Article

2019-12-16 Home Front: Politix

Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment

[BREITBART] Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz pointed out on Friday that the Supreme Court had undercut the Democrats’ second article of impeachment by agreeing to hear three White House appeals against subpoenas.

The second article of impeachment passed by the House Judiciary Committee earlier Friday on a party-line vote accuses President Donald Trump

...dictatorial for repealing some (but not all) of the diktats of his predecessor, misogynistic because he likes pretty girls, homophobic because he doesn't think gender bending should be mandatory, truly a man for all seasons......
of "obstruction of Congress" because he appealed to the courts rather than immediately obeying congressional subpoenas.

George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley had warned Democrats not to impeach the president for obeying the Constitution: "If you impeach a president, if you make a ’high crime and misdemeanor’ out of going to the courts, it is an abuse of power. It’s your abuse of power. You’re doing precisely what you’re criticizing the president for doing. We have a third branch that deals with conflicts of the other two branches."

But the House Judiciary Committee ignored Turley’s warning, passing two articles of impeachment. The first accused Trump of "abuse of power" ‐ a new standard never before used against a president ‐ and "obstruction of Congress."

Appearing on Hannity on Fox News that evening, Dershowitz pointed out that the Supreme Court’s decision later the same day completely undermined the second article of impeachment.

Posted by Fred 2019-12-16 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11132 views ] Top

#1 If I understand this right:

Democrats sent out subpoenas to government officials who ignored them. Then Democrats said, we're not going to the courts to force the witnesses to comply, we just name it "Obstruction of Congress" if they don't.

Dershowitz says it can't be obstruction as long as you haven't exhausted your legal possibilities. And the Supreme Court, by taking Trump's case, is signaling that you have these legal possibilities.

It makes sense. Whatever the government or Congress asks or forces you to do, you must have the possibility to legally challenge this.

Any subpoena can be challenged in court before you have to produce anything.

The problem I have with Dershowitz is this: You can't just ignore a subpoena, you must challenge it. If you don't, you could be held in contempt of court.

It will be interesting to see whether this also applies to subpoenas issued by Congress. If not, any investigation will just be a hell of a lot more difficult, because it could take years before a witness can be forced to appear before Congress and testify.

Posted by European Conservative 2019-12-16 00:26|| 2019-12-16 00:26|| Front Page Top

#2 ...see AG Eric Holder, Fast and Furious, non-compliance with Congressional investigation. Anybody go to jail? /rhet question

Posted by Procopius2k 2019-12-16 07:09|| 2019-12-16 07:09|| Front Page Top

#3 The penalty for ignoring a Congressional subpoena is a misdemeanor which would require a separate intervention by DOJ or a federal DA-- which almost never happens in reality.

People ignore Congressional subpoenas all the time. This is because it's just a dead-letter, minor feature of the power-sharing relationship between Congress and the other government branches.

Posted by Lex 2019-12-16 07:31|| 2019-12-16 07:31|| Front Page Top

#4 Will these Congressional scofflaws be punished for their transgressions? Although, I think they should be slapped hard, it probably won't happen judging from the past.

Posted by JohnQC 2019-12-16 07:51|| 2019-12-16 07:51|| Front Page Top

#5 we just name it "Obstruction of Congress" if they don't.

Euro conserve: The Dems say 'obstruction of Congress'; however, it is just one chamber of the two Houses of Congress who make this claim--the radical left-wing branch.

Posted by JohnQC 2019-12-16 07:55|| 2019-12-16 07:55|| Front Page Top

#6 How it is supposed to go, since no one branch of our government has power over the other, is congress sends out subpoenas. If the Executive branch ignores or disputes them, Congress is supposed to go to the judicial branch where the matter can be decided.

The demoncrats NEVER went to the courts and filed impeachment over "obstruction". Dershowitz is right. They didn't follow the process and now are doing the very thing the other article states Trump did. Abuse of power.

Posted by DarthVader 2019-12-16 08:50|| 2019-12-16 08:50|| Front Page Top

#7 Their projection is breathtaking. Belongs in the manual of psychiatric disorders.

Posted by Lex 2019-12-16 09:08|| 2019-12-16 09:08|| Front Page Top

#8 You people should know by now not to confuse Democrats with facts.

Posted by Abu Uluque 2019-12-16 11:37|| 2019-12-16 11:37|| Front Page Top

#9 A federal judge is considering a last-minute effort to prevent Georgia election officials from canceling more than 120,000 inactive voters Monday night.

U.S. District Judge Steve Jones called a hearing Monday on a request from Fair Fight Action, an organization suing the state over voting rights, to halt the planned voter registration cancellation.

A Georgia law, known as “use it or lose it,” allows registrations to be canceled after voters fail to participate in elections for several years.

“Georgians should not lose their right to vote simply because they have not expressed that right in recent elections,” said Fair Fight Action CEO Lauren Groh-Wargo. “Georgia’s practice of removing voters who have declined to participate in recent elections violates the United States Constitution.”

The secretary of state’s office declined to comment

Posted by Beavis 2019-12-16 14:04|| 2019-12-16 14:04|| Front Page Top

#10 "and they're too stupid ~~or dead~~ to re-register"

Posted by Frank G 2019-12-16 14:32|| 2019-12-16 14:32|| Front Page Top

14:48 NoMoreBS
14:31 NoMoreBS
14:16 NoMoreBS
14:15 NoMoreBS
14:04 swksvolFF
13:47 Regular joe
13:43 swksvolFF
13:38 swksvolFF
13:34 swksvolFF
13:31 Abu Uluque
13:25 Heribertus Vedente
13:24 mossomo
13:20 Abu Uluque
13:14 mossomo
13:06 swksvolFF
12:51 Grom the Affective
12:31 Abu Uluque
12:20 swksvolFF
12:17 Abu Uluque
12:08 swksvolFF
12:08 ed in texas
12:05 ed in texas
12:01 ed in texas
12:00 ed in texas