I'm unpretendian. There are many, many people in Oklahoma with her narrative - my mother's family fitting into that group.
How many of them try to exploit it to get politically correct job preferences at prestigious law schools?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'm unpretendian. There are many, many people in Oklahoma with her narrative - my mother's family fitting into that group.
That’s a mischaracterization. Is that the best you got?I heard Dershowitz say that. Applying that standard , Nixon would have been in the clear.
That’s a mischaracterization. Is that the best you got?
As long as there was a thread of national interest, it’s not impeachable
Murkowski tapped out
Sover
I think it's laughable that you guys think Clinton should have been impeached over lying about a hummer yet, now that all of this is true, it's "not impeachable".
Then THAT is the argument. The argument has to be pinned somewhere, but your point doesn’t negate Dershowitz.Then any president can try get out of anything by parroting "national interest" the way that people can try and justify anything as Constitutional by parroting "general welfare".
If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachmentI didn't see what Dershowitz said, but the way the Charlottesville lie gets pitched by the media, I assume that they're lying about what he said. I'll listen to his comments and decide for my own, but my initial presumption is that their characterization is a lie. It's sad that our media has become this.
If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment
Please show me those 12 felony convictions. I never voted for Bill.Hmmmm, just sex? Bubba, that's the poor man's lame argument. Your smarter than that.
Clinton? what was it, ~ 12 ~ felony convictions? Grand Jury contempt conviction. Dis-barred from practicing law in Ark.?
Impeachable, yes, clearly.
Trump? No felony convictions, no bribery, no treason, no collusion, no contempt convictions... no other high crimes or misdemeanors.
Impeachable? No.
Jan 31, 2020 has the chance to go down as a big day in history --
-- Trump acquitted (hopefully by midnight) after 3 years of fake attacksIn both cases, the will of the people will have beaten back the Establishment, something that seemed close to impossible just 5 years ago
-- Great Britain finally leaves the EU to finish off BREXIT
This is Mississippi Aug 2016
If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment
Got it from here: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/tr...egins-day-n1123371/ncrd1124386#liveBlogHeaderIs that the extent of what Dershowitz said? I know your OU education was better than that.
It won't stop the fake attacks. Dems may try to impeach him for failure to put his phone in airplane mode on AF1 next. And as others have stated he hasn't exactly helped himself out with his low class comments.
Jan 31, 2020 has the chance to go down as a big day in history --
-- Trump acquitted (hopefully by midnight) after 3 years of fake attacksIn both cases, the will of the people will have beaten back the Establishment, something that seemed close to impossible just 5 years ago
-- Great Britain finally leaves the EU to finish off BREXIT
My analysis of what Dershowitz said is not based on any "media" save that which broadcast the words directly from his mouth. He said that a president can take action in the "national interest" and his perception of "national interest" can include getting himself reelected. Seems to cover Nixon's perception of what he was doing. In fairness to Jackhammer, his remarks perhaps conveyed narrower immunity than did the more extensive remarks of the OJ dream steamer.I didn't see what Dershowitz said, but the way the Charlottesville lie gets pitched by the media, I assume that they're lying about what he said. I'll listen to his comments and decide for my own, but my initial presumption is that their characterization is a lie. It's sad that our media has become this.
Rumor is there will be an intermission and Paul Boesch will interview congressional leadership.The State of the Union will set viewing records.
Yeah... We kept on having Beghazi hearings.Bear with me here.
So........, because an impeachment trial is not a criminal case, an acquittal does not necessarily settle the question as double jeopardy does not apply (only applies to criminal cases). If that is the case what’s stopping the presidents opponents from starting this all over again next Spring? Same charges, same witnesses, same testimony. Like calling this attempt a mulligan and calling for a do-over.
And if this does indeed happen, can’t the House then call all the witnesses they are being denied by the vote this evening?
Sorry, I’m tired and probably not expressing myself adequately, but I would like the more learned posters here to enlighten me (that includes pretty much everybody who posts here).
I think it's laughable that you guys think Clinton should have been impeached over lying about a hummer yet, now that all of this is true, it's "not impeachable".
* Predict HORNS-HOGS *
Sat, Nov 16 • 11:00 AM on ABC