Dave's been redpilling people for a while now. How many people have you redpilled? How much hope have you given to people struggling like he has. Or... Do you just complain about the work other people are doing while doing nothing yourself?
"Article 1 section 3 says 'Judgements in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office, and disqualification to hold any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States'"
It sounds like you are trying to convince us of something we don't believe. He was "impeached" by a House who committed treason by their own most likely stolen elections and then their complicity in the Presidential election.
They "impeached" him without due process and on complete fabrication of lies.
So you are here trying to turn Patriots against Patriots because we don't believe or support the lies and political theater of the fake House & Senate "impeachment".
They are criminals and their days are numbered
while i do think you are trying to just poke the hornets nest here, you are correct about the whole "obama can be impeached too" thing due to "precedent".
heres the deal:
i think everyone will agree that trump was not given due process and that this whole impeachment thing was rushed by the democrats for political reasons.
trump was impeached while still in office, however, Article 1 section 3 says 'Judgements in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office, and disqualification to hold any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States'". so it shouldve died on the vine january 20th.
dave puts on a thoughtful show, and i enjoy x22 report, but it is my honest opinion that this particular thing dave said is actually inaccurate, and he is misinformed. i dont think it is deliberate though.
two things can be true at the same time. lets be civil and discuss this rationally. we cannot let emotion cloud our judgement, sound mind and pragmatic thinking will prevail.
Why does impeachment of Obama give us hope? He needs to be tried for treason and hung or Gitmo for life. I could care less about an impeachment. He is only saying they could be opening a door for other ex Pres.
Again it's like you are trying to argue the case for the Dems and trying to convince us the fake impeachment was real. They are treasonous criminals trying to impeach a President in our out of office
Bullshit,today was opening arguments and vote to proceed with impeachment.
Fuck me that idiot al green introduced articles of impeachment every second day for thevlast four years,under your deduction President Trump has been constantly under impeachment.
Pray tell me is it Ben Sasse's or Benjamin or ben dover and take it?
Maybe its more about exposure, the very exposure that creates an environment that we are even openly discussing the nuances of impeaching private citizens,ex Presidents,ex senators etc. Delicious.
Just trying to help... the precedent arises when these idiots ignore the purpose of impeachment being to "remove from office". And pretend that it has another valid function as a political weapon.
You're right about the technicality. the Dens rushed an article thru before he left office. To proceed with this sham establishes as precedent that impeachment can be used to attack or punish a political enemy after they leave office.
How long do you give them before they make up an excuse to ignore the impeachment deadline?
The house doesn't impeach. Impeach = convict. That's the job of the senate. The house charges. Charging = indictment. So the house indicted Trump while he was POTUS. However, the constitution says the Senate can impeach a sitting member of a federal government office. So, technically, former office holders cannot be impeached because the sole purpose is to remove someone from public office and prevents them from holding public office in the future.
You are not correct in your understanding here of the terms fren. Impeachment (indictment) happens in the house, and the trial of the charges from the Impeachment occurs in the senate. I am a retired History and Government teacher, I do know the process well.
You are starting to sound like the leftists who said Sidney Pow had typos on her legal docs. Ben Sasse is a con. I could care less about the correct pronounciation of his name.
Sorry miss the impeachment papers weren't finished till after his presidency is over. You are worried about mispronouncing someone's name you must be a tranny shill who constantly gets upset when you are called "he."
Don’t like him, don’t watch him. Btw ACLJ disagree with you. They point out the argument by the house managers, that there is no “January exemption”. Based upon their argument, impeachment is possible for acts committed on the last day in office. Further, they argue that removal and barring from future office are separate and independent, openly be door to impeachment after leaving office.
I think your exuberance is not based upon anything more than a difference in opinion
X22 content is about a hundred fold better than this b-string shill post.
Your opinion is moot. Have a snickers, bud.
Oh. I thought you were going to complain about something actually important.
(I stand corrected.)
They all can't be as perfect as Chris Cuomo, eh?
Dave's been redpilling people for a while now. How many people have you redpilled? How much hope have you given to people struggling like he has. Or... Do you just complain about the work other people are doing while doing nothing yourself?
Was there anything to Ms. Khait’s story, or was it all fluff?
Meh... weak effort.
The articles of impeachment were delivered to the Senate after the 20th of January. YOU are WRONG. Get your facts straight!
House voted to send the the impeachment to senate to try. THUS he IS NOT impeached.
This is the trial to see if he will be forealzies impeached.
Wrong
You must be fun to be around.
How do you really feel about him though
Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz disagrees with you.
LoL. That's rich.
I turned off community styling just to down-vote this.
Impeachment is to remove a SITTING president. Your counter NARRATIVE is moot
He was denied due process. No hearings, sham impeachment. Next moot point?
He’s a private citizen now. There is no retroactive prosecution. Next moot point?
"Article 1 section 3 says 'Judgements in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office, and disqualification to hold any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States'"
Wrong Felicia ! no due process Another railroaded bull shite false narrative.
