• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dershowitz claims 'abuse of power' is not a 'high crime or misdemeanor' under US Constitution

eman623 said:
You thought wrong, and the snark is not appreciated.

And I didn't vote for Trump who I agree makes up **** all the time. But that's not impeachable either.
Click to expand...

Snark retracted.
 
Paradoxical said:
Trump was for Russia interfering? Are you serious about a joke that they should find Hillary's destroyed emails

But.......You said Trump interfered. Now you're changing your story.

And if somehow by magic that Russia could get the 10 cellphones that were smashed with hammers and get those emails and give them to the press, how would that be interfering with an election unless Hillary had some bad stuff in her emails?
Click to expand...

One of the features of a cult is that they'll deny anything that the cult leader says that would incriminate him, no matter how blatantly it does just that. Thank you for being such a willing example of cult control.
 
digitusmedius said:
One of the features of a cult is that they'll deny anything that the cult leader says that would incriminate him, no matter how blatantly it does just that. Thank you for being such a willing example of cult control.
Click to expand...

Do you seriously think he was serious??

How can you get DESTROYED emails??? Think, my man THINK!! That is why it was such a great line. It drove you guys nuts
 
eman623 said:
Nice strawman. Why respond to what I actually say when you can make **** up, call it, "in other words, you really said X" and then refute that.

Both sides are partisan. It's part of the reason why Congress is so dysfunctional.
Click to expand...

Accurate characterization, I'd say.

It's one thing to be partisan, it's another thing to be on the wrong side of history, which is the case with the right regarding Trump.
 
Paradoxical said:
Do you seriously think he was serious??

How can you get DESTROYED emails??? Think, my man THINK!! That is why it was such a great line. It drove you guys nuts
Click to expand...

This worn out old Cult refrain "oh, he's only joking" is called gaslighting. It doesn't work but it is a great identifier of high cultism.
 
Paradoxical said:
It is only emotional to those who are heavily indoctrinated by MSM. Humanity was indoctrinated into Christianity and Islam, Hitler and the Russian Collusion Ruse and now that Trump did something to be impeached over. Evil people find the lemmings easy.
Click to expand...

So what's next, you don't have an argument, so are you going to start pounding a desk?
 
Paradoxical said:
This is about the presidency and a rogue congress impeaching him or her "because".

This particular congress is the most evil I have ever seen or could have imagined. The founders were worried about exactly this.

But, really this is all academic discussions. Trump will not be removed. I am worried about the future.
Click to expand...


How is a Congress evil that wants to remove the most corrupt president in history?

You are not making sense.
 
Paradoxical said:
It is duly noted that you ignore the fact that the "33" indictments have nothing at all to do with Trump

.
Click to expand...


Oh, but they have a lot to do with Trump.

If you are running with criminals and/or corrupt people, the odds are you are one yourself.


We are talking about Trump, who was....


The guy that who schtupped a porn star, paid her $130,000 hush money, got his attorney jailed and threw him under the bus,
the guy that was fined $2,000,000 for charity fraud,
the guy that has helped russian mobsters launder millions for decades,
the guy that was negotiating to build a hotel in Moscow, and told the American public he had nothing going on in Russia,
the guy who admitted on Howard Stern that he likes to barge in while teens are dressing to "inspect" them during pageants,
the guy that brags about grabbing women's genitals because, as a celebrity, he can get away with it,
the guy that some 19 women have accused him of sexual misconduct,
the guy that settled $25,000,000 in a class action lawsuit for screwing thousands out of millions for a fake university,
the guy that was sued over 100 times for not paying contractors,
the guy that once tried to use eminent domain to screw a widow out of her home so he could build a limo garage,
the guy that ****ed over the good townspeople of Aberdeenshire Scotland so that he could build a golf course there,
Click to expand...

and with indictments flying off the handle surrounding Trump, on top of all the above....

WHAT ARE THE ****ING ODDS HE'S ONE OF THEM?


I'd say the odds are 100%.


Ever heard of the phrase, "Birds of a feather flock together"? Who are 'the very best people" if you, yourself, are criminally corrupt?

Duh.....


And you are accusing me of being 'ignorant'?

No, you are in denial. That's ignorance to a higher level.

You want proof? Your average republican or right wing rebuttal to the above is...

TDS!

Jeezus, and republicans wonder they are called the party of stupid.
 
Last edited:
RaleBulgarian said:
The Federalist papers provide valuable insight into what the founders intents were in constructing our Constitution. It is utterly dishonest to dismiss their significance out of hand.
Click to expand...

True, but they still aren't law. Considering there the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers, both composed by the Founders and contradictory to each other, neither should be used to interpret The Constitution. The Constitution shouldn't be interpreted, anyway. The word "infringed" has but one meaning.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
No worse than voting to acquit after an admission to felony perjury.
Click to expand...

But a big difference between getting a bj, and trying to extort a foreign government to interfere in an American presidential election. That's like comparing jaywalking to armed robbery.
 
JustHanging said:
But a big difference between getting a bj, and trying to extort a foreign government to interfere in an American presidential election. That's like comparing jaywalking to armed robbery.
Click to expand...

Hmm... I must have missed the "extrotion" and "election interference" articles of impeachment.
 
apdst said:
True, but they still aren't law. Considering there the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers, both composed by the Founders and contradictory to each other, neither should be used to interpret The Constitution. The Constitution shouldn't be interpreted, anyway. The word "infringed" has but one meaning.
Click to expand...
Stunning.

The Federalist Papers, composed by three of our founding fathers, Madison, the principle author, considered “the father of our Constitution, Hamilton, and Jay) are some of the most important, invaluable really, historic documents we have to reference when considering what our founding fathers intended in that sacred document.

