Posted on 08/23/2018 9:49:44 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
President Donald Trump's actions during the campaign -- possible conspiracy to accept help from a foreign national and to violate campaign-finance laws in order to hide two alleged extramarital affairs -- as well as his actions once he became president (e.g. possible obstruction of justice, witness-tampering) are at issue for special counsel Robert Mueller and for Congress in the context of impeachment.
For now, let's assume that Trump did nothing wrong during his presidency, that only his pre-election conduct is at issue. Most commentators have taken the view that Mueller cannot indict for criminal activity during Trump's presidency, although this is a matter of current Justice Department policy and not airtight law.
We've never been confronted with the situation where the means by which a candidate got elected allegedly violated the law. When he should arguably have never gotten to the presidency to enjoy temporary immunity, must the prosecutor refrain from criminal indictment? There is no definite answer. One could look at pre-election criminal conduct as no different from criminal conduct during the presidency (i.e., no indictment), or one could look at the pre-election conduct as a fraud on the electorate. In the latter case, one could argue that the president cannot use his ill-gotten gain (the presidency) as a shield to immediate prosecution.
To take this question to the extreme, what if a candidate killed his opponent?
Joshua Matz, co-author of "To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment," points out that indicting for pre-election conduct raises all sorts of practical problems, including proving that the criminality swung the election....
(Excerpt) Read more at nj.com ...
OK, I still haven’t gotten an answer to my question about this (I’ve been asking for months).
Given that the President and Vice President are chosen by the Electoral College, which is appointed by State Legislatures using sovereign authority granted by Article II to them directly, and given that the ONLY authority Congress has over any elections taking place ANYWHERE in the US is granted in Article I §4 (specifically over elections of Representatives and Senators) - how are any purported FEDERAL laws that seek to govern HOW State Legislatures appoint their Electors Constitutional?
Where can I find authority for a Federal Elections Commission, a Presidential Debates Commission, any laws pertaining to “campaigning” for President, etc, etc?
That all 50 States have chosen, perhaps temporarily, to use idiots voting to appoint their Electors does not relocate their AUTHORITY over the processes they have chosen to Washington.
cough cough, Al Gore and the Chinese? Buddhist Temple?
Constitution doesn’t identify when the “events” have to occur.
“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
Here’s what I think should be done (if only Ryan would agree... The long pole in the tent).
The current Congress should hold Impeachment hearings now.
Don’t dilly-dally, but get right to it. Bring up ALL of the FBI/CIA conspiracy, get it ALL out in the open. From this, create a special counsel—or call it what you will—an independent attorney with subpoena authority and a grand jury to completely investigate the Clinton Foundation, Fusion GPS, Perkins-Coie, and any action taken by the previous administration to a) illegally exonerate Hillary Clinton of actual crimes, and b) spy on the Trump campaign for political purposes.
Let’s get it on. This slow leak to this or that needs to end. All of this damages the entire country. Get busy and get it done.
An Impeachment hearing now can not just indict a President to the Senate, but also CLEAR one of spurious media charges!
Dont forget the LATimes is reputed to have an audio interview with a very bad guy affiliated with the Kenyan, which they have refused to make public. This practice is eerily similar to what the Enquirer is being accused of, which is said to be an illegal campaign contribution. If you ever wanted proof that DoJ is behaving in a partisan manner, this reinforces that belief.
Iirc its Obamas speech at a dinner of Muslims in la
Must be worse than his I stand with Islam speech at U.N. where he lied to the world about Benghazi
I think you are right. Thanks for the sharp memory!
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.