Congress has the power to impeach even if law is not broken, argue Democrats

Congress has the power to impeach even if law is not broken, argue Democrats

House Democratic impeachment managers argued Thursday that the Congress has the power to impeach and remove a president over conduct that may not violate black-letter law. The Constitution doesn’t specify that a president must technically have broken a law so as to be impeached, argued Rep. Nadler. Later, Rep. Lofgren observed that President Trump had broken the law in the Ukraine affair.

Simone
Simone
CommanderVaasDC
CommanderVaasDC 5 months

and with that no future president will ever be safe from impeachment. you've set the bar so low, that I can forsee every single president will face impeachment, be it democrat, or Republican.

Andre Gerard
Andre Gerard 5 months

So if no crime is needed, why are they now pressuring the Senate to call more witnesses.

Seekster
Seekster 5 months

"Treason, Bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors."

Correspondent in Virginia
Correspondent in Virginia 5 months

So essentially, Nadler just admitted to this being a kangaroo court and that innocent until proven guilty does not matter. Only time will tell whether or not the Democrats will realize the precedent that they are setting for future presidencies and congresses. If a crime is not needed to impeach a president, then the moment a Democratic president is sworn into office with a Republican controlled house, the Republicans can call for an impeachment and begin voting later that week.

atlas shrugged
atlas shrugged 5 months

Jerrold, you are a sad specimen.

Scott in FLorida
Scott in FLorida 5 months

Democrats can not understand the Constitution they are either stupid or lying criminals FUCK THEM. It clearly states High Crimes and Misdemeanors they are completely lying about everything

Crimson Jester
Crimson Jester 5 months

um, that's not what the Constitution actually says. Can someone send everyone of the house copies of the Constitution?

jh72826
jh72826 5 months

just so everyone defending trump knows here are some things to keep in mind about the impeachment trial. 1. it IS debatable if trump broke the law a quid pro quo isn't directly illegal the only thing this is is an exchange of favors me washing my neighbors car and him mowing my lawn is a quid pro quo and it's not illegal. what makes it illegal is intention. For example an illegal quid pro quo would be an employer forcing an employee to have sex with him to keep her job but the reason this is illegal is he is using his position of power for self benefit and that's what makes a quid pro quo illegal. you have the intention of self benefit. 2.the republicans argument weak and trump is acting like a guilty person. the Republicans went from saying "there was no quid pro quo" to there current argument that " a quid pro quo did happen but the president has the authority to do this" that's true but what they don't address is if he benefited personally from this. trump has also done no cooperation with the investigation during the impeachment probe, he handled it the same way he did the Muller investigation, and took every chance he could to call it a witch hunt and that he did nothing wrong without providing any evidence to show he had no intention of trying to beat a political rival. 3. it doesn't matter what Joe bidens motivation for firing the head of burisma was we are talking about trump and his intentions for trying to dig up dirt on the bidens. just because bill Clinton got away with raping someone doesn't mean Harvey Weinstein should. if biden did something wrong then talk about that later not during an investigation into trump! 4. any evidence Rudy giulani finds should not be used during the trial and he should be investigated for not providing evidence to the impeachment probe when requested. pleading the fifth is Constitutionally allowed but the people who use it are usually guilty of something they are being accused of. 5. the trial is about intention not if it was or was not a quid pro quo to me trump is guilty and should be arrested but I can see why some people are defending him intention is hard to prove and nearly impossible if the party being accused provides no evidence. anything trump says should taken with a grain of salt as he has a history of lying and using less than accurate information to prove a point. finally, let me just say the trump era is going to be looked back upon as a low point for the us similar with how we look at Richard Nixon. extreme polarization and a complete lack of faith in government institutions is something that is going to persist as long as people only get their news from one side of the spectrum and don't take the time to try and here the other side out. take care everyone and read some news sources you disagree with feel free to trash my comment you have a right too.

Cole Erdmann
Cole Erdmann 5 months

hey you didnt commit any crimes but we are gonna arrest you anyway lolz

Based Haole
Based Haole 5 months

yep that's basically the cue the Democrats want to just make shit up because they failed so fucking spectacularly...

Binx1
Binx1 5 months

the people voted. hillary tried cheating. ifu dont want trump again leave it alone.

Cary Brown
Cary Brown 5 months

So now the Democrats have officially introduced Clownworld. If they don't approve of the people's choice of President then they seek to overturn their choice. Sounds like a totalitarian state to me. Perhaps we should just throw them in prison without a trial or crime?

Barry
Barry 5 months

why does the title seem to have nothing to do with any of the linked stories?

porcus
porcus 5 months

I love this. The Asshole Left says "Nu-uh, Trump broke laws, must impeach, this is not at all political". Yet here we see that the Democrat politicians let the mask slip and admit that whatever the Constitution says they just want to impeach and remove Trump. As many of the Asshole Left do as well. Keep asking Trump supporters to side with you on this Shampeachment. I'm not going to.

Jake
Jake 5 months

Fun fact: Republicans said precisely the same thing during the Clinton impeachment. Don't fool yourselves; nobody in Congress gives a shit about the process. The only relevant proof is the letter after the president's name.

Fin
Fin 5 months

N so does Hamilton in federalist paper sixty five

Fin
Fin 5 months

Instead of reading snippets of federalist papers try reading them... Then go read some James Madison... U actually may learn y the constitution in this unique republic is worth fighting for even if in the minority...

Fin
Fin 5 months

That's the very argument one Alan d one of dear leaders counsel presented before he was well paid to do the polar shift hokey pokey

Ed skelton
Ed skelton 5 months

I think anyone with a working knowledge of the process knows you don't need a guilty person to impeach. It just makes actually concluding the process with a conviction a lot harder lmao

Fin
Fin 5 months

Ur points bizzare.. U can not arrest a sitting president.. While in office.. Per constitution but upon leaving or if removed the criminal courts can Persue a case against him or her.. The iac was indeed broken... N was done so in part of the larger scheme... N yes abuse of power is in fact impeachable and it wasn't intent... The act was complete up n til the act was exposed n then n only then did funds get released... Go read the law... Go look at the case presented... Oh he did have a scheme in the works... Omb was implicit n provided false reasons for the hold.. N yes it was done to smear his political opponent . No is that grounds to remove

Top in Politics
Get the App