Into the Night (01-23-2020)
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
Author: Booker T. Washington
Into the Night (01-23-2020)
The House does not have authority to change the Constitution of the United States.
That does NOT give them authority to decide what an impeachable offense is.
The House does not have power of subpoena. They must use the courts.
The Senate does not have power of subpoena unless they ARE acting as a court. Otherwise, they must use the courts.
The Supreme Court does not have authority to change or interpret the Constitution.
Truth Detector (01-24-2020)
christiefan915 (01-23-2020), Into the Night (01-24-2020)
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
Author: Booker T. Washington
It is not a false authority, it is exactly what the House passed and they are the authority. The first article charges him with abuse of power for pressuring Ukraine to assist him in his re-election campaign by damaging Democratic rivals. The second article charges him with obstruction of Congress for blocking testimony and refusing to provide documents in response to House subpoenas in the impeachment inquiry.
Those are impeachable because he has already been impeached for those actions.
And the House believed those two acts met the standard of high crimes and misdemeanors and reading the Constitution tells me they have the sole power to make that determination.
It matters little since almost all the Senators will vote straight party and they can't get a 2/3 majority to convict.
They are not the authority. False authority fallacy. The House does not have authority to change the Constitution.
He didn't pressure the Ukraine on anything. Define 'abuse of power'.
Not illegal. The House is not Congress. Redefinition fallacy.
False authority fallacy. Circular argument fallacy.
Truth Detector (01-29-2020)
'Abuse of power' is not defined. 'Obstruction of Congress' has not occurred. Congress is still functioning. Trump has made no effort to stop them from functioning.
You have obviously never read the Constitution. There is no such power given to the House or to the Senate.
The Senate can't convict anyone. All they can do is remove the President from office.
But they won't.
Truth Detector (01-29-2020)
The founders included "high crimes and misdemeanors". We all know that high crimes should remove the president. But the lesser acts, like misdemeanors, shows they did not want a guy who is damaging the presidency and nation to stay in office if he were doing lesser acts. They also can remove the president.
Trump is obstructing on an industrial scale. Obstruction was part of what got Nixon booted. No president ever thought of a blanket declaration of privilege. It is shocking to think a Prez would even say that, but more so that Reds would defend it.
The constitution says "No person shall be CONVICTED without 2/3rds concurrence of the members present"
Nowhere does the Constitution say it must be defined but it does define it by saying "President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election." [and this is further explained].
Obstruction of Congress does not mean it has to totally stop functioning, but not giving them the documents and witnesses to complete their job obstructs them. Richard Nixon did not stop Congress from functioning but not turning over the tapes and the articles of impeachment passed by the House Judiciary Committee included "withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States
Again, The Constitution says otherwise. "The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."
The actual words in the Constitution are very different than your claims. In Article I, Section 3 regarding the Senate role in impeachment it says: "And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
So, the Senate does convict. Technically, impeachment and conviction does not automatically mean the person is removed from office. That is one of the two punishments that can be imposed upon conviction.
Actually, the Constitution gives sole authority to decide what an impeachable offense is to the House of Representatives. Basically, The Founding Fathers realized it would be impossible to list out all the reasons to impeach, so gave a vague description, and a huge amount of authority to the House of Representatives.
By the way, the House of Representatives was supposed to be the only part of the government elected by the people. They were giving the authority to the people to impeach. The Senate was supposed to be elected by the state legislat
You are just wrong. Congress has the power to subpoena. Where do you come up with these odd ideas?
The Supreme Court definitely has the power to interpret the Constitution.
Bookmarks