Justice Roberts: Hell No! I Won't Go! To The Senate Impeachment "Trial"

For me, Q is a letter of the alphabet. For you, it must be a figment of your imagination.

 

Nope, not gonna do your research for you.

 

A lot more than the very small fraction of a percent that occurs. See #266.

 

I wish it was, republicans are now putting Q in positions of power

 

No it is not. Just like the Dems would not vote to impeach Clinton

All of the impeachment trials in our lifetime were just a waste of time. It is just a partisan exercise on both sides and you have a mafia-esque boss that most Republicans will not cross.

Trump's lies, tweets, speeches for 2+ months incited the riot. What he said on 1/6 did not specifically cause it, the flame was already lit. If the case is just based on what he said 1/6 only, he should be acquitted. However that won't change that Trump caused the issue

 

Sigh . . .

Firstly, you keep using the term "fake news" like you're trying really hard to convince yourself.

Secondly, fine ... using Georgia as an example:

Total votes cast for president: 4,999,960

Using the percentage of voter fraud from the previous two elections, which is 0.0025%, fraud attempts would amount to about 125 votes. I'll spot you four times that and give you 500 possibly fraudulent votes in 2020. Not enough to change the results. If you want the same info for other states, do it yourself.

Again, for the third and last time, I can't respond to a vaguely worded and grammatically incorrect question without some context.

This is not me dodging, it's you refusing to pony up the context for your challenge.

Tell me what the Democrats are doing to prevent election security and perhaps I can venture an opinion, but unliie many, I don't form my opinions in a snap. I would research this myself if I gave a crap, or if I wanted to make a claim or point of it, but that's you in this case, not me. You're making a claim, and instead of providing corroborating facts, you seem to expect me to do so in some vague way that will make you feel like you've scored some sort of point. Sorry, I'm not playing by your rules, I prefer the regular old style debate rules where the burden of proof is on the one making the claim.

Once again, I will not do your homework. You claim that the Dems are preventing election security and/or creating opportunity for fraud. Show me the proof, give me the facts.

And btw, saying "we all know" is what people do when they have no facts.

 

Biden tore up the constitution... so justice Roberts may not be required for impeachment, they'll do it anyway

 

How much 10%? How much would it have taken in the Bush/Gore election? MASSIVE? How about in Virginia 2016 for control of the statehouse? Massive? How about all the state and local elections that are decided by fractions of a percent? Al Franken and Norm Coleman? Bob Dornan in California. The idea that it has to be massive is a leftwing canard.

 

Yes it is.

Clinton was stripped of law license in Arkansas and lost his privilege to practice before the Supreme Court, though he was exonerated of any Impeachable offenses. No sanctions like that will be applied to Trump because he committed no offenses, either civil or criminal and he can't be removed from office because he doesn't hold office.

Yup.

Fake News. He has a right to his opinion, he is free to voice his opinion, the idea that constitutionally protected speech is a crime is some sick notion that the Left had adopted that is going to make them look really stupid when Trump is wholly exonerated for a third time in just 12 months.

No he didn't. Democrats lying about whether they were counting so they could trick GOP observers into leaving, and then hauling out boxes of votes from under tables that were almost exclusively Biden votes, folks other than the Legislatures changing election to ensure that fraud could take place undetected and other Democrats covering windows of vote counting centers caused the problem.

When you pull crap like that you are asking for controversy and you most certainly cannot claim that the results produced require assent.

The Dems caused this, and it's time they quit blaming others and work with the Republicans to ensure that the next election results are worthy of trust.

 

No. Your claim is Fake News. We vote within States and Districts.

So, if an election is decided by a 998 votes, 997 fraudulent votes are fine, but 999 is unacceptable? And if the fraud level is "acceptable", then no need to work to eliminate fraud, even though we don't know what the "acceptable" number of fraudulent votes are until AFTER we count the votes? I think you would have to be a Democrat for that to make sense to you, because it makes no sense at all. Every illegal vote steals and legal vote. There is no acceptable level of fraud in elections. If you want the same info for other states, do it yourself.

They are do nothing to improve election security and they fight every measure.

Name one thing Democrats support that would make vote fraud harder to accomplish and easier to detect. Just one thing. We'll wait.

 

Oh ffs. Get a grip.

There. Was. No. Massive. Voter. Fraud. Period.

 

Now you're just harrassing me. Please stop.

 

They can't ever accept that. The Trump worship requires you to believe all of the lies, otherwise, it all comes crumbling down

 

What 10% do you mean? There wasn't a single state reporting fraud any higher than a tiny fraction of one percent, ffs.

Biden won. Trump lost. What's it gonna take for you guys to concede? The rest of us had to suck it up and deal with it for four years. Your turn.

 

Explain to me what Q is, since you seem to be the one obsessed with it.

 

You know exactly what I am talking about, how much fraud is ok? 5%? 1%? The issue is not whether Biden won or lost, I have clearly stipulated Biden won and is President. Understand? Got it? No need to keep repeating it. I asked you how much voter fraud is OK in an election, any election. You know the votes in each state for the Electoral College electors is NOT the ONLY election that ever takes place.

 

How much does it take the change the outcome of an election? Only "massive" fraud which you have yet to say what percent would be massive. How about .009%? Would you call that massive?

 

No fraud is okay, and those who attempt it should go to jail.

No election in the history of humanity has ever been completely, 100% secure. That's a ridiculous benchmark. There is always some fraud. There will always be some fraud. But throughout our country's history, the fraud has been minimal, a tiny fraction of votes, rarely enough to sway an election.

I am DONE with you on this issue. Please stop the harrassment. Thank you.

 

PLEASE STOP HARRASSING ME ON THIS ISSUE.

Thanks very much in advance.

 

^^^^^
Sleep Monster's concession of the point.

 

There have been rumblings that Roberts would bow out before the Senate trial, which would make way for Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., to preside. A Senate source told Fox News that the president pro tempore of the body presides in cases when the impeached individual is no longer president of the U.S.

Schumer told MSNBC that the decision was up to Roberts.


"The Constitution says the chief justice presides for a sitting president. So it was up to John Roberts whether he wanted to preside with a president who is no longer sitting, Trump, and he doesn't want to do it," Schumer said.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ro...-over-trumps-second-impeachment-trial-schumer



There is no statement given by Roberts.
The OP title is a lie.
I don't see a quote of Roberts anywhere in the OP. Link to the OP titles words?

 

That was my take as well. They knew full well that he had committed no crime, so wanted the "trial" in a forum not filtered by a probable cause finding (or lack of it).

Now they are pushing another idea: Convict Donald Trump For Violating 18 U.S.C. § 2383 Disqualifying Him From Serving As President.