Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

He endangered national security

13»

Comments

  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390

    SFGbob said:

    If ever you want complete immunity from unethical and or criminal activity just become a political opponent of the President and then no one can investigate you.

    If you ever want complete immunity from unethical and or criminal activity just become President and then no one can indict you.
    So Nadler can't do whatever he wants?
    He can impeach. And then the Manhattan DA can indict. Does that work for you?
    Well lets get those articles of impeachment out and call for a vote

    What the fuck are you waiting for? This is SERIOUS
    You don’t think they’re coming?
    Gosh I hope so. All I hear now is hot air. When is the full House vote to get this started? Why do we have to wait? Trump is guilty, lets roll
    A House vote is required for an impeachment inquiry? I’m sure you can cite that and are not regurgitating trump trash bullshit.

    Here’s your Destiny: it’s rolling baby, it’s rolling!
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 107,730 Founders Club

    SFGbob said:

    If ever you want complete immunity from unethical and or criminal activity just become a political opponent of the President and then no one can investigate you.

    If you ever want complete immunity from unethical and or criminal activity just become President and then no one can indict you.
    So Nadler can't do whatever he wants?
    He can impeach. And then the Manhattan DA can indict. Does that work for you?
    Well lets get those articles of impeachment out and call for a vote

    What the fuck are you waiting for? This is SERIOUS
    You don’t think they’re coming?
    Gosh I hope so. All I hear now is hot air. When is the full House vote to get this started? Why do we have to wait? Trump is guilty, lets roll
    A House vote is required for an impeachment inquiry? I’m sure you can cite that and are not regurgitating trump trash bullshit.

    Here’s your Destiny: it’s rolling baby, it’s rolling!
    So where are the Articles? What the fuck is the delay? This is SERIOUS

    Every other Impeachment began with a full House vote. Is it Law? No. Is it revealing that Pelosi won't do it? Yes

    Do something other than bang you gums together spouting bullshit

    TIA
  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390

    SFGbob said:

    If ever you want complete immunity from unethical and or criminal activity just become a political opponent of the President and then no one can investigate you.

    If you ever want complete immunity from unethical and or criminal activity just become President and then no one can indict you.
    So Nadler can't do whatever he wants?
    He can impeach. And then the Manhattan DA can indict. Does that work for you?
    Well lets get those articles of impeachment out and call for a vote

    What the fuck are you waiting for? This is SERIOUS
    You don’t think they’re coming?
    Gosh I hope so. All I hear now is hot air. When is the full House vote to get this started? Why do we have to wait? Trump is guilty, lets roll
    A House vote is required for an impeachment inquiry? I’m sure you can cite that and are not regurgitating trump trash bullshit.

    Here’s your Destiny: it’s rolling baby, it’s rolling!
    So where are the Articles? What the fuck is the delay? This is SERIOUS

    Every other Impeachment began with a full House vote. Is it Law? No. Is it revealing that Pelosi won't do it? Yes

    Do something other than bang you gums together spouting bullshit

    TIA
    Every other impeachment began with a full house vote? Lou Dobbs tell you that?
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 107,730 Founders Club

    SFGbob said:

    If ever you want complete immunity from unethical and or criminal activity just become a political opponent of the President and then no one can investigate you.

    If you ever want complete immunity from unethical and or criminal activity just become President and then no one can indict you.
    So Nadler can't do whatever he wants?
    He can impeach. And then the Manhattan DA can indict. Does that work for you?
    Well lets get those articles of impeachment out and call for a vote

    What the fuck are you waiting for? This is SERIOUS
    You don’t think they’re coming?
    Gosh I hope so. All I hear now is hot air. When is the full House vote to get this started? Why do we have to wait? Trump is guilty, lets roll
    A House vote is required for an impeachment inquiry? I’m sure you can cite that and are not regurgitating trump trash bullshit.

