- 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
re: Trump lawyers respond to articles of impeachment: 'Constitutionally invalid'
Posted on 1/19/20 at 12:39 am to texashorn
Posted on 1/19/20 at 12:39 am to texashorn
Both sides are playing to audiences.
The Dems are crowing about how they impeached Trump and he will be “forever impeached”.
The Trump side is pointing out exactly how full of shite the whole procedure is on a number of fronts and doesn’t conform to how the Constitution nor House rules say the procedure is supposed to go.
All of the above is for the purpose of PR rather than affecting the outcome in the Senate, which will not be a conviction barring something major changing given that the two articles aren’t even crimes. Hell, ONE article is invalid on its face because it contradicts known court precedent with regard to disputes between branches.
The Dems are crowing about how they impeached Trump and he will be “forever impeached”.
The Trump side is pointing out exactly how full of shite the whole procedure is on a number of fronts and doesn’t conform to how the Constitution nor House rules say the procedure is supposed to go.
All of the above is for the purpose of PR rather than affecting the outcome in the Senate, which will not be a conviction barring something major changing given that the two articles aren’t even crimes. Hell, ONE article is invalid on its face because it contradicts known court precedent with regard to disputes between branches.
1
Posted on 1/19/20 at 12:42 am to teke184
Yes, but wouldn’t you say that a Trump line of defense that “they didn’t do it right” simply plays into the Democrats’ hands by encouraging them to restart the impeachment process?
Posted on 1/19/20 at 12:57 am to texashorn
quote:
Let’s look at the overall picture, shall we?
Are you advocating for court intervention to have Trump’s impeachment invalidated?
Here is where this specific sub started, a couple of lines from a couple of your posts:
"There is no recourse. The courts are out of this."
"The Congress has SOLE power of impeachment and subsequent trial. No ifs, ands or buts."
I provided a link that shows the courts are not out of it, and indeed they do provide recourse for disputed issues that arise during impeachment between the parties.
That's really the end of it. I've gotta say, you are very averse to giving in. I always find it impressive when a person can simply stand corrected, even only on a single point. In fact, I practiced that with you last week in a thread about the Trump Farsi tweet. You didn't exactly receive in the most ideal fashion, but I wouldn't let that stop me from doing it again.
Posted on 1/19/20 at 12:58 am to texashorn
If “they did it right”, would there even be articles?
Allowing rebuttal witnesses with evidence that exonerates Trump kills this dead because you blatantly have Dems voting to impeach on stuff shown to be bullshite.
The only reason this passed last time around was that Schiff and Nadler stacked them deck to prevent anything contradicting their arguments from being admissible.
Allowing rebuttal witnesses with evidence that exonerates Trump kills this dead because you blatantly have Dems voting to impeach on stuff shown to be bullshite.
The only reason this passed last time around was that Schiff and Nadler stacked them deck to prevent anything contradicting their arguments from being admissible.
Posted on 1/19/20 at 1:18 am to texashorn
quote:
Yes, but wouldn’t you say that a Trump line of defense that “they didn’t do it right” simply plays into the Democrats’ hands by encouraging them to restart the impeachment process?
No. It’s a valid defense against obstruction of congress charge.
Posted on 1/19/20 at 8:39 am to texashorn
quote:
Trump’s lawyers are attacking the Constitution
quote:
texashorn
Alan Dershowitz is attacking the CONSTITUTION.....
Posted on 1/19/20 at 8:39 am to texashorn
quote:Holy shite, that's the dumbest comment I've ever read on this board!
Holy shite, I would be worried if they’ve gone this erroneous route.
Posted on 1/19/20 at 9:11 am to Buckeye Jeaux
Here's the bottom line. The House has impeached the President. But the Senate now makes the rules and calls the shots. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks, it matters what THEY think.
If they decide to not even hear this and tell the House they have no case and to pound sand, that's the end of it.
If they decide to call witnesses or do whatever, that's how it works
They called no witnesses in the Clinton impeachment, and I am thinking that is the likely scenario here. The House managers will say what they have to say and squawk, but at the end of the day The Turtle will point at precedent , they will vote and that will end it.
"He's impeached!" is meaningless. It's the same thing as "He was accused!" But he was not convicted.
