I don't think you understand the difference between an impeachment hearing and a criminal law proceeding. I also think Newt was sloppy with what he was saying. President cannot obstruct justice simply for doing what he has the constitutional power to do, namely fire FBI director or direct investigations under the executive branch.Quick video of Newt contradicting himself.
Fake News CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/06/17/newt-gingrich-contradicts-himself-bts.cnn
I don't think you understand the difference between an impeachment hearing and a criminal law proceeding. I also think Newt was sloppy with what he was saying.
President cannot obstruct justice simply for doing what he has the constitutional power to do, namely fire FBI director or direct investigations under the executive branch.
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of the impeachment charges against Bill Clinton obstruction of justice? Also CMIIW but wasn't Eye of Newt on board with the charges against Clinton? Now all of a sudden a President can't obstruct justice??I don't think you understand the difference between an impeachment hearing and a criminal law proceeding. I also think Newt was sloppy with what he was saying. President cannot obstruct justice simply for doing what he has the constitutional power to do, namely fire FBI director or direct investigations under the executive branch.
Trump can be impeached for anything the house can agree on, this is a political situation, not criminal.
I don't think you understand the difference between an impeachment hearing and a criminal law proceeding. I also think Newt was sloppy with what he was saying. President cannot obstruct justice simply for doing what he has the constitutional power to do, namely fire FBI director or direct investigations under the executive branch.
Trump can be impeached for anything the house can agree on, this is a political situation, not criminal.
I don't think you understand the difference between an impeachment hearing and a criminal law proceeding. I also think Newt was sloppy with what he was saying. President cannot obstruct justice simply for doing what he has the constitutional power to do, namely fire FBI director or direct investigations under the executive branch.
Trump can be impeached for anything the house can agree on, this is a political situation, not criminal.
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of the impeachment charges against Bill Clinton obstruction of justice? Also CMIIW but wasn't Eye of Newt on board with the charges against Clinton? Now all of a sudden a President can't obstruct justice??
lol. GOP-sponsored education right here, folks. Get your vouchers now for the re-education camps opening up next year! Bucky is a proud graduate!
Impeachment is political. People can be impeached for wearing red ties.Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of the impeachment charges against Bill Clinton obstruction of justice? Also CMIIW but wasn't Eye of Newt on board with the charges against Clinton? Now all of a sudden a President can't obstruct justice??
At least I knew what impeachment was.lol. GOP-sponsored education right here, folks. Get your vouchers now for the re-education camps opening up next year! Bucky is a proud graduate!
He only "hoped" one time to Comey about Flynn. He didn't attempt to pressure Comey to drop the Russian investigation. He didn't fire Comey to "thwart" any investigation, he wanted it be known if any of his affiliates were involved. Trump wanted Comey to let it be known that he wasn't under investigation as he was told 3 times.Firing Comey, by itself, was legal. But Trump fired Comey explicitly to thwart an investigation (remember, Trump admitted that this was the real reason), and after repeated attempts to pressure Comey into letting the case go.
This is criminal, not political.
Witness tampering is a crime. Lying under oath is a crime. Clinton did both of those things. ie. he was breaking the law.I'm sure he does understand, and that's why he knows Gingrich is a hypocrite. Gingrich explicitly said for Clinton that the rule of law was the reason for impeachment. If the president can't obstruct justice then there's no threat to the rule of law.
Easy peasy.
Would you agree that the firing of Comey had zero affect on any investigation?Of course he can. As mentioned in another thread there is no law saying that a CEO can't order documents to be destroyed, as that is totally within his powers as head of a company. If he's doing it for the purpose of obstructing an investigation then his otherwise legal action becomes a crime. Same with Trump.
And Trump can be impeached for obstruction of justice.Impeachment is political. People can be impeached for wearing red ties.
You do not know what Trump's motives were. A person may not even know their own motivations, but if you seriously look at yourself you will begin to detect a pattern that everything is motivated by protection of the ego, and it has been scientifically demonstrated that conservatives do that more than liberals.He only "hoped" one time to Comey about Flynn. He didn't attempt to pressure Comey to drop the Russian investigation. He didn't fire Comey to "thwart" any investigation, he wanted it be known if any of his affiliates were involved. Trump wanted Comey to let it be known that he wasn't under investigation as he was told 3 times.
Impeachment is by definition political.And Trump can be impeached for obstruction of justice.
Impeachment over criminality becomes apolitical.
Based on what we know it is the most reasonable interpretation of the facts. I do not "know" why he did it, just that the version the lefties are pushing doesn't make sense of the facts.You do not know what Trump's motives were. A person may not even know their own motivations, but if you seriously look at yourself you will begin to detect a pattern that everything is motivated by protection of the ego, and it has been scientifically demonstrated that conservatives do that more than liberals.
Don't be asinine. If a Republican-held congress calls for the impeachment of their Republican sitting president, it's not 'political' anymore.Impeachment is by definition political.
At least I knew what impeachment was.
He only "hoped" one time to Comey about Flynn. He didn't attempt to pressure Comey to drop the Russian investigation. He didn't fire Comey to "thwart" any investigation, he wanted it be known if any of his affiliates were involved. Trump wanted Comey to let it be known that he wasn't under investigation as he was told 3 times.
It is by definition.Don't be asinine. If a Republican-held congress calls for the impeachment of their Republican sitting president, it's not 'political' anymore.
At least I wasn't ignorant as to what impeachment was, like you.there's that prideful ignorance. Glad to see the admission of embracing it.
What did Trump admit?...except by all of Trump's own admissions. You're an idiot for pridefully ignoring the many truths that are smacking you in the face.
It is by definition.
At least I wasn't ignorant as to what impeachment was, like you.
What did Trump admit?