Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
The Democrats have given Trump more rights than the Republicans gave Clinton.Was it any different when Clinton was impeached by Republicans in the late 90s?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Democrats have given Trump more rights than the Republicans gave Clinton.Was it any different when Clinton was impeached by Republicans in the late 90s?
Are you sure about that?No matter, they must find a high crime, to impeach. That crime must meet all of the elements of a crime in a penal code or statute.
Source: High Crimes Without LawThen as now, there was an ongoing scholarly debate over the meaning of the phrase “high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”11×11. U.S. Const. art. II, § 4. Most people, including a majority of the House of Representatives, interpreted the phrase to refer not to literal crimes or misdemeanors but to any serious abuses of presidential power.12×12. See Cong. Globe, 40th Cong., 2d Sess., Supp. 411 (1868). This interpretation remains the dominant one 150 years later. In the words of Professor Laurence Tribe and Joshua Matz, the majority view is that a president can legally be impeached for “intentional, evil deeds”13×13. Laurence Tribe & Joshua Matz, To End a Presidency 42 (2018). that “drastically subvert the Constitution and involve an unforgivable abuse of the presidency” — even if those deeds didn’t violate any criminal laws.14×
But, the 'crimes' are totally different.
Sexual indiscretion leading to lying - let's be honest, that's Trump's hobby versus dodgy with foreign countries.
The Harvard Law Review disagrees with you.
High Crimes Without Law
Also, the Constitution lists two other reasons for impeachment besides "high crimes and misdemeanors:" treason and bribery. As this article describes, a strong case could be made for bribery... along with all the other strong cases that can be made for other aspects of Trump's wrongdoing:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...mmitted-democrats-arent-really-talking-about/
The "crimes" were perjury and obstruction of justice on Clinton's part
Yup. Lying about having an affair and/or what they were doing. Pretty serious.The "crimes" were perjury and obstruction of justice on Clinton's part
To an extent you are right. When the star chamber moves into public hearings, schiff has forty five minutes of time for each witness, all else have five minutes.
The democrats can subpoena whomever they choose, the Republicans must get schiffs approval to subpoena.
Fairness, compared to the Nixon and Clinton impeachment is totally absent.
No matter, they must find a high crime, to impeach. That crime must meet all of the elements of a crime in a penal code or statute. So far, they are having problems with this.
As I have predicted, it is a wasted exercise that accomplishes nothing other than to show that democrats aren´t really interested in dealing with the serious problems of the nation.
Removal from office means the senate must say it is required. So, when after impeachment the articles go to the Senate, mc Connell could say the process was so blatantly unfair, he recommends a vote on whether a trial should even be held. The Republican majority could quash the trial right then.
If it goes to trial, twenty Republican senators must vote for removal, which will never happen.
In the end the whole circus will expose the democrats as whinney babies who forgot the country in their zeal to overturn the election of 2016.
I wanted them to go down this path.
With their collection of presidential candidates, impeachment, and kowtowing to the leftist idiots, they are destroying their party, which is all good.
Exactly. Trump does both on a daily basis. Well, since he rarely goes under oath, perhaps not the first. he lies on a daily basis about fundamentals of his job, though. And obstruction of justice is clear.
Yup. Lying about having an affair and/or what they were doing.
Oh. Yeah. Forgot about that one. That's definitely a case of abuse of power. Someone using their power of influence to get other people to do them favors.It started with a sexual harassment case with Paula Jones, do we remember how she was treated?
Oh. Yeah. Forgot about that one. That's definitely a case of abuse of power. Someone using their power of influence to get other people to do them favors.
Clinton was found guilty of it, Trump has not been
Sorry if I touched a nerve. Wasn't the perjury and obstruction related to the investigation into the sexual harassment? Basically, if they do the inquiry and have a hearing with Trump and he lies, it would be the same situation and same obstruction?You attempted to diminish the Clinton impeachment to it was just an affair which was disingenuous, now you refer to your own opinion which is irrelevant. Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice while Trump has not
To an extent you are right. When the star chamber moves into public hearings, schiff has forty five minutes of time for each witness, all else have five minutes.
The democrats can subpoena whomever they choose, the Republicans must get schiffs approval to subpoena.
Fairness, compared to the Nixon and Clinton impeachment is totally absent.
No matter, they must find a high crime, to impeach. That crime must meet all of the elements of a crime in a penal code or statute. So far, they are having problems with this.
As I have predicted, it is a wasted exercise that accomplishes nothing other than to show that democrats aren´t really interested in dealing with the serious problems of the nation.
Removal from office means the senate must say it is required. So, when after impeachment the articles go to the Senate, mc Connell could say the process was so blatantly unfair, he recommends a vote on whether a trial should even be held. The Republican majority could quash the trial right then.
If it goes to trial, twenty Republican senators must vote for removal, which will never happen.
In the end the whole circus will expose the democrats as whinney babies who forgot the country in their zeal to overturn the election of 2016.
I wanted them to go down this path.
With their collection of presidential candidates, impeachment, and kowtowing to the leftist idiots, they are destroying their party, which is all good.
I'm sure some Trumpeters will insist the only way it can be fair is for Trump to be the investigator, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.He has all the rights that he would be accorded in any court of law. I think Pelosi and the Democrats were quite smart about that. The fact is, the Constitution grants a President under impeachment no rights in the proceeding, while the House has granted him the right to be considered innocent until judged guilty, to counsel -- present in the hearings, to object, personally or through counsel, and so forth. You can't get much fairer or more open than that.
And we're seeing obvious obstruction on the part of the current regime by demanding that people ignore a valid Congressional summons. Those who refuse should be locked up until they comply.The "crimes" were perjury and obstruction of justice on Clinton's part
Like I said, Trump's hobbyThe "crimes" were perjury and obstruction of justice on Clinton's part
I'm sure some Trumpeters will insist the only way it can be fair is for Trump to be the investigator, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.
He can't tell the truth even if it was written on a teleprompter. He would lie to the agent within the first minute.