The bottom line is the impeachment is about either or, it is either
1. stay loyal to the Oath of Office where you swore to uphold the Constitution RIGHT HAND RAISED AND LEFT HAND ON THE BIBLE, or
2. be a slave to Trump, power, and money, and getting re-elected by Trump loving constituents.
There comes a time when the Republic superseded getting reelected for a politician. Loyalty to constituents is a second priority AFER loyalty to the Oath of Office. The American Republic, our Democracy are priorities in every political argument. The GOP has forgotten that fact.
Abuses of power have accrued in many Presidencies, all sort, but NONE involved asking a foreign power to help with your next election. GOP Rep listed abuses as has Dershowitz. but they did not find an abuse like the Ukraine shake-down by Tweety trump.
"This is why the House articles of impeachment are constitutional"
By Lawrence Friedman, opinion contributor — 12/12/19 11:00 AM EST 464The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill
"In response to the two proposed articles of impeachment for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, professor Alan Dershowitz Alan has argued that the allegations fail to satisfy the constitutional criteria for impeachable offenses. But there should be little doubt that allegations meet the criteria. In fact, the articles describe the kind of misconduct the Framers designed impeachment to address.
The Constitution does not define “high crimes and misdemeanors,” but we are certainly not without guidance here. The historical understanding of the term, which is derived from English law and practice, referred to the misconduct of government officials that could be deemed out of the ordinary. Discussions at the Constitutional Convention of 1787, though brief, also illuminate its scope. After James Madison made comments that were critical of impeachment for mere “maladministration,” the Framers added “other high crimes and misdemeanors” to distinguish between unpopular policy choices and conduct warranting removal from office.
A quarter century ago, the legal scholar Charles Black concluded that impeachable offenses are acts “that a reasonable man might anticipate would be thought abusive and wrong, without reference to partisan politics or differences of opinion on policy.” Black further explained that offenses subject to impeachment are extremely serious offenses “which in some way corrupt or subvert the political and governmental process.” Finally, he specified that impeachment should only be considered for “a definite act or acts,” as opposed to general “lowness and shabbiness.” If the bar were set at “lowness and shabbiness,” then the current occupant of the White House might have suffered impeachment some time ago."
Then there is this character, Dershowitz. Dershowitz in unfazed, but also unfathomable. What is he saying? Why is he ignoring facts of the Tweety case that make his argument moot?
"Dershowitz maintains that abuse of power and obstruction of Congress are nowhere mentioned in the Constitution, and that the proposed articles of impeachment are unconstitutionally vague and open ended. It is true that the Constitution does not name “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress” as impeachable offenses, but other than crimes of “treason” and “bribery,” the text does not name impeachable offenses. By adding “other high crimes and misdemeanors,” the Framers plainly intended that the bases for impeachment should not be limited to treason and bribery.
Dershowitz is like a robot and never strays from his argument. He is wrong tho. Repeating a wrong argument is not going to change the truth and the facts. Dershowitz argues that, for example of his false equivalent arguments, as a defense attorney he would never give up evidence to the prosecutor.
WTF! lol!
Yo!, Alan, Mr Der, funny old guy, you can withhold evidence in your trials defending murders and gangsters, or whomever, BUT this OBVIOUS false equivalence about sharing evidence, documents, that can exonerate or indict the President of the United States is no where close to your low level trials.
Alan, Mr. Der, this impeachment is about the United States, our Democracy, national Security and you dare to compare your works with this? Of course Tweety Trump and his White House has to turn over documents!
"December 12, 2019Trump administration resists Ukraine disclosures ordered by court"
After lawsuit, the Center for Public Integrity received heavily redacted documents, will ask judge to order full transparency
Trump administration resists Ukraine disclosures ordered by court
R. Jeffrey Smith National Security Editor
https://publicintegrity.org/national-security/ukraine-documents-dod-omb-foia/
"The Trump administration has refused to disclose how key officials at the Department of Defense and the White House Office of Management and Budget reacted to President Trump’s decision to halt military aid to Ukraine.
On Nov. 25, federal district court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ordered the administration to produce records reflecting what these officials said to one another about the legality and appropriateness of Trump’s order. The Center for Public Integrity sought the information in Freedom of Information Act requests filed in late September."
Alan Dershowitz, this Judge say you are wrong, your idea Tweety Trump can refuse to provide documents, i.e, evidence to the impeachment is wrong, not good legal logic.
Here is another Judge ruling against your notion of legally hiding evidence in an impeachment proceedings Der.
"Judge orders State Dept. to search for and provide more Ukraine docs"
By Rachel Frazin - 12/14/19 01:22 PM EST 466
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/474581-judge-orders-state-dept-to-search-for-provide-more-ukraine-docs
THE OATH ALL MEMBERS OF CONGRESS SWORE TO WAS TO THE CONSTITUTION, NOT THEIR CONSTITUENTS!
Here is how strongly Dershowitz feels. Notice he does not address the arguments presented to him that support the impeachment.
The nasty part of Dershowitz's opinions / arguments over impeachment is his effort to get the House Representatives doing their job as a duty voted out of office. Well see how that goes.
