Discussion:
Non-white jew inferiorists in Great Satan such as grubby incajonic Anti-American jew cocksucker Klaun Scheisseziegelsteine continue to be targeted by WHITE Supremacists!
Add Reply
just-a-guy
2019-11-05 12:57:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
There is only one SOLUTION:
'Israeel' is thataway -------------------------->
Peeler
2019-11-05 14:40:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 05 Nov 2019 04:57:39 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
Post by just-a-guy
'Israeel' is thataway -------------------------->
There is only ONE solution for you, pedophilic gay Razovic:

You->loony bin (shortest way)!
--
Pedophilic dreckserb Razovic arguing in favour of pedophilia, again:
"A lowering of the age of consent to reflect the rate at which today's
youngsters 'mature'."
MID: <gKNUE.1374684$***@usenetxs.com>
Michael Ejercito
2019-11-09 19:22:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peeler
On Tue, 05 Nov 2019 04:57:39 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
Post by just-a-guy
'Israeel' is thataway -------------------------->
You->loony bin (shortest way)!
The mangina is on a highway to Hell.

Now here is Alan M. Dershowitz on weaponizing impeachment.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15120/weaponizing-impeachment


Weaponizing Impeachment against Political Opponents
by Alan M. Dershowitz
November 4, 2019 at 5:00 am

Send
Print

Share520
To be impeached, a president must commit a crime (misdemeanor is a species
of crime) and the commission of that crime must also constitute an abuse of
office. An abuse of office without an underlying crime is a political sin,
but not an impeachable offense.

This very issue was debated at the Constitutional Convention, where one
delegate proposed "maladministration" as the criteria for impeachment and
removal of a president. James Madison, the Father of our Constitution,
strongly objected on the ground that so vague and open-ended a criterion
would have the president serve at the will of Congress and turn us from a
Republic with a strong president into a parliamentary democracy in which the
chief executive can be removed by a simple vote of no confidence. Instead,
the Convention adopted strict prerequisites for impeachment: treason,
bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Congress is not above the law. It is bound by what the Framers accepted and
cannot now apply the criterion the framers explicitly rejected.

Most important, misusing the impeachment power in a partisan manner would
pose, in the words of Hamilton, "the greatest danger" to our Constitution.


The constitutional power to impeach a duly elected president was intended by
the Framers of the Constitution as a neutral, non-partisan tool of last
resort to be used against only criminal incumbents in extreme cases.
Pictured: Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States, oil
on canvas, by Howard Chandler Christy, 1940. (Image source: The Indian
Reporter/Wikimedia Commons)

The constitutional power to impeach a duly elected president was intended by
the Framers of the Constitution as a neutral, non-partisan tool of last
resort to be used against only criminal incumbents in extreme cases. It is
now being deployed as a partisan weapon that can be used routinely against
presidents of a different party from those who control the House of
Representatives.

Under the views of some members of Congress, any time the House is
controlled by one party, a simple majority can properly vote to impeach. As
Congresswoman Maxine Waters put it: "Impeachment is about whatever the
Congress says it is. There is no law." She is wrong. The Constitution is the
law and she is not above it.

The recent partisan misuse of this emergency power began with the
impeachment of former President William Jefferson Clinton by the
Republican-controlled House in 1998. Clinton did not commit an impeachable
offense, even if he feloniously lied under oath about his sex life. Such
perjury, if it occurred, would satisfy the definition of a "crime," but not
meet the required Constitutional criteria of a "high crime and misdemeanor."
If President Clinton committed a crime, it would be a low crime related to
his sex life and comparable to the low felonies — adultery and paying off an
extortionist — committed by Alexander Hamilton when he was Secretary of the
Treasury. Had Hamilton payed the extortionist from Treasury funds, as he was
falsely accused of doing, he would have been guilty of an impeachable high
crime.

To be impeached, a president must commit a crime (misdemeanor is a species
of crime) and the commission of that crime must also constitute an abuse of
office. An abuse of office without an underlying crime is a political sin,
but not an impeachable offense.

This very issue was debated at the Constitutional Convention, where one
delegate proposed "maladministration" as the criteria for impeachment and
removal of a president. James Madison, the Father of our Constitution,
strongly objected on the ground that so vague and open-ended a criterion
would have the president serve at the will of Congress and turn us from a
Republic with a strong president into a parliamentary democracy in which the
chief executive can be removed by a simple vote of no confidence. Instead,
the Convention adopted strict prerequisites for impeachment: treason,
bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors. The House is no more
empowered to substitute its own criteria for those enumerated in the
Constitution than the Senate would be to change the 2/3 vote requirement for
removal to a simple majority or a 3/5 super majority. Congress is not above
the law. It is bound by what the Framers accepted and cannot now apply the
criterion the framers explicitly rejected.

Those who characterize the impeachment and removal process as completely
political are wrong as a matter of constitutional law, even if they are
right in describing the reality of how it is being currently misused.
Advocates of this view misquote Hamilton in Federalist #65.

