Jump to content

Trump impeachment trial opens as watchdog faults White House on Ukraine


webfact

Recommended Posts

Just as foreign policy is an enumerated power of the POTUS, declaring war falls on the Congress.  

 

No one, including me, said that declaring war was part of foreign policy and a power of the POTUS.  Since I know that declaring war is an enumerated power of Congress, I did not state or even insinuate that war would be related to the POTUS' foreign policy powers. 

 

Powers not specifically enumerated in the Constitution to the three branches, fall to the states.  This amendment ensured states' rights and the federal system with another layer of "separation of powers."  See the 10th Amendment.

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendment/amendment-x

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, xylophone said:

Trump has been violating both the domestic and foreign emolument clauses of the Constitution from day one of his moneymaking presidency.

And yet.... everything claimed, are not listed in the Impeachment charges... why not?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WalkingOrders said:

And yet.... everything claimed, are not listed in the Impeachment charges... why not?

Firstly, read this again...............Trump settled three different fraud lawsuits related to his Trump University for $25 million. Earlier this month, as the New York Attorney General Letitia James formally announced, the president was “forced to pay $2 million for misusing charitable funds for his own political gain,” and his Trump Foundation was “shut down for its misconduct.” 

trump has been found guilty of misusing charitable funds, and of misconduct with regards to funding and has been forced to pay $2 million.

 

The reason those events that are listed have not been included in the impeachment process is because no current POTUS has ever been convicted of such crimes, and the process for doing so is unprecedented, and is not even clear in the constitution whether this is allowable or not.

 

So basically, following those lines this POS could do just about anything with regards to fraudulent activity and get away with it, however if he weren't president he would be taken to court and probably convicted.

 

The fact that this impeachment focuses on certain aspects is because they are easily definable as being "impeachable offences" whereas fraud, misusing/stealing charitable funds and running a scam are not – – go figure.

 

It basically means that the man is a crook, but little can be done about it at the moment apart from forcing him to pay back the monies. 

  • Confused 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Off topic deflection posts and replies have been removed. 

 

Forum Netiquette:

 

5. Please do not quote multiple nested quotes. Quote only the relevant section that you are discussing. Moderators will snip excessively long nested quotes. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, mogandave said:


Yes, he is representing the Constitution, which in this case is the same as representing Trump. 

Yes, Dersh has explained his role several times in the last 24-48 hours.  He has stated that he is there to defend the Constitution and refute both articles of impeachment -- non crimes.   That role is in defense of Trump.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/18/2020 at 12:58 AM, jm91 said:

The issue is not popularity. The issue is did the man break the law? Did he use the resources of the US to further his own interests. 

His cult followers don't care but people who believe in the rule of law see possible criminal behavior that needs to be investigated. 

trumps cult followers engage in pure hypocrisy when they claim to be conservative then say they don't care that their dear leader has broken the law...strange. 

 

Close but not quite.

Impeachment is not a criminal process.

High crimes and misdemeanors as mentioned in the constitution for impeachment are not the same thing as literal criminal offenses in a criminal code.

The consequences of an impeachment conviction (has never happened to a president but has to other officials and won't happen this time) is removal from office. There is no criminal law consequence, again, because this isn't about criminal law.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...