Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When Mueller rules out charges on contemporaneous issues or issues involving the lead up to the campaign I may agree with you. For whatever reasons America elected a person of unquestionably awful character as President. Trumps past was no secret to the people who voted for him. However, Mueller has not ruled out contemporaneous acts yet and as long as the investigation is moving forward I say let it continue to its logical conclusion. Republicans let Starr jump the shark and move past the point of illegal activities into the realm of moral issues, this would be pointless with Trump because we already know he is a morally bankrupt liar.
" For whatever reasons America elected a person of unquestionably awful character as President.'
"other high crimes and misdemeanors" is a nebulous phrase which seems very open to interpretation. Do you have a link to any 'official' interpretation?
"Which brings us to "other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." As constitutional lawyer Ann Coulter correctly notes in her book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors --- The Case Against Bill Clinton (Regnery Publishing, 1998): "The derivation of the phrase 'high crimes and misdemeanors' has nothing to do with crimes in English common law for which public servants could be impeached," but had much to do with dishonorable conduct or a breach in the public trust."
"Indeed, in his influential Commentaries on the Constitution, Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story (1811-1845; the intellectual mate of Chief Justice John Marshall) explained: "The offenses to which the remedy of impeachment has been and will continue to be principally applied are of a political nature...[W]hat are aptly termed political offenses, growing out of personal misconduct, or gross neglect, or usurpation, or habitual disregard of the public interests.""
"James Madison explained the requirement for impeachment during the debates of the Constitutional Convention of 1787: "[S]ome provision should be made for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the chief magistrate. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers."
"other high crimes and misdemeanors" is a nebulous phrase which seems very open to interpretation. Do you have a link to any 'official' interpretation?[/quote]
"Impeachment, according to the Founding Fathers, was the remedy for those officials who through professional or personal misconduct violated the public trust and vitiated our republican form of government"
"James Madison explained the requirement for impeachment during the debates of the Constitutional Convention of 1787: "[S]ome provision should be made for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the chief magistrate. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers."
"Alexander Hamilton explained in The Federalist Papers (No. 65) that impeachment of the president should take place for "offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to society itself.""
"And, in The Federalist Papers (No. 70), Hamilton further explained: "Men in public trust will much oftener act in such a manner as to render them unworthy of being any longer trusted, than in such a manner as to make them obnoxious (subject) to legal punishment.""
[/b]
"Which brings us to "other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." As constitutional lawyer Ann Coulter correctly notes in her book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors --- The Case Against Bill Clinton (Regnery Publishing, 1998): "The derivation of the phrase 'high crimes and misdemeanors' has nothing to do with crimes in English common law for which public servants could be impeached," but had much to do with dishonorable conduct or a breach in the public trust."
"Indeed, in his influential Commentaries on the Constitution, Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story (1811-1845; the intellectual mate of Chief Justice John Marshall) explained: "The offenses to which the remedy of impeachment has been and will continue to be principally applied are of a political nature...[W]hat are aptly termed political offenses, growing out of personal misconduct, or gross neglect, or usurpation, or habitual disregard of the public interests.""
"James Madison explained the requirement for impeachment during the debates of the Constitutional Convention of 1787: "[S]ome provision should be made for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the chief magistrate. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers."
"other high crimes and misdemeanors" is a nebulous phrase which seems very open to interpretation. Do you have a link to any 'official' interpretation?
"Impeachment, according to the Founding Fathers, was the remedy for those officials who through professional or personal misconduct violated the public trust and vitiated our republican form of government"
"James Madison explained the requirement for impeachment during the debates of the Constitutional Convention of 1787: "[S]ome provision should be made for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the chief magistrate. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers."
"Alexander Hamilton explained in The Federalist Papers (No. 65) that impeachment of the president should take place for "offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to society itself.""
"And, in The Federalist Papers (No. 70), Hamilton further explained: "Men in public trust will much oftener act in such a manner as to render them unworthy of being any longer trusted, than in such a manner as to make them obnoxious (subject) to legal punishment.""
Yes, you lost and probably supported a corrupt Clinton. Trumps doing exactly what 70% of the Electoral College elected him to do and he's doing an outstanding job.
I look forward to his 2020 reelection and watching people like you continue your meltdown. I hear Zoloft is good for your condition.