The anti-Federalist Papers, important as they are to understanding the anti-Federalist views, are a collection of many, mostly anonymously authored papers, written over many years that argue against the construction of the Constitution in a non uniform manner.

As for “interpreting”, the primary duty of the United States Supreme Court, established by Article 3 Section 1 of our Constitution, is interpreting our Constitution. Being the highest court of the United States, it is the final arbiter of all Constitutional disputes.
 
digitusmedius said:
This worn out old Cult refrain "oh, he's only joking" is called gaslighting. It doesn't work but it is a great identifier of high cultism.
Click to expand...

How could Russia get them when our illustrious FBI couldn't? She destroyed 10 cell phones with hammers and used Bleach Bit on her computers and wasn't prosecuted.
 
OscarLevant said:
How is a Congress evil that wants to remove the most corrupt president in history?

You are not making sense.
Click to expand...

Wanting the Ukraine to investigate corruption is now corrupt? LMAO
 
OscarLevant said:
Oh, but they have a lot to do with Trump.

If you are running with criminals and/or corrupt people, the odds are you are one yourself.


We are talking about Trump, who was....




and with indictments flying off the handle surrounding Trump, on top of all the above....

WHAT ARE THE ****ING ODDS HE'S ONE OF THEM?


I'd say the odds are 100%.


Ever heard of the phrase, "Birds of a feather flock together"? Who are 'the very best people" if you, yourself, are criminally corrupt?

Duh.....


And you are accusing me of being 'ignorant'?

No, you are in denial. That's ignorance to a higher level.

You want proof? Your average republican or right wing rebuttal to the above is...

TDS!

Jeezus, and republicans wonder they are called the party of stupid.
Click to expand...

What of the above were indictments? Think, my man.Think.
 
Felis Leo said:
What is a more serious offense under the law for a public officer to have committed: embezzling taxpayer money from the public coffers, or embezzling your grandmother's Social Security check? One is an abuse of one's office and the public trust for personal gain, the other is an abuse of an intimate relation and her trust in you for personal gain. I would argue that either should disqualify one from continued employment in public office.
Click to expand...

There was no embezzlement of taxpayer money, Trump never took money to use for himself. He withheld until he knew the money was going to where it was supposed to go. Also, the money only had to be delivered by the end of Sept and it was received by the 12th of Sept. So the letter of the law was met.
 
Integrityrespec said:
There was no embezzlement of taxpayer money, Trump never took money to use for himself. He withheld until he knew the money was going to where it was supposed to go. Also, the money only had to be delivered by the end of Sept and it was received by the 12th of Sept. So the letter of the law was met.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I was not making myself clear, Integrityrespec, for which I will not fault you. I was attempting to draw an analogy, in that embezzling from the public coffers is typically treated as a worse offense under the law than embezzling from your grandmother. But embezzling is wrong and should disqualify a person from public office, irrespective of whether one is stealing from the public or an intimate relation. Mr Person seemed to be intimating that Bill Clinton's perjury was not as serious as Donald Trump's present actions because Bill Clinton perjured himself in order to cover up a non-criminal offense, i.e., an affair with an intern. He was not perjuring himself in order to cover up an actual crime, which, under the law, would have probably landed him in even greater hot water had he been convicted in the Senate and subject to criminal prosecution. My point is simply this: Perjury should disqualify one from public office, whether it is used to cover up a criminal act or a non-criminal act.
 
Paradoxical said:
Do you seriously think he was serious??

How can you get DESTROYED emails??? Think, my man THINK!! That is why it was such a great line. It drove you guys nuts
Click to expand...

Why do you want Hillary's personal emails anyway? Are you a perv?
 
Mycroft said:
shrug...

This is irrelevant.

Trump isn't being charged with "abuse of power". The article of impeachment accuses him of "abuse of Congress".

So that means that this opinion by Dershowitz...and your response...are nothing but discussion about something that doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

Only that it does matter as it is being used the Trump team as a defense.
 
iguanaman said:
Why do you want Hillary's personal emails anyway? Are you a perv?
Click to expand...

smashes up several phones because of personal emails? Seriously? Uses Bleach Bit because they are personal emails about her Yoga classes (which she must have failed).
 
Deuce said:
"Illegitimate impeachment."

You people really do want to throw the constitution out.
Click to expand...

Nadler said it was an illegitimate impeachment.
so did pelosi.

so i am simply using the terms that they discribed it as based on their definitions of an illegitimate impeachment.
you should be ok with that.
 
OscarLevant said:
I think he is wrong:

Per Hamilton's federalist paper #65, it's clear that abuse of power is, indeed, an impeachable offense:



Although Hamilton is arguing that such a charge is "political" and given to "one side or the other" based on partisan passions, he is not saying it's inappropriate to so charge a president. He is merely indicating that removing a president based on such a charge is not easy. No one ever said it was.

And, then there's precedent, whereas 'abuse of power' has been included in prior articles of impeachment, and were never stricken, right?


So, if (paraphrased) "abuse of public trust by public men" is NOT "abuse of power", I find that a rather silly argument.

Click to expand...


Does the article of impeachment use the words you have conjured?
 
Only infidels, protestants, rebels, and renegades, disrespect the authority of the House and any oversight they believe may be necessary and proper, and enacted so in the House, assembled.
 
danielpalos said:
Only infidels, protestants, rebels, and renegades, disrespect the authority of the House and any oversight they believe may be necessary and proper, and enacted so in the House, assembled.
Click to expand...

The House is a rogue body pf assassins
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom