General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHere's what questioners shoulld read back to Jonathan Turley
Link to tweet
What a damned hypocrical opportunist.
TheFourthMind
(343 posts)"It is important to restate the specific context for this threshold argument. President Clinton stands accused of a series of knowing criminal acts in office, including perjury, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, and abuse of office. While I greatly respect the academics on the other side of this debate, I do not believe that there is a basis to exclude such conduct from potential articles of impeachment on any definitional, historical or policy basis. Far from it, I believe that the argument advanced by the White House would create extremely dangerous precedent for our country and would undermine fundamental guarantees of the Madisonian Democracy. It is my view that the allegations in this inquiry, if proven, would constitute clear and compelling grounds for impeachment and the submission of this matter to the United States Senate for a determination of the merits."
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)PS: Welcome to DU.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)eleny
(46,166 posts)He pointed out that important Executive Branch witnesses refused testify. Since Trump insisted they not comply with House subpoenas, he's guilty of obstruction.
TheRealNorth
(9,481 posts)Depending on the political party of the defendant.
These fuckers are all corrupt.