Evidently KFsdisciple isn't doing his job or else trump wouldn't have those stains.You voted for this guy twice...
Republicans impeach Mayorkas
- Thread starter Huey Grey
- Start date
US sanctions on Venezuela, Covid, climate change leading to subsistence farms failing, domestic instability in multiple countries... There are lots of reasons. There were lots of reasons from 2017 to 2021.
The US needs comprehensive border security reform, and immigration reform. It's a never ending job for our elected leaders. They've been AWOL for 40 years.
I didn't vote for him twice... that's why you're a gym coach, you can't read very well. Well don't worry I typed this slowly since I know you don't read fast.You voted for this guy twice...
Im guessing that when so many Republicans are screaming on their talk shows and social media platforms day in and day out that the border is wide open, it will entice people to come to the border.
It is if they are applying for asylum in the USA. You want to ignore laws.
That's what almost everyone on this board is saying. We need to reform immigration. There was recently a bill that was turned down by the Republicans that would have made some great steps forward but Trump didn't like it. You are countering your own arguments.
Immigration laws ands Regulations are the job of Congress……not the Executive branch. ASs mentioned above, Congress has been AWOLfolr decades…..Junior gave them a deal 20p years ago but the “conservatives” of the House (about a dozen) blew the deal up and Congress has been arguing ever since.
Why do Dems insist there must be immigration reform, as if there aren't already laws on the books. You are right, it's not the Executive's job to make laws. It is the Executive's job to faithfully enforce laws, which doesn't mean write Executive Orders saying how he's not going to enforce laws, or grant some form of amnesty.
Current laws are outdated and inapplicable today….as they were back when Junior and Congress agreed to a new law 20 years ago….
This is hilarious. Let's just start breaking laws. You don't live in reality on this issue. You really need to become more informed.
No. they. aren't.
The only thing that's outdated are the number of judges and CBP officers, and that's partially the fault of more illegals thinking they are welcome here, and being given defacto amnesty.
Immigration laws haven’t been updated in 40 years. Times have changed and the laws should to.
I’m saying whyncant we have an executive order that temporarily (unstated) shuts it down due to national security. You are correct, I don’t know immigration law, I just know that we should be able to close our border if it benefits the US.
Yes they are. The established quotas are way out of line and in the past 60 years immigration patterns have changed….laws have changed but the immigration rules gave not. Why do you think every President since Reagan has asked Congress for immigration reform?
In Federalist 65, Alexander Hamilton defined impeachable offenses as "those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself."[5]
Seems like ignoring the border for 3 years qualifies.
What’s weird is I don’t see that definition in the constitution. Something about high crimes and misdemeanors if I recall.
Hamilton offered American colonists a point of view, and certainly not THE point of view. As a FF he was certainly part of the conversation but not necessarily the whole conversation.
Actually, Hamilton’s argument here could have been most effectively used against American citizens as they invaded and disregarded the Mexican government as these folks invaded Texas and expanded slavery into that territory in the late 18th century.
Frankly, the constitution doesn't spell out who can be impeached by congress other than the president and vice president and "all civil officers"
It doesn't exactly say that a non-elected secretary of homeland security is even an impeachable position.
Do you think he should be impeached because republicans believe he’s bad at his job?
They’ve not once said or specified a law that he’s broken.
No, I don't think that's a reason to impeach anyone. If someone wants to make the argument that his ineffectiveness on the border is criminal negligence, I suppose that's why you have impeachment proceedings, but I think this is more theater than anything else.
I think republicans are more concerned about the laws that he and his boss refuse to enforce in a reasonable fashion...
I don’t think Republicans are looking at the “laws” as they are written/interoreted. This is 100%subjective. One man’s gold is another man’s folly. Just more noise, more distraction and Hiuse Republicans are desperate. Look who they have placed in charge of the impeachment. MTG? Honestly…she’s the lead attack dog?
It shouldn't matter on who is leading the charge if it's legit. I just don't like this game of impeachment that's being played, and this feels way more like political games or stunts than effective governing/representation.
They MIGHT I use that term loosely, MIGHT be able to impeach AM on perjury or lying to congress, they MIGHT have something more there than actions or inactions at the border, and that's a stretch.
It certainly will make a difference! MTG is 100% nuts and 100% off the rails. The Republicans will provide the stage and cast of characters for their latest edition if their shitshow.
I mean, if I’m the Senate Democrats - who will ultimately determine the rules in the senate trial; I’m for using, dare I say “liberal” trial rules and let Greene and co make fools of themselves….right?
Latest posts
-
WATCH: Fran on Prepping for Nebraska, Learning from Wisconsin Loss
- Latest: ClintonHawk
-
-
-
-