Posted on 11/03/2019 4:50:11 AM PST by MarvinStinson
They utilize a sleazy House member, who has been impeached and convicted of wrongdoing as a federal judge, as the one who writes the rules for this sleazy impeachment scam against Trump, all whilst he is breaking congressional rules himself by having his girlfriend work in his office against House rules.
Only the democRATS would think this was okay. The more corrupt their members, the better they like them.
Hastings reflects their highest ethical values.
Fair rules? We don't need no steenkin fair rules
Rules to a Democrat are only a means to handicap their enemies. Neither oaths nor rules or their word mean anything to a Democrat.Rules, oaths, and one’s word of honor are only valid or have meaning if one has honor. Democrats have no honor, therefore, none of these are valid.
The Impeachment Trial of Alcee L. Hastings (1989) U.S. District Judge, Florida
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Impeachment_Hastings.htm
Brief History of the Case
In 1981, a federal grand jury indicted Judge Alcee L. Hastings, appointed to the federal district court in 1979, along with his friend William A. Borders, a Washington, D.C. lawyer. Hastings was charged with conspiracy and obstruction of justice for soliciting a $150,000 bribe in return for reducing the sentences of two mob-connected felons convicted in Hastings’ court. A year after Borders was convicted of conspiracy, the result of an FBI sting effort, Hastings’s case came before the criminal court. Despite Borders’ conviction, and the fact that Hastings had indeed reduced the sentences of the two felons, he was acquitted in a criminal court in 1983 and returned to his judicial post.
Subsequently, suspicions arose that Hastings had lied and falsified evidence during the trial in order to obtain an acquittal. A special committee of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals began a new probe into the Hastings case. The resulting three-year investigation ended with the panel concluding that Hastings did indeed commit perjury, tamper with evidence, and conspire to gain financially by accepting bribes. The panel recommended further action to the U.S. Judicial Conference, which, in turn, informed the House of Representatives on March 17, 1987, that Judge Alcee Hastings should be impeached and removed from office.
On August 3, 1988, following an investigation by the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, the House of Representatives voted 413 to 3 to adopt H. Res. 499, approving 17 articles of impeachment against Hastings, the greatest number of articles in any impeachment proceeding to date. Charges included conspiracy, bribery, perjury, falsifying documents, thwarting a criminal investigation, and undermining the public confidence “in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.” The Senate received the articles on August 9, 1988.
Following the precedent set in the 1986 Claiborne impeachment case, the Senate again chose to refer the matter to a special committee as authorized by impeachment rule XI. On March 16, 1989, the Senate rejected a motion by Hastings to dismiss the case, and adopted S. Res. 38, creating a 12-member trial committee to hear evidence and then report to the full Senate on contested and uncontested facts. The committee was not tasked with making a recommendation on guilt or innocence. Committee hearings continued from July 10, to August 3, 1989. Consisting of six Republicans and six Democrats, the committee heard evidence for and against Hastings, and took testimony from 55 witnesses, including Borders.
The House managers presented convincing evidence that Hastings had, indeed, conspired with Borders to solicit the bribe. Hastings, who appeared in his own defense, objected to the use of the committee, insisting that the full Senate should be required to hear evidence. His motion failed. Hastings also insisted that the Senate trial amounted, in legal terms, to “double jeopardy” since he had already been acquitted in a court of law.
The trial committee presented its report on October 2, 1989. Sixteen days later, the trial began in the U.S. Senate, with prosecution and defense given two hours to summarize their cases. The Senate deliberated in closed session on October 19, 1989. The following day, the Senate voted on 11 of the 17 articles of impeachment, convicting Hastings, by the necessary two-thirds vote, on 8 articles (1-5, 7-9).
Having achieved the necessary majority vote to convict on 8 articles, the Senate’s president pro tempore (Robert C. Byrd) ordered Hastings removed from office. The Senate did not vote to disqualify him from holding future office.
Four years later, Hastings was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives for the term beginning January 3, 1993.
Alcee Hastings defense team for his impeachment as Disritrict Court judge:
Defense Team
Professor Terence J. Anderson, University of Miami School of Law, chief counsel
Patricia Williams, counsel
John W. Karr, attorney
William G. McLaine, attorney
Robert S. Catz, attorney
“They utilize a sleazy House member, who has been impeached and convicted of wrongdoing as a federal judge, as the one who writes the rules for this sleazy impeachment scam against Trump, all whilst he is breaking congressional rules himself by having his girlfriend work in his office against House rules.”
Perfect synopsis.
I’m in Dousche (Deitsch)’s district. I wrote him as an angry fed-up-w-Trump supporter whose vote for Dousche is on the line....
A female ain't no "beau." A belle?
Maybe. But the word you're looking for is mistress.
Oooo! Can't use that word because . . . because that implies that old, "patriarchy" thing where an unscrupulous man could use his position of influence and wealth to entice a much-younger woman to live with him illicitly just because he could, and she's willing.
Which would be the case here and . . . virtually everywhere. It's a sin. And in this situation, a fact.
It's pretty simple, actually. If you have an R after your name, you're getting investigated especially if you're a conservative. Just ask Devin Nunes. If you have a D after your name, you're not getting investigated unless the RATS need your hide to achieve some aim. Just ask Al Franken who was dispatched because his seat would be filled by another RAT while getting rid of him helped in the Alabama Senate race against the very compromised Roy Moore.
The very first word in the title, “Dem”, is all you need to know. Rules and laws don’t apply to them.
Agree. Does any of this corruption actually surprise anyone?
Trump should dig up all the dirt of the Congressmen. Trouble is no News outlet would publish it.
My goodness, Marvin, quite a memory you got there.
Looks like Patricia may provide full-service staff duties.
Sounds like the nepotism rule should apply. Oh dear, there is no such rule...
RULES? WE DON’T NEED NO STINKIN’ RULES!!
I’m telling you, what did Katie Hill in was the IRON CROSS! To the Left, RULES ARE REALLY JUST SUGGESTIONS. Don’t ever think that the Left cared about the sleazy relationships Hill had.
Alcee Hastings is an impeachment expert
Having been impeached as a crooked judge
The good news is...he’s 83
How long, oh Lord...
“Looks like Patricia may provide full-service staff duties.”
Kinda like Kamala Harris.
Unless that's another lie of his, it shouldn't be long.
Hastings is 83 years old and has already been impeached as a Judge and still gets reelected every 2 years. We all know he is a crook and he could care less. He laughs all the way to the bank.
At his age, the eternal flame will soon be his retirement wage.
Trump’s attorneys should make him a witness if this comes to trial.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.