Your shilly ego and narrative needs to take nap
AI generated voice.
Guys, guys, guys ... you’re all beautiful. Now stop arguing and pass the collagen.
I don't think I'd call him an ignorant fraud. There's a lot of information that all of us are digesting. We've all made a few mistakes here and there.
We must be close to the end. Shills are out IN FORCE today.
Nah, I don't watch X22.
The mispronouncing of someone's name is enough to have you write someone like X22 off? Jeeebus, how far we have fallen
It sounds like you are trying to convince us of something we don't believe. He was "impeached" by a House who committed treason by their own most likely stolen elections and then their complicity in the Presidential election. They "impeached" him without due process and on complete fabrication of lies. So you are here trying to turn Patriots against Patriots because we don't believe or support the lies and political theater of the fake House & Senate "impeachment". They are criminals and their days are numbered
while i do think you are trying to just poke the hornets nest here, you are correct about the whole "obama can be impeached too" thing due to "precedent".
heres the deal:
i think everyone will agree that trump was not given due process and that this whole impeachment thing was rushed by the democrats for political reasons.
trump was impeached while still in office, however, Article 1 section 3 says 'Judgements in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office, and disqualification to hold any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States'". so it shouldve died on the vine january 20th.
dave puts on a thoughtful show, and i enjoy x22 report, but it is my honest opinion that this particular thing dave said is actually inaccurate, and he is misinformed. i dont think it is deliberate though.
two things can be true at the same time. lets be civil and discuss this rationally. we cannot let emotion cloud our judgement, sound mind and pragmatic thinking will prevail.
Why does impeachment of Obama give us hope? He needs to be tried for treason and hung or Gitmo for life. I could care less about an impeachment. He is only saying they could be opening a door for other ex Pres. Again it's like you are trying to argue the case for the Dems and trying to convince us the fake impeachment was real. They are treasonous criminals trying to impeach a President in our out of office
Over the target, methinks?
Can you give me back my time, please.
Dude, just reclaim it.
/me Nadler's.
I like him.
Most, if not all of these people are frauds.
Let’s talk about your health
LMAO. Gotta pay the bills.
I swear to God, this comment deserves to have more upvotes than it does...
Lol
OoooooMeh hah!!
Bullshit,today was opening arguments and vote to proceed with impeachment. Fuck me that idiot al green introduced articles of impeachment every second day for thevlast four years,under your deduction President Trump has been constantly under impeachment. Pray tell me is it Ben Sasse's or Benjamin or ben dover and take it?
Maybe its more about exposure, the very exposure that creates an environment that we are even openly discussing the nuances of impeaching private citizens,ex Presidents,ex senators etc. Delicious.
Just trying to help... the precedent arises when these idiots ignore the purpose of impeachment being to "remove from office". And pretend that it has another valid function as a political weapon.
You're right about the technicality. the Dens rushed an article thru before he left office. To proceed with this sham establishes as precedent that impeachment can be used to attack or punish a political enemy after they leave office.
How long do you give them before they make up an excuse to ignore the impeachment deadline?
Hoiiiiiiiiii and welcome to the x22 report
Dick, much? Chill... He's doing more good work than many of us combined, especially you Mr Critical.
The house doesn't impeach. Impeach = convict. That's the job of the senate. The house charges. Charging = indictment. So the house indicted Trump while he was POTUS. However, the constitution says the Senate can impeach a sitting member of a federal government office. So, technically, former office holders cannot be impeached because the sole purpose is to remove someone from public office and prevents them from holding public office in the future.
You are not correct in your understanding here of the terms fren. Impeachment (indictment) happens in the house, and the trial of the charges from the Impeachment occurs in the senate. I am a retired History and Government teacher, I do know the process well.
youre incorrect man. you need to brush up on polysci before trying to take people to school.
house brings impeachment charges. senate convicts if there is a 2/3 vote.
You are starting to sound like the leftists who said Sidney Pow had typos on her legal docs. Ben Sasse is a con. I could care less about the correct pronounciation of his name.
hey p8riot we like x22report on here and it is a trial for the impeachment of Trump, that is why it is called an Impeachment Trial.
Sorry miss the impeachment papers weren't finished till after his presidency is over. You are worried about mispronouncing someone's name you must be a tranny shill who constantly gets upset when you are called "he."
You mad bro?
I have mispronounced Michelle Remples name. I watch politics. Lol.
You're mistaken.
I'm not a daily podcaster? Do you watch my show? Lol
Taodully redonkulus!
This sounds like that clown in america hack alex jones would say...
The god damn globalists were arguing this point today! They reference a case where a guy was impeached two years after he left office.
Don’t like him, don’t watch him. Btw ACLJ disagree with you. They point out the argument by the house managers, that there is no “January exemption”. Based upon their argument, impeachment is possible for acts committed on the last day in office. Further, they argue that removal and barring from future office are separate and independent, openly be door to impeachment after leaving office.
I think your exuberance is not based upon anything more than a difference in opinion