Hamilton did characterize the criteria for impeachment as "political," but
only in the sense that they relate to "injuries done immediately to the
society itself." He then immediately rejected the view that the process
should be partisan, based on "the comparative strength of parties," rather
than on "the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt." He called that the
"greatest danger" and demanded "neutrality toward those whose conduct may be
the subject of scrutiny." Those who misquote and misunderstand Hamilton
wrongly conflate the words "political," by which he meant governmental, and
"partisan, " by which he meant related to the comparative strength of
parties and factions.

It is difficult to imagine a greater breach of Hamilton's principles than
the recent House vote along party lines (with two exceptions, both opposing
impeachment) to open a formal impeachment investigation against President
Trump. The vote was determined exclusively by the "comparative strength of
parties," as was the vote to impeach President Bill Clinton two decades ago.

A partisan House vote to impeach President Trump, followed by a partisan
Senate vote to acquit him, would not only hurt the Democratic Party — as the
votes in the Clinton case hurt the Republican Party — it would damage our
constitution and further polarize our already divided nation.

Most important, misusing the impeachment power in a partisan manner would
pose, in the words of Hamilton, "the greatest danger" to our Constitution.

Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law Emeritus at
Harvard Law School and author of The Case Against the Democratic House
Impeaching Trump, Skyhorse Publishing, 2019.

Follow Alan M. Dershowitz on Twitter and Facebook
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
2019-11-10 17:19:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 11:22:22 -0800, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
[FLUHS Grik skata]...and better air in here again! [sic][SIC!!! LOL]

Watch, it geezer!
Post by Michael Ejercito
The mangina is on a highway to Hell.
YOU should be on a banana boat to Manila.
Post by Michael Ejercito
Now here is Alan M. Dershowitz on weaponizing impeachment.
Now who gives two jew shits what inanities sleazy jew
shyster/pedophile Dershowitz has plagiarised about weapons mong?

Cheers!

RJ (preferred jew aliash)
--
The Illiterate Foreskin Peeling Grik anus admits he got
no life AT ALL outside stalking on THE Usenet!
"Frankly, if he were gone, I wouldn't know what to do here."
Message-ID: <FCOQt.107901$***@fx13.fr7>

The Illiterate Foreskin Peeling Grik anus, defending his fellow
Grik sodomite the Grikboxer® and under the delusion that he's
been able to grow a pair: "You'd have to get past me first,"
Message-ID: <LOOQt.337647$***@fx08.fr7>

Yet more proof that the Illiterate Foreskin Peeling Grik anus
thinks he got a pair: "Just to let you know: ANYONE who "befriends"
the subnormal swine will have to deal with me! Get ready, bitch!"
Message-ID: <FHg6t.166438$***@newsfe07.iad>

The Illiterate Foreskin Peeling Grik anus STILL seems to think
he got a pair: "Which will NEVER happen! You'd have to get past
me first, poor psycho! LOL"
Message-ID: <MCSIu.1$***@fx32.fr7>

The Illiterate Foreskin Peeling Grik anus having still MORE delusions
about growing a pair: "If ANYONE dared to grab me by the neck
like that he'd get my fist in his face."
Message-ID: <qeilfu$iog$***@gioia.aioe.org>

In spite of all the evidence, the Illiterate Foreskin Peeling Grik anus
STILL has delusions about growing a pair!
"What kind of other-worldly pussies (men?) are you all? If someone
would dare to grab me by the back of my neck like that and push me
around, my instinctive, AUTOMATIC reaction would be to knock him in
the face! NOBODY is allowed to do that to ANYONE!"
Message-ID: <qfnPE.73303$***@usenetxs.com>

Best of all! From the Foreskin Peeler's doctoral dissertation in divinity,
'University' of Salonica (1992): "The jew g-d is your g-d's dad."
Peeler
2019-11-10 17:27:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 10 Nov 2019 09:19:15 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
sexual cripple, making an ass of herself as "jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew
Post by jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Post by Michael Ejercito
Post by Peeler
You->loony bin (shortest way)!
The mangina is on a highway to Hell.
YOU should be on a banana boat to Manila.
You REALLY would like to get rid of your torturer, eh, you suffering
psychopath? Guess what will come of your wishes! LOL
Post by jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Post by Michael Ejercito
Now here is Alan M. Dershowitz on weaponizing impeachment.
Now who gives two jew shits what inanities sleazy jew
shyster/pedophile Dershowitz has plagiarised about weapons mong?
INTELLIGENT people care about that exceptionally smart man's intelligent and
original articles, dumb serb peasant!
Post by jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Cheers!
BTW, "cheers"??? Is that what you say when you are about to swallow nazi
jizz, you housebound cocksucking wanker? <BG>
--
Pedophilic dreckserb Razovic arguing in favour of pedophilia, again:
"Isn't it time that paedophiles were admitted to the LGBTQ rainbow?
Now that every other sexual deviation seems to have been accommodated?"
MID: <Y8LUE.513827$***@usenetxs.com>
Loading...