For investors looking for a niche to take stock in, sales of the constitution have seen a dramatic increase during the term of Commander in Chief Take Away. Everybody deserves to know their rights, even if they are soon to be taken away. Maybe they are all just trying to understand the side of the man violating the constitution, while crying himself that an impeachment inquiry is unconstitutional.
Speaking of the constitution, Article III, Section 1, indicates that the judiciary branch is a legal body rather than a political body. Contrary to the understanding of Commander in Chief Take Away, the judiciary branch is not in place to increase the power of the executive branch. Doesn’t the constitution say anything about corruption?
There is “The Anti-Corruption Principle” that was built into the constitution by our founding fathers. This built-in principle covers all branches of government and all variations of corruption from bribery and inequality to suppressed speech and dispirited public. Not to mention loss of integrity, which leads to each of the others.
The Commander in Chief can’t worry about such principles, leaving it up to his personal attorney and AG Smooth-it-over to work out the details. His personal attorney worked to attain visas for men who had dirt on a political opponent. It’s hard to believe AG Smooth-it-over found time to be involved in this new scandal, with all the time he was investing in discrediting the Russia investigation.
Somewhere in the US, a group of people answered their phones and took a poll to represent the American people. When asked questions concerning Commander in Chief Take Away, their public opinion was the president’s actions were illegal more so than legal and more inappropriate than appropriate, but the same people whose opinions don’t matter do not want the president impeached or removed from office, probably because we are going to war.
AG Smooth-it-over was brought in when the previous attorney general attempted to work for the American people instead of Commander in Chief Take Away. Like funds allocated for national security projects, the previous AG saw his position replaced by someone more in line with the president’s political agenda. AG Smooth-it-over has stepped in where the president’s personal attorney failed.
The AG decided that the president was cleared of any wrong doing in terms of a lengthy investigation that the previous AG recused himself from. The president, who was always adamant there was “no collusion,” took the tone of “I did it once and I would do it again.” This time the president included AG Smooth-it-over from the beginning.
Commander in Chief Take Away has a history of taking from funds appropriated for one thing to further his own agenda. If he can do it with funding, why not people? It makes no sense to him that a lawyer should be restricted to enforcing federal laws, when he could work as his personal attorney. While AG Smooth-it-over declined to be part of the president’s defense team early on, he has decided to open a criminal investigation against the culprits who opened the Russia investigation. All the while the American people are watching trillions of dollars go to waste, as the department of justice is no longer separate from the executive branch.
AG Smooth-it-over knows what its like to be treated unfairly by democrats. During his confirmation hearings, some believed he would show differential treatment to the president, who has also been known to receive unjust treatment from the Democratic Party. His defenders might suggest the AG is just working on keeping justice alive and that the Commander-in-Chief not interfering allows both to move their agenda further. AG Smooth-it-over would not be able to test his ideas and make changes to some legal issues without the president looking the other way. The AG has his own issues in staying in line with constitution.
AG Smooth-it-over has a small issue with the establishment clause of the first amendment. Government should show no partiality to religion or non-religion. The AG is dedicated to supporting Catholic education and values and has made religious liberty a priority for the DOJ, as he believes it is for the current administration. He believes our current system is morally corrupt allowing people to fall prey to their own devices. Rather than fighting for justice for all, he’s put forth his own agenda to fight for those who hold his morals in place.
Morals like the those of Commander-in-Chief Take Away, who would start a war to distract from the impeachment process. After being accused of not giving notice to congress for starting a war, he declares the notice was given via tweet and if congress wants further notice they should follow him on twitter. He began informing congress via tweets of his threatening war crimes if a war escalates. As long as he hasn’t blocked them from previous disagreements, they should be able to stay up to date there.
With the impeachment process, the games begin. The speaker of the House wants to see the process resolution for the trial, before releasing the articles of impeachment to get the party started. The Senate majority leader wants to mirror the impeachment process of a president that lied about getting a blowjob from an intern for a president who pulled a snow job on America. With the majority, he claims he already has the votes he needs to pass a resolution.
