I Know This Won’t Come As A Shock

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

But US Republicans have abandoned the Constitution. Senator Lindsey Graham has said that, if his party takes control of the House in 2022, they are looking at impeaching Vice President Harris for supporting the Bill of Rights.

Boru

[Rev. Rye]

Surprisingly, it looks like the issue isn't because of the Bill of Rights, but more because of [url=https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:JLB0qMRVNqwJ:https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/09/03/kamala-harris-tweeted-support-bail-fund-money-didnt-just-assist-protestors/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-b-1-d[her support for the Minnesota Freedom Fund, which recieved $35 million in donations in the wake of the George Floyd protests, apparently under the assumption that the protesters would be the ones being helped out.[/url] Unfortunately, it turned out that, of the 170 protesters arrested in Hennepin County that week, only 13 actually needed to pay bail and ten of those managed to get out by June 3. And as a result, the money ended up being given to the less deserving. Then again, I doubt this is something anyone involved could have foreseen. And by support, I mean she tweeted a link to the fund.

This line made me laugh:

“If you’re going to pursue this, and you want to start calling witnesses, and you want to drag this thing out, it would be fair to have Kamala Harris’ tape play where she bailed people out of jail,

And the funny thing is, there is no tape. What she did was tweet in support of a bail fund. And I'm not even certain she even paid a dime in support of the fund, and if she did, I doubt she could have figured out exactly what was going to happen.

“What more could you do to incite future violence, than to pay the bail of the people who broke up the shops and beat up the cops​,” Graham added. ​”How’s that not inciting future violence? Be careful what you wish for my Democratic colleagues, be careful what you wish for.”

Maybe by actually gathering rioters in one place and directing them to go to a specific place and fuck shit up, especially if it's to intentionally disrupt the process of American democracy. But, hey, it's not like that's actually got any precedent in Presidential history, right?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Surprisingly, it looks like the issue isn't because of the Bill of Rights, but more because of [url=https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:JLB0qMRVNqwJ:https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/09/03/kamala-harris-tweeted-support-bail-fund-money-didnt-just-assist-protestors/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-b-1-d[her support for the Minnesota Freedom Fund, which recieved $35 million in donations in the wake of the George Floyd protests, apparently under the assumption that the protesters would be the ones being helped out.[/url] Unfortunately, it turned out that, of the 170 protesters arrested in Hennepin County that week, only 13 actually needed to pay bail and ten of those managed to get out by June 3. And as a result, the money ended up being given to the less deserving. Then again, I doubt this is something anyone involved could have foreseen. And by support, I mean she tweeted a link to the fund.

This line made me laugh:

“If you’re going to pursue this, and you want to start calling witnesses, and you want to drag this thing out, it would be fair to have Kamala Harris’ tape play where she bailed people out of jail,

And the funny thing is, there is no tape. What she did was tweet in support of a bail fund. And I'm not even certain she even paid a dime in support of the fund, and if she did, I doubt she could have figured out exactly what was going to happen.

“What more could you do to incite future violence, than to pay the bail of the people who broke up the shops and beat up the cops,” Graham added. ”How’s that not inciting future violence? Be careful what you wish for my Democratic colleagues, be careful what you wish for.”

Maybe by actually gathering rioters in one place and directing them to go to a specific place and fuck shit up, especially if it's to intentionally disrupt the process of American democracy. But, hey, it's not like that's actually got any precedent in Presidential history, right?

Bail funds were established to counteract bail imposed that was beyond the means of the accused to pay. This qualifies as excessive bail. The Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive bail. When VP Harris tweeted in support of the fund, she was in effect supporting the Eighth Amendment.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

Completely in character for the treason caucus.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Graham is involved in a "Trump+" movement, so this isn't at all out of character.

[Brian37]

Un fucking believable that after Mitch voted to acquit, he blamed Trump for the riot, which was the entire point of the impeachment in the first place. Basically he'd be like a cop at a bank robbery having the drop on the suspect, but freezes and expects others to go after the suspect.

He basically implied that court remedies could still be employed. Yea well, a conviction would make those things easier. The GOP are spineless outside the few that did the right thing.

[brewer]

Putz's gonna putz.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Un fucking believable that after Mitch voted to acquit, he blamed Trump for the riot, which was the entire point of the impeachment in the first place. Basically he'd be like a cop at a bank robbery having the drop on the suspect, but freezes and expects others to go after the suspect.

He basically implied that court remedies could still be employed. Yea well, a conviction would make those things easier. The GOP are spineless outside the few that did the right thing.

Which has nothing to do with Sen. Graham, the Bill of Rights, or VP Harris.

Boru

[Brian37]

Un fucking believable that after Mitch voted to acquit, he blamed Trump for the riot, which was the entire point of the impeachment in the first place. Basically he'd be like a cop at a bank robbery having the drop on the suspect, but freezes and expects others to go after the suspect.

He basically implied that court remedies could still be employed. Yea well, a conviction would make those things easier. The GOP are spineless outside the few that did the right thing.

Which has nothing to do with Sen. Graham, the Bill of Rights, or VP Harris.

Boru

Wha?

An aside, I do find it laughable that Lindsey thinks he can scare Harris.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Which has nothing to do with Sen. Graham, the Bill of Rights, or VP Harris.

Boru

Wha?

An aside, I do find it laughable that Lindsey thinks he can scare Harris.

What do you mean ‘Wha?’? Just pointing out that your reply has nothing to do with this thread.

If your takeaway is that Graham is trying to scare Harris, you’re not getting the gist.

Boru