Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Libloather

Why do New Yorkers keep electing this fool?


4 posted on 02/11/2020 2:01:15 AM PST by Ciaphas Cain (SMOKE YOUUUUUUUU!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: All
Americans demand Sen Schumer be required to answer for unconstitutional applications of US law.

The US Department of Justice should not stand by idly while public officials like Schumer violate constitutional rights.

Civil Rights laws should be mobilized since Mr Schumer does not require for those who espouse leftist ideology.

There are sufficient factual allegations First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment claims to investigate Mr Schumer.

Pres Trump was acquitted of false charges. A Senate trial found sufficient reasons and many unfounded allegations to move forward to acquittal.

The Senate found Trump's arguments persuasive, and acquitted him.

Sen Schumer outrageously moves to suppress only conservative speech.

=======================================

Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice
How to file a complaint: https://www.justice.gov/crt/how-file-complaint

10 posted on 02/11/2020 2:42:21 AM PST by Liz (Our side has 8 trillion bullets; the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: All
CIRCA 2019---The Schumer Principle: Lying Under Oath Is Not Impeachable
Townhall.com ^ | December 18, 2019 | Terry Jeffrey / FR Posted by Kaslin

Twenty-one years ago, WRT then-President Bill Clinton's impeachment, then-Rep. Charles Schumer worked to establish the precedent that a president could lie under oath. The question for Schumer was not whether the president was lying but what he was lying about. The ultimate question underlying then-President Bill Clinton's impeachment was this: Did Paula Jones, an Arkansas state employee, have a right to fair and honest proceedings when she brought a federal civil suit against the former governor of Arkansas who had gone on to become the president?

"She claimed the Governor made boorish and offensive sexual advances that she rejected, and that her superiors at work subsequently dealt with her in a hostile manner and punished her in a tangible way for rejecting those advances," Judge Susan Webber Wright would eventually write in a 1999 opinion in which she held Clinton in contempt.

===============================

REFERENCE Judge Susan Webber Wright wrote the 1999 opinion which held then-Pres Clinton in contempt.The ultimate question underlying Clinton's impeachment: Did Paula Jones, an Arkansas state employee, have a right to fair and honest proceedings when she brought a federal civil suit against the former governor of Arkansas who had gone on to become the president? "Jones claimed the Governor made boorish and offensive sexual advances that she rejected, and that her job superiors dealt with her in a hostile manner and punished her for rejecting Clinton's advances,"

ITEM Clinton fought all the way to the USSC to prevent Jones' suit from proceeding. In 1997, the USSC ruled against Clinton; he had to give a deposition addressing Jones' suit in Wright's court. In her contempt opinion, the judge said Clinton made "intentionally false" statements in that deposition.

12 posted on 02/11/2020 2:49:42 AM PST by Liz (Our side has 8 trillion bullets; the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Ciaphas Cain
Why do New Yorkers keep electing this fool?

I believe you answered your question in your question.....just saying

25 posted on 02/11/2020 3:50:23 AM PST by eartick (Stupidity is expecting the government that broke itself to go out and fix itself. Texan for TEXIT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson