"High crimes and misdemeanors"

Discussion in 'Politics' started by CoinBlazer, Nov 11, 2019.

  1. CoinBlazer

    CoinBlazer de omnibus dubitandum

    According to the Constitution, the POTUS may be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors.

    Hamilton, Federalist 65, defines high crimes and misdemeanors as
    "...proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they chiefly relate to injuries done immediately to the society itself."

    Fascinatingly, their is no legal or objective definition for the term, meaning that is it subject to much interpretation.
    Cheers!
     
  2. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    The founding fathers wrote that way because it would have been impossible for them to have covered all of the possible crimes or misdemeanors that could have occurred into the future. I am quite sure, however, that they never intended it to be used as political weapon that could effectively keep a president from doing his job. That’s why what has been done to Trump over the last two and half years is unprecedented and heinous.

    If anyone deserves to be kicked out of office, it should Adam Schiff who has orchestrated this farce the entire time. His conduct has been worse than “The Committee on the Conduct of War” which made Lincoln’s job harder during the Civil War. He is as big a liar as Joe McCarthy who recklessly accused innocent people of involvement with the Communist Party when he had no evidence.

    Like McCarthy, Adam Schiff should be censored, and if there were a mechanism to remove him from office, I would support it. His record is black stain on the history of this country.
     
  3. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

    If you can impeach Bill Clinton for a consensual extra-marital affair, why not impeach Trump for using his office to get a foreign power, an ally, to investigate his political rivals and doing so by illegally withholding military aid from that ally until they investigate one specific political opponent? I don't think you have to look too hard at what the Founding Fathers called high crimes and misdemeanors to equate what Trump did with both crimes and misdemeanors.

    The truth is that what Trump did was far and away enough to impeach him. The reason we are even in this place right now isn't because of anyone other than Trump himself. The man is a complete and total moron. Does Trump think that he can do whatever he wants to do and has absolutely no concept of the responsibilities and duties of the Office of the President? Oh yeah!! He doesn't' read. He doesn't take briefings. He has no ability to deal with the complexities of the job he was elected to. He has no interest in learning anything. If you want 1 good reason to impeach this straight up idiot, impeach him because he is totally unfit for the office by just about any measure you can name. Regardless of what his poorly educated zombie-like followers think. They would gladly follow him and this country right off a cliff.

    If it isn't this situation that he gets impeached for, it will be something else. He is just too damn stupid for words.
     
  4. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

  5. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    Clinton was impeached for perjury to a grand jury and obstruction of justice, not for his affair. It got him disbarred as an attorney. Getting disbarred is hardly something the voters should have taken lightly.

    After reading your endless rant, the bottom line is he committed no impeachable offense given the information we have now. Unfortunately, for your side, all the information we do have was leaked by Adam Schiff to his toadies in the lame stream media. All we have is one side, and that side has yet to prove anything.

    All you have is a Congressional farce which calculated to lower Trump’s standings in the polls. Impeachment is just a cover for the release of this information. It also calculated to keep Trump from performing his duties as president. Calling it an “impeachment issue” gives it more credibility with the gullible and uninformed.

    If Obama or Hillary Clinton had been treated the way your has treated Trump, you would be screaming you head off about how unfair it is. One of the reasons why I have been treating you and your cohort badly is because I am sick of this crap. Enough is enough.
     
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2019
  6. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    BTW Joe, I'm glad that your handlers are giving you such nice graphics to post. I'm sure that displays like that look great to the low information voters. Tell me, does "Unite Blue" charge you a membership fee?

    Senator Chis Murphy represents Connecticut. That state is so full of yellow dog Democrats and “pigs on the teat” government worker union members that they wouldn’t elect a Republican if the Democrats nominated bin Laden. Their other Senator lied about his military record, but he got in office just the same. That’s par for the course from one of the bluest states in America.
     
  7. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

    Geoff Bennett, Leigh Ann Caldwell and Garrett Haake

    2h ago / 1:07 PM CST
    What to expect when you're expecting an impeachment hearing
    House Democrats are carefully choreographing this week’s public impeachment hearings to emphasize their “simple abuse of power case against President Trump,” multiple sources tell NBC News.

    Their strategy is reliant on two key components: the witness list and the hearing format.

    IMPEACHMENT WITNESSES
    House Democrats characterize their first three witnesses – Amb. Bill Taylor, George Kent, and Amb. Marie Yovanovitch -- as respected, apolitical public servants with long, storied careers.

    All three gave House investigators damning accounts of President Trump’s interactions with the new Ukrainian government. Democrats expect the American public will trust the testimonies, as the witnesses detail the alleged impeachable offenses underlying Trump’s Ukraine maneuvers.

    Democratic Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut told Chuck on "Meet the Press" that the public will “hear immensely patriotic, beautifully articulate people telling the story of a president who ... extorted a vulnerable country by holding up military aid.”

    “They are all strong character witnesses. All three bring credibility to impeachment inquiry,” a Democratic aide tells NBC News, adding that Amb. Bill “Taylor is going to lay everything out” on Wednesday and Yovanovitch is going to “tug at America’s heartstrings” on Friday.

    Taylor -- the current top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine -- told House investigators that Trump directed officials to tie foreign aid for Ukraine to demands that the country open an investigation into the Biden family and the 2016 election. A second Democratic aide says Taylor’s “exquisite note-taking” will lend credibility to his testimony, which “corroborates the whistleblower complaint.”

