Jonathan Turley at the relentless congressional inquisition said, “I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and abundance of anger.” Turley continued “This is not how you impeach an American president.” “I get it. You’re mad. The president’s mad. My Democratic friends are mad. My wife is mad. My kids are mad. Even my dog seems mad — and Luna is a golden doodle and they don’t get mad,” he continued. “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 exactly what you’re criticizing the president of doing,” he said. Turley’s reasoning is thoughtful especially the latter quote. Other legal “expert” testimonies tendered, like Stanford Law School professor Pamela Karlan, reek of wrath and irrationality that, in my view, excoriates a reasoned appraisal of this kangaroo court anarchy masquerading as impeachment.
Recall, President Bill Clinton committed perjury and lost his law license. Yet, he was not convicted in a Republican controlled Senate. Trump has been relentlessly accused of various felonies, but unlike Clinton, the evidence for them persists as specious and vague. Impeachment is not a casual affair people. A future Democratic president may be treated likewise in the future. Is the current impeachment enterprise destined to birth a new third world American governing aberration solely due to one party’s incapacity to reconcile a loss to a duly elected president?
JME - in case you have been under a rock, in this US of A one is innocent until proven guilty and that would be determined by the Senate during a trial. The House is just parading hired guns who will say anything to justify their salaries. This should remind you of the Soviet era and Nazi trial process. Have the man and then find the crime to convict him on. Beria would be proud of you.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(3) comments
The House has a self-admitted guilty individual to impeach.
JME - in case you have been under a rock, in this US of A one is innocent until proven guilty and that would be determined by the Senate during a trial. The House is just parading hired guns who will say anything to justify their salaries. This should remind you of the Soviet era and Nazi trial process. Have the man and then find the crime to convict him on. Beria would be proud of you.
@ JME, exactly.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.