If they claim to believe it is wrong, and then acquit, why should we not simply conclude they were lying? If their belief is that the risks of punishing him for it are too high, then they believe it is acceptable in certain circumstances, don't they? Why give them the out?
In theory, perhaps. In practice, many more senators would agree in principle that flat stonewalling is unconstitutional than are prepared to convict and remove a man they fear.https://twitter.com/RoundTableLaw/status/1206301603143151616 …
-
-
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.