    Here’s your Destiny: it’s rolling baby, it’s rolling!
    So where are the Articles? What the fuck is the delay? This is SERIOUS

    Every other Impeachment began with a full House vote. Is it Law? No. Is it revealing that Pelosi won't do it? Yes

    Do something other than bang you gums together spouting bullshit

    TIA
    Every other impeachment began with a full house vote? Lou Dobbs tell you that?
    Might want to reconsider before the 15 minute edit window shuts
  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390

    SFGbob said:

    If ever you want complete immunity from unethical and or criminal activity just become a political opponent of the President and then no one can investigate you.

    If you ever want complete immunity from unethical and or criminal activity just become President and then no one can indict you.
    So Nadler can't do whatever he wants?
    He can impeach. And then the Manhattan DA can indict. Does that work for you?
    Well lets get those articles of impeachment out and call for a vote

    What the fuck are you waiting for? This is SERIOUS
    You don’t think they’re coming?
    Gosh I hope so. All I hear now is hot air. When is the full House vote to get this started? Why do we have to wait? Trump is guilty, lets roll
    A House vote is required for an impeachment inquiry? I’m sure you can cite that and are not regurgitating trump trash bullshit.

    Here’s your Destiny: it’s rolling baby, it’s rolling!
    So where are the Articles? What the fuck is the delay? This is SERIOUS

    Every other Impeachment began with a full House vote. Is it Law? No. Is it revealing that Pelosi won't do it? Yes

    Do something other than bang you gums together spouting bullshit

    TIA
    Every other impeachment began with a full house vote? Lou Dobbs tell you that?
    Might want to reconsider before the 15 minute edit window shuts
    Every other impeachment began with a full house vote? Lou Dobbs tell you that?
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 107,730 Founders Club
    edited October 2019
    Pay attention - I did say that but I was wrong. Only the Nixon and Clinton ones. Not Johnson. At any rate when do we start the hearings.

    I said it wasn't law and it isn't. It is precedent since 40 plus years ago.

    This has been the subject of much dispute. The House voted to open an inquiry into Nixon and Clinton, but when the House impeached President Andrew Johnson in 1868, it did not.

    Pelosi has indicated she doesn’t see such a vote as being necessary. Republicans meanwhile are using the lack of a vote to argue the inquiry isn’t legitimate.

    Just because the House voted to open an inquiry in the past doesn’t mean it must always do so, Brookings Fellow Margaret L. Taylor said.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    Pay attention - I did say that but I was wrong. Only the Nixon and Clinton ones. Not Johnson. At any rate when do we start the hearings.

    I said it wasn't law and it isn't. It is precedent since 40 plus years ago.

    This has been the subject of much dispute. The House voted to open an inquiry into Nixon and Clinton, but when the House impeached President Andrew Johnson in 1868, it did not.

    Pelosi has indicated she doesn’t see such a vote as being necessary. Republicans meanwhile are using the lack of a vote to argue the inquiry isn’t legitimate.

    Just because the House voted to open an inquiry in the past doesn’t mean it must always do so, Brookings Fellow Margaret L. Taylor said.

    Same with the president releasing their tax returns.
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 107,730 Founders Club
    2001400ex said:

    Pay attention - I did say that but I was wrong. Only the Nixon and Clinton ones. Not Johnson. At any rate when do we start the hearings.

    I said it wasn't law and it isn't. It is precedent since 40 plus years ago.

    This has been the subject of much dispute. The House voted to open an inquiry into Nixon and Clinton, but when the House impeached President Andrew Johnson in 1868, it did not.

    Pelosi has indicated she doesn’t see such a vote as being necessary. Republicans meanwhile are using the lack of a vote to argue the inquiry isn’t legitimate.

    Just because the House voted to open an inquiry in the past doesn’t mean it must always do so, Brookings Fellow Margaret L. Taylor said.

    Same with the president releasing their tax returns.
    Gee thanks for nothing as usual
Sign In or Register to comment.