If they decide to not even hear this and tell the House they have no case and to pound sand, that's the end of it.
If they decide to call witnesses or do whatever, that's how it works
They called no witnesses in the Clinton impeachment, and I am thinking that is the likely scenario here. The House managers will say what they have to say and squawk, but at the end of the day The Turtle will point at precedent , they will vote and that will end it.
"He's impeached!" is meaningless. It's the same thing as "He was accused!" But he was not convicted.
This post was edited on 1/19/20 at 9:13 am
Posted on 1/19/20 at 9:14 am to bamarep
Aggiehank must only have 9.
Posted on 1/19/20 at 9:42 am to texashorn
quote:NO SIR !
Trump’s lawyers are attacking the Constitution, namely its sole power of impeachment to the House
Sorry . . . but
The House Article claiming "Obstruction of Congress" is in direct violation of the first two articles of the Constitution.
Posted on 1/19/20 at 10:20 am to texashorn
quote:
Holy shite, I would be worried if they’ve gone this erroneous route.
Trump’s lawyers are attacking the Constitution, namely its sole power of impeachment to the House, the fact that it is not a criminal proceeding, and moreover, a frontal attack on the American grand jury system to which impeachment is analogous, whereby the accused is not afforded due process, doesn’t have the right of representation at the proceedings, and which further allows secret proceedings.
Wow.
The biggest issue with this impeachment isn't Donald J Trump, it's the precedence it has now set. Not liking the opposition is now an impeachable event. Bill Clinton's never should have got as far as it did, but at least he lied under oath eventually. This will have far flung ramifications, and I'm willing to bet every other president will now be impeached.
Posted on 1/19/20 at 10:23 am to texashorn
quote:
Yes, but wouldn’t you say that a Trump line of defense that “they didn’t do it right” simply plays into the Democrats’ hands by encouraging them to restart the impeachment process?
Mohammed himself could fly down from the rafters and say it's garbage, and they will restart the process.
Posted on 1/19/20 at 10:57 am to AggieHank86
You won’t be able to sway too many people because you are full of intellectual dishonesty.
You are dishonest and are phony as hell. Horn isn’t much better.
Good luck on changing the way you live so immorally .
You are dishonest and are phony as hell. Horn isn’t much better.
Good luck on changing the way you live so immorally .
Posted on 1/19/20 at 11:39 am to WPBTiger
The only judicial aspect to this whole process is that there are lawyers involved and the Chief Justice is presiding. Otherwise it’s all a political calculation. Since the Democratic controlled House through the machinations of its committees formulated this fiasco, the Republican controlled Senate should do the same and dismiss the articles as fast as possible, vote to absolve Trump and be done with it. The Democrats and most of the television people will scream, but only ONCE. If this matter is allowed to be drawn out with conflicting witness testimony on a daily basis for a month, there will be screaming and spinning EVERY DAY. And, in the end there will not be a “conviction” in the Senate anyway.
Posted on 1/19/20 at 1:43 pm to texashorn
quote:
Not complying with a congressional subpoena of any nature is contempt of Congress.
Then every single fricking president since at least Nixon has been in contempt of Congress without one single motherfricking goddamned exception.
Posted on 1/19/20 at 1:46 pm to texashorn
quote:
Yes, but wouldn’t you say that a Trump line of defense that “they didn’t do it right” simply plays into the Democrats’ hands by encouraging them to restart the impeachment process?
Yes, the longer this drags on, the better it is for Trump.
Posted on 1/19/20 at 1:50 pm to 88Wildcat
I’m not sure about the basis of your claim. Nixon complied... he gave up the tapes. It was part of a criminal investigation.
This has gone off the rails. Nixon complied after taking it to the Supreme Court. It was justiciable because there were criminal charges.
Clinton had civil charges.
This has gone off the rails. Nixon complied after taking it to the Supreme Court. It was justiciable because there were criminal charges.
Clinton had civil charges.
This post was edited on 1/19/20 at 1:59 pm
Posted on 1/19/20 at 3:18 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
If they call shift for brains as a witness , does he have to appear?
Posted on 1/19/20 at 3:50 pm to WPBTiger
Nonsense
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News