re: Trump lawyers respond to articles of impeachment: 'Constitutionally invalid'

quote:

---

I believe section 4(c)(1) of the impeachment inquiry resolution gave the chairman sole authority over whether to allow certain witnesses

---

Unfortunately that does not extend to the point of committing fraud or perjury.

Those things are actually illegal.

The entire thing is like "fruit of the poisoned tree." No matter which way they come at it, they based their argument on fraud.

quote:

---

The Judiciary is never ever out of anything, unless they choose to be of course.

---

Well, I guess, if you think that the Supreme Court has more authority than the Congress and Executive Branch, in each and every conceivable case.

That's scary. Talk about a coup.

No man, the Judiciary is there to resolve legitimate disputes between the other two branches. That's my point. Separation of powers?? Checks and balances??

Separation of powers is exactly right. The Congress has SOLE power of impeachment and subsequent trial.

No ifs, ands or buts.

quote:

---

I equated impeachment with a grand jury proceeding.

An impeachment can lead to a loss of office, a grand jury can lead to a loss of freedom (and perhaps your life, if convicted).

Doucheowitz and shite-stirring Starr are attacking the Constitution. They purport to embrace the grand jury system while selectively wiping their arse with other parts of the Constitution. No bueno.

---

See the fricking dumb shite I have to deal with every time I post in the Cloak Room at Surly.

The Constitution says there are three branches of government, all equal. Conflicts between the legislative branch (that means Congress for any other imbeciles that have floated from over there) and the executive branch (i.e. president) are decided by the judical branch. So if Congress wants to subpoena a member of the president's staff and the president feels they are not legally obligated to honor the subpoena the case gets sent to the courts and the courts decide who is right and who is wrong. There are always different circumstances and variables with every case so every time this happens it goes to court. Just because the courts ruled against Trump in the Mcwantshisnames case does not mean that any subpoena Congress issues to a member of Trump' staff has to be honored, only that particular one has to. The second article of impeachment pretends that this is not the case and that the president has to surrender to the will of Congress whenever and wherever Congress demands. That means the legislative branch is placed above the executive branch. The whole argument the Democrats are making here is a middle finger to the Constitution and the executive branch.

LINK

This peach mint foety five is DOA. But that won't stop the democrats. Schiff should have been removed a long time ago and Pelosi makes him and Penguin Managers.

quote:

---

There is no recourse. The courts are out of this. It's a political proceeding and a sole power of Congress.

So Trump's attorney's should stop whining about it and I hope, come up with a better defense than "they can't do that

---

You’re basically saying, we didn’t read him his rights, and violated court proceedings but eff it, onwards and upwards?

quote:

---

I appreciate the name-calling. It displays superior intellect.

---

I bet your mother is smart enough to realize she raised a douchebag...she must really dislike you.

quote:

---

I appreciate the name-calling. It displays superior intellect.

---

quote:

---

Doucheowitz and shite-stirring Starr

---

You can't make this up.