Posted on 12/13/2019 6:17:56 PM PST by Its All Over Except ...
Unrefined dog squeezins.
One could also argue that if the Supreme Court deems a law unconstitutional, the Court is obstructing Congress.
The satisfaction of seeing Nancy stand before a judge accused of treason cannot be measured.
The Judiciary couldnt obstruct Congress if Congress was attempting to absorb some of the Judiciary’s powers and the Judiciary ruled that to be unconstitutional.
He said the House has made this "crime" up to charge Trump with because they have no other crime to charge him with in articles of impeachment.
"Abuse of Power" is so vague and non-specific as to not be a crime at all.
I think these to charges or articles were brought against Trump because the House democRATS have nothing else to save face with.
After all this time of secret hearings and witnesses who testify as to their opinions and feelings about Trump's but not providing any direct evidence, is going to become an epic fail in the Senate.
This is their way of saying "we got nuthin but we impeached him" to appease their radical Left base that they did what they said they were going to do.
Trump has been mominaying and the Senate has been approving his Judicial appointments therefore, loaded the courts with conservative judges and in some cases flipping them from democrat majorities to conservative.
Even the 9th Circus is feeling it. 13 of the 29 judges are republican now. If Trump can appoint 2 more that court is flipped as well.
Its getting harder for them to cherry pick a court to stop Trump. More winning for us and whining from them.
As far as I know, Obstruction of Congress has never been defined in a statutory sense. It’s as though they assembled several actions taken by the Trump administration and said, This is what “Obstruction of Congress” is. That’s a classic definition of an ex post facto law. How can a person be expected to comply with a law that has not been defined or enacted? It’s absurd.
It’s more than ex post facto. It the Legislative attempt to usurp Executive and Judicial power.
Do you know when this was done, by chance?
Looked it up....
“3 U.S.C. 19 (volume 3 of the United States Code, section 19) makes the Speaker of the House the next in line to be president when no vice president is available. That law was put into place in 1947.”
Answers.com.
I wonder why, though. Yes, Truman became POTUS. But why change succession then?
A good article on the history of the US presidential succession laws is here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession
This should be dismissed prior to trial.
p
(A) If they get Trump out, Pence becomes Prez.
(B) First thing Pence does is name a VP.
Nancy would then have to knock off Pence and the new VP.
As per the 25th Amendment, Nancy Pelosi stands to benefit from the impeachment by moving herself into
position for the presidency.....increasing her stature.....and her power.
That’s a quid pro quo.
ACTION NOW:
Demand Pelosi (A) remove herself from the line of succession to the presidency,
(B) or, recuse herself from any involvement in the impeachment process.
Both the Senate and the House have to approve the replacement VP.
Picking a Dem VP would drive Pelosi nuts...........
A hat tip for me? Aw shucks! Thanks!
...........well-—deserved...........
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.