I voted for Biden and I'm strongly opposed to impeaching Trump. No one who reads his speech and other statements can seriously claim he incited violence, let alone a coup.
-
-
There’s a lot of evidence that “high crimes and misdemeanors” were never meant to be limited to statutory crimes. Such a characterization would be both too broad and too narrow. (I understand that opinions may differ.)
-
The typical example is if he pardoned all Republicans. His pardon power is indeed absolute, but that would be an abuse for which most legal scholars agree a President should be impeached. But it’s not a crime and he couldn’t be charged for it later...
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
-
By that standard there's nothing to discuss either. They can convict if they want to and not convict if they don't... and who is to say they're wrong? (I guess voters.)
Keskustelun loppu
-
-
-
on 'high crimes and misdemeanors': when you're a random jimbo inciting hatred and spreading lies in a town hall speech - does not qualify. when you're the president - does qualify. also, 'just bad behavior' is open to interpretation. its clear yours and mine are very different.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
When the Constitution was drafted, "high crimes and misdemeanors" was a very broad term that included bad behavior and even just breaking promises.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_crimes_and_misdemeanors …
-
A very relevant observation. Pedro is very keen to appeal to laws and regulations when it suits him, but I doubt he’ll pay much attention to this crucial piece of information.
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.