If we make a coldly realistic analysis, isn't Dershowitz right? A Senate conviction for impeachable offenses means nothing more or less than what 67 Senators agree is an impeachable offense. Since no such consensus can exist, nothing is impeachable.https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/1221971781818425345 …
-
-
But this procedure is borrowed from British Parliament. Ought we not look to that to see what has been historically understood to be impeachable? I think we should separate the practical from the theoretical instead of conflating them.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.