Comments by "Robert Steele" (@robertsteele474) on "" video.

  1. "So sad to see the congresswoman's mental decline" I have suffered under Pelosi for some time now. Her mind is about the same as it has always been. Unfortunately. No More Socialite Politicians
    3
  2. It is not hard to remember a week ago, even at my age ;-)
    3
  3. Constitutional crisis brought on by Podesta and Hillary.
    1
  4. She was pretty much the same
    1
  5. "Do any of you Democrats out here on political YouTube actually like Pelosi, Schiff & Schumer?" I believe I speak or everyone. Nope
    1
  6. Except she doesn't believe a word of it.
    1
  7.  @mddevice2108  Nope
    1
  8. I am amazed of the lynch mentality and lack of understanding of the constitution and the rule of law. IF the President broke the law as well as violated his oath to the Constitution. IF there is actual evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of the alleged crime and not just hearsay, then he should be impeached. Your opinion is not going to make the statement true of false or prove his guilt or innocence. That is for the Senate to decide. Wiki: The impeached official remains in office until a trial is held. That trial, and their removal from office if convicted, is separate from the act of impeachment itself. Analogous to a trial before a judge and jury, these proceedings are (where the legislature is bicameral) conducted by the upper house of the legislature, which at the federal level is the Senate. However, impeachment is not a criminal proceeding, as the defendant does not risk forfeiture of life, liberty or property; the only penalty is removal from office upon conviction by two-thirds of the senators present. Upon conviction (no president or vice-president has ever been convicted), a second vote is held to determine, by majority vote of the senators present, if the convicted office holder shall be barred from holding further federal office. Why are we wasting time on this when: The 2/3s of the Senate will not convict him There are no real repercussions since the defendant does not risk forfeiture of life, liberty or property no president or vice-president has ever been convicted The main point is there are other crimes that have a much better chance of Trump being convicted of, emollients for one. Choosing the (currently) weakest and vaguest area to prove impeachment on is either just plain stupid or a duplicitous distraction from another agenda. Most likely both. It is a circus with no bread. There are a myriad of other important and critical issues to fight for that this dog-and-pony show is distracting from. This is NOT the hill to die on.
    1