• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Trump Directed His Attorney To Lie to Congress

Fishbelt Deac said:
I think double jeopardy would turn closely on the DoJ's OLC opinion on whether a sitting president can be indicted. That opinion is debatable, but assuming the opinion that the only avenue against a sitting president is impeachment, then once the Senate is "sworn" as a jury on article of impeachment passed by the House, jeopardy would attach.
Click to expand...

OLC has already weighed in on the matter. An acquittal on articles of impeachment doