he is dodging like a Kunt the initial question he was asked.CirrhosisDawg said:
You should provide Congress your legal guidance on impeachment standards. Sanctuary state laws too while you’re at it.SFGbob said:
Seriously, this is as bad as any Hondo level bullshit I've seen here. Why even bother? And it comes on the heels of his "it's not a transcript" Kunt act.CirrhosisDawg said:
“An opinion on legal grounds for impeachment?”PurpleThrobber said:I’ll rephrase for typhus boy.
Give us your opinion on the legal grounds for impeachment based on the words written on a piece of paper detailing the conversation between Trump and the president of the Ukraine.
Most normal English speaking people would call that a transcript but you don’t seem to want to answer that question.
Or are we going to play the ‘depends on what your definition of the word is is’ game?
You don’t know what impeachment means nor what a transcript is. Start there. -
-
-
L O L
-
Fuck. Go for it. Educate me. You have a wide open field to showcase your critical thinking skills.CirrhosisDawg said:
So you didn’t read article 2 section 4 of the constitution or you don’t understand it?PurpleThrobber said:
Expand on that. How is the contents of the transcript evidence of violation of the constitution and US law?CirrhosisDawg said:
Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution. Could it be more simple?PurpleThrobber said:
Educate them. Or just keep running the belly option to the fullback. Same old shit.CirrhosisDawg said:
You sound assured impeachment should be off the table but you have no clue what it means, what it implies or how it is rendered.SFGbob said:
El Monte is now throwing any shit he can come up with against the wall hoping something sticks in a desperate attempt to have people forget that he is dodging like a Kunt the initial question he was asked.CirrhosisDawg said:
You should provide Congress your legal guidance on impeachment standards. Sanctuary state laws too while you’re at it.SFGbob said:
Seriously, this is as bad as any Hondo level bullshit I've seen here. Why even bother? And it comes on the heels of his "it's not a transcript" Kunt act.CirrhosisDawg said:
“An opinion on legal grounds for impeachment?”PurpleThrobber said:I’ll rephrase for typhus boy.
Give us your opinion on the legal grounds for impeachment based on the words written on a piece of paper detailing the conversation between Trump and the president of the Ukraine.
Most normal English speaking people would call that a transcript but you don’t seem to want to answer that question.
Or are we going to play the ‘depends on what your definition of the word is is’ game?
You don’t know what impeachment means nor what a transcript is. Start there.
Or isn’t that included in the central party talking points?
Cmon. Do it. Show us that El Monte magic. Build the case. -
Embarrassing.CuntWaffle said:L O L
-
I’ll be more specific. What high crimes, misdemeanor or treasonous activity did the POTUS commit and what evidence is there of that?
You keep referencing the consequence but, you see, in these United States one must be convicted. And in order for one to be convicted, one must be found guilty based on the evidence of said crimes.
What are the crimes and what is the evidence?
Build the case. -
Biggest CDawg meltdown yet
