Impeachment sandbagging idea
came from Harvard law professor
Two days before House Democrats voted articles of impeachment against President Trump, a Harvard law professor publicly urged Speaker Nancy Pelosi to stall further action.
Laurence Tribe, a well-known Harvard law professor, wrote in a Washington Post op-ed:
"For some time now, I have been emphasizing the duty to impeach this president for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress regardless of what the Senate might end up doing. Now that President Trump’s impeachment is inevitable, and now that failing to formally impeach him would invite foreign intervention in the 2020 election and set a dangerous precedent, another option seems vital to consider: voting for articles of impeachment but holding off for the time being on transmitting them to the Senate."
Tribe added that as a "tactical matter, it could strengthen Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) hand in bargaining over trial rules with McConnell because of McConnell’s and Trump’s urgent desire to get this whole business behind them.
Further, "On a substantive level, it would be justified to withhold going forward with a Senate trial. Under the current circumstances, such a proceeding would fail to render a meaningful verdict of acquittal. It would also fail to inform the public, which has the right to know the truth about the conduct of its president."
Alan Dershowitz, an emeritus Harvard law professor, countered that Tribe's recommendation "would withhold the trial until the Senate agreed to change its rules, or presumably until a new election put many more Democrats in the Senate. Under his proposal, there might never be a Senate trial, but the impeachment would stand as a final and permanent condemnation of President Trump."
Dershowitz added, "It is difficult to imagine anything more unconstitutional, more violative of the intention of the Framers, more of a denial of basic due process and civil liberties, more unfair to the president and more likely to increase the current divisiveness among the American people. Put bluntly, it is hard to imagine a worse idea put forward by good people."
The fact that Pelosi followed advice publicly aired by a Democratic professor should not be taken to mean that there is no deep-laid conspiracy to delay impeachment until the Deep Swamp security chieftains can hand something stronger to House Democrats for a third article of impeachment, one that would they hope result in swaying Senate Republicans and ridding them of their nemesis, John Durham. Though Durham's probe would not be officially killed, his position would be gravely weakened, which is what spook Washington is aiming for.
Laurence Tribe, a well-known Harvard law professor, wrote in a Washington Post op-ed:
"For some time now, I have been emphasizing the duty to impeach this president for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress regardless of what the Senate might end up doing. Now that President Trump’s impeachment is inevitable, and now that failing to formally impeach him would invite foreign intervention in the 2020 election and set a dangerous precedent, another option seems vital to consider: voting for articles of impeachment but holding off for the time being on transmitting them to the Senate."
Tribe added that as a "tactical matter, it could strengthen Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) hand in bargaining over trial rules with McConnell because of McConnell’s and Trump’s urgent desire to get this whole business behind them.
Further, "On a substantive level, it would be justified to withhold going forward with a Senate trial. Under the current circumstances, such a proceeding would fail to render a meaningful verdict of acquittal. It would also fail to inform the public, which has the right to know the truth about the conduct of its president."
Alan Dershowitz, an emeritus Harvard law professor, countered that Tribe's recommendation "would withhold the trial until the Senate agreed to change its rules, or presumably until a new election put many more Democrats in the Senate. Under his proposal, there might never be a Senate trial, but the impeachment would stand as a final and permanent condemnation of President Trump."
Dershowitz added, "It is difficult to imagine anything more unconstitutional, more violative of the intention of the Framers, more of a denial of basic due process and civil liberties, more unfair to the president and more likely to increase the current divisiveness among the American people. Put bluntly, it is hard to imagine a worse idea put forward by good people."
The fact that Pelosi followed advice publicly aired by a Democratic professor should not be taken to mean that there is no deep-laid conspiracy to delay impeachment until the Deep Swamp security chieftains can hand something stronger to House Democrats for a third article of impeachment, one that would they hope result in swaying Senate Republicans and ridding them of their nemesis, John Durham. Though Durham's probe would not be officially killed, his position would be gravely weakened, which is what spook Washington is aiming for.
No comments:
Post a Comment