The Commander-in-Chief may not benefit from the judges he appointed to the Supreme Court, since the Chief Justice residing over his impeachment trial is not one of his nominees and does not agree precedents should be decided on basis of political affiliation. Chief Justice Fair and Balanced wants to keep the Supreme Court just and non-politicized in their decision-making. Thank God for the celestial body of the Supreme Court. Too bad any decision he rules, the partisan Senate may vote to overturn. He is more of a fixture for the seat that overlooks the impeachment hearings than the final decision. It just makes more sense to have a judge in that seat than the vice president, as the VP would be the next in power upon impeachment.
A fair and impartial jury would be more plausible if there were not politicians involved. The Senate majority leader has made clear he is not impartial and this is politics. The idea that a man who could be bribed would convict another man on such said charges is ludicrous. The Senate majority leader isn’t above accepting campaign funding for a little anti-impeachment support. Senators are required to take an oath when sitting as jurors on a trial, but when was the last time an oath meant something to a sitting politician. The Senate majority leader says enough with the bribery clause already and by the way Kentucky, I can deliver a billion dollars in federal spending and tax cuts. Just a little incentive when you hit the poles, remember to cast your vote for me.
The Commander in Chief appears as calm as can be about the upcoming weeks impeachment proceedings. He is carrying-on at the same level of pose he has had through his presidency to date, with name-calling and derogatory remarks. He claimed the House is demanding the Senate do a job they were unable to do, without acknowledging that the Senate is the one who holds the responsibility of determining whether he is removed from office and that it has never been the responsibility of the House. He declares his innocence again, while whining that he doesn’t want his former national security advisor to testify.
The president is pushing for dismissal without review. The Senate would prefer to not call any witnesses in order to get through the trial in a timely manner. The majority leader doesn’t care what evidence there is, how much there is, how damning it is, what he cares about is the money he was promised by the Commander in Chief to help fund his re-election. If the House wanted him to take his position seriously, they should have offered something more than the articles of impeachment. Maybe a little quid pro quo.
Speaking of the constitution, Article III, Section 1, indicates that the judiciary branch is a legal body rather than a political body. Contrary to the understanding of Commander in Chief Take Away, the judiciary branch is not in place to increase the power of the executive branch. Doesn’t the constitution say anything about corruption?
There is “The Anti-Corruption Principle” that was built into the constitution by our founding fathers. This built-in principle covers all branches of government and all variations of corruption from bribery and inequality to suppressed speech and dispirited public. Not to mention loss of integrity, which leads to each of the others.
The Commander in Chief can’t worry about such principles, leaving it up to his personal attorney and AG Smooth-it-over to work out the details. His personal attorney worked to attain visas for men who had dirt on a political opponent. It’s hard to believe AG Smooth-it-over found time to be involved in this new scandal, with all the time he was investing in discrediting the Russia investigation.
Somewhere in the US, a group of people answered their phones and took a poll to represent the American people. When asked questions concerning Commander in Chief Take Away, their public opinion was the president’s actions were illegal more so than legal and more inappropriate than appropriate, but the same people whose opinions don’t matter do not want the president impeached or removed from office, probably because we are going to war.
AG Smooth-it-over was brought in when the previous attorney general attempted to work for the American people instead of Commander in Chief Take Away. Like funds allocated for national security projects, the previous AG saw his position replaced by someone more in line with the president’s political agenda. AG Smooth-it-over has stepped in where the president’s personal attorney failed.
The AG decided that the president was cleared of any wrong doing in terms of a lengthy investigation that the previous AG recused himself from. The president, who was always adamant there was “no collusion,” took the tone of “I did it once and I would do it again.” This time the president included AG Smooth-it-over from the beginning.
