[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Hypocrite much

By David Hogarty • Published November 6, 2008 • Updated on November 6, 2008 at 2:11 pm

President-elect Barack Obama won't be inaugurated for another ten weeks, but groups are already forming on the Internet to call for his impeachment.

Several groups exist on the social networking site Facebook, calling for the removal of Obama from office for a number of reasons, including planning to not uphold the Constitution of the United States and campaign finance violations.

Impeach Barack Obama was formed under the assumption that the winner of Tuesday's election will waste little time in violating his oath of office and already has more than 2,500 members on Facebook:

"This group has been created under the assumption that it takes approximately 7 seconds for a modern day President to violate this oath. So we should be ready."

Impeach Barack Hussein Obama seems mostly concerned with the Democrat's prior support for an assault weapons ban and accusations that he's a closet Marxist.

"Obama has voiced support for various unconstitutional programs such as the assault weapons ban, universal healthcare, and various schemes for wealth distribution. What are we going to do about it? RESIST SOCIALISM! IMPEACH HIM!

might as well start before he gets in office."

Originally Posted by Pete F.

From the last election, I wonder who the Republicans were listening to?
Insert stupid period thing here......

A historic number of “faithless” electors -- seven in total--each cast their ballots on Monday for a candidate other than the one who won his or her state. What may be more surprising, given the level of protests against Donald Trump and the pressure exerted on Republican electors, is that a greater number were untrue to Hillary Clinton than to Mr. Trump.


Among the 538 electors chosen to represent their states in the Electoral College, five were faithless to the Democratic nominee and two to the Republican. Prior to this year, there hasn’t been more than one faithless elector in any presidential election since 1948.

Originally Posted by Pete F.

NO. The Democrats did not decline to accept defeat in 2016. Hillary Clinton conceded, albeit with insinuations that the Russians had helped Trump. But grumbling about your loss is a far cry from contesting it. A few Democrats lodged complaints about the vote in January 2017 when the Electoral College results were read out. Joe Biden, the then-president of the Senate and sitting vice-president handled those matters as he should according to the Constitution.

And playing your silly game about how "there are allegations of" is baloney, it matters now. Never more than now. It isn’t about the precedent that this might set for some imagined Democratic abuse of the future. The abuse is here. The abuse of power is now. This is a constitutional crisis because one party has decided that it cares more for power than for the American system. Giving one iota of support for Trump’s unconstitutional coup attempt is discrediting for every person, politician and commentator who fails to call it out loudly and unequivocally. A decent few, like Senators Ben Sasse and Mitt Romney have done so. Find your voice, or don’t insult the rest of us by calling yourself a patriot.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Bonkers and dishonest. God forbid you be critical of your side.

The only thing that democrats didn't say about 2016, was that they lost fair and square. They made every other conceivable claim. Including putting pressure on electors to vote for someone other than Trump after the election. Sorry Pete, that happened. Just because you can't being yourself to admit how terrifying that is, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

You consistently ignore history to repeat Trumplican tropes.