Posted on 02/21/2020 9:38:05 AM PST by Kaslin
The avalanche of denunciation that fell upon the head of Professor Alan Dershowitz after his address before the Senate’s impeachment proceeding was unsurprising. In lending his stature and knowledge to the President’s defense, he, of course, became the enemy of Trump’s progressive pursuers. The fact that Dershowitz is a lifetime Democrat and liberal made it worse. The Left does not react well to apostasy.
But the adverse reaction to Dershowitz’s defense of the President emanated from the nominal right as well -- particularly from National Review and the Dispatch.
Jonah Goldberg is not entirely persuaded that impeachable misconduct must be a defined criminal offense, as contended by Dershowitz. He thinks the very notion to be “logically, legally, morally, constitutionally, historically, and factually absurd.” He cites first the remarks of Edmund Burke during the 1788 impeachment trial of Warren Hastings, Governor-General of India, suggesting that the House of Lords should not restrict its deliberations to the precepts of jurisprudence. The detail that Hastings was acquitted, Goldberg does not vouchsafe.
More importantly, the American Constitution dispenses with the British motion for a vote of no confidence. While the procedure of impeachment derives from the English tradition, impeachment under the provisions in Articles I and II is a procedure for removal on the basis of moral turpitude, not faulty performance. The British prime minister can be removed simply because a majority in Parliament think he is doing an unacceptably bad job. Churchill himself had to defend against a motion for a no confidence vote after Tobruk fell to Rommel’s Afrika Korps.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Jonah Goldberg — now there’s a name that nobody should care to read about except, in some medical journal of people who have contracted TDS.
Didn’t see critics from the right mentioned except a never-trumper.
Dershowitz backed off of that concept. It is possible for a president to sell out his country and not commit a statutory crime. A president could start a war as in “wag the dog” and it would not be a crime. But those are good reason to impeach. On the other hand with “3 felonies a day” in mind, impeaching for criminal acts could have a president removed on trivial grounds.
Dershowitz’ argument was dangerous. That Trump shouldn’t be impeached because what he did wasn’t criminal. But what if it was? I say even if it was it wasn’t a level worth impeaching.
Famed NeverTrump "Constitutional scholar" Jar-Jar Fatberg weighs in...
Even when he re-explained his view to CNN buffoon Wolf Blatherer, Wolfie just ignored him and pottered onward with his own fantasy about what The Dersh said. Right to Dershowitz's face...
..not from the “right”. Jonah Goldberg is no longer engaging as a conservative, and not sure if National Review can still hang that label on their door either.
I notice he hasn’t written an article for Townhall for some time now. Did Townhall finally have enough?
I’ll criticize him. I have a hard time listening to anything he says because when it comes to his penis all his constitutional wisdom vanishes like dust on a condom. You sleep with 16 year old sex slaves, you don’t deserve to be heard or respected.
Never Trumpers, in effect, are hardly “on the right.”
Where? Because I just heard him defending it the other day on Breitbart radio.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.