Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Trump Acquitted.
Comments
-
Nailed it. Hilarious that either side thinks they won here.HuskyJW said:This is one big fucking loser thread
Both sides -
Your side lost. Pretty simple, really.Duckwithabone said:
Nailed it. Hilarious that either side thinks they won here.HuskyJW said:This is one big fucking loser thread
Both sides -
-
They won’t be able to doctor evidence in any criminal proceeding. And the simple fact is that the Court was already being stormed before Trump was done speaking Jan 6th.NorthwestFresh said:
The Left has a fantasy about criminally indicting Trump for “insurrection” but that would require discovery along with Pelosi’s and Bowser’s official communications, along with the media who were in the Capitol during the “riot” like the NYT reporter being subpoenaed.Kaepsknee said:The Real crime here is the House leadership pushing through a 2nd impeachment when they knew there wasn’t a chance in Hell of the Senate convicting.
The first time was when the Pandemic was getting their guys in there and no attention from Congress was given.
This time it was for a not my President. The guy that left office a month ago. Meanwhile Biden’s main campaign promise of sending Cheques as soon as possible rings empty.
And come next Thursday, Trump won’t get the clicks and eyeballs that any tweet or news story about him received today. And within 2 weeks the Media Cabal will be looking for fresh meat. And that will be ol Joe.
Trump fades away to help primary RINOs unless New York’s AG goes after him. Which opens a whole can of worms for Cuomo. -
You lost, again. Take the L and STFU.HHusky said:
acquittedPurpleThrobber said:
Please to be posting a copy of your law degree -it's quite clear you have no fucking clue on the US Constitution.HHusky said:"clears"
funny
Article I § 2 of the United States Constitution gives the House of Representatives the sole power to impeach (make formal charges against) and Article I § 3 gives the Senate the sole power to try impeachments. The Senate would then debate the matter, and vote, each individual Senator voting whether to convict the President and remove him from office, or against conviction. If more than two-thirds of the Senators present vote to convict, the President would be removed from office. Thus a Senator who abstained from voting but was present would in effect be voting against conviction. (Article I § 3).
It's over - your overlords didn't have the votes.
Like we say, fuck off.
The Founding Fathers win again.
not cleared of inciting the Capitol riot
words have meaning -
Swalwell needs more tim to get his own photoshopped tweets in thereTurdBomber said:
You lost, again. Take the L and STFU.HHusky said:
acquittedPurpleThrobber said:
Please to be posting a copy of your law degree -it's quite clear you have no fucking clue on the US Constitution.HHusky said:"clears"
funny
Article I § 2 of the United States Constitution gives the House of Representatives the sole power to impeach (make formal charges against) and Article I § 3 gives the Senate the sole power to try impeachments. The Senate would then debate the matter, and vote, each individual Senator voting whether to convict the President and remove him from office, or against conviction. If more than two-thirds of the Senators present vote to convict, the President would be removed from office. Thus a Senator who abstained from voting but was present would in effect be voting against conviction. (Article I § 3).
It's over - your overlords didn't have the votes.
Like we say, fuck off.
The Founding Fathers win again.
not cleared of inciting the Capitol riot
words have meaning -
Fang Fang approved, of course.....LoneStarDawg said:
Swalwell needs more tim to get his own photoshopped tweets in thereTurdBomber said:
You lost, again. Take the L and STFU.HHusky said:
acquittedPurpleThrobber said:
Please to be posting a copy of your law degree -it's quite clear you have no fucking clue on the US Constitution.HHusky said:"clears"
funny
Article I § 2 of the United States Constitution gives the House of Representatives the sole power to impeach (make formal charges against) and Article I § 3 gives the Senate the sole power to try impeachments. The Senate would then debate the matter, and vote, each individual Senator voting whether to convict the President and remove him from office, or against conviction. If more than two-thirds of the Senators present vote to convict, the President would be removed from office. Thus a Senator who abstained from voting but was present would in effect be voting against conviction. (Article I § 3).
It's over - your overlords didn't have the votes.
Like we say, fuck off.
The Founding Fathers win again.
not cleared of inciting the Capitol riot
words have meaning -
Ah the “punting is winning” mindset. Makes sense on a full blown doog board.doogie said:
Your side lost. Pretty simple, really.Duckwithabone said:
Nailed it. Hilarious that either side thinks they won here.HuskyJW said:This is one big fucking loser thread
Both sides -
-
There are many fine zip ties.....
