Comments on the POTUS killing a Terrorist?

[techman05]

I read that article. Again, it seems that bin Laden was hiding under a rock. No threat. Based on that, the Dems should have argued that he be left alive.

[DawgyNWindow]

I read that article. Again, it seems that bin Laden was hiding under a rock. No threat. Based on that, the Dems should have argued that he be left alive.

Had Trump called the shots, they'd still be whining that we invaded a sovereign country illegally (Pakistan) WITHOUT DECLARING WAR, which of course would make Trump a war criminal and would also be an impeachable offense.

Dems are no longer real Americans.

[Guisslapp]

I read that article. Again, it seems that bin Laden was hiding under a rock. No threat. Based on that, the Dems should have argued that he be left alive.

The difference is Congressional authorization.

[techman05]

Are we sure that the terrorists loving leftists would approve a hit on their friend? Are we sure no members of Congress would make a call to warn their buddies in the ME?

[Guisslapp]

Are we sure that the terrorists loving leftists would approve a hit on their friend? Are we sure no members of Congress would make a call to warn their buddies in the ME?

Yes, you are being paranoid from listening to crankyankers. But you wouldn’t necessarily need to work with all members of Congress to get the approval. And at the end of the day, one branch can’t do the Constitutional job of the other branch even if the one branch thinks the other job will bungle their responsibility.

[DawgyNWindow]

Yes, you are being paranoid from listening to crankyankers. But you wouldn’t necessarily need to work with all members of Congress to get the approval. And at the end of the day, one branch can’t do the Constitutional job of the other branch even if the one branch thinks the other job will bungle their responsibility.

Yeah, I remember you saying the same thing when Nancy was attempting to run the Senate impeachment trial from the house.

You need to turn off the cable news and try to use your thinky thinky thing.

[Guisslapp]

Yeah, I remember you saying the same thing when Nancy was attempting to run the Senate impeachment trial from the house.

You need to turn off the cable news and try to use your thinky thinky thing.

Te Senate and the House are the same branch of government. Back to civics for you.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

Here is what Heritage Foundation says about it.

https://www.heritage.org/constitutio...49/declare-war



I am not arguing that the Supreme Court is likely to say that killing Soleimani was unlawful. But the concern that the Framer’s raised still applies today. A president SHOULD NOT alone make these types of decisions unless repelling an imminent attack. This is an area of shared Constitutional responsibility.

Hypocrite again.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

Te Senate and the House are the same branch of government. Back to civics for you.

What DNW said was true and what Pelosi attempted to do. In fact she has been and is now trying to effect the 2020 elections with her and the squad’s bogus impeachment attempt, which should be illegal.

[techman05]

Shouldn’t we see her, Schiff, and Naddy daddy tried for election tampering?

[DawgyNWindow]

Te Senate and the House are the same branch of government. Back to civics for you.

You are aware that there are certain things for which the House is responsible and others specifically designated for the Senate, right? I kinda see why things are difficult for you to understand now.

It's OK...we all have our limitations.

[Guisslapp]

You are aware that there are certain things for which the House is responsible and others specifically designated for the Senate, right? I kinda see why things are difficult for you to understand now.

It's OK...we all have our limitations.

My comment was about branches of government. Congress is its own branch - the roles of house and senate do not remotely raise the same separation of powers concerns as the executive and legislative branches. I forget that some people are slow here.

And, since some folks are slow, you realize the House doesn’t just throw the articles of impeachment over to the Senate, right? The House is still involved through their managers, who will be prosecuting the case. The House will therefore be presenting the case and arguing the motions for witnesses and the like. They have a continuing advocacy role and it is kind of their job to use it.

Hopefully you can begin to think more clearly now that you have these facts.

[techman05]

So, do the senators call the witnesses, or do the managers call on witnesses? If it’s the dem selected managers, I see this being very fair and bipartisan. Er, welp, probably not.

[Guisslapp]

So, do the senators call the witnesses, or do the managers call on witnesses? If it’s the dem selected managers, I see this being very fair and bipartisan. Er, welp, probably not.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pol...es-work-098226

[dawg80]

So, do the senators call the witnesses, or do the managers call on witnesses? If it’s the dem selected managers, I see this being very fair and bipartisan. Er, welp, probably not.

Sen. Rand Paul is the one pushing the hardest for ALL witnesses being called if this hoax is not dismissed. Unfortunately, Paul is on to something, since we know the Bidens, obummer, Krooked Killary et al will never be brought to justice if left to the so-called "justice" system.