Jump to content


The First Trump Impeachment Thread


Recommended Posts


9 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I have a friend who's a defense lawyer.  I asked him one time if he ever has trouble defending someone who he knows/thinks is guilty.  His answer was, "I'll defend them till their bank account says zero."

 

I'm sure Qmany can expand on this.  But, in the US, everyone has the right to an attorney and those lawyers are going to argue the case their client wants them to argue...or at least the one that they believe gives them the best chance to a constitutional defense. 


 

 

No, I get that. But Dershowitz has said he's not doing this for money.


 

Quote

 

Attorney Alan Dershowitz said Friday night that he will not be pocketing any money for his work on President Trump’s impeachment defense team.

 

During an appearance on "Anderson Cooper 360," the attorney said the details of his payment arrangement haven’t “been discussed” yet, but added, “If I were to be paid, all the money would go to charity.”

 

“I will not take a single penny of payment that I would keep based on what I’m doing,” he said. “I’m doing this because I strongly believe in the Constitution. I strongly oppose the impeachment. I worry about the weaponization of impeachment, and it could be used in other cases.” 

 

 

Link to comment


16 hours ago, Decoy73 said:

executive privilege is NOT a law and isn’t in the constitution.  So it doesn’t “absolutely” protect anything.  When you have time, check out how the Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Nixon’s use of it.  

 

15 hours ago, Nebfanatic said:

Pretty sure executive privilege was waived as soon as Trump decided to comment on it in public. How can you assert executive privilege when the conversation will be sold on bookshelves in March? 

 

No.  What the Ds want is testimony from the National Security Advisor over direct communications that he had with the President.  Do you realize how harmful that would be for the rest of our future?  Presidents have to keep things secret in case a hostile congress impeaches for the usual political anger.  No one would want that standard, at least not applied to Presidents of their own party. 

15 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

What is this pertaining to?

Your tidbit that some Rs signed off on the firing of the UKR prosecutor who wanted to look into Burisma.  As if any of them knew who he was...

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...