Say they do. You say numbers. Work with me. Reduce their numbers. How many are in Democratic states. Is there a mechanism to remove a member not requiring vote. Then make them bow out. Force resignations. Put so much pressure that it would be better than voting against impeachment.

Sorry not to add to your stress. I'm 52 work full time. My wife can't work. But I make too much for her to get any assistance even though she is entitled. My youngest is a soldier like I was. Youngest of 3 boys. I've buried my oldest. I fear these people giving my son an unlawful order. Yes. Bad.

Also, see what local services need donations or volunteers, I heard meals on wheels received cuts. See if you can help out. Most food banks did not take direct food donations, but policies may have changed. If you can't ask someone else. Or pool resources.

You really missed the point. You engaged. Showed me where to refocus. You helped me better present my line of thinking. Thank you for engaging. Really, thank you.

Update I argue they can refer for impeachment. Not compel. OK, but it puts it back in their face to respond. So, maybe not all the way there, but getting there.

No. Irresponsible government on purpose. Republicans spend more when in control. They want receipts when reversed. 95% are under attack by Republican bills that will increase the number of people in poverty. Those red states have some of the poorest in our country. Who will help them?

Please help the Senator. Put pressure on the administration. Make noise. Repost. Comment. Look at their actions. It is getting more and more difficult for them to lie.

Good news, but those that have not been restored. Does anyone know what programs and grants are going on in the courts. We need to be aware. What cases in what districts. Who among you watches the courts closely? By state and districts. Give us a heads up on what cases to watch for. I'm watching NC.

My motives are bringing awareness. Making citizens active in their own destiny. I might not have the answer. Hell, i may be wrong. But it will not be because I did not try. Every person looking at this document is an eye opened. Maybe not to my answer, but towards an answer together. She is alive.

Support is the people knowing. Think. You have a question opposing mine. I try countering. If they know the true law, it is harder for Republicans to lie to them. Trial in front of informed citizens. How will they act then.

You're not getting it. Be sure. Find a possibility run it. Try something different. It is a living thing. Each of us will have a different view. I just spent several posts doing my best to argue my point. I lost a lot of ground, but it takes that. We won't understand her or honor her by worrying.

That does not preclude them from referral. Only the Congress can try him. You keep refusing to hear what you said. In the case of defying a equal branch. We wait for the hostage takers to move. Or do we take corrective actions. They rule against him. What? Why even make a decision.

To have the trial. You are trying your best to make this something it is not. Only congress can hold the proceedings of impeachment. At what point does the stop SCOTUS form call for the proceedings. You are are trying to overpower my view. You still have not answered why not.

Why here. Not with the president. Why not with the congress. If SCOTUS finds contempt, tell me what their recourse for that. I'm waiting. This is not a oil dispute. Tell me what is the recourse. You have the answer for that. This is that check you seem to think is not there. If SCOTUS does nothing.

This is why Americans are saps. You would rather argue against the accept it's intent. Congress has the trial duty. That is the impeachment. Drop what you think you know. Read it. Compelling is not impeachment. Government was meant to be run by its people. They laid out each section carefully.

3.3 refers to treason. The power to carry out impeachment is not what what I'm pointing out. SCOTUS, in particular, has power when treason is the change. No where else is there direction. My question is, why do say I'm wrong? All that you are showing me does not address 3.3.

You seem to think that makes what I'm saying untrue. They do. That power can be compelled by 3.3 to begin. It is the house that has the trial. They are not overreaching. They have power to compel proceedings. They do the deed. Compelling is not the same as impeachment.

Everyone keeps saying things like what authority. It is there by nature. If they can't expect to be able to check another branch then you bought the Kool-Aid too.