    REPUBLICAN DEFENSE
    Republicans have the task of trying to separate President Trump from the string of damning testimonies.

    The GOP witness list – which includes Hunter Biden, the anonymous whistleblower, and a former DNC consultant – highlights the degree to which Republicans want to change the subject away from Trump’s interaction with his Ukrainian counterpart.

    House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff has already signalled that most of the names on the GOP request list are non-starters. Calling Hunter Biden, Democrats say, would have the effect of creating the political investigation into the Bidens that Trump wanted the Ukrainians to open.

    Democrats could find some rhetorical value in allowing at least one of the GOP witnesses, as a means of pushing back against process arguments.

    Don’t be surprised if Democrats allow Tim Morrison, the top Russia and Europe adviser on the National Security Council, to appear for public testimony.

    Republicans will also attempt to undermine the witnesses by pointing out that their most damning information comes to them secondhand -- from EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland or from NSC officials -- not from firsthand conversations with key players such as President Trump, Rudy Giuliani or Mick Mulvaney.

    HEARING FORMAT
    The House voted to change the format for the impeachment hearings when it approved a resolution establishing the procedures for the inquiry. It allows House Democrats to keep control of the proceedings and explore lines of inquiry at greater length.

    The hearings will kick off with opening statements from the House Intelligence Committee chairman and ranking member, plus the witnesses.

    Following that, the committee will move to a questioning period of 90 minutes, split evenly between Democrats and Republicans.

    Chairman Adam Schiff and the committee’s top Republican, Rep. Devin Nunes, can use the time to question the witnesses themselves or instruct a committee lawyer to do it instead.

    Once the first 90 minutes is up, Schiff will decide if more time is needed for additional Q&A. That’s when the format reverts to a traditional congressional hearing, with lawmakers each getting five minutes to pose questions.

    “If the American people only watch the first hour, they’ll hear plenty,” a third Democratic source familiar tells NBC. “The first hour of each hearing is designed to be a blockbuster.”
     
  8. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    Ah yes, a canned response from fake News NBC, which is about the same CNN. Is that the best you can do Joe?

    Any you have the brass the call Trump supporters "cultists."
     
  9. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

  10. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

  11. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

    Committees Release Laura Cooper's Transcript as Part of Impeachment Inquiry
    Source: House Intelligence Committee

    Press Releases
    Committees Release Laura Cooper’s Transcript as Part of Impeachment Inquiry

    Washington, November 11, 2019

    Washington, D.C.— Today, Rep. Adam B. Schiff, the Chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Rep. Eliot L. Engel, the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, the Acting Chairwoman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, released the transcript from the joint deposition of Laura Cooper, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Department of Defense.

    The three Chairs issued the following statement announcing today’s release:

    “Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Laura Cooper testified that President Trump, through the Office of Management and Budget, directed the freeze on hundreds of millions of dollars of critical military aid for Ukraine, against the judgment of career officials in the Department of Defense, Department of State, and other relevant agencies. Cooper also told the Committees that she raised concerns, as did others on several occasions, to senior U.S. government officials about the legality of withholding the congressionally-authorized money, and the challenges that White House delays would put on spending it.

    “Cooper also testified that, during a meeting on August 20, 2019, with Ambassador Kurt Volker, he strongly implied that the hold on assistance might be resolved if Ukraine was willing to issue a statement related to election interference.”

    The testimony of Deputy Assistant Secretary Laura Cooper can be found here.

    Key excerpts of Deputy Assistant Secretary Laura Cooper testimony can be found here.

    Background:

    H. Res. 660, which was passed by the House of Representatives on October 31, 2019, authorizes the Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence “to make publicly available in electronic form the transcripts of depositions” with “appropriate redactions for classified and other sensitive information.”

    Pursuant to this resolution, and consistent with the Committee’s rules and longstanding bipartisan practice, the Committee has begun preparing transcripts from the impeachment inquiry for public release, which includes a thorough, nonpartisan security review to protect classified and other sensitive information.

    As part of this process, the Committee is redacting (1) personally identifiable information; (2) the names of non-senior Executive Branch personnel and Intelligence Community employees; (3) the names of committee staff who did not ask questions or make on-the-record statements; and (4) classified or potentially classified information or other sensitive information not pertinent to the subject of the impeachment inquiry.

    In addition, consistent with the Committee’s rules, each transcript has been made available to the witness for inspection, including to identify technical, grammatical, and typographical corrections. The Committee has also taken into consideration requested redactions from witnesses, if they fall within the parameters above.

    Although the transcripts list Members of the three Committees who were present at the outset of a deposition, they do not necessarily reflect the attendance of all Members who may have joined or departed a deposition at different points.

    The Committee will release individual transcripts on a rolling basis as this process is completed.

    ###


    Read more: https://intelligence.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=822
     
  12. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    Canned responses Joe ... it's all you got.
     
  13. JoeNation
    Angelic

    JoeNation FOX Lies, GOP buys!

    All that you merit.
     
  14. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Active Member

    Ah Joe, you've been looking forward to this moment since the day after Election Day, haven't you?
    I'll give you this. I've seen a person who was as much obsessed with bringing down a political candidate as you. Were you this hot for Hillary Clinton, or is it intense hatred that keeps you going?

    I know I have never disliked a Democrat as much you dislike Trump. It’s really pathological with you.
     
  15. Recusant
    Spaced

    Recusant Member

Share This Page