Submit your comments on this article |
Home Front: Politix |
Dershowitz: Supreme Court Just Destroyed 2nd Article of Impeachment |
2019-12-16 |
[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 ![]() 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. Related: Harvard Law School: 2019-06-30 Harvard Must Set the Record Straight on Elizabeth Warren Harvard Law School: 2019-04-26 Warren Wants to Give $50 billion to colleges where students historically default on student loans Harvard Law School: 2019-02-15 'Attempted coup d'etat': Trump cites Alan Dershowitz in effort to discredit McCabe Related: Alan Dershowitz: 2019-12-09 Alan Dershowitz to Mark Levin: Democrats Are Using Soviet Tactics to Take Down Donald Trump Alan Dershowitz: 2019-11-12 Key Syrian White Helmets backer found dead in Istanbul - diplomat Alan Dershowitz: 2019-10-29 Dem Position on Impeachment: 'I Killed my Parents, and Now I Ask for Mercy on the Grounds That I'm an Orphan' Related: Jonathan Turley: 2019-12-13 Trump loyalist introduces impeachment amendment on live TV by bringing up Hunter Biden's cocaine habit Jonathan Turley: 2019-12-11 Dems’ impeachment absurdities are making them look like the threat to democracy Jonathan Turley: 2019-12-10 Louie Gohmert goes off during hearing, stops Nadler in his tracks with final punch |
Posted by:Fred |
#10 "and they're too stupid |
Posted by: Frank G 2019-12-16 14:32 |
#8 You people should know by now not to confuse Democrats with facts. |
Posted by: Abu Uluque 2019-12-16 11:37 |
#7 Their projection is breathtaking. Belongs in the manual of psychiatric disorders. |
Posted by: Lex 2019-12-16 09:08 |
#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 |
#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 |
#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 |
#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 |
#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 |
#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 |