Posted on 11/25/2019 9:17:05 AM PST by jazusamo
The descent of Fox News legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano into foolishness continues with a series of TV appearances in which the former New York Superior Court judge adopts the Adam Schiff interpretation of the Constitution where you are not allowed to confront your accuser, where being a fact witness does not require you to recuse yourself from running a kangaroo court impeachment inquiry, and where hearsay and presumption determine you are guilty until proven innocent.
In the face of public hearings in which Schiff unloaded his clown car of hearsay witnesses who made every presumption about President Trump except for the presumption of innocence, Napolitano warmly embraced Schiff’s fables, telling Reason’s Nick Gillespie that there is more than enough, and he uses the word very loosely, "evidence" to justify three or four articles of impeachment against President Trump:
In an interview with Reason’s Nick Gillespie on Friday, Fox News analyst Andrew Napolitano said there was “overwhelming” evidence of impeachable actions by President Donald Trump.
Napolitano said, “The Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee have unearthed enough evidence, in my opinion, to justify about three or four articles of impeachment against the president. We have to start this conversation by underscoring the fact that impeachment is not legal, it is political. Its only Constitutional base is treason, bribery, or other hard crimes and misdemeanors.”
He continued, “Here’s what I think the Democrats will want, Nick. Here’s what I think they will advance. One is bribery. The technical definition of bribery is the failure to perform an official duty until a thing of value comes your way, and they will argue that the president’s failure to disperse [sic] funds that the Congress ordered be dispersed [sic] until the recipient of the funds agreed to investigate a potential political opponent is an...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Napolitano should be exiled to a desert island with Peggy Noonan, Max Boot, Ruth Marcus, Mitt Romney, David Brooks, and William Kristol.
Have not heard anything about that lately. I wasn’t an early supporter of Trump either, but it is clear he has has established himself as a great President.
I can understand some objections to abusing McCain, but McCain’s long term behavior brought it on himself. With the Gallagher actions, Trump has proven himself to be for the troops. Maybe Sinise will ease off on Trump a bit. Clearly, Trump is on the right track with respect to our military.
Napster, Juan Williams, Chris Matshews and the woman from CNN who gave Hillary the questions are all on my radar to turn on something else.
FNC needs to sh*tcan that clown and hire someone who at least knows the law.
I think it is true that homosexuality eventually affects the brain in a negative way.
I have no evidence...just hearsay, listening to Napolitano.
“...reeducation camp seminar that FOX sent him to..”
I remember that. He had his own show on Fox, for a little while, however he ‘dumped’ on the Muzzies for something and that was that.
It was when the Nap mentioned the FBI/CIA using the British GHQ spying to circumvent our laws on surveillance. He was removed from Fox until he got his mind right about becoming anti-Trump.
Fox News should fire this clown.
“...agreed to investigate a potential political opponent”
An investigation is in of itself not a thing of value since there’s no guarantee how the investigation will end up helping or hurting anyone.
I had the guy pegged as a Marxocrat plant right from the start, regardless of his “libertarian” horse dung, because his sister is Janet Napolitano, the lesbian fat body communist in Hussein O’Bozo’s cabinet.
Nappy’s gone batsh*t crazy! Yet, Faux Snooze uses him as an expert legal anal-yst!
About what everyone knows he fudge packs with Shemp Smith
Yep, I’m sure money is involved and like you I’ve never read of an Epstein connection but that doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
Whose pocket?
I thought she was his alter drag queen ego
I was never interested in him in the past, but from what I read he had a fairly abrupt change in his stance on various topics.
I was never one to to think of blackmail as a primary political tool used with a heavy hand in this country, but after seeing people like Sondland, Napolitano, Roberts, Coulter, and others completely and bizarrely begin to take up leftist stances or exhibit very un-conservative behavior, I don’t have much else to make of it.
I can only think someone has the goods on them and has made it known to them.
They are not related.
Yes! That’s it, thanks. He admitted Trump was wiretapped.
Right. And a “potential political opponent” could theoretically be any one of literally tens of millions of people.
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.