If this is your answer to what was my measured and reasonable post, you've got nothing of substance to contribute. It's a hollow shell.
"Impeachment, according to the Founding Fathers, was the remedy for those officials who through professional or personal misconduct violated the public trust and vitiated our republican form of government"
"James Madison explained the requirement for impeachment during the debates of the Constitutional Convention of 1787: "[S]ome provision should be made for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the chief magistrate. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers."
"Alexander Hamilton explained in The Federalist Papers (No. 65) that impeachment of the president should take place for "offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to society itself.""
"And, in The Federalist Papers (No. 70), Hamilton further explained: "Men in public trust will much oftener act in such a manner as to render them unworthy of being any longer trusted, than in such a manner as to make them obnoxious (subject) to legal punishment.""
http://www.jpands.org/hacienda/edcor4.html
Too much cut and paste to read but we are quoting Ann Coulter?[/quote]
"Too much cut and paste to read"
A question was asked and I answered it.
If it means nothing to you, don't waste your time responding but, DON'T comeback and try to get engaged in the discussion if you are not interested in the learning about the subject.
To remain ignorant is YOUR choice!
I'm confused.
We CONSTANTLY read on her how having a "higher" education is so important and makes you so much smarter then the rest of us and all those that have them are SOOOO superior to us dummies.
Oh I forgot your clams of being smart ONLY apply to dems. Go it.
More hypocrisy, Obam "taught" Constitutional Law, yet not 1 student has ever come forward saying he was their teacher, as is put on a pedestal by the left.
" As constitutional lawyer Ann Coulter" and ALL other equally educated repubs are dumb, stupid, idiots etc., and shouldn't be listened too.
So, is getting a higher education good or bad?
P.S. I didn't quote her, the article did among other info the questioner asked.
"Impeachment, according to the Founding Fathers, was the remedy for those officials who through professional or personal misconduct violated the public trust and vitiated our republican form of government"
"James Madison explained the requirement for impeachment during the debates of the Constitutional Convention of 1787: "[S]ome provision should be made for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the chief magistrate. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers."
"Alexander Hamilton explained in The Federalist Papers (No. 65) that impeachment of the president should take place for "offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to society itself.""
"And, in The Federalist Papers (No. 70), Hamilton further explained: "Men in public trust will much oftener act in such a manner as to render them unworthy of being any longer trusted, than in such a manner as to make them obnoxious (subject) to legal punishment.""
http://www.jpands.org/hacienda/edcor4.html
Unworthy of no longer being trusted?
In the last century, the bar for Articles of Impeachment is lying about a blow job.
Pretty clear we've met that standard.
However, with Republican majority in the House, I don't see Articles of Impeachment in Trump's immediate future. So no need to worry.
The Republicans in the House are already pissed-off at the FBI and DOJ because they have refused to cooperate with their investigation.
The Treasonous Republicans are p-off because the FBI and DOJ won't release the redacted pages, showing the actual information on who has said what, who are witnesses and what evidence they have on Trump.
Because they then want to leak it or tell Trump what they have on him!!
They are demanding unprecedented information about a criminal investigation.. when they themselves will not undertake a real investigation themselves.
[quote=ChrisC;51847171]Basically, you guys' witch hunters have wasted two years of my (and our) tax dollars on nothing. You have absolutely nothing to show for it. And you have a clown that is now trying to invent laws in order to accuse certain individuals of breaking them. That's the only topic that really matters: wasted money, time and effort, and a witch hunt that is even more absurd than it was in Salem over 300 years ago.
(Formatting seems bewitched today: the above is from ChrisC; the below from me, CraigCreek).
Oh, I dunno, seems like several "witches" have been indicted thus far, with more a-boilin' in the pot. I hear Baba Yaga is fuming, over there in the forest in her house on chicken's feet.
"Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble...". Yep, Mueller is certainly toiling away, and trouble is a-brewing.
Better grab your broomsticks. Or maybe a flying mortar and pestle
(BTW, did you know that Trump's multiple golf jaunts to Mar-a-Lago have cost far more than the entire Mueller investigation? Maybe he'd do better flying on a broomstick rather than Air Force One).
Last edited by CraigCreek; 05-10-2018 at 08:36 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
