Pelosi Impeachment Inquiry

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Big AAPL, Sep 24, 2019.

  1. Buy1Sell2

    Buy1Sell2

    https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...-allegations-would-not-constitute-impeachable
    Dershowitz: Bolton allegations would not constitute impeachable offense
    “If any president had done what The [New York] Times reported about the content of the Bolton manuscript, that would not constitute an impeachable offense,” Dershowitz said during lengthy remarks from the Senate floor Monday night.

    “Let me repeat: Nothing in the Bolton revelations, even if true, would rise to the level of an abuse of power or an impeachable offense. That is clear from the history. That is clear from the language of the Constitution,” he continued.

     
    #2511     Jan 28, 2020
    Optionpro007 and WeToddDid2 like this.
  2. I dont believe that but I see several pubs putting that right in the face of dems just to piss them off and feed into all their fears- so I am all for it.

    Problem is though, Bernie sent AOC out on the trail to shake her guns and she is getting even more votes for Bernie than if Bernie were there. :cool: I heard roundabout that El Cocho stood in line for three hours to get a selfie with AOC. And when an MSDNC reporter asked him what he thought of AOC, he was heard to say: "I'd tap that." Thus confirming that there was enthusiasm in the crowd.

    Meanwhile, Joe is out campaigning with John Kerry as his back-up singer.
     
    #2512     Jan 28, 2020
    Optionpro007 and vanzandt like this.
  3. Buy1Sell2

    Buy1Sell2

    Both sides will challenge (or at least could) each witness and this would drag on forever. The idea of impeachment is for The House to investigate and for the Senate to pass judgement on The Articles.
     
    #2513     Jan 28, 2020
  4. UsualName

    UsualName

    No. Don’t believe what buy and tree are telling you. Believe what people actually in the fight are doing.

    Trump’s team is opposing witnesses and democrats are proposing witnesses. The reason is simply because witnesses will help uphold the charges against Trump.

    Nothing more, nothing less.

    All of this talk about the Biden’s is simply a talking point. If for second Trump’s team thought a Biden interview would be exculpatory then McConnell would have had witnesses in the originally voted on rules.

    The Biden stuff is all bluster because there is nothing else they can threaten. Democrats hear them loud and clear and are still saying bring on the witnesses.
     
    #2514     Jan 28, 2020
    vanzandt likes this.
  5. vanzandt

    vanzandt

    :D
     
    #2515     Jan 28, 2020
  6. UsualName

    UsualName

    Alan Dershowitz apparently believes piracy is the only impeachable offense, just like you.

    Yo ho Ho Ho and a bottle rum.
     
    #2516     Jan 28, 2020
  7. jem

    jem

    I realize you have not studied jurisprudence but have you ever tried to see both sides of the issue instead of only the propublica side?

    You were so dead ass wrong on all the crap you were claiming about Trump and prosecutions and immunity from prosecution... I would have thought you would have learned to be more equivocal by now.

    The justifications for executive privilege do not disappear because there is an impeachment trial.
    You could argue the reason why we have privilege is illustrated by this exact scenario....Because the opposition party might conjure up a potentially phony impeachment...
    And presidents need to know their conversations shall remain private. For myraid reasons.

    In my opinion if you are ever going to make exceptions to privilege the exceptions should be very limited. One reasonable limitation might be when an actual crime is alleged with strong supporting evidence for each element of the allged crime.

    But... I understand there are other arguments.



     
    #2517     Jan 28, 2020
    WeToddDid2 likes this.
  8. vanzandt

    vanzandt

    That sounds reasonable. Good point about the Turtle writing it into the rules, I'm sure you're right about that. Or at least it would seem like he would have.
     
    #2518     Jan 28, 2020
  9. piezoe

    piezoe

    The justification may, in fact, according to the Court, disappear in specific circumstances. That is, so long as what is claimed as privileged by one Branch can be shown to be necessary to another Branch in the fulfilling of its Constitutional mandate, the privilege may disappear. At least that was the clear message from the Court in U.S. v Nixon. I.E., the Executive Privilege of one branch must not be allowed to thwart the proper functioning of another Branch. I agree with the Court on this point.

    In camera functioning of tribunals provides the means to handle a situation in which a privileged communication must be kept from the public eye. But in the case of an impeachment tribunal it is difficult to imagine such a situation. Trump will not be able to block Bolton's testimony with regard to his (Trump's) reason for withholding military support to Ukraine by claiming a conversation with Bolton, to this effect, is privileged.
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2020
    #2519     Jan 28, 2020
  10. SunTrader

    SunTrader

    Dump only got his panties in a bunch about Biden and "corruption" once Biden announced he would run in 2020.

    Dump's own hand-picked AG Barr has yet to open any kind of Biden "corruption" investigation.

    How come? Oh right deeeeeeeeeeep state lol.
     
    #2520     Jan 28, 2020