What happened to quid pro quo and bribery?? I thought that was what they had overwhelming evidence for. Guess not....
They, of course, went the way of "Russian collusion" and "emoluments" and "extortion" and "mental instability" and "sexual harassment" and on and on and on and on ...
They finally settled on what flew best with the focus group. Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress. Both are easily defended against.
The first article of impeachment is easily defended by arguing and showing there is a rational alternative, logical, and legal explanation under the law that covers all the events the Democrats claim are only for some future benefit resounding to Trump that are instead benefiting the goals of the US, which also might potentially but peripherally benefit President Trump.
The second Article of Impeachment is much more easily defended by pointing out that legally stating that invoking the Right to involve the Third Branch, which is the Constitutional remedy to Congressional overreach in defense of Executive privilege and immunities, cannot be Obstruction of Congress. It has been used multiple times before by multiple presidents, including President Trump, and President Obama.
The Constitutional fact is that the overriding authority of TWO branches in agreement is the only thing that (ahem) trumps the unconstitutional demands of the THIRD branch.
If the Courts rule in favor of Congress, then the House of Representatives get to question the President’s Executive Department employees and have free access to the documents they want to see, but if the Courts rule in favor of the president’s position, then they do not. The courts may split the baby and allow a compromise, which the court has done in the past. Congress wants to have sole discretion to demand anything they want, but, as Professor Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz have both pointed out, it doesn’t work like that, and has not for 230 years.
Both of those very scholarly Constitutional experts have said that if the Democrats in the House brought an Article of Impeachment based on Obstruction of Congress because President Trump went to court to block demands for access to testimony from close advisors and for privileged documents, they’d be abusing their power. They did, and are.
What happened to quid pro quo and bribery?? I thought that was what they had overwhelming evidence for. Guess not....
One of the news organizations should do an analysis of how many hours were spent on those issues in the days of hearings and then ask , why isn’t it an article...
This would show it was all fakery to simply just get something out there to impeach him on.
“What happened to quid pro quo and bribery??”
They joined Global Warming..to be renamed something else?