Lawyer Explains ABSURDITY of Trump Impeachment Hearings Day 1

[jmdrake]

Yes, they were.


What about all of the people that congress "can't" subpoena because of "executive privilege?"

Who has congress wanted to subpoena but can't?

[jmdrake]

Does anybody here actually have an argument against the OP's posted video stating how absurd the impeachment hearings were?

Just curious.

Good question for @TheCount and @Zippyjuan. I'm guessing the answer is no.

[Swordsmyth]

Actually though it is Fox, it isn't an article but the White House released memorandum of the phone call. It is OK to read that. (assuming one trusts the White House- it is not a literal transcription of the actual conversation but was written from notes later and it has since been learned that some parts were left out). Trump expresses concern about Biden but does not mention Ukrainian corruption at all. Trump has claimed that it is corruption he was concerned about- not dirt on a political opponent. He also criticizes the US Ambassador who was actually trying to crack down on corruption in the Ukraine (he had her removed).

The usual MSM lies.
Biden was a case of corruption and so was Ukrainian interference in the US election in 2016.
And the Ambassador was complicit in corruption and was removed because she is corrupt.

[Swordsmyth]

Just pointing out that I do not recall you lambasting Obama for his egregious executive privileges the way you have over Trump. Granted you think executive privilege should not exist but it has been there for a very long time and sometimes the good-guys have to use it to correct the wrongs.

We are supposed to keep our boxing gloves on while the enemy pulls a gun.
That's the way to restore liberty.

[Swordsmyth]

And ^this is why I don't rely on NPR for news anymore. If Joe Biden stopped an investigation looking into a company that was paying his son $50,000 per month, that is evidence of corruption affecting the Ukrainian government. My only problem is, that's the only corruption regarding the Ukrainian government Trump raised. Even looking into the Crowdstrike server had nothing to do with the Ukrainian government.

The Ukrainian interference in 2016 did have to do with the Ukrainian government and Trump doesn't have to deal with every corruption issue in every phone call.

[jmdrake]

The Ukrainian interference in 2016 did have to do with the Ukrainian government and Trump doesn't have to deal with every corruption issue in every phone call.

There has been no accusation that the Ukrainian government ran Crowdstrike or was involved with hacking the DNC server. Not even by Trump.

[Swordsmyth]

There has been no accusation that the Ukrainian government ran Crowdstrike or was involved with hacking the DNC server. Not even by Trump.

But there are accusations that they participated in the election tampering that involved those.

[jmdrake]

But there are accusations that they participated in the election tampering that involved those.

That's a totally separate matter.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48268762

[Swordsmyth]

That's a totally separate matter.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48268762

No, it isn't.

It's all connected.

[jmdrake]

No, it isn't.

It's all connected.

Not at all. But you will keep saying it is even if it isn't. You have a knack for ignoring facts and just making crap up.

[Swordsmyth]

Not at all. But you will keep saying it is even if it isn't. You have a knack for ignoring facts and just making crap up.

That's what you are doing.
You are either ignorant or making things up.
Hitlery and the coup plotters conspired with Ukrainians to manufacture dirt on Trump as part of the Russiagate hoax.

[Danke]

[TheCount]

Who has congress wanted to subpoena but can't?

John Eisenberg, legal adviser to the National Security Council
Michael Ellis, deputy legal adviser to the National Security Council
Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff
Robert Blair, a top aide to acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney
Brian McCormack, an aide at the White House Office of Management and Budget
John Bolton, National Security Council advisor
Dr. Charles Kupperman, aide to John Bolton as National Security Advisor
Rick Perry, Secretary of Energy


Those are just from the last two weeks.

[TheCount]

Good question for @TheCount and @Zippyjuan. I'm guessing the answer is no.

I already answered.


If you think that the proceedings were absurd because people are relaying second-hand information, the reason for that is supposed executive privilege, that the executive branch thinks that it is immune to congressional oversight.

[Swordsmyth]

I already answered.


If you think that the proceedings were absurd because people are relaying second-hand information, the reason for that is supposed executive privilege, that the executive branch thinks that it is immune to congressional oversight.

That's just a stupid excuse.
There is nothing and can't be anything.

[TheCount]

That's just a stupid excuse.
There is nothing and can't be anything.

Thank you for your thoughtful and reasoned contribution to the discussion. I learned a lot.



What's your opinion on executive privilege / absolute immunity?

[acptulsa]

Thank you for your thoughtful and reasoned contribution to the discussion. I learned a lot.



What's your opinion on executive privilege / absolute immunity?

Many people approve of it when they approve of the president, and hate it when they hate the president.

Any bets?

[Stratovarious]

We don't even have a crime to attach to Trump yet, you all know I'm not keen on Trump lately,
but I always call blsht when I see it, and right now I see this topic swarming with Hillary sycophants
that could care less that Hillary Committed treason, too many times to count, admits it along with
Comey, and doesn't even get indicted.
And Hillary's Russian Collusion along with Mueller regarding uranium 1 , foundation shenanigans.

[KEEF]

We don't even have a crime to attach to Trump yet, you all know I'm not keen on Trump lately,
but I always call blsht when I see it, and right now I see this topic swarming with Hillary sycophants
that could care less that Hillary Committed treason, too many times to count, admits it along with
Comey, and doesn't even get indicted.
And Hillary's Russian Collusion along with Mueller regarding uranium 1 , foundation shenanigans.

Agree

[Swordsmyth]

Thank you for your thoughtful and reasoned contribution to the discussion. I learned a lot.



What's your opinion on executive privilege / absolute immunity?

You seem to think the following overrides all other pieces of the Constitution including specific rights in the BoR:

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

So what does this mean to you?

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

I think the President and those that work for him are protected from malicious prosecution etc. and that the reasonable suspicion barrier hasn't been satisfied in the least because not only is what he did not a crime but he was required to do it by law and treaty.

[TheCount]

Many people approve of it when they approve of the president, and hate it when they hate the president.

Any bets?

No bets; we already know that he favors a dictatorial executive.

[oyarde]

Trump continues to insist that he was only concerned about corruption in the Ukraine- yet in neither of the phone conversations released (another one was put out today) does he even mention "corruption". But "Biden" comes up several times in the July phone call.

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/15/77849...with-zelenskiy

Biden , bernie etc is legitimate code for corruption.

[TheCount]

You seem to think the following overrides all other pieces of the Constitution including specific rights in the BoR:



So what does this mean to you?

Saying that he has executive power does not mean that he has unlimited power.

That is the first line of article II. Article II then goes on to specify the powers of the executive. Nowhere in the listed executive powers is an immunity from oversight, investigation, or prosecution.

I think the President and those that work for him are protected from malicious prosecution etc. and that the reasonable suspicion barrier hasn't been satisfied in the least because not only is what he did not a crime but he was required to do it by law and treaty.

Protected by what? Where? Can I read it somewhere? Can you show it to me?

Also, reasonable suspicion, the lack thereof, malicious prosecution, etc. are entirely irrelevant to the matter. The powers which he - and you - claim to exist do not merely extend to the impeachment proceedings but to all matters. His claims of immunity from any and all oversight did not start with his impeachment but with the beginning of his presidency.

[acptulsa]

...and right now I see this topic swarming with Hillary sycophants
that could care less that Hillary Committed treason, too many times to count, admits it along with
Comey, and doesn't even get indicted.

Who are you talking about? Because there's not more than one person who has participated in this thread who wouldn't be absolutely delighted to see the Wicked Witch of the West indicted.

[oyarde]

Does anybody here actually have an argument against the OP's posted video stating how absurd the impeachment hearings were?

Just curious.

There can be none .

[Stratovarious]

Agree

I think Sword nailed it when he said this forum has been over run.

This isn't a libertarian forum and its not a free speech friendly one either, damn shame, look at who's name
is on it, I'd be shocked if Ron knew what went on here, and I'm guessing he has no idea of the censorship a
buses that are rampantly pervasive.

[Swordsmyth]

Saying that he has executive power does not mean that he has unlimited power.

That is the first line of article II. Article II then goes on to specify the powers of the executive. Nowhere in the listed executive powers is an immunity from oversight, investigation, or prosecution.

I see, but saying the House has the power of impeachment DOES mean they have unlimited power?
Please explain that.

Protected by what? Where? Can I read it somewhere? Can you show it to me?

Also, reasonable suspicion, the lack thereof, malicious prosecution, etc. are entirely irrelevant to the matter. The powers which he - and you - claim to exist do not merely extend to the impeachment proceedings but to all matters. His claims of immunity from any and all oversight did not start with his impeachment but with the beginning of his presidency.

5thA:

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law


There are laws governing the instigation and conduct of investigations and Congress is NOT immune from them.
No crime has been committed to be investigated and no conduct meets the reasonable suspicion threshold.

[Stratovarious]

It shouldn't take a Brilliant Legal Mind to lead us to the conclusion that all of these witch hunts
against Trump are just that.
Globalist , socialist Liberals, will use any means to justify the end, they have lost any scruples that
they once may have sported.

[Swordsmyth]

I think Sword nailed it when he said this forum has been over run.

This isn't a libertarian forum and its not a free speech friendly one either, damn shame, look at who's name
is on it, I'd be shocked if Ron knew what went on here, and I'm guessing he has no idea of the censorship a
buses that are rampantly pervasive.

The entire movement has been overrun, it is filled with leftists who happened to agree with real liberty lovers on a few topics like ending wars and ending the Fed.
The only hope to revive it is to graft on Trump and conservative Republicans.

[Swordsmyth]

It shouldn't take a Brilliant Legal Mind to lead us to the conclusion that all of these witch hunts
against Trump are just that.
Globalist , socialist Liberals, will use any means to justify the end, they have lost any scruples that
they once may have sported.

They openly gloat about not following any rules and try to tell us that the rules don't apply to them.
Then their trolls come and tell us they are right and that we must follow all the rules while the enemy breaks them all.


Nobody ever survived a gunfight using boxing gloves.