Submitted by boundfortrees t3_zzxay0 in Pennsylvania
Electr_O_Purist t1_j2ebc7p wrote
Reply to comment by JudasChair in Commonwealth Court sides with Philly DA Larry Krasner in impeachment lawsuit by boundfortrees
How? Impeachments are for people using their office to commit crimes, for example, bribing foreign leaders with military support in exchange for political favors, or instigating violence in support of something like a fake electors plot to overthrow the election you lost. These are just random examples.
Did Krasner commit a crime, or do you just not approve of his platform?
delusions- t1_j2eemoy wrote
> How?
Hollow right wing publicity stunt doesn't sound familiar?
Electr_O_Purist t1_j2ehjf3 wrote
Well, that part certainly does!
dclxvi616 t1_j2ecztr wrote
Impeachments are entirely outside of both the civil system of law and the criminal system of law. They're uniquely a political proceeding.
felldestroyed t1_j2fgsy0 wrote
Federal impeachment is not the same as PA impeachment, as the PA constitution states that the conduct must be "misbehavior in office" that has "improper or corrupt motive".
dclxvi616 t1_j2fh6u2 wrote
Federal impeachment limits the grounds of impeachment to "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors", but that still doesn't make it a criminal proceeding.
TrashApocalypse t1_j2euhew wrote
It’s almost like you don’t understand that our politics actually determine how we live in a society.
Just like how a government should be run by citizens of a country, who work in the best interest of the citizens of that country. “Politics” is just the word we use to describe our own governance.
So when someone gets impeached, it’s almost as if society as a whole is saying, “hey, that shit you did right there, not cool dude” of course, that’s only assuming that our political leaders actually reflect the values of its citizens.
dclxvi616 t1_j2eut68 wrote
>It’s almost like you don’t understand that our politics actually determine how we live in a society.
On what basis are you making this judgment? In case it was unclear, all I've really said is that impeachments are not criminal proceedings.
hedgerow_hank t1_j2ec73g wrote
Ah! Another know nothing right wing mouthpiece.
jaythebearded t1_j2ecxpe wrote
How does what they're saying make them a know nothing right winger?
Edit: I'm starting to feel like some people are vastly misreading electr's comments as being dismissive of the 2 trump impeachments, but it's literally the opposite they're saying those were legitimate impeachments unlike this krasner impeachment.
[deleted] t1_j2edrjp wrote
[removed]
hedgerow_hank t1_j2eeuo0 wrote
Because the right winger is applying one false set of circumstances to another non-complicit person entirely. Kind of falls under the "shill" category.
Will you be needing help with what the word "complicit" means also?
jaythebearded t1_j2egbls wrote
I still don't get it honestly, what false circumstances are you saying electr_o_purist is applying?
hedgerow_hank t1_j2egkdz wrote
Might I suggest reading the article and quit plying me with idiotic questions that are easily answered if only you read the article?
Hmm?
jaythebearded t1_j2eh8u1 wrote
I did read the article and I still fail to see how what they've said in this comment chain makes them a right winger.
> Impeachments are for people using their office to commit crimes, for example, bribing foreign leaders with military support in exchange for political favors, or instigating violence in support of something like a fake electors plot to overthrow the election you lost
And
> This whole phony impeachment is a hollow right wing publicity stunt.
This doesn't sound like a right winger to me. I'm trying to understand what you're saying, there's no need to be rude.
hedgerow_hank t1_j2f3fi6 wrote
So you read it and don't understand it. Perhaps your mom can explain it to you because everything you've said so far indicates that you have little to no comprehension regardless how well you read.
jaythebearded t1_j2f4tuu wrote
I comprehend the article and electr's comments just fine, what I don't understand is why you think electr is right wing when their comments indicate they are not.
Electr said
> Impeachments are for people using their office to commit crimes, for example, bribing foreign leaders with military support in exchange for political favors, or instigating violence in support of something like a fake electors plot to overthrow the election you lost
And you claim that
> the right winger is applying one false set of circumstances to another non-complicit person entirely.