"Impeaching Trump Would Be an Abuse of Power by Congress"
By Alan Dershowitz 5 Dec 2019
https://www.newsmax.com/alandershowitz/dershowitz-trump-impeachment-pelosi/2019/12/05/id/944720/
Let's go further with Alan, as he compares the Dems pursuit of impeachment like the KGB in the Soviet Union. Straying from rationale arguments, it seems the defender is trying way too hard to make his point.
Dershowitz also compared House Democrats’ search for an impeachable offense to use against the president to the authoritarian behavior of the leaders of the former Soviet Union.
Hard over on ourselves are we, Der. You think you are the ONLY authority on the Constitution and impeachment, claiming Democrats are "lawless?" Give me a break man. You are not the sole authority on everything Constitutional, everything Impeachable.
"Alan Dershowitz to Mark Levin: Impeachment ‘would be an utter abuse of the power of Congress’"
Nate Madden · December 9, 2019
“What they’re trying to do is what the KGB under Lavrentiy Beria said to Stalin, the dictator — I’m not comparing our country to the Soviet Union; I just want to make sure it never becomes anything like that,” Dershowitz said. “Beria said to Stalin, ‘Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime.’ And that’s what some of the Democrats are doing. They have Trump in their sights, they want to figure out a way of impeaching him, and they’re searching for a crime.” [I think Dershowitz motto is "Show man any charge for a crime and I will defeat it." Dershowitz brain cannot work with the prosecution of crimes, only the defense of crimes.]
Dershowitz went on to warn that Democrats have created “open-ended criteria which bear no relationship to the words of the Constitution itself” and that a potential impeachment of President Trump would set a precedent that will “weaponize impeachment, and the next Democrat who gets elected will be impeached.”
Look at the weakest point made by Dershowitz here:
"Dershowitz went on to warn that Democrats have created “open-ended criteria which bear no relationship to the words of the Constitution itself” and that a potential impeachment of President Trump would set a precedent that will “weaponize impeachment, and the next Democrat who gets elected will be impeached.”"
We have already seen a President impeached for a BJ in the Oval Office Mr. D.! lol! What standard for impeaching a Democrat could be lower?
Then we have the Fox State Media people asserting the one and only opinion that counts.
"Sean Hannity calls Democrats who represent Trump districts 'cowards' and 'frauds'"
By Victor Garcia | Fox News Published December 13, 2019
"
Sean Hannity slammed House Democrats who won seats in districts that President Trump carried in 2016 Friday night, blaming them for the ongoing impeachment process and calling them "cowards" and "frauds."
"[Impeachment] could all come to an end right now if these 31 ... self-described moderates, they ran as moderates, weren't standing in the way," Hannity said on his television program. "They represent the districts that President Trump won and in some cases by big margins. Almost none of them willing to go up for their own constituents. We hear maybe eight might break away. Now, sadly, these cowards are ready and willing, they're willing to walk the plank for Nancy Pelosi, AOC, the squad."
The host accused the Democrats of being more loyal to their party's leadership than to their constituents.
"They care more about the radical socialist, far-left leadership, divisive, do-nothing Democratic Party than they do about Americans and what they have now done to this country for three years," Hannity said."
Hannity sounds real intelligent right? In my view it is the Republic, our Democracy, the Constitution, and America before constituents. Sorry about that, but these people in Congress took an oath to uphold the Constitution, not uphold their constituents, right?
Here's a view I see more clearly.
"The Cowardly Republicans"
Republicans are afraid to criticize the president. That fear is rational—but there is a way to overcome it.
by Niels Rosenquist October 28, 2019 5:44 am
https://thebulwark.com/the-cowardly-republicans/?amp
It is shame on the GOP and all Tweety Trump surrogates who argue anything that ignores the clear abuse of power of Tweety Trump shaking down Ukraine, asking a foreign power for assistance for personal gain, not for corruption, not for National Security by literally harming an Ally, Ukraine, of critical National Security importance [yep, I said it twice.], against Russian aggression, to win a political campaign in 2020.
"Here are all the major newspaper editorial boards that support impeaching Trump"
By Eliza Relman 12 Dec 2019
- A handful of prominent American newspaper editorial boards have formally announced their support for impeaching and removing President Donald Trump.
- In recent weeks, the editorial boards of the Los Angeles Times, The Boston Globe, and the New York Daily News have all called for Trump to be impeached.
- National-newspaper editorial boards, which are generally independent from the newsroom, overwhelmingly endorsed Hillary Clinton over Trump during the 2016 election.
These are the true Patriots of the media in our land. These newspapers will go on Tweety Trump's enemies list. There will be reprisals. It's sad that this is 100% predictable, but knowing Tweety Trump LOVES revenge, we will see Tweety get his revenge at some day in the future.
"A handful of prominent American newspaper editorial boards have formally announced their support for impeaching and removing President Donald Trump. "
These all are "liberal" branded papers, so unlikely to sway Tweety Trump supporters. At least they were courageous in the face of a pathologically dangerous President, and similarly pathological cult-like following.
The New York Daily News, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago-Sun Times,
