Posted on 03/16/2022 2:46:48 PM PDT by Beave Meister
“It is a strawman to argue that they thought it out and that’s what they meant.”
I wasn’t arguing that they thought it out. That’s the whole point of me making the statement, to show them that they had not thought out the consequences of their argument. Using a bit of sarcasm to illustrate that still does not constitute a strawman.
That’s impeachment. De-certifying an election would not be impeachment. If it happened, it would create a true Constitutional crisis because the Constitution does not specifically address de-certification.
The people here claiming the election would be decertified are idiots.
.
Yes, let’s pile on our side and call them idiots. The quitters on this site are the issue. All they do is complain but take no action. I have taken action and I do so everyday.
” it would create a true Constitutional crisis because the Constitution does not specifically address de-certification”
It’s true that the Constitution does not address de-certification, but that article clearly states that impeachment is the only method to remove a sitting President, which completely rules out removing them by “de-certification”. Unless, of course, you are a liberal lawyer and think you can find some exception in the penumbras and emanations of the Constitution, rather than the actual text.
p
You are the idiot for believing that it can’t happen - you’ve been successfully gaslit.
They got caught red-handed stealing an election, so their only fallback position is the absurd notion that once someone is sworn in as POTUS, nothing can be done about it - even if it was the wrong person!
And you believed it!
Exactly. If the rules are that the biggest best cheater wins, then them’s the rules.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.