Posted on 11/02/2019 4:14:21 PM PDT by xzins
HOUSE Speaker Nancy Pelosi has now formally stamped an institutional imprimatur on the continued House harassment intended to punish and harm President Donald Trump.
Following another deep-state assault against Trump, six House committees are operating under Speaker Pelosi’s recycled 2016 “resistance” umbrella for impeachment inquiries.
Speaker Pelosi needs to be reminded that the U.S. Constitution’s Article II, Section 4 has an exacting “high crimes” evidence standard for a valid House impeachment.
President Trump did absolutely nothing wrong in his telephone call with the Ukrainian leader.
Just as the Mueller investigation yielded no collusion and no obstruction, here there is no abuse of power or cover-up.
There is no quid, no pro, and no quo.
The media reports that this latest deep-state move against Trump comes from a CIA officer who was granted high-level security access in the White House.
However, the federal whistleblower statute’s protection is not applicable to illegal leaks of presidential communication by an intelligence official. Any reasoned legal analysis shows the CIA officer is not a whistleblower.
Regardless, the so-called “whistleblower complaint” evidences no wrongdoing by Trump. But its exacting legal form does indicate a coordinated intelligence operation against the 45th president.
Any collusion to mask the leak as a “whistleblower complaint” would itself be a gross betray of trust. And the so-called White House “cover up” was an appropriate attempt to plug and prevent illegal leaks.
The full House needs to be reminded that the U.S. Constitution explicitly forbids legislative harassment—that is, punishment that causes direct harm or even reputational harm—such as those of a fake, partisan impeachment.
Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution states that “[n]o bill of attainder…shall be passed.”
The House may not punish or harm any individual, including Donald John Trump.
Whether using a de facto (by fact) or de jure (by law) paradigm, the House’s punitive harassment, and the evolving fake impeachment against Trump, should be analyzed as an attainder.
Like attainders of old, the only purpose of the House’s fake impeachment of Trump, without any credible evidence of a high crime and without any possible chance of Senate conviction, is to punish, taint, and stain the president.
English jurist William Blackstone described “attainder” as any legislative harm, taint, stains, or blackening.
According to Blackstone, the prohibited “attintus” may come in any form or fashion. The attainder may constitute an actual penalty or it may be purposed solely to damage a targeted individual’s reputation and credibility.
The U.S. Constitution’s attainder restriction was a disruptive 18th century human rights advancement.
Harvard Law professor Zechariah Chaffee Jr. described the legislative punishment ban as “one of the three most important human rights” in the U.S. Constitution’s 1787 main (unamended) text.
The Constitution’s textual prohibition against attainder provides a solid, human-rights argument against the House moving forward with its fake impeachment of our duly elected president.
The inability to articulate a crime of any kind, or even to articulate a reasonable hypothesis of a crime, means that the democrats truly are engaged in a witch hunt.
As you can see from this article, a witch hunt is an attainder. It is an effort to have a person tainted by constant harrassment, fake accusations, etc.
So President Trump can have his picture next to that definition on internet dictionaries. Who has been harassed and falsely accused as much as he?
No one.
It doesn’t matter what the Constitution says, Pelosi and her communists Democrats have the vote in the House to impeach President Trump. It doesn’t matter what the reason is but they have the votes. It will be the Senate to take action and the Senate is mostly made up of RINO’s and cowards. The impeachment will not pass most of the Senate.
Trump should fire the top 2000 people.
Over the past three years the Demonicrat House has done nothing less than give aid and comfort to the enemy.
For $340 million, Soros could get the Senate to vote to convict—offer $20 million each to 17 Republican Senators to vote to convict (Romney, Murkowski and Collins will vote that way for free). Of course they would have to move to New Zealand afterwards. They could be neighbors there with James Comey, except that Comey will stay in the US if Trump is removed from office.
The author's points on the continue harassment of Trump, but I am not clear why he omitted "and misdemeanors" from his description.
And would change this cold civil war into a hot one.
JoMa
Just listen to CNN recently beat-down a guest for having the audacity to suggest crimes are required to impeach
https://www.mediaite.com/news/cnns-camerota-triggers-matt-schlapp-by-telling-him-you-cant-be-misleading-about-trump-impeachment/
Or this AP article from a few weeks ago greasing the skids to basically say congress decides who the president shall be and they hold the power to remove without any crimes
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3790844/posts
Their game plan, there is only a quid needed to impeach quo is no longer needed ( since they don't have one) , and how dare the American public think they elect and choose who shall be president, the agenda is that congress can remove for whatever reason as long as they frame it as an abuse for what ever reason without any proof. No actual crimes required, just votes.
Isn’t it true that there is no specific definition of high crimes and misdemeanors? I think all agree that a speeding ticket is not a high crime, but otherwise there is leeway.
Wasn’t one of Nixon’s articles of impeachment, an abuse of power, which they didn’t really specifically define?
Victor Williams, a widely-published scholar on the impeachment removal process, has taught at Catholic University’s Columbus School of Law, the City University of New York’s John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and the University of Maryland’s Carey School of Law. Williams is chair of Lawyers and Law Professors for Trump, and is running for the U.S. Senate in 2020 against Sen. Mark Warner.
The Dems are just making it up as they go along and things fail and backfire on them
Why would they have to move? Seems to me that many, many of the hundreds of Senators and Congressmen are on the take for more or less money than your figure, perhaps even per annum.
They live, breathe, sleep, and live spectacular, rewarding lives with impunity, they retire as millionaires or billionaires, even though their actions virtually prove they are on the take to someone really bad.
If not bribery, how could one explain their actions which are so inimical to good, ethical, behavior and good government, and so toxic to their constituents and to the United States as a nation.
Other than massive bribery, what on earth could explain the behavior of the Democrats and many of the Republicans?
What?
When are republicans going to wake up and realize their asses are on the line too. If they allow this travesty to continue then they deserve what they’re going to get.
Is that fancy for “people would hang for treason”?
Someone should point this out to Trump’s lawyers.
Attainder is exactly what Pelosi is doing. POTUS should sue them. Seriously. Thanks for posting this.
Yep, Bill of Attainder.
And they all knew it.
Hanging is too good for these subhuman vermin.
Actually, I'm kinda hoping Melania gets her claws into them instead.
Woman scorned and all that.
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.