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.
Don't forget Nutty Nancy saying they were working on it 30 months BEFORE he even made the call! I guess the Psychic Hotline still exists and Dems have it on speed dial!
Sources say that Nancy had many a sit down with Miss Cleo back in the day.
This isn't a coherent response to anything I've said, it's a rambling response to something someone else said...
It’s actually a very clear, direct response to your assertion that “there’s no case that Trump” obstructed Congress. The case that Trump obstructed Congress is open-and-shut; he explicitly said that he wouldn’t cooperate with Congressional inquiries, even in response to formal subpoenas.
You may applaud Trump for obstructing Congress, but claiming that he isn’t doing it just makes you look like an uninformed hack.
But legal experts quickly digested the letter’s constitutional claims — or, as they saw them, the lack thereof.
"Cipollone’s letter isn’t so much a legal challenge as a press release. The letter is undignified and borderline hysterical,” Walter Shaub, who resigned as director of the Office of Government Ethics over objections about perceived lapses by the Trump administration, told CQ Roll Call. “The points he raised are based on political bluster, not law. … Cipollone would rip up the Constitution and make impeachment subject to presidential consent.
“Its underlining assumption, that the executive must consent to an impeachment inquiry, mistakes Trump for a king,” Shaub, now a senior adviser at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington said of the letter. “The executive branch claims the President can’t be prosecuted because he can be impeached, then claims he can’t be impeached because he hasn’t consented.”
Former ethics czar warns impeachment letter ‘mistakes Trump for a king’
Georgetown prof: ‘Politically, the letter is strong;’ former GOP staffer calls it ‘bananas’
It’s actually a very clear, direct response to your assertion that “there’s no case that Trump” obstructed Congress. The case that Trump obstructed Congress is open-and-shut; he explicitly said that he wouldn’t cooperate with Congressional inquiries, even in response to formal subpoenas.
You may applaud Trump for obstructing Congress, but claiming that he isn’t doing it just makes you look like an uninformed hack.
The case that Trump obstructed Congress rests on the notion that it is obstruction of Congress for the president to refuse to waive his right to executive privilege.... despite that privilege being unchallenged. Only a simpleton or a partisan trying to sell something would claim that to be legitimate.
It's similar to charging someone with obstruction of justice for refusing to be questioned without counsel present or for refusing to waive their 5th amendment rights.
The case that Trump obstructed Congress rests on the notion that it is obstruction of Congress for the president to refuse to waive his right to executive privilege.... despite that privilege being unchallenged. Only a simpleton or a partisan trying to sell something would claim that to be legitimate.
It's similar to charging someone with obstruction of justice for refusing to be questioned without counsel present or for refusing to waive their 5th amendment rights.
As I said, there's no valid case there.
Please see unanimous SCOTUS decision in United States v. Nixon:
Quote:
United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that resulted in a unanimous decision against President Richard Nixon, ordering him to deliver tape recordings and other subpoenaed materials to a federal district court. Issued on July 24, 1974, the decision was important to the late stages of the Watergate scandal, when there was an ongoing impeachment process against Richard Nixon. United States v. Nixon is considered a crucial precedent limiting the power of any U.S. president to claim executive privilege.
That might be a basis for a legal challenge to the assertion of executive privilege, but that legal challenge never happened so it's presumed to be a valid claim of executive privilege and a valid claim of executive privilege cannot be obstruction of Congress.
That might be a basis for a legal challenge to the assertion of executive privilege, but that legal challenge never happened so it's presumed to be a valid claim of executive privilege and a valid claim of executive privilege cannot be obstruction of Congress.
What does this mean in terms of the current scenario?
What does this mean in terms of the current scenario?
It means there is no basis for an obstruction of Congress article of impeachment.
Now of course Congress doesn't need legitimate grounds to impeach, they just look really bad and they disgrace their office when they do so without legitimate grounds.
It means there is no basis for an obstruction of Congress article of impeachment.
Now of course Congress doesn't need legitimate grounds to impeach, they just look really bad and they disgrace their office when they do so without legitimate grounds.
Your underlining assumption mistakes Mr. Trump for a king; there is no legal, Constitutional or otherwise basis for that assumption.
It means there is no basis for an obstruction of Congress article of impeachment.
Now of course Congress doesn't need legitimate grounds to impeach, they just look really bad and they disgrace their office when they do so without legitimate grounds.
I agree. All impeachment means now is our party controls the House of Representatives. But it is not a parliamentary system so the head of government is not going to resign and call for an election to install a new government.
"History" and "my legacy has been soiled" by impeachment has been nerfed and only Nixon's resignation where there was a true chance of 2/3rds of the Senate removing him is important.
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.
