Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Attacking Trump

Marco Rubio Asked if New Precedent of Impeaching After Office Can Be Used Against a Certain Former Secretary of State

Description Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaking with supporters at a campaign rally at the Intramural Fields at Arizona State University in Tempe, Arizona. Please attribute to Gage Skidmore if used elsewhere. Date 2 November 2016, 20:16 Source Hillary Clinton Author Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America

Democrats are masters at lying and scheming and projecting and manipulating facts but their downfall is they’re so impulsive that they usually screw themselves more than their intended targets.  Think filibuster nuclear option.

Such is the case after the Democrats’ lust for revenge against Donald Trump for making America great again they impeached him a second time and ran an unconstitutional Senate trial after the former president already left office.  Does this mean that future congresses can go after former presidents and other officials who can be impeached?  Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) asked that very question.

On Friday, during the impeachment trial, Rubio asked if retroactively using the Constitution’s impeachment powers against Trump would open up a whole world of allowing a vengeful majority in Congress to go after other former government officials for impeachment after the fact and face a Senate trial?

In the question that Rubio posed he asked about “a former secretary of state,” which was a clear swipe at Hillary Clinton who also lost to Donald Trump.

Rubio’s question went like this:

“Voting to convict the former president would create a new precedent that a former official can be convicted and disqualified by the Senate. Therefore, is it not true that under this new precedent a future House facing partisan pressure to ‘lock her up’ could impeach a former Secretary of State and a future Senate be forced to put her on trial and potentially disqualify from any future office?”

King of the idiots Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD) said that the “jurisdictional issue is over.”  Actually, it’s not, because I’m going to still talk about it.

King Raskin then continued saying, the senator from Florida’s question “has no bearing on this case because I don’t think you’re talking about an official who was impeached while they were in office for conduct that they committed while they were in office.”  I just loved it he had to answer that question.

One of former President Trump’s defense lawyers Michael van der Vee completely disagreed, telling Rubio that the Democrats are setting a dangerous precedent that could be applied to the “former secretary of state,” and further, their irresponsible behaviors could apply  “to a lot of people and that’s not the way this is supposed to work and not only could it happen to a lot of people, it would become much more regular, too.”

Van der Veen then warned against a slippery slope the Democrats created when they decided to hold a Senate impeachment trial against a president that is no longer in office.

“The original question is an absolutely slippery slope that I don’t really think anybody here wants to send this country down,” van der Veen said.

I believe they do because this was not about the Constitution, it was not about our country, it was not about a “criminal president.”  This was about the Democrats’ desire for power and nothing else.  They fear a Donald Trump run in 2024, not only because he could run and win but because he will be scrutinizing everything that the Biden administration and the Democrat-controlled Congress does between now and then.  Had they convicted him, the Left could have claimed Trump’s political clout was worthless.  Now, they have to deal with him in the real world.

I guarantee because he was acquitted in the Senate that the Democrats are going to push for state officials to criminally go after him.

President Trump was acquitted for the second time on Saturday with a vote of 57 – 43.  That included 7 Republicans who either don’t understand the Constitution, have no concept of weighing evidence, or hate Trump so much that were willing to risk a primary.

The seven turncoats who voted with the Democrats to convict an innocent president of their own party are Mitt Romney, Richard Burr, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Bill Cassidy, Ben Sasse, and Pat Toomey.   Toomey and Burr are retiring, so they will save their states the trouble, but the rest of them need to be primaried out.  These are the Republicans who are more like Democrats and they do nothing for the party and nothing for America.  Collins and Sasse were just reelected, but elephants are known to have good memories.  Mitt Romney is already more underwater than a Chinese submarine, so that leaves us Murkowski, who in the recent past said she’s not running again, but she can be the canary in the coal mine for primarying out worthless Republicans.  Good riddance to all of them.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

ULTRA MAGA REPUBLICAN

PRO ❤️ LIFE

Patriot Supply

You May Also Like

Election

For Virginia voters who are considering voting for Terry McAuliffe for governor on November 2, who has already served as the 72nd governor of...

Opinion

On Saturday, a rally at the State Fairgrounds in Des Moines, Iowa held by Donald Trump (Donaldus Magnus) had record setting attendance by any...

Military

Mike Pompeo, former Secretary of State and Director of the CIA under the Trump administration, has a problem with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs...

Copyright © 2022 Unite America First. Turbocharged by Adrevv

0