Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Take This Impeachment And Shove It...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    I'm curious, does the right to a speedy trial come into play here?
    Legally, no. Politically, dang straight it does.

    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


    "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

    My Personal Blog

    My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

    Comment


    • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
      Is not. Until it is demonstrated that the investigation is "due and proper" there is no obstruction. That the impeachment inquiry dropped its requests rather than attempt to enforce them shows me that the requests were not "due and proper."

      ETA: Which is still, by the by, under "obstruction of justice", not the Democrats' phantom "obstruction of congress" charge.
      The problem with this thread is by the time I saw this, I'd already answered the same points...



      "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


      "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

      My Personal Blog

      My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

      Comment


      • JimL:

        hillary prez.jpg

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          I'm curious, does the right to a speedy trial come into play here?
          Should, but doesn't.
          "Neighbor, how long has it been since youíve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?Ē

          Comment


          • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
            Is not. Until it is demonstrated that the investigation is "due and proper" there is no obstruction. That the impeachment inquiry dropped its requests rather than attempt to enforce them shows me that the requests were not "due and proper."

            ETA: Which is still, by the by, under "obstruction of justice", not the Democrats' phantom "obstruction of congress" charge.
            I guess my post has to do with purpose. Whatís the subpoena for? Obviously they want documents or testimony but they know that trump wonít comply so they would have to drag it out in court and rather than doing that they decided to use it for something else.

            Instead of going to court, they just hit trump with obstruction for every subpoena not complied with and used it to form another article of impeachment. Which is what they did. If trump had a valid reason for not complying then itís on trump to start court proceedings to prove it. Until then the democrats can show obstruction of congress, which is also a crime.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Watermelon View Post
              I guess my post has to do with purpose. Whatís the subpoena for? Obviously they want documents or testimony but they know that trump wonít comply so they would have to drag it out in court and rather than doing that they decided to use it for something else.

              Instead of going to court, they just hit trump with obstruction for every subpoena not complied with and used it to form another article of impeachment. Which is what they did. If trump had a valid reason for not complying then itís on trump to start court proceedings to prove it. Until then the democrats can show obstruction of congress, which is also a crime.
              No, actually it's not. A defendant is not required to testify against himself, and declining to take the stand should not be seen as proof of guilt (though a prosecutor will always try to make that case).

              It is up to the prosecution to make their case, and if they believe they are being obstructed, there is a judicial remedy for that.
              "Neighbor, how long has it been since youíve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?Ē

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Watermelon View Post
                I guess my post has to do with purpose. Whatís the subpoena for? Obviously they want documents or testimony but they know that trump wonít comply so they would have to drag it out in court and rather than doing that they decided to use it for something else.

                Instead of going to court, they just hit trump with obstruction for every subpoena not complied with and used it to form another article of impeachment. Which is what they did. If trump had a valid reason for not complying then itís on trump to start court proceedings to prove it. Until then the democrats can show obstruction of congress, which is also a crime.
                Nah... doesn't work that way. Democrats still need to prove their case, not simply file an accusation.
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Watermelon View Post
                  I guess my post has to do with purpose. Whatís the subpoena for? Obviously they want documents or testimony but they know that trump wonít comply so they would have to drag it out in court and rather than doing that they decided to use it for something else.

                  Instead of going to court, they just hit trump with obstruction for every subpoena not complied with and used it to form another article of impeachment. Which is what they did. If trump had a valid reason for not complying then itís on trump to start court proceedings to prove it. Until then the democrats can show obstruction of congress, which is also a crime.
                  There's no obligation to comply with unlawful demands - and the burden would not be on the accused in a congressional matter unless or until Congress sought enforcement.

                  And, no, it's not. You (general) can commit obstruction of justice in relation to a congressional committee's LAWFUL actions - but there is no such crime as obstruction of congress.

                  In a House full of lawyers, this is damning. They wouldn't have accidentally said 'congress' meaning 'justice' - so, why the wording? Most reasonable conclusion is that they KNEW the could not prove the elements of obstruction of justice.

                  "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


                  "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                  My Personal Blog

                  My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                    In a fair trial the accussed doesn't get to block the testimony of witnesses and other evidence against them.
                    And the prosecution does not get to block testimony of witnesses and other evidence that is exculpatory towards the accused, all evidence must be heard. that is why Pelosi does not want to send the articles to the senate Trump will have a truly fair trial one where both sides will be heard not just the one side. as happened in the house proceedings.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Watermelon View Post
                      I guess my post has to do with purpose. Whatís the subpoena for? Obviously they want documents or testimony but they know that trump wonít comply so they would have to drag it out in court and rather than doing that they decided to use it for something else.

                      Instead of going to court, they just hit trump with obstruction for every subpoena not complied with and used it to form another article of impeachment. Which is what they did. If trump had a valid reason for not complying then itís on trump to start court proceedings to prove it. Until then the democrats can show obstruction of congress, which is also a crime.
                      The problem of course all presidents have the right to Executive Privilege (it is explicitly spelled out in the Constitution) and can use it to resist Congressional subpoenas. I can't think of a single Administration that has not exerted this right at some point.

                      The remedy, of course, for when you have two conflicting rights (Executive Privilege v. Congressional oversight/subpoena power) is to let the courts sort it out. That has been the solution for hundreds of years. And such cases can be expedited so that a decision can be made rather quickly.

                      Now the Democrats repeatedly proclaimed that they couldn't wait for the courts because Trump is such an existential threat -- a clear and present danger -- that they had to move as quickly as possible to impeach him..

                      But the very fact that they are now holding up sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate incontrovertibly demonstrates that there is no such urgency. If there was the Senate would already have the articles of impeachment in their hands.

                      IOW, this claimed need for speed was nothing but yet another lie and they have no excuse whatsoever for not turning to the courts for adjudication.

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        The problem of course all presidents have the right to Executive Privilege (it is explicitly spelled out in the Constitution) and can use it to resist Congressional subpoenas. I can't think of a single Administration that has not exerted this right at some point.

                        The remedy, of course, for when you have two conflicting rights (Executive Privilege v. Congressional oversight/subpoena power) is to let the courts sort it out. That has been the solution for hundreds of years. And such cases can be expedited so that a decision can be made rather quickly.

                        Now the Democrats repeatedly proclaimed that they couldn't wait for the courts because Trump is such an existential threat -- a clear and present danger -- that they had to move as quickly as possible to impeach him..

                        But the very fact that they are now holding up sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate incontrovertibly demonstrates that there is no such urgency. If there was the Senate would already have the articles of impeachment in their hands.

                        IOW, this claimed need for speed was nothing but yet another lie and they have no excuse whatsoever for not turning to the courts for adjudication.
                        Psst! Exec privilege isn't in the Constitution.

                        "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


                        "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                        My Personal Blog

                        My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                          Psst! Exec privilege isn't in the Constitution.

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            I amen'd you anyway, and that's my amen and I'm stickin' to it!
                            "Neighbor, how long has it been since youíve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?Ē

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Watermelon View Post
                              I guess my post has to do with purpose. Whatís the subpoena for? Obviously they want documents or testimony but they know that trump wonít comply so they would have to drag it out in court and rather than doing that they decided to use it for something else.

                              Instead of going to court, they just hit trump with obstruction for every subpoena not complied with and used it to form another article of impeachment. Which is what they did. If trump had a valid reason for not complying then itís on trump to start court proceedings to prove it. Until then the democrats can show obstruction of congress, which is also a crime.
                              I think youíre a murderer. To prove it, I need to search and comb through every aspect of your life, until I find it and you better comply or else youíre obstructing justice. Thereís a reason due process, presumption of innocence, judicial review, etc exist. To prevent shams, such as the above, from happening.
                              "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                              GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                                Did you even bother to read 1505? It specifically refers to the Antitrust Civil Process Act which has nothing to do with an impeachment inquiry.
                                The second paragraph includes congress. When a sentence ends and then thereís a Ďorí it indicates a different application to that section will follow.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, 10-24-2020, 08:17 AM
                                9 responses
                                75 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Starlight  
                                Started by LiconaFan97, 10-23-2020, 04:56 PM
                                32 responses
                                195 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by Juvenal, 10-23-2020, 11:08 AM
                                10 responses
                                103 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Juvenal
                                by Juvenal
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 10-23-2020, 08:52 AM
                                6 responses
                                67 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Ronson, 10-22-2020, 10:59 PM
                                85 responses
                                619 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Working...
                                X