- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
House Judiciary Committee Open Hearing 10AM EST
Posted on 12/4/19 at 8:05 am
Posted on 12/4/19 at 8:05 am
The committee will have 4 "witnesses" today. Below are the 4 and what they are expected to say in opening statements. Johnathan Turley is the lone Republican "witness" today.
Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School
"President Trump’s conduct described in the testimony and evidence clearly constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under the Constitution."
"By freezing aid to Ukraine and by dangling the promise of a White House visit, the President was corruptly using the powers of the presidency for personal political gain."
Pamela S. Karlan of Stanford Law School
"Based on the evidentiary record, what has happened in the case before you is something that I do not think we have ever seen before: a president who has doubled down on violating his oath to 'faithfully execute' the laws and to 'protect and defend the Constitution.'"
"If we are to keep faith with the Constitution and our Republic, President Trump must be held to account."
Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina School of Law
"When we apply our constitutional law to the facts found in the Mueller Report and other public sources, I cannot help but conclude that this President has attacked each of the Constitution’s safeguards against establishing a monarchy in this country."
"The President’s serious misconduct, including bribery, soliciting a personal favor from a foreign leader in exchange for his exercise of power, and obstructing justice and Congress are worse than the misconduct of any prior president, including what previous presidents who faced impeachment have done or been accused of doing."
Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School
"I get it. You are mad. The President is mad. My Democratic friends are mad. My Republican friends are mad. My wife is mad. My kids are mad. Even my dog is mad . . . and Luna is a golden doodle and they are never mad. We are all mad and where has it taken us? Will a slipshod impeachment make us less mad or will it only give an invitation for the madness to follow in every future administration?"
"This is not how an American president should be impeached. For two years, members of this Committee have declared that criminal and impeachable acts were established for everything from treason to conspiracy to obstruction. However, no action was taken to impeach. Suddenly, just a few weeks ago, the House announced it would begin an impeachment inquiry and push for a final vote in just a matter of weeks."
This is even more comical than the other "witnesses" that had a bunch of hearsay. Now we get complete "opinion" from 3 Democrat law professors that they vetted to say what they want. All 3 of the democrat lawyers have all called for Trump's impeachment over the last 3 years before the Ukraine "inquiry" started
Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School
"President Trump’s conduct described in the testimony and evidence clearly constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under the Constitution."
"By freezing aid to Ukraine and by dangling the promise of a White House visit, the President was corruptly using the powers of the presidency for personal political gain."
Pamela S. Karlan of Stanford Law School
"Based on the evidentiary record, what has happened in the case before you is something that I do not think we have ever seen before: a president who has doubled down on violating his oath to 'faithfully execute' the laws and to 'protect and defend the Constitution.'"
"If we are to keep faith with the Constitution and our Republic, President Trump must be held to account."
Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina School of Law
"When we apply our constitutional law to the facts found in the Mueller Report and other public sources, I cannot help but conclude that this President has attacked each of the Constitution’s safeguards against establishing a monarchy in this country."
"The President’s serious misconduct, including bribery, soliciting a personal favor from a foreign leader in exchange for his exercise of power, and obstructing justice and Congress are worse than the misconduct of any prior president, including what previous presidents who faced impeachment have done or been accused of doing."
Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School
"I get it. You are mad. The President is mad. My Democratic friends are mad. My Republican friends are mad. My wife is mad. My kids are mad. Even my dog is mad . . . and Luna is a golden doodle and they are never mad. We are all mad and where has it taken us? Will a slipshod impeachment make us less mad or will it only give an invitation for the madness to follow in every future administration?"
"This is not how an American president should be impeached. For two years, members of this Committee have declared that criminal and impeachable acts were established for everything from treason to conspiracy to obstruction. However, no action was taken to impeach. Suddenly, just a few weeks ago, the House announced it would begin an impeachment inquiry and push for a final vote in just a matter of weeks."
This is even more comical than the other "witnesses" that had a bunch of hearsay. Now we get complete "opinion" from 3 Democrat law professors that they vetted to say what they want. All 3 of the democrat lawyers have all called for Trump's impeachment over the last 3 years before the Ukraine "inquiry" started
This post was edited on 12/4/19 at 8:08 am
Posted on 12/4/19 at 8:19 am to IT_Dawg
No thanks.
Not watching this clown show
Not watching this clown show
This post was edited on 12/4/19 at 8:19 am
Posted on 12/4/19 at 8:19 am to IT_Dawg
When does the crane arrive to position Humpty Dumpty up onto his wall?
Posted on 12/4/19 at 8:27 am to IT_Dawg
Nadler is going to get knocked around like a ball in a pinball machine by Collins
Posted on 12/4/19 at 8:29 am to IT_Dawg
The hearing today will not move the needle on impeachment AT ALL
Nobody gives a shite what some partisan "legal scholars" have to say
This is an embarrassment to our country
Nobody gives a shite what some partisan "legal scholars" have to say
This is an embarrassment to our country
Posted on 12/4/19 at 8:38 am to IT_Dawg
Let me guess, 0 evidence and more muh feels
Posted on 12/4/19 at 8:41 am to Bunyan
quote:
Nobody gives a shite what some partisan "legal scholars" have to say
Obama was also a "legal scholar". I wonder what his opinion is of political impeachments.
Posted on 12/4/19 at 8:45 am to IT_Dawg
Points are given to the viewer who fist identities the breakfast droppings on Nadler's suit.
Posted on 12/4/19 at 8:46 am to Erin Go Bragh
quote:
Points are given to the viewer who fist identities the breakfast droppings on Nadler's suit.
I'm not looking at Nadler that close.
Posted on 12/4/19 at 8:47 am to Centinel
quote:
I'm not looking at Nadler that close
Can't say I blame you.
Posted on 12/4/19 at 9:06 am to IT_Dawg
Wait, what is this?
What are the differences in what we jut went through and this hearing?
What are the differences in what we jut went through and this hearing?
Posted on 12/4/19 at 9:08 am to Bunyan
quote:I’ve been fairly locked in to this entire thing and had NO idea this was going on today.
The hearing today will not move the needle on impeachment AT ALL
Nobody gives a shite what some partisan "legal scholars" have to say
ETA: These old arse dudes will lose any casual viewers in a matter of minutes.
This post was edited on 12/4/19 at 9:09 am
Posted on 12/4/19 at 9:08 am to ReauxlTide222
Four constitutional attorneys get to keep the charade going.
Posted on 12/4/19 at 9:10 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
What are the differences in what we jut went through and this hearing?
Different committees.
The judicial is the actual one that should be handling impeachment inquiries. Which is why Schiff's little show was meaningless horseshite.
This post was edited on 12/4/19 at 9:10 am
Posted on 12/4/19 at 9:10 am to loogaroo
Was this always scheduled? Even before the intelligence committee hearings?
Or is this solely to keep the impeachment stuff fresh and in the headlines?
Or is this solely to keep the impeachment stuff fresh and in the headlines?
Posted on 12/4/19 at 9:11 am to Centinel
quote:I see, I see.
Centinel
Posted on 12/4/19 at 9:12 am to ReauxlTide222
And Nadler already starting off with the same authoritarian shite Schiff did.
Posted on 12/4/19 at 9:13 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Wait, what is this? What are the differences in what we jut went through and this hearing?
It has now moved to the judiciary committee, which is the committee that will write up the formal impeachment charges. They are questioning biased lawyers now, who will give their biased opinion on why its constitutional for impeachment.
All 3 of the democrat lawyers have previously stated Trump should be impeached, all before the Ukraine inquiry...
Repubs going to go in dry on these folks.
"Can you please tell us a case where you got someone convicted of a made-up crime, while having no direct evidence?"
Anyone that ever had one of these lawyers prosecute them, will be filing an appeal for biased actions after today
This post was edited on 12/4/19 at 9:14 am
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News