Kamala’s Impeachment

[Rebound]

If it’s true that, while Vice President, Kamala Harris  received millions of dollars worth of gifts from wealthy donors, and didn’t even report half of them, should she be impeached?

Edited August 27, 2024 by Rebound

[gatomontes99]

6 minutes ago, Rebound said:

If it’s true that, while Vice President, Kamala Harris  received millions of dollars worth of gifts from wealthy donors, and didn’t even report half of them, should she be impeached?

Thats the first I've heard of it.

[Nationalist]

10 minutes ago, Rebound said:

If it’s true that, while Vice President, Kamala Harris  received millions of dollars worth of gifts from wealthy donors, and didn’t even report half of them, should she be impeached?

If it's true...then yes she should. 

[Rebound]

42 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Thats the first I've heard of it.

But if it is true, should she be impeached?

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

If it's true...then yes she should. 

I absolutely agree with you. 

[Aristides]

13 minutes ago, Rebound said:

I absolutely agree with you. 

But it seems to be fine for Supreme Court justices.

[gatomontes99]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

But if it is true, should she be impeached?

I'm not answering impeachment questions based on rumors. Do you have an article that actually says she did something illegal with some level of proof?

Edited August 27, 2024 by gatomontes99

[Nationalist]

26 minutes ago, Aristides said:

But it seems to be fine for Supreme Court justices.

How so? I don't remember any SCOTUS judge getting political donations while on the bench.

Do you?

[Nationalist]

54 minutes ago, Rebound said:

I absolutely agree with you. 

Rebound...a "gift" is not a donation. It's a "gift". If "wealthy doners" gave "gifts" to Kamala, then 2 things should be true:

1. The "gifts" were NOT political donations to any campaign or cause.

2. The person giving Kamala the "gift" should be expecting nothing in return.

Your warping of that sentence is a silly attempt to make a point, where none exists.

A "doner" donates to promote a political cause.

A "gift" is given to celebrate friendship. 

But nice try.

Man...these faux-Liberal slimeballs just can't seem to fly straight. Yet they think people should trust them. Such huberous.

Edited August 27, 2024 by Nationalist

[Hodad]

3 hours ago, Rebound said:

If it’s true that, while Vice President, Kamala Harris  received millions of dollars worth of gifts from wealthy donors, and didn’t even report half of them, should she be impeached?

Of course she should. 

Everyone (correctly) felt a sense of moral outrage for a moment. Then they figured out that this has implications for the bought-and-paid-for Clarence Thomas and they quickly rearranged their morality. 🙄

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Rebound said:

If it’s true that, while Vice President, Kamala Harris  received millions of dollars worth of gifts from wealthy donors, and didn’t even report half of them, should she be impeached?

You can't answer that question with that limited amount of data.  Who were the donors? What were the circumstances?

There are rules in place and if she took gifts  and was required to declare them and didn't  then there should be a consequence. Impeachment may be over the top depending on the circumstances, censure might be more appropriate, but the devil is in the details. 

What are they claiming she did specifically?

[Aristides]

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

How so? I don't remember any SCOTUS judge getting political donations while on the bench.

Do you?

I'll refresh your 10 minute memory.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/06/supreme-court-justices-millions-dollars-gifts-clarence-thomas.html

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

I'll refresh your 10 minute memory.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/06/supreme-court-justices-millions-dollars-gifts-clarence-thomas.html

Which of those were political donations exactly? 

Let me refresh your English.  

Judges are not politicians. A judge may accept a gift from anyone provided they're not working on a case involving that person, and if they do in the future they may need to recuse themsevles and have another judge assigned. A judge's role in society is very limited and specific and so it's easily dealt with. 

This is very different than a politician.  Politicians can recieve gifs but because their influence may include voting on an number of bills there are rules that surround that and which must be followed. 

As usual those on the left try to compare two completely different things as if they were the same. 

Yet most voted liberal again afgter justin literally got caught and was found guilty of accepting bribes in the form of 'gifts'   

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Of course she should. 

Everyone (correctly) felt a sense of moral outrage for a moment. Then they figured out that this has implications for the bought-and-paid-for Clarence Thomas and they quickly rearranged their morality. 🙄

"Gift" "Donation"

One needs to be a m0ron in order to think them the same thing.

 

[Rebound]

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Rebound...a "gift" is not a donation. It's a "gift". If "wealthy doners" gave "gifts" to Kamala, then 2 things should be true:

1. The "gifts" were NOT political donations to any campaign or cause.

2. The person giving Kamala the "gift" should be expecting nothing in return.

Your warping of that sentence is a silly attempt to make a point, where none exists.

A "doner" donates to promote a political cause.

A "gift" is given to celebrate friendship. 

But nice try.

Man...these faux-Liberal slimeballs just can't seem to fly straight. Yet they think people should trust them. Such huberous.

You sure are trying very hard to defend Clarence Thomas, aren’t you?  

Here’s your problem: You are a corrupt individual. You believe that if someone is on your “team,” then laws and rules don’t apply to them. A judge cannot accept a gift if it creates the appearance of impropriety. You don’t see the impropriety, because he’s on your “team.” But that doesn’t mean impropriety doesn’t exist, and as soon as you saw the precise exact same thing with Harris, you immediately agreed that it was impeachable.  
 

“They’re all the same,” you say.   False! Democrat Senator Robert Menendez was just convicted of receiving “gifts.”  Not one Democrat leader protested this prosecution. Not one. He’s out of the Senate and he’s convicted. Just like that.  No Supreme Court interference, no Federal judges claiming that assigning Federal prosecutors is unconstitutional. Democrats are far from perfect, as Menendez proves, but the Republicans are teeming with corruption right now and you are a part of it, whether you believe it or not.  

[Rebound]

4 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

I'm not answering impeachment questions based on rumors. Do you have an article that actually says she did something illegal with some level of proof?

So all you need is to “see an article,” and that makes something true? 
 

I asked you a hypothetical.  “Should she be impeached?” is a question of whether the offense, if true, is impeachable. In my view, yes, receiving a massive amount of gifts from anyone is inappropriate for someone who holds a position of power. These people are paid salaries for their work.  If they want to make more money, they can work in the private sector.  
 

Should a General be able to receive $4 million in gifts from defense contractors? Absolutely, positively not.  And judges shouldn’t receive gifts from anyone, beyond a meal or a modest speaking honorarium. 

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, Rebound said:

So all you need is to “see an article,” and that makes something true? 
 

I asked you a hypothetical.  “Should she be impeached?” is a question of whether the offense, if true, is impeachable. In my view, yes, receiving a massive amount of gifts from anyone is inappropriate for someone who holds a position of power.

But then you try to translate that into a completely different circumstance.

This is the logical fallacy of false equivalency.  And it's a dishonest debate tactic. 

The president of the united states is not the same as a judge.  They are radically different jobs with completely different responsibilities and what applies to one does not ipso facto apply to the other. 

There are tons of people in power or positions of power who receive gifts all the time and it's not an issue. Teachers, doctors, lawyers, all kinds of people who are recognized as having positions of power or authority. For some or in some circumstances it may not be appropriate such as the president of the united states receiving undisclosed gifts of large value. But that does not mean that anyone in power should automatically fall into the same circumstance.

 

[Rebound]

41 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

But then you try to translate that into a completely different circumstance.

This is the logical fallacy of false equivalency.  And it's a dishonest debate tactic. 

The president of the united states is not the same as a judge.  They are radically different jobs with completely different responsibilities and what applies to one does not ipso facto apply to the other. 

There are tons of people in power or positions of power who receive gifts all the time and it's not an issue. Teachers, doctors, lawyers, all kinds of people who are recognized as having positions of power or authority. For some or in some circumstances it may not be appropriate such as the president of the united states receiving undisclosed gifts of large value. But that does not mean that anyone in power should automatically fall into the same circumstance.

 

That is baloney and you know it. 
Paying off a judge $4 million is “different”? In what nation, state or county is it legal to give a judge $4 million?

Hate to say it, but you’re corrupt as Nationalist.  

Edited August 27, 2024 by Rebound

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

I'm not answering impeachment questions based on rumors. Do you have an article that actually says she did something illegal with some level of proof?

Why can't you state YOUR STANDARD? Cause you KNOW the issue is about Clarence Thomas? LMAO

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

How so? I don't remember any SCOTUS judge getting political donations while on the bench.

Do you?

The question is NOT about "political donations."

The FACT is, there are strict standards prohibiting gifts for Federal employees EXCEPT JoSCOTUS, who don't even face penalties for not reporting them.

