Barr Says Democrats, Courts Are Engaged in Efforts to Cripple Presidential Power

Apr 2019
4,128
708
America
It is not like he is telling us what we do not know already.
During a speech at an annual gathering of conservative lawyers on Friday, Barr defended presidential power and accused opponents of President Donald Trump of “waging a scorched-earth, no-holds-barred war of resistance” against him that involves the “systematic shredding of norms and undermining the rule of law.”
It is more than obvious to anyone who knows even the least bit about the law. To say anything different is childish denial and decidedly un-American.
 
Dec 2018
4,761
1,307
New England
It is not like he is telling us what we do not know already.

It is more than obvious to anyone who knows even the least bit about the law. To say anything different is childish denial and decidedly un-American.
I think the Democrats can rightly be criticized for the process they've put in place to impeach Trump, but that doesn't speak to (or alter) the ramifications of Trump's behavior. There just seems to be no getting around the fact that Trump foolishly sought to leverage US aid in order to gin up an investigation on his likely 2020 rival.
 
  • Like
Reactions: se7en
Dec 2006
26,812
12,051
New Haven, CT
OH, horsefeathers.

The Constitution requires that the House hold impeachment hearings when there is a question about a President breaking laws.

It's clear (and obvious to all but those but most interested in playing sematics games and internet quarrels) that the President has done just that. In fact, he's done it even as his advisors and supporters have warned him from doing it further.

The process the Democrats are using is the one put in place BY THE GOP. When you elect a dishonest, lying, conniving, thieving, self-serving, vulgarian crime lord who has chosen to break ever norm and precedent set for Presidential behavior - and you stand behind him cheering, supporting him, and championing him - this is exactly what you get.

Just think - it could be worse. It could be a BIGGER circus - over a blow job.
 
Dec 2018
4,761
1,307
New England
OH, horsefeathers.

The Constitution requires that the House hold impeachment hearings when there is a question about a President breaking laws.

It's clear (and obvious to all but those but most interested in playing sematics games and internet quarrels) that the President has done just that. In fact, he's done it even as his advisors and supporters have warned him from doing it further.

The process the Democrats are using is the one put in place BY THE GOP. When you elect a dishonest, lying, conniving, thieving, self-serving, vulgarian crime lord who has chosen to break ever norm and precedent set for Presidential behavior - and you stand behind him cheering, supporting him, and championing him - this is exactly what you get.

Just think - it could be worse. It could be a BIGGER circus - over a blow job.
Oh, there's so much wrong with that post, Tristan.

To date, I think the Democrats have run a flawed process. Holding secret meetings, selective testimony transcript leaks, not allowing the President's counsel to attend, and not approving witnesses called by Republican committee members all smack of a kangaroo court in search of a predetermined outcome. This does not excuse Trump one iota, but Trump's failings don't give Democrats a free pass, either.

If you think a sloppy BJ or two is what got Clinton impeached you really haven't the slightest idea what that impeachment was about. All you've done here is -- ahem -- swallowed the Clinton camp's spin.
 
Apr 2019
4,128
708
America
I think the Democrats can rightly be criticized for the process they've put in place to impeach Trump, but that doesn't speak to (or alter) the ramifications of Trump's behavior. There just seems to be no getting around the fact that Trump foolishly sought to leverage US aid in order to gin up an investigation on his likely 2020 rival.
I disagree that goes to intent, that cannot be proven. Also rooting out corruption is one of his duties.
 
Dec 2006
26,812
12,051
New Haven, CT
To date, I think the Democrats have run a flawed process. Holding secret meetings, selective testimony transcript leaks, not allowing the President's counsel to attend, and not approving witnesses called by Republican committee members all smack of a kangaroo court in search of a predetermined outcome. This does not excuse Trump one iota, but Trump's failings don't give Democrats a free pass, either.

An investigation is not "secret meetings." Have you ever heard of a suspect's lawyer being privy to law enforcement's investigations/!?! Don't be absurd. All witnesses were called who had BEARING on this case. The only ones not approved were ones who were desired by the GOP were obfuscation witnesses. Yes, like every impeachment hearing I'v e ever heard of, most of the outcome is known and predetermined by the time the public hearings and trial take place.

If you think a sloppy BJ or two is what got Clinton impeached you really haven't the slightest idea what that impeachment was about. All you've done here is -- ahem -- swallowed the Clinton camp's spin.
Clinton's impeachment was about lying to Congress (perjury) and obstruction because he lied about a sexual relationship with Lewinsky when answering a question he should never have been asked.
 
Dec 2006
26,812
12,051
New Haven, CT
I disagree that goes to intent, that cannot be proven. Also rooting out corruption is one of his duties.
Oh, just stop. It is NOT HIS DUTY to withhold aid funding that was appropriated by Congress (THEIR DUTY) until they got dirt on his political election opponent. It is ILLEGAL for the President to subvert funding allotted by Congress. He is not in the charge of the nation's purse strings. PERIOD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007 and se7en
Dec 2018
4,761
1,307
New England
Clinton's impeachment was about lying to Congress (perjury) and obstruction because he lied about a sexual relationship with Lewinsky when answering a question he should never have been asked.
You forgot the bit about suborning perjury, and that this question was not asked out of the blue (dress). He committed these acts -- normally considered felonies -- while a defendant in a sexual harassment case.
 
Dec 2018
4,761
1,307
New England
Oh, just stop. It is NOT HIS DUTY to withhold aid funding that was appropriated by Congress (THEIR DUTY) until they got dirt on his political election opponent. It is ILLEGAL for the President to subvert funding allotted by Congress. He is not in the charge of the nation's purse strings. PERIOD.
But he is in charge of foreign relations and national defense, thus I believe the President has some latitude in this area, though certainly not for personal gain.
 
Apr 2019
4,128
708
America
Oh, just stop. It is NOT HIS DUTY to withhold aid funding that was appropriated by Congress (THEIR DUTY) until they got dirt on his political election opponent. It is ILLEGAL for the President to subvert funding allotted by Congress. He is not in the charge of the nation's purse strings. PERIOD.
Did I say withholding funds was his duty? Comment on what I said, or do not bother.