What exactly are you trying to say is a false set of circumstances?
Finrodsrod t1_j2fan0z wrote
He's sealioning you. Don't bother answering the troll
jaythebearded t1_j2ferli wrote
I'm literally not, look at electr's comments across this thread, he doesn't at all come across as a right winger. Can you explain how the electr saying
> Impeachments are for people using their office to commit crimes, for example, bribing foreign leaders with military support in exchange for political favors, or instigating violence in support of something like a fake electors plot to overthrow the election you lost
Leads to a response of
> the right winger is applying one false set of circumstances to another non-complicit person entirely.
I haven't sealioned at all, I've been asking about one thing this entire time, how they think the user electr is a right winger. Beyond that, I've refrained from any insulting comments despite them being repeatedly rude
Electr_O_Purist t1_j2ehyee wrote
What’s happening now?
Alfa505 t1_j2egb32 wrote
Your bias blinders are quite thick
hedgerow_hank t1_j2egnpd wrote
And your shill is quite weak.
Odd_Shirt_3556 t1_j2fcejn wrote
So Trumps first impeachment was an attempt to remove a sitting president?
Electr_O_Purist t1_j2ffhj6 wrote
It was an attempt to hold a criminal accountable for abusing his office.
DutyRoutine t1_j2esjzu wrote
Well there was that time when Krasner requested a sentence reduction for a man giving a life sentence for the brutal murder of a husband and wife. At the hearing, they blatantly lied to the judge saying that the victims now grown child was notified about the hearing and had no problem with it. Total bullshit, never notified, never agreed to it. Somehow stories such as this isn't worth the Philadelphia Inquirer's time.
Electr_O_Purist t1_j2ew6oc wrote
Downvoting this with an explanation: people who make vague references like this do it with intention: to control the narrative. We only have as much information as you give us, so we can’t see it from any perspective but yours. Your job is done though, you’ve already spread your view. We could asks for links and have a conversation about whether what you’re saying is accurate or even fits here, but it’s all under your original framing, which is the part you want to promote anyway. In other words, you’re trolling and it shows.
AbsentEmpire t1_j2f28ec wrote
Or you know instead you could look it up, since it actually happened.
And this wasn't the only time he got reprimanded by judges for bad conduct.
Electr_O_Purist t1_j2f2u1d wrote
Oh, would you look at that. The sentence reduction was from the death penalty to life without parole. Wow, what a monster!
AbsentEmpire t1_j2f406k wrote
The issue is that he lied in court, which is why he was reprimanded by the judge, the issue that the other user was alluding to.
Electr_O_Purist t1_j2f4ey1 wrote
K, shouldn’t have done that. Didn’t help the case. Isn’t an abuse of the office.
AbsentEmpire t1_j2f4vql wrote
Expect he has a track record of getting slapped down by judges for lying or just straight up trying to rewrite laws.
Electr_O_Purist t1_j2fc4nm wrote
You don’t have much experience with the judicial system, do you?
Electr_O_Purist t1_j2f40mq wrote
Alright, so I read it. I mean, I’m not going to defend it, but, under no possible reading of this is it an impeachable offense. People who worked for Krasner suggested to a court that a victim said something they didn’t…yeah, lawyers are manipulative, scummy people. Welcome to adulthood. It’s not a crime that abuses the office. The judge rejected the claim anyway, Pennsylvania doesn’t really put people on death row to death. In fact, most people on death row get their sentences reduced to life.
Electr_O_Purist t1_j2f2lwe wrote
Hey, thanks for posting this inquirer article (in response to your post about how the inquirer can’t be bothered to cover). Off to a good start! Now I’m gonna read it.
AbsentEmpire t1_j2f42tl wrote
Different user, I'd didn't say they didn't cover it.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments