It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NPR - The Legal Case For Impeachment

page: 1
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 07:37 PM
link   
NPR The Legal Case For Impeachment

This morning on NPRs morning edition Noel King spook with law professor Jonathan Turley about building a legal case for President Trump's impeachment. He took a refresher middle road on the subject while laying out the case.

He opens with giving the Democrats credit for having two good people giving testimony. A challenge for them in the last set of public hearings.


TURLEY: Well, I think the Democrats had a particularly good day. Ambassador Taylor proved to be the witness that they hoped they had in Mueller. He proved to be lucid and quite compelling on television. He - most of us felt that he is precisely the type of person you want as ambassador of Ukraine.

And so they made a lot of progress in establishing that the view of virtually everyone involved was that there was a quid pro quo connecting the military aid to an investigation of the Bidens. 


He also thinks Chairman Schiff did a good job challenge Republican claims that no crime could have occurred because the money was released with out reciprocation from the Ukrainians.


And also, I think they also made a nice connection at the very end of the hearing, when Chairman Schiff said that it's true that the military aid was indeed given to Ukraine without those demands being fulfilled. But it actually occurred 48 hours after it became known that the IG report involving this whistleblower had gone to Congress, and so the White House was aware that this was about to blow open into the public sphere.


But the interview became critical of the Democrats on legal and public opinion grounds.


the Republicans noted that and established a timeline of their own. And the most important, in my view, was that it's clear that the Ukraine did not know about the hold on the aid until around August 29, when a political article ran. And Taylor pretty much confirmed that by saying that as soon as that article ran talking about the hold, he got a virtually immediate call from the Ukraine.

Now, the aid was released only about 10 or 11 days after that. So the question for a lot of people is going to be, how significant, really, is that? They didn't really know about the quid pro quo, if there was one. And more importantly, the aid got to them. And so the argument is sort of like - you know, in Watergate, they made it into the office. You know, they actually did a criminal act. Here, it's not clear. 


He goes on to be critical of Chairman Schiff's use of bribery as an impeachment charge.


TURLEY: I'm afraid history does not support Chairman Schiff on his suggestion of a bribery article of impeachment. His position is that bribery was defined differently during the colonial times and had this much broader meaning. On the face of it, I thought that was a little bit humorous because, you know, Chairman Schiff seems to support a living Constitution, so suddenly, he sounds like an originalist. But the problem is that it was not the case - that bribery was defined differently, but it was not as broadly defined as Chairman Schiff suggests.

I think if they use a bribery article of impeachment, it will undermine them dramatically from a constitutional standpoint. You will follow tragedy with farce, in my view.


He finishes his criticism of the Democrat's position stating that it is too narrow for an impeachment of the president; possibly the most narrow argument for a presidential impeachment in history.


TURLEY: Well, there's obviously a rather last-minute paradigm shift in what is being argued as impeachable. For three years, Democratic members have argued that impeachable and even criminal acts are well-established on the record, particularly from special counsel Mueller. None of that stuff is being proposed as an article of impeachment thus far. And instead, they're focusing solely on this Ukrainian controversy. That would be the narrowest foundation of any impeachment in history, particularly for a president.

You know, if you take a look at the three past impeachments, the gold standard is Nixon, which is ironic because it didn't result in an impeachment. But it was broad. It was so strong that he resigned.

This is very similar to the Johnson impeachment. Even though there were 11 articles there, they were all based basically on the same types of claims dealing with the Tenure in Office Act (ph) and the termination of the secretary of war. That failed. It failed because even members of the opposing party felt that it was an abuse of the impeachment process.

And Clinton was also quite narrow. This would be even narrower still.


edit on 14-11-2019 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

Since they are currently basing their entire impeachment on heresy and the opinion of non-elected governmental officials, I personally don't think it's doing as well as he thinks.

If they want to really go with bribery, then they are going to have to show where Trump was bribed.

You know, the actual understood meaning of it in the Constitution.

If denying military aid to the Ukraine was a bad thing, then why did Obama get away with it?

And the other thing that bothers me... they say Trump has no right withholding aid, but it's actually part of the statute that Congress approves the aid, but the President by the same statute needs to check and make sure to the best of his/her abilities that it will not be used for any other purpose but for what Congress intended it to be used for.

In the case of the Ukraine, it's a corrupt place.

So his withholding of it until he's comfortable with the new Ukrainian President was what he is actually supposed to do.

Nah... if Pelosi doesn't drop this in the next few weeks I'd be surprised.

She already made sure everyone knew today that it ISN'T an impeachment at this point... it is merely an inquiry and they haven't decided on impeachment yet.

That woman cares more about the gavel then anything else.




posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 08:02 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat




He also thinks Chairman Schiff did a good job challenge Republican claims that no crime could have occurred because the money was released with out reciprocation from the Ukrainians.

Again that i still see no crimes being committed. The Ukrainians got the aid they wanted to aid with their militant groups.



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

Seeing as he was being interviewed by notoriously Left leaning NPR, he had to hand out a little praise for the Dems so as not to trigger the interviewer.
But in the end as a law professor, he knows the law....and the Dems dumpster fire isn’t even close.



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 08:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: DanDanDat

Seeing as he was being interviewed by notoriously Left leaning NPR, he had to hand out a little praise for the Dems so as not to trigger the interviewer.
But in the end as a law professor, he knows the law....and the Dems dumpster fire isn’t even close.


A person close to the matter took a picture of the current Democratic impeachment efforts today...






posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: DanDanDat

Seeing as he was being interviewed by notoriously Left leaning NPR, he had to hand out a little praise for the Dems so as not to trigger the interviewer.
But in the end as a law professor, he knows the law....and the Dems dumpster fire isn’t even close.


I listen to NPR every day during my commute; the last few days to a week however has been steeped in more bias than usual to the point that I have had to switch over to music a few times it was so bad. NPR usually gets this way before a big election; but I guess impeachment also brings it out in them.

It was refreshing to hear this interview with someone of more level headedness.



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

How is anything DT is innocent of a higher risk to national security then
what the Democrats are doing to remove a sitting President? Even if he
were guilty I don't see that a common bribe is even comparable to high
treason. Comey and Nadler should be taken out behind the paint shed
and shot.

Maybe the rest of the DNC would stop sand bagging this admins and go
back to work.



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

National Public (Leftist) Radio.
The bias from that outfit is
nauseating.

I think they have got a bunch
of "Coffee Talk Communists"
running the back room.

Really obvious and a shame
at this point.
I used to LOVE NPR and The Car Guys.
I really think this should become
a "politically neutral" station or lose
all Federal Taxpayer Funding.

Great thread! S&F



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:10 PM
link   
NPR used to be.............. 'nuff said



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:15 PM
link   
this Jonathan Turley..

jonathanturley.org...

GW Law Professor Warns Democrats Not To Impeach Trump | The ...
Search domain dailycaller.com/2017/08/25/gw-law-professor-warns-democrats-not-to-impeach-trump/dailycaller.com... ot-to-impeach-trump/
Aug 25, 2017George Washington University Law School Professor Jonathan Turley called efforts to impeach President Donald Trump over political disagreements "dangerous," and warned Democrats to stop forcing the issue. "I think people need to understand how dangerous this is," Turley said during an interview on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" Friday.



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: DanDanDat

Since they are currently basing their entire impeachment on heresy




Heresy.



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: ChefFox
a reply to: DanDanDat




He also thinks Chairman Schiff did a good job challenge Republican claims that no crime could have occurred because the money was released with out reciprocation from the Ukrainians.

Again that i still see no crimes being committed. The Ukrainians got the aid they wanted to aid with their militant groups.


The impeachment argument might stand or fail, but the fact they got the Aid does not invalidate the accusation.

Banks Robbers are still arrested even when the heist fails and they don't escape with the cash.



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

Professor Turley also wrote an article for the Hill yesterday:


Are Democrats building a collapsible impeachment?

thehill.com...



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Caractacus

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: DanDanDat

Since they are currently basing their entire impeachment on heresy




Heresy.


Hearsay.

Fixed that for you.




posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: DanDanDat

Since they are currently basing their entire impeachment on heresy and the opinion of non-elected governmental officials, I personally don't think it's doing as well as he thinks.


Thank you for that refreshing level of honesty.

I don’t know of many Ardent Trump Supporters who would so openly admit how they feel about someone criticizing the President ... but HERESY! You come right out, eh?

Burn the Unbelievers!

(Lol)



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

More seriously though ... damning all the testimony as hearsay is absurd. The transcript of the call is known and attested to by the White House.

These “non-elected officials” make up the great bulk of the working staff of the United States Government ... so your idea is that they for some reason can’t testify to meetings, conversations, memos, etc. that they have had regarding the subject matter?

That’s absurd.



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

Ukraine and the "Gates of Kiev" have
a long history with Russia and the Soviets.
The Black Market/Corrupt/Bribery methods
are so ingrained into that society that the youth/skilled
are leaving in droves because of permeated corruption.

www.unian.info...

Why the United States of America would get into bed
with this old Soviet State in the first place requires inquiry.
The easy answer would be the Zbigniew Brzezinski historical method
of Russian "containment".

en.wikipedia.org...
Jimmy Carters "Old Boy".

In this day and age, it is a money laundering fiasco and much more.
I would speculate that Putin is fully monitoring and aware of all transactions
traversing Ukraine. In fact, I would wager that our past Administrations' involvement
in Ukraine was a trap well placed, baited, and set by Russia.
NPR is not reporting on that though.
NPR needs to be investigated for their claims
and their portion of Taxpayer Non Profit Status.
NPR has become a Brainwash Bullhorn.
Where is Georgie Soreass"s hidden hand in all this?



edit on 14-11-2019 by Wildmanimal because: Layout

edit on 14-11-2019 by Wildmanimal because: Add Content



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:37 PM
link   
“Everyone must be investigated!”

“WUSA 666 AM - All Investigations, All the Time”



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: DanDanDat

Since they are currently basing their entire impeachment on heresy and the opinion of non-elected governmental officials, I personally don't think it's doing as well as he thinks.


Thank you for that refreshing level of honesty.

I don’t know of many Ardent Trump Supporters who would so openly admit how they feel about someone criticizing the President ... but HERESY! You come right out, eh?

Burn the Unbelievers!

(Lol)


Sorry... I normally speak another language so homonyms in the English language confuse me.

Feel free to feel great about getting me on that one!

You're a real winner!!!

If you kick a homeless person in the ribs on your way to work tomorrow (if you actually have a job, that is) then you will be well on your way to having a stellar liberal weekend.

Empowerment, right?




edit on 14-11-2019 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

Poking a bit of fun at you is like kicking a homeless person?

Wow.

Strange how you went to that right away ... old pastime?

TL;DR - Don’t act like a zealot and perhaps folks won’t joke about it.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join