Impeachment
- Thread starter 57Brave
- Start date
Runnin
Well-known member
The way Trump and Barr are lying about all this shows them to be the worst kind of criminals, the really smart, evil and unrepentant kind. They are both traitors to The Constitution and should be thrown in jail, but I doubt that ever happens. The GOP learned from their mistake with Nixon. They are just going to deny the rule of law and lie all the way to their graves.
OTOH Trump will continue to break laws and norms and he will at some point find an even more egregious line to cross and he will cross it.
OTOH Trump will continue to break laws and norms and he will at some point find an even more egregious line to cross and he will cross it.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
https://youtu.be/O50NvGrOx2k
Trump outlines how he thinks Bill Clinton should have defended himself from impeachment is remarkably similar to what he is doing now.
Trump outlines how he thinks Bill Clinton should have defended himself from impeachment is remarkably similar to what he is doing now.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
striker42
Well-known member
The Democrats had a reason to call it "Abuse of Power" instead of bribery. The reason is simple, it wasn't bribery. The exchange of official favors has been determined by the Federal Courts to not be bribery.
Think about it. Suppose you're a Representative from Kentucky with a strong election challenger looming. There's a factory in your district that makes parts for an outdated weapons system. If this weapons system is cancelled, the factory closes and thousands of jobs are lost. So you make a deal with with the Speaker of the House to support her speakership if she uses her power to ensure the money for this weapons system is included in the next budget.
You have used your official power (voting for the Speaker of the House) in order to get money funneled to your district to strengthen your re-election campaign. Conversely, the Speaker ensured money was funneled to your district to ensure her election as Speaker.
Would this be bribery? This kind of situation plays out countless times in DC every day. It's called logrolling. The Courts knew that if they made the exchange of official favors (even those motivated purely by self interest) illegal, they would end up making every member of Congress a criminal. So the Courts said Congress when it passed the bribery laws clearly weren't making themselves criminals and so it clearly was not intended to be applied to the exchange of official favors.
This put the Democrats in a sticky situation. They felt like they had evidence that Trump did a bad thing but they didn't have evidence of him doing a criminal thing. So they called Con Law experts to testify a crime wasn't required and then used a vague, general term in "Abuse of Power",
This is why you've seen the term "bribery" fall to the background. Though, legally speaking, it makes little difference. Congress could impeach the President because they didn't like the color tie he was wearing.
Think about it. Suppose you're a Representative from Kentucky with a strong election challenger looming. There's a factory in your district that makes parts for an outdated weapons system. If this weapons system is cancelled, the factory closes and thousands of jobs are lost. So you make a deal with with the Speaker of the House to support her speakership if she uses her power to ensure the money for this weapons system is included in the next budget.
You have used your official power (voting for the Speaker of the House) in order to get money funneled to your district to strengthen your re-election campaign. Conversely, the Speaker ensured money was funneled to your district to ensure her election as Speaker.
Would this be bribery? This kind of situation plays out countless times in DC every day. It's called logrolling. The Courts knew that if they made the exchange of official favors (even those motivated purely by self interest) illegal, they would end up making every member of Congress a criminal. So the Courts said Congress when it passed the bribery laws clearly weren't making themselves criminals and so it clearly was not intended to be applied to the exchange of official favors.
This put the Democrats in a sticky situation. They felt like they had evidence that Trump did a bad thing but they didn't have evidence of him doing a criminal thing. So they called Con Law experts to testify a crime wasn't required and then used a vague, general term in "Abuse of Power",
This is why you've seen the term "bribery" fall to the background. Though, legally speaking, it makes little difference. Congress could impeach the President because they didn't like the color tie he was wearing.
"Abuse of Power" lol. Contempt of congress. That **** is laughable. Like always, they have nothing. Impotence. Will get stompted 2020. Except in NY, LA, and ATL. Where people suck the teet of mainstream media and pray (else if athiest, then ree) for socialism to save them from their 9-5.
57Brave
Well-known member
Reading and watching clips from yesterdays rally in Hershey where a number of people warned of impending violnce should they not get their way I gleaned this little nugget.
Jonathan
@JonoftheLibrary
·
2h
Replying to
@bobcesca_go
Interesting how the side that "says guns don't kill people do" always happen to threaten to kill people with those guns.
Jonathan
@JonoftheLibrary
·
2h
Replying to
@bobcesca_go
Interesting how the side that "says guns don't kill people do" always happen to threaten to kill people with those guns.
Runnin
Well-known member
What's laughable about Abuse of Power and Contempt of Congress? Susan McDougal's 18 months in prison for refusing to testify in the Clinton Impeachment were no joke.
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
Good riddance. Not because I think impeachment is that important, but because the member that switched parties sucks in general.
Polling is completely stagnant on impeachment.