Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

Try reading the posts

Posted on: January 31, 2020 at 09:57:25 CT
raskolnikov MU
Posts:
188057
Member For:
24.78 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
I stated 3-4 times now that Roberts make likely defer and NOT vote.

But is wholly up to him. And the Senate would need to vote - this is your rules - to overturn the judge. And in a tie vote, gosh don't see that happening.
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

So the constitution doesn't actually state - Sal MU - 1/31 09:08:08
     RE: So the constitution doesn't actually state - MOCO SON MU - 1/31 10:33:54
     * - DollarSigns MU - 1/31 09:39:14
     The presiding officer breaks the tie - raskolnikov MU - 1/31 09:22:42
          RE: The presiding officer breaks the tie - MOCO SON MU - 1/31 10:45:51
          What "evidence?" - Alferd Packer MU - 1/31 09:57:17
          Where does it say that the presiding officer breaks a tie? - DHighlander NWMSU - 1/31 09:36:00
               Try reading the posts - raskolnikov MU - 1/31 09:57:25
                    Tie vote is your last hope. - Alferd Packer MU - 1/31 10:00:16
                    It's not his choice (nm) - Sal MU - 1/31 09:59:29
                    it isn't wholly up to him - ashtray UF - 1/31 09:58:26
          RE: The presiding officer breaks the tie - hefeweizen MU - 1/31 09:24:11
               Be careful arguing against raskputin. The law of - hokie VT - 1/31 09:27:55
                    RE: Be careful arguing against raskputin. The law of - raskolnikov MU - 1/31 09:29:35
                         A governing truth of Tigerboard - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 1/31 09:31:25
                              Give him a break because... - hefeweizen MU - 1/31 09:32:06
                                   Wrong so often you don't even count, but stiil a coward(nm) - raskolnikov MU - 1/31 09:36:20
                                        RE: Wrong so often you don't even count, but stiil a coward(nm) - hefeweizen MU - 1/31 09:37:13
                         Of course you do. You’re VERY smart. Right, everyone? Nm - hokie VT - 1/31 09:31:23
                         RE: Be careful arguing against raskputin. The law of - hefeweizen MU - 1/31 09:29:54
                              Power of your rhetoric blisters. Coward(nm) - raskolnikov MU - 1/31 09:31:34
                                   RE: Power of your rhetoric blisters. Coward(nm) - hefeweizen MU - 1/31 09:32:18
                                        You're a coward boy - and you use another man's work to try - raskolnikov MU - 1/31 09:58:41
          there is no cover up - Sal MU - 1/31 09:23:24
               You're wrong, just flat wrong and I never said - raskolnikov MU - 1/31 09:29:11
                    The House managers have repeatedly claimed that they have - DHighlander NWMSU - 1/31 09:41:05
                    The House decided they did not wish to pursue this - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 1/31 09:30:07
                         More cover-up for the cowards - raskolnikov MU - 1/31 09:32:57
                              RE: More cover-up for the cowards - hefeweizen MU - 1/31 09:33:11
                    RE: You're wrong, just flat wrong and I never said - hefeweizen MU - 1/31 09:29:29
                         Is that your king? L'etat, c'est Trump(nm) - raskolnikov MU - 1/31 09:30:46
                              RE: Is that your king? L'etat, c'est Trump(nm) - hefeweizen MU - 1/31 09:31:08
     VP does not preside over impeachment. The Chief Justice - MrBlueSky MU - 1/31 09:20:40
          The VP is still the President of the Senate - Sal MU - 1/31 09:22:20
               NOT IN AN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL !! - raskolnikov MU - 1/31 09:25:13
                    Read the constitution (nm) - pickle MU - 1/31 10:04:55
                    RE: NOT IN AN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL !! - hefeweizen MU - 1/31 09:27:51
                    what evidence is that? (nm) - Sal MU - 1/31 09:26:22
                    that still doesn't mean Roberts automatically breaks a tie (nm) - ashtray UF - 1/31 09:25:55
                         Correct, but he can and a Chief Justice has before (nm) - MrBlueSky MU - 1/31 09:26:32
                              RE: Correct, but he can and a Chief Justice has before (nm) - hefeweizen MU - 1/31 09:27:16
                              Sure, but the GOP won't let him (nm) - Sal MU - 1/31 09:27:05
                              he can if the Senate allows it (nm) - ashtray UF - 1/31 09:26:55
                    RE: NOT IN AN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL !! - hefeweizen MU - 1/31 09:25:51
               VP has nothing to do with impeachment, according to the - MrBlueSky MU - 1/31 09:24:13
                    I said he wasn't involved with impeachment (nm) - Sal MU - 1/31 09:25:01
     according to the Constitution, the Senate decides their - ashtray UF - 1/31 09:20:16
          I'm guessing the GOP won't want Roberts - Sal MU - 1/31 09:21:17
               no way in hell they would - ashtray UF - 1/31 09:22:19
     The VP does not have a role in an impeachment trial - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 1/31 09:10:12
          read the constitution. it’s “ordinary” business - pickle MU - 1/31 09:24:37
          The Constitution doesn't say anything about "ordinary - ummmm MU - 1/31 09:12:33
               Impeachment has a special set of rules for those sitting - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 1/31 09:19:19
                    Read the constitution. I’ve posted it numerous times (nm) - pickle MU - 1/31 09:25:30
                    The only special rules, Constitutionally speaking, are that - ummmm MU - 1/31 09:22:42
                         Yes there is - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 1/31 09:24:20
                              For the Senate, but the constitution doesn't say - Sal MU - 1/31 09:25:58
                                   No, the Senate does indeed make those rules - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 1/31 09:26:46
                                        “Constitutionally speaking” (nm) - pickle MU - 1/31 09:36:30
                                        That's what we are all saying (nm) - Sal MU - 1/31 09:27:21
                              "Constitutionally speaking" (nm) - ummmm MU - 1/31 09:25:20
                              rules set by the Senate - ashtray UF - 1/31 09:24:52
                                   They Senate is given the authority to do that(nm) - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 1/31 09:25:31
                                        yes (nm) - ashtray UF - 1/31 09:26:24
                    yes, the VP has a conflict of interest - ashtray UF - 1/31 09:21:44




©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard