Posted on 08/25/2018 3:18:37 AM PDT by SMGFan
Laurence H. Tribe, a professor of constitutional law at Harvard, is the co-author of To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment. Imagine if in 1972, President Richard M. Nixon, rather than routing his opponent, had barely won the presidential election. In that world, when evidence came to light that Nixon had committed impeachable offenses during his campaign, it would have been plausible to suppose that those offenses were essential to his victory.
And the stakes would then have been even higher than they were when, in 1974, the Supreme Court was deciding whether Nixon had to comply with a grand jury demand that he deliver up subpoenaed tapes and documents that would prove whether those offenses, and abuses of executive power to cover them up, had indeed been committed by the president. As we all know, United States v. Nixon came out 8 to 0, sounding the death knell of Nixons presidency, once he produced the incriminating tapes.
A similarly unanimous outcome would be less likely today, however. Observers need look no further than Bush v. Gore to conclude that the courts heightened polarization and the pro-executive leanings of several of its justices point to a closely divided ruling in an increasingly-less-hypothetical United States v. Trump.
So instead imagine a Trump appointee to the court one named as impeachment clouds were gathering and seemingly selected with a presidential eye focused sharply on his pro-presidential writings casting the deciding vote in a future case against Trump, involving an issue such as the presidents obligation to comply with a subpoena to testify or the presidents amenability to indictment.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The dead white Founding Fathers also did nothing about SLAVERY, so why should we try to channel them?
(spit a bit back at the Left)
Bill Clinton's nominee for SCOTUS, Stephen Breyer, was confirmed on July 29, 1994.
He was at that time under investigation by DOJ Special Counsel Robert Fiske for Whitewater scandal, suicide of Vince Foster, Travelgate, Filegate. When days later, Aug 4, 1994 that investigation was taken over by Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr the Lewinsky scandal was added.
Bill Clinton SCOTUS nominee could be confirmed while he was under a special investigation - that could have led to the SCOTUS - but Trump's can't?
SOMEbody is in need of some Dr. D.J. Trump’s Butt Hurt Salve.
That may very well be.
BS. What I suspect is that the Founding Fathers would have had no trouble spotting a “witch hunt”/coup against a sitting Presdent & would have no trouble at all with Trump’s SCOTUS pick in view of Kavanaugh’s interpretation of the Constitution, especially as contrasted to anyone a Democrap would nominate.
She even had FIVE electors who refused to vote for her compared to Trump's two.
He’s fullasheet.
The idea that justices would be approved along party lines is an abomination.
The vote can’t happen fast enough IMO.
I don't need to know anything else from or about this commie...
Guilty until proven innocent. Trump has committed no crimes. Tribe should know better.
Mr. Tribe: What the Founding Fathers would want us to do at this point - well, let me put it this way: If you were still around when we were finished, you wouldn’t have many friends or colleagues left.
Horsecrap. Clintons nomination of Breyer sailed right through.
“”I think well find down the road that Kavanaugh is Kennedy.......”
Actually l am afraid that’s the best we can hope for. Just take solace it’s not the witch making the picks.
But if you think the Left will give up trying to remove Trump from office or, at minimum, make his life miserable while he is president, you're kidding yourself.
The Left only "moves on" when it's to their benefit. Hillary invokes it all the time except when the democRATS want her to "move on" after her loss to Trump.
Hillary started moveon.org after Billie BJ's problems with an underage intern in the WH.
These people will never give up. They are relentless in their hate for America and Americans.
After obamacare, I am under the impression that Roberts is Kennedy.
This article heralds this poor soul as a constitutional scholar but wouldn't a constitutional scholar know that the founders have no say so in the matter.
Crazy Larry channeling the Founding Fathers again. The boy definitely has some “issues”.
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.