Commander in Chief Take Away has a history of taking from funds appropriated for one thing to further his own agenda. If he can do it with funding, why not people? It makes no sense to him that a lawyer should be restricted to enforcing federal laws, when he could work as his personal attorney. While AG Smooth-it-over declined to be part of the president’s defense team early on, he has decided to open a criminal investigation against the culprits who opened the Russia investigation. All the while the American people are watching trillions of dollars go to waste, as the department of justice is no longer separate from the executive branch.
AG Smooth-it-over knows what its like to be treated unfairly by democrats. During his confirmation hearings, some believed he would show differential treatment to the president, who has also been known to receive unjust treatment from the Democratic Party. His defenders might suggest the AG is just working on keeping justice alive and that the Commander-in-Chief not interfering allows both to move their agenda further. AG Smooth-it-over would not be able to test his ideas and make changes to some legal issues without the president looking the other way. The AG has his own issues in staying in line with constitution.
AG Smooth-it-over has a small issue with the establishment clause of the first amendment. Government should show no partiality to religion or non-religion. The AG is dedicated to supporting Catholic education and values and has made religious liberty a priority for the DOJ, as he believes it is for the current administration. He believes our current system is morally corrupt allowing people to fall prey to their own devices. Rather than fighting for justice for all, he’s put forth his own agenda to fight for those who hold his morals in place.
Morals like the those of Commander-in-Chief Take Away, who would start a war to distract from the impeachment process. After being accused of not giving notice to congress for starting a war, he declares the notice was given via tweet and if congress wants further notice they should follow him on twitter. He began informing congress via tweets of his threatening war crimes if a war escalates. As long as he hasn’t blocked them from previous disagreements, they should be able to stay up to date there.
With the impeachment process, the games begin. The speaker of the House wants to see the process resolution for the trial, before releasing the articles of impeachment to get the party started. The Senate majority leader wants to mirror the impeachment process of a president that lied about getting a blowjob from an intern for a president who pulled a snow job on America. With the majority, he claims he already has the votes he needs to pass a resolution.
The Commander-in-Chief may not benefit from the judges he appointed to the Supreme Court, since the Chief Justice residing over his impeachment trial is not one of his nominees and does not agree precedents should be decided on basis of political affiliation. Chief Justice Fair and Balanced wants to keep the Supreme Court just and non-politicized in their decision-making. Thank God for the celestial body of the Supreme Court. Too bad any decision he rules, the partisan Senate may vote to overturn. He is more of a fixture for the seat that overlooks the impeachment hearings than the final decision. It just makes more sense to have a judge in that seat than the vice president, as the VP would be the next in power upon impeachment.
A fair and impartial jury would be more plausible if there were not politicians involved. The Senate majority leader has made clear he is not impartial and this is politics. The idea that a man who could be bribed would convict another man on such said charges is ludicrous. The Senate majority leader isn’t above accepting campaign funding for a little anti-impeachment support. Senators are required to take an oath when sitting as jurors on a trial, but when was the last time an oath meant something to a sitting politician. The Senate majority leader says enough with the bribery clause already and by the way Kentucky, I can deliver a billion dollars in federal spending and tax cuts. Just a little incentive when you hit the poles, remember to cast your vote for me.
The Commander in Chief appears as calm as can be about the upcoming weeks impeachment proceedings. He is carrying-on at the same level of pose he has had through his presidency to date, with name-calling and derogatory remarks. He claimed the House is demanding the Senate do a job they were unable to do, without acknowledging that the Senate is the one who holds the responsibility of determining whether he is removed from office and that it has never been the responsibility of the House. He declares his innocence again, while whining that he doesn’t want his former national security advisor to testify.
The president is pushing for dismissal without review. The Senate would prefer to not call any witnesses in order to get through the trial in a timely manner. The majority leader doesn’t care what evidence there is, how much there is, how damning it is, what he cares about is the money he was promised by the Commander in Chief to help fund his re-election. If the House wanted him to take his position seriously, they should have offered something more than the articles of impeachment. Maybe a little quid pro quo.