Started By
Message

re: Andrew Weissmann's intentional ignorance on checks and balances.

Posted on 4/29/24 at 4:48 pm to
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
26825 posts
Posted on 4/29/24 at 4:48 pm to
quote:

You've not posted that much here.

Then you didn't read the thread that you popped into halfway through.

SFP is correct on the impeachment clauses not making any sort of distinction between POTUS' and the judiciary, except to the extent that the CJ presides over a POTUS impeachment trial. Not sure what your point is there.

As far as federal prosecution in office, its really a pointless exercise considering that DOJ is part of the executive branch and it would never happen in practice.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
424527 posts
Posted on 4/29/24 at 4:50 pm to
quote:

As far as federal prosecution in office, its really a pointless exercise considering that DOJ is part of the executive branch and it would never happen in practice.

That's the current understanding via the DOJ memo.

Now state prosecutions...that's much more of a spicy meatball, especially with the initial conceptualization of federalism and the expansive state power it envisioned, at the time of the passing of the Constitution.
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124349 posts
Posted on 4/29/24 at 5:02 pm to
quote:

You've not posted that much here.
---
Then you didn't read the thread
I've read the thread. Address your post totals in this thread vs SFP's. I'm just going on personal impressions here b(I've counted nothing), however I'd guess you'd be out of range. If I'm wrong I'll happily admit it.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram