Maybe a lame game to you but my statement is from the Constitution if people who claim to be upholding the document but only agree to it when it is convenient are in my opinon just as lame.

Impreachment yes that is just the acceptance of articles by the house to present to the Senate to consider if it is enough for removal.

His making some possible points , but none of it will be considered in the impreachment process simply put the only time a law professional will be involved will be when the impreachment is going against the president.

Article I, Sec 2, Clause 5: The House of Representatives shall have the sole power of impeachment.

Article I, Sec 3, Clauses 6-7: The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside. And no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the members present.

Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States; but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment according to law.

Article II, Sec 4: The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
An impeachment begins when an official behaves in a manner which the people believe disqualifies him from further public service. A complaint requesting an impeachment investigation of that official is lodged with the House of Representatives. That request may either be general in its scope or it may delineate specific offenses; it may be requested in a petition filed by individual citizens or on the request of a single Representative, a group of Representatives, or the President.

“The request is referred to the House Judiciary Committee which forwards it to the Subcommittee on the Constitution. The Subcommittee then investigates the complaints and, if there is merit to the charges, Articles of Impeachment describing the specific offense(s) are prepared. Those Articles are forwarded to the full Judiciary Committee for a v**e. If approved, the Articles are sent to the full House for a v**e.

“A simple majority of the House either approves or disapproves the Articles. If disapproved, the issue is terminated. Approval, however, is, in effect, the equivalent of a grand jury indictment against that official. The approved Articles of Impeachment are then delivered to the Senate. With this action, the House’s role in an impeachment is finished.

Then the Senate gets involved
“The Senate, according to the process described in Article 1, Section 3, Clause 6 and 7, then becomes a courtroom for a full-scale trial, with the Senators serving as the jury. In that setting, evidence is presented both by the defendant (the impeached official) and the prosecution. A v**e is then taken. If less than two-thirds of the Senators present concur in the official’s guilt, then the impeached official is acquitted and returns to the practice, responsibilities, and full privileges of his office.

“However, if two-thirds of the Senators believe the evidence proves the impeached official guilty, then the Constitution allows the Senate to impose two penalties: (1) remove the individual from that specific office, or (2) remove the individual from that office and also prohibit him from all future office-holding. This is the extent of the Senate penalty; it can withhold political positions, but it cannot impose civil or criminal penalties. (If an impeachment conviction is rendered by the Senate, a court may not overturn it; a decision by Congress on impeachment is final .) (Impeachment, by David Barton, p.11, Wallbuilders, Aledo, TX,

Agreed but with the rules for net neutrality while they were in force it did keep the corporation under control to a certain extent, if you remember there were less of the conservative sites being black listed and removed. Now the corporation's can remove the sites when it does present an opposing view.

This is directed to the entire thread, it doesn't matter what you as a individual consider what is important , Main Stream or Main Street, MSM, F**e news if you like or dislike what is being reported or the lack of it. The real need is to get the larger picture of what is being reported then use your individual ability to think. Lies or t***hs if you only rely on one source you will only get one source.

Correct but I did not enter it as off branch I responded to a view in a statement made.

Life begins at the moment the spem enters the egg which changes the egg to a one cell organism. Even the difinition agrees ;
an individual animal, plant, or single-celled life form.
synonyms:living thing, being, creature, animal, plant, structure, life form, entity, body.

"fish and other organisms"

According to the following the attempt at a simple or clear explanation does not even consider whether the product is human other then the refence to him or her.

During the first 24 hours, once the sperm and egg bind to each other, the membranes of these two cells fuse, creating in less than a second a single hybrid cell: the zygote, or one-cell embryo. To protect his or her bodily integrity, within minutes the zygote initiates changes in its ionic composition, releasing zinc in a spark that induces “egg activation,” first modifying the surrounding zona pellucida blocking further sperm binding to the cell surface. Cooperation between sperm and egg components to achieve replication of DNA, cell division, and growth occurs as maternally and paternally derived factors in the zygote begin interacting with and chemically modifying each other to initiate the final round of meiotic division in the maternally derived nucleus to enable DNA replication.

“However, what is controversial is whether this genetically unique cell should be considered a human person.”

Even in the people in your example can't come to agreement except the amount of time it takes for the possible consideration.

1985
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12340403

Updated July 2019
https://abort73.com/a******n_facts/us_a******n_history/

The links are for the history of a******n this is a summary from abort73
For those who support a******n, there is a tendency to argue that it has always been widely practiced and broadly accepted. Those who oppose a******n, however, generally argue that its permissive and widespread use is a recent phenomena. The t***h probably lies somewhere in between.

If this country was a Theocracy then no problem the bible laws are what hold sway but we are not we are a republic which people have rights given to them via the laws which are supposedly guided by a accepted document and the difinition from a accepted source.
So again it comes down to when it can be considered a human. Some say it is at the time of acceptance of the sperm others say no. Ether way it appears that more of the same is happening the forced acceptance of my view over yours.

Have to agree that colleges should be kept for extended learning not for
a place where you play beer pong. There are some careers that require extended training. More often jobs are more of a on the job training but since it has gotten to the point that college has some people starstruck. Most jobs want a diploma holding employee so as to raise the appearance of the business. It would be better if you as a student want a degree go to a trade school. Then all that has to been done is the schools get accredited to ensure that the training is applicable.

You brought the idea up of a wacko of a party that can be controlled by what is said by one person , I just reminded that there are wackos on both sides so the same result is possible. There have been cases from statements made that blame has been placed on what is said.

No but he has said to kick people out of his presence and if they get hurt he would take care of what ever laws are broken or charges made.

I am sure you have heard some of the statements made by Trump, so by what you are saying it is also applicable for a extreme right wacko to also be moved to action.

Straighten out as in getting everyone on the same page on who could be trusted. Presently most of the government agencies appear to be running things according to their own agenda. Infomation has been used as a bargaining chip in the past. That has to be changed and an agenda that promotes the best for everyone's needs not just the few.

No arguement there it needs to be set straight.

OR maybe something was found is more damaging to present administration

Just what this thread is about , the states want to change
to ensure that the v**e go the way the college was expected to be , and now the courts want to define what was meant by what the founders wanted. So changes are always to be expected. Like you mentioned it may change or may not time will tell.