boosiebadazz
Favorite team: | |
Location: | |
Biography: | |
Interests: | |
Occupation: | |
Number of Posts: | 80187 |
Registered on: | 2/25/2008 |
Online Status: | Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Maybe I’m a simpleton but how did the left go from “trump is literally Hitler” to
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/27/24 at 9:09 pm
They started by posting it on the right board ...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/27/24 at 6:19 pm
[quote]As determined by the same people who allowed an innocent man to be tried.[/quote]
[img]https://media1.giphy.com/media/f5emDh4zYFh8Kevbmq/200w.gif?cid=6c09b952kheht9dx5ujt7dd1eaagvv0xm276e8ged3y0tpsl&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=200w.gif&ct=g[/img]...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/26/24 at 9:07 pm
According to Robin Masters, they do until they’re impeached. ...
re: LASIK eye surgery in BR
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/26/24 at 8:27 pm
Fay woo ...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/26/24 at 8:27 pm
Still struggling with basic command of the written word? ...
re: How long would you stand in line to see Mona Lisa?
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/26/24 at 9:28 am
It’s not that impressive. It’s smaller than you think and behind protective glass. It’s pretty meh to be honest. ...
re: Zelensky presses the US and allies for Patriot missiles
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/26/24 at 9:22 am
[quote]It is amazing to me how easily our politicians aid other countries, but we can’t seem to get the same level of effort to help our own vets.[/quote]
lol what?
[quote]The $328.1 billion 2024 budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs is the largest in agency history. President Joe Bide...
re: Adam Schiff has luggage stolen in San Francisco
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/26/24 at 8:00 am
:lol: got me by seconds! ...
re: Adam Schiff has luggage stolen in San Francisco
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/26/24 at 7:59 am
What the frick am I going to do with 14 dildos?
[img]https://cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/gray/INZZ34HJ4BGPBEBJSVUFRX4KWQ.jpg[/img]...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/25/24 at 10:32 pm
The devil is going to be in the official act/ private act details. Maybe they’ll give us some factors to consider.
But this will have to be flushed out from this ruling and within the inferior courts over time. SCOTUS may chime in if someone goes out of bounds but this is generally new territory...
re: Alpha male Andrew Tate wants you to know enjoying sex with women is gay
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/25/24 at 10:07 pm
Hey man good luck selling houses tomorrow. Remember it’s now called a primary suite ...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/25/24 at 10:02 pm
Make sure you fortify your trailer park. ...
re: Alpha male Andrew Tate wants you to know enjoying sex with women is gay
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/25/24 at 9:58 pm
[quote]clearly love the BBC[/quote]
I hope you mean the British Broadcasting Corporation, right?
The other BBC would be *~racist~* of you. Right, puta? ...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/25/24 at 9:45 pm
I think that was the first drop of pigeon shite on the chess board. I’m out. ...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/25/24 at 9:36 pm
Google “nevertheless”
[img]https://i.imgur.com/4EHG0FT.gif[/img]...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/25/24 at 9:28 pm
I’ll try one more time because what you and I responded to was the last snippet of the pertinent clause. Here’s the entire thing:
[quote]Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or prof...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/25/24 at 9:19 pm
[quote]Except they wouldn’t be “convicted” until they are found guilty in an impeachment proceeding so they wouldn’t be subject to criminal proceedings.[/quote]
Yeah man, you’re just missing this one. I think you’re in good faith but this is just simple reading and sentence structure. Good luck w...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/25/24 at 9:14 pm
[quote]It’s specifically qualified the eligible party as one who has been convicted.[/quote]
Yes, and it says they’re “still subject” to the criminal process. Nothing says they enjoy immunity from the criminal process until they are convicted and impeached.
It’s clarifying that impeachment do...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/25/24 at 9:07 pm
Oh ok. I misunderstood your post.
If you’re “still subject” to something, you’re subject to it even if the something doesn’t happen.
If you wear purple panties to work tomorrow, you’re still subject to me showing up and punching you in the face.
I can still show up and punch you in the fa...
re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity
Posted by boosiebadazz on 4/25/24 at 9:03 pm
No, it’s speaking of convicted in the Senate and impeached.
You have to be indicted before being convicted in a criminal context. It says the convicted party is still subject to indictment, i.e. the conviction is speaking of impeachment. ...
Popular