You’ll be surprised as well as they what Trump has up his sleeve, just break out the popcorn.
I would think that if it was possible that Judicial Watch would be on this.
If I recall correctly, there is some constitutional provision that members of Congress can’t be held liable for things they say in sessions of Congress. So Adam Schiff can lie as he did and can’t be legally held accountable for lies.
I believe Harry Reid was on the floor of the Senate, when he lied about Mitt Romney not paying taxes. It was because he couldn’t be legally liable for anything he said while inside of the Congress. The floors of Congress are a “safe space”.
But I get the overall point. How in the sam hill can a Congressman read into the record what was supposedly the record of what was said in the conversation in question, and then afterward say it was a parody? This dude is a parody of a Congressman.
Just because we don't like or agree with something doesn't make it unconstitutional.
Hamilton wrote of this in the Federalist Papers. Can’t recall where.
Basically, they can Impeach for anything they can get the public to go along with. Doesn’t matter if it breaks any Laws or not.
I used to joke back in the late 90’s that a President can be Impeached if enough of the People didn’t like his haircut.
I never saw Trump on the horizon when I said that
In the bug-eyes of the Democrat leadership, defeating the great and powerful Hildebeast in November, 2016, was a high crime in and of itself.
Besides, I thought that the Dems see the Constitution as a "living, breathing document". Why bother with trifles like following what a bunch of dead White guys wrote 240 years ago? It should be viewed in the context of 21st century "morals".
I’m not an attorney and I don’t play one on t.v. That said, I don’t believe Congress can be sued for this however, there is enough concerning evidence that this has been orchestrated by certain Democrats. Perhaps a class action civil suit against those involved in the collusion would be possible.
They are exempt. And that is the problem.
That is true, however, what is also true is the Constitution does not define what high crimes and misdemeanors actually are. In other words it is up to Congress to determine what they are impeaching him for. On the flip side they made the conviction bar in the Senate very high, 2/3 of Senators must vote for conviction to remove the President. Since it takes 67 to convict, that means only 34 have to vote for acquittal. There are 53 Senators. So Democrats would have to get 20 Republicans, the 2 Independent Senators, and all of the Democrat Senators to vote conviction. The odds are against them them doing so. But it certainly does give cause for concern, because while we know there are some Senators who wold vote for conviction, how many actually exist is not known. However, they also have to face reelection themselves at some point in time, and President Trump's supporters would likely not stand with them if the voted for conviction and would very likely lose their reelection bid.
Clinton ran for reelection as an impeached President and it did not hurt him one bit. In fact many say it helped him. The Democrats have to worry that the same would be true for President Trump.