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Rebound...a "gift" is not a donation. It's a "gift". If "wealthy doners" gave "gifts" to Kamala, then 2 things should be true:

1. The "gifts" were NOT political donations to any campaign or cause.

2. The person giving Kamala the "gift" should be expecting nothing in return.

Your warping of that sentence is a silly attempt to make a point, where none exists.

A "doner" donates to promote a political cause.

A "gift" is given to celebrate friendship. 

But nice try.

Man...these faux-Liberal slimeballs just can't seem to fly straight. Yet they think people should trust them. Such huberous.

It's YOU who is the slimeball making excuses to IGNORE the issue. Duh

Thomas should be impeached for accepting and FAILURE TO REPORT $4M of gifts from people with business before the court.

It was BRIBES to keep him on the BENCH, so Democrats could not appoint his replacement. 🤮

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

"Gift" "Donation"

One needs to be a m0ron in order to think them the same thing.

^Needs to be a M0R0N to pretend there's less than a semantic difference.

It's very clear that Thomas solicited additional income to stay on the bench.

27 minutes ago, Rebound said:

That is baloney and you know it. 
Paying off a judge $4 million is “different”? In what nation, state or county is it legal to give a judge $4 million?

Hate to say it, but you’re corrupt as Nationalist.  

Don't hate to say the truth.

[gatomontes99]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

So all you need is to “see an article,” and that makes something true? 
 

I asked you a hypothetical.  “Should she be impeached?” is a question of whether the offense, if true, is impeachable. In my view, yes, receiving a massive amount of gifts from anyone is inappropriate for someone who holds a position of power. These people are paid salaries for their work.  If they want to make more money, they can work in the private sector.  
 

Should a General be able to receive $4 million in gifts from defense contractors? Absolutely, positively not.  And judges shouldn’t receive gifts from anyone, beyond a meal or a modest speaking honorarium. 

I asked to see some level of proof because I wasn't answering a hypothetical. But, since you are willing to make irrefutable assumptions based on nothing more than hypothetical, I'm sure you are calling for Biden to be impeached and then imprisoned for having his family accept $22 million in bribes for policies he pushed. After all, if friends can't travel together because one is a judge that isn't making any ruling about his friend then Joe Biden using his family as proxies to take money for policies would be a very serious problem. Especially when you habe a confession from Joe, text and WhatsApp messages from Hinter, bank records l, dozens of SARs from banks, multiple business partner testimony, IRS whistleblower twstimony, and dozens of shell companies all pointing to corruption.

45 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Why can't you state YOUR STANDARD? Cause you KNOW the issue is about Clarence Thomas? LMAO

Clarence Thomas did far less.than Sotomayor. Why aren't you going after her first?

[robosmith]

13 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

I asked to see some level of proof because I wasn't answering a hypothetical. But, since you are willing to make irrefutable assumptions based on nothing more than hypothetical, I'm sure you are calling for Biden to be impeached and then imprisoned for having his family accept $22 million in bribes for policies he pushed. After all, if friends can't travel together because one is a judge that isn't making any ruling about his friend then Joe Biden using his family as proxies to take money for policies would be a very serious problem. Especially when you habe a confession from Joe, text and WhatsApp messages from Hinter, bank records l, dozens of SARs from banks, multiple business partner testimony, IRS whistleblower twstimony, and dozens of shell companies all pointing to corruption.

^No EVIDENCE. Seeing a story on FOS LIES is NOT EVIDENCE. 

13 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Clarence Thomas did far less.than Sotomayor. Why aren't you going after her first?

Really? How much in gifts did Sotomayor get and not report?

[Rebound]

13 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

I asked to see some level of proof because I wasn't answering a hypothetical. But, since you are willing to make irrefutable assumptions based on nothing more than hypothetical, I'm sure you are calling for Biden to be impeached and then imprisoned for having his family accept $22 million in bribes for policies he pushed. After all, if friends can't travel together because one is a judge that isn't making any ruling about his friend then Joe Biden using his family as proxies to take money for policies would be a very serious problem. Especially when you habe a confession from Joe, text and WhatsApp messages from Hinter, bank records l, dozens of SARs from banks, multiple business partner testimony, IRS whistleblower twstimony, and dozens of shell companies all pointing to corruption.

Clarence Thomas did far less.than Sotomayor. Why aren't you going after her first?

Hypothetically, if Biden’s family accepted $22 million in bribes, and he had knowledge of it, then yes, I would support his impeachment.