Trump Impeachment Trial: Shields Family Reactions

Regarding the meme here:

My mother will be gratified to see that I’m quoting the (conservative) Wall Street Journal.

My brother, who thinks this “trial” can’t possibly do anything but acquit the president, may have some hope for a conviction.

I personally have more hope, and for a number of additional reasons, including the fact U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts can call witnesses, even if the cowardly and traitorous senate Republicans won’t.

 

Tagged with:
One comment on “Trump Impeachment Trial: Shields Family Reactions
  1. marcopolo says:

    Craig,

    “Cowardly and traitorous Senate Republican”.

    This sort of rhetoric is totally unhelpful. Whatever John Bolton can testify would only be his opinion, He was not party to the conversation between the two President’s.

    Such testimony is only speculation, not evidence.

    Essentially, what is being forgotten is the Constitution places no restrictions on how the President conducts foreign affairs.

    If the President allocated the money elsewhere, that would be a different story, but the conduct of US foreign relations is the prerogative of the President alone.

    Even if the President’s sole purpose of his phone cal was to investigate Joe Biden’s overseas dealings for evidence of corruption, that is within the power of a President and neither unlawful nor corrupt.

    It may be seen as rough politics, but is within the powers granted by the constitution to the President.

    Again, if a US President pressured a foreign government to invent or corruptly create a false case against a US citizen (especially a potential political rival) that may be exceeding the power granted by by the constitution, but simply requesting (even with pressure) that the dealings of a US national be investigated for corruption, is not, in itself forbidden and could be said to be a duty of a President.

    Congress has the right, even duty to debate, and criticize how the President conducts foreign affairs. It’s certainly the right of the American people to judge the President’s actions when voting.

    But Congress can’t usurp or restrict the President’s constitutional right to conduct foreign policy as he feels is in the best interests of the nation.

    However unorthodox, crude, undiplomatic or no matter how outraged professional US officials become, how much hurt pride, or belief that the President is wrong or lacks manners etc, these officials have a sworn duty to carry out to the best of their ability the policies of the peoples elected Executive.

    Anything less, is treason and a betrayal of their oath of service.

    Conspiring unlawfully to covertly remove or subvert a sitting President is an act of sedition. Being elected to Congress doesn’t make anyone immune from the charge of sedition.