Trumps impeachment is not official!!!!

[Unique_Carpenter]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Pelosi can balk the impeachment until then?
Would you please provide a link? Is this based on an opinion? Or rules?

I'd have to look it up.
But yes, all un-acted resolutions expire at the end of each "Congress" (the two year period), the current one expires at the December 2020 recess.
Straight out of a poly-sci course a zillion years ago.
I'm of the opinion that this stuff should actually be taught extensively in high school.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by Unique_Carpenter

I'd have to look it up.
But yes, all un-acted resolutions expire at the end of each "Congress" (the two year period), the current one expires at the December 2020 recess.
Straight out of a poly-sci course a zillion years ago.
I'm of the opinion that this stuff should actually be taught extensively in high school.

resolutions and bills.


yeah, you're right. they expire at the end of each congressional session. its not carried over unless they made arrangement for it to be re-filed in the next session ahead of time.

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by Unique_Carpenter

I'd have to look it up.
But yes, all un-acted resolutions expire at the end of each "Congress" (the two year period), the current one expires at the December 2020 recess.
Straight out of a poly-sci course a zillion years ago.
I'm of the opinion that this stuff should actually be taught extensively in high school.

I don't think it will be held until then. The State of the Union address will factor in heavily. I am of the opinion the Senate will agree to hear the case to remove before February.

I totally agree with the teaching statement. Have good Social Studies in middle or junior high. Then a four-year option in straight up Government in High School. Like an elective - a second language, a sport or whatever shop. Not mandatory.

If you can actually get a degree in Political Science, then an extensive precursor course before higher learning is a great opportunity. One would think it could help if you want to study the law. Makes sense, right?

[theonean]

Yeah we need more lawyers good idea...

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by theonean

Yeah we need more lawyers good idea...

No, just more citizens who know the law. Can someone call themselves a lawyer if they only have a degree in law? Or do they have to pass the bar to be a lawyer?

[Munchmasterman]

Looks like you don't understand why those 31 dems were elected. What has trump done since the midterms that would cause them to change their votes?
Other than being impeached?
Nope. Sounds like voters changed their votes based on some issues the trumpys have dismissed as non-important. And trump is starting to fall apart.

Although trump has received that crucial endorsment that Russia had nothing to do with the 2016 election. You know, from Putin.

Originally Posted by 00 gauge

Every network and major newspapers might be reporting Trump's re-election next year, too ..... the impeachment vote just piss off enough of middle America to make that happen ..... and as I stated in another thread, those 31 Democrats who voted to impeach Trump - you know, those 31 who represent a district that Trump carried in 2016 - well they might consider polishing up their resumes ..... if the voters in those districts react the way I think they will, that Democratic lead in the House could take a major hit in 2020 ..... but hell yeah, forget all that ..... Trump was impeached !!! .....

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

No, just more citizens who know the law. Can someone call themselves a lawyer if they only have a degree in law? Or do they have to pass the bar to be a lawyer?

you should know this. to know the law you need a JD from Law school. to practice Law you need to pass the bar exam. my Dad had a JD from UofL Law school, but he never took the bar exam as he never intended to be a lawyer. he wanted the JD to know corporate and commercial law for business.


by the way, Law school like Med school does not make you a specialist in any specific area of Law or Medicine. you graduate with a knowledge of all areas or Law or Medicine then you choose your area of focus. in Medicine in do your residency in the area of Medicine you choose to practice, in the Law it's the same you join a Law firm in the specialty you want and work under an established lawyer doing their case research to learn that area in depth then become an associate lawyer in that area.


there is one "short cut" available to lawyers not available to Doctors. a lawyer can pass the bar and open a private practice in whatever area they choose, a Doctor must complete a residency before becoming a full fledged licensed medical professional in any state they reside.

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

you should know this. to know the law you need a JD from Law school. to practice Law you need to pass the bar exam. my Dad had a JD from UofL Law school, but he never took the bar exam as he never intended to be a lawyer. he wanted the JD to know corporate and commercial law for business.


by the way, Law school like Med school does not make you a specialist in any specific area of Law or Medicine. you graduate with a knowledge of all areas or Law or Medicine then you choose your area of focus. in Medicine in do your residency in the area of Medicine you choose to practice, in the Law it's the same you join a Law firm in the specialty you want and work under an established lawyer doing their case research to learn that area in depth then become an associate lawyer in that area.


there is one "short cut" available to lawyers not available to Doctors. a lawyer can pass the bar and open a private practice in whatever area they choose, a Doctor must complete a residency before becoming a full fledged licensed medical professional in any state they reside.

Who the FUCK says you need to go to school at ALL to know the law. You? Shiiiit.

Are jailhouse lawyers beneficial or bad for the system?

http://www.abajournal.com/news/artic...for-the-system

During the jailhouse lawyer’s initial argument with the prosecutor, she quips that, “I know the judge feels you’re qualified to handle this case, but a murder trial is a lot different than writing writs or juggling bogus appeals for your other pals in prison.” His reply? “I’ve set in my cell and read law books 18 hours a day for the past 11 years. I may not be a lawyer, but I plan to win this case.”

Care to take a stab at wether impeachment . . .

. . . is a Judicial or Legislative matter?

[oeb11]

Well - 9500- 'triggered" again!

TWK is correct, and your frenchie YSL is just that - an authority on nothing except lapel size.

9500 is moe than welcome to engage an attorney who never went to an accredited law school ( here in the US), and pay that 'lawyer'' lots and lots of money for "Services rendered"!.

9500 will deserve the opinion he /she gets.

Or, go to Mexico for medical care - Steve McQueen, and many other have done so, and died there.

With Bernie and Lizzie's Medicare for All rationing plan - it might be the best care available in North and Central America someday. But. to one beholden to DPST fantasies, you are welcome to go try your luck.



Now - go play at nukes with Swalwell.


And take your YSL with you to keep One warm at nite.

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by oeb11

Well - 9500- 'triggered" again!

TWK is correct, and your frenchie YSL is just that - an authority on nothing except lapel size.

9500 is moe than welcome to engage an attorney who never went to an accredited law school ( here in the US), and pay that 'lawyer'' lots and lots of money for "Services rendered"!.

9500 will deserve the opinion he /she gets.

Or, go to Mexico for medical care - Steve McQueen, and many other have done so, and died there.

With Bernie and Lizzie's Medicare for All rationing plan - it might be the best care available in North and Central America someday. But. to one beholden to DPST fantasies, you are welcome to go try your luck.



Now - go play at nukes with Swalwell.


And take your YSL with you to keep One warm at nite.

Still won't adress the issues. Just bitch about the process.

Exclamation mark and a period?

[oeb11]

Deflection - a DPST character requirement.

As i wrote - U look, I read.

Still cannot comprehend.

Go home to your YSL and Robespierre.
Stop by the grocery store for your "Period" supplies.

[eccieuser9500]

Right. Thought so.

[oeb11]

Thinking is not part of the DPST marching in lockstep ideologic "narrative".
Be careful - they will come for One's in violation of the PC-DPST thought guidelines.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Who the FUCK says you need to go to school at ALL to know the law. You? Shiiiit.

Are jailhouse lawyers beneficial or bad for the system?

http://www.abajournal.com/news/artic...for-the-system


Care to take a stab at wether impeachment . . .

. . . is a Judicial or Legislative matter?

do you need one?


BAHHAHHAAAAAAAA


actually impeachment is both a judicial and legislative matter. typically the judicial committee of the House handles the inquiry of impeachment, unless you have an idiot like Jerry Nadtard as chair. then you have to move it to the Intel committee so Schitthead can handle it. which is exactly what the Democrabs did. is that legal? sure! close enough anyway.


it becomes a legislative matter when the House votes formally on articles of impeachment. then it becomes judicial again when the Senate holds a trial.


i find it amusing that the usual leftists like sissy chaps and others claim Pelosi is making a "brilliant" move by not moving the articles to the Senate. it's a ploy but one that will fail. McConnell knows full well who decides the rules in the Senate and that is the majority party. i.e. HIM. the republicans hold the high ground and the Constitution says so.


Pelosi can stall all she wants. she can hope for the courts to rule in favor of their cases for testimony and Trump's tax returns, hoping for more articles to add to the current ones. good luck with that! all of it will go to the Supreme Court and legal precedent favors Trump in all cases. they aren't going to get Trump's returns without an existing reason. they have none. oversight of the IRS? laughable. "suspicion" of a crime? Nope! if Congress had the subpoena powers they claim they do, they wouldn't have to go to court over it, would they? the Supreme Court has upheld the rights of a president to executive privilege in the majority of cases they have heard and will do so again for Trump. they will also uphold the rights of the private citizen, i.e. Trump to not have his tax info used in a witch hunt.


so let them stall all they want. by the time the Supreme Court rules the election will be over and no impeachment. after Trump wins again, they'll still get shutdown when the Supreme Court rules in favor of Trump. So they'll be stuck with this Ukraine call stupidity. right where they are now. then they'll lose in the Senate. if they think that they will hold the Senate after 2020 they still lose because they need a 2/3rds vote to remove and even if they regain the Senate they aren't going to get a 2/3rds majority. they still lose.


so they lose no matter what they do or when they do it.


BAHHAHHAAAAAAAAAA

[HoeHummer]

Originally Posted by oeb11

Thinking is not part of the DPST marching in lockstep ideologic "narrative".
Be careful - they will come for One's in violation of the PC-DPST thought guidelines.

Yous are a little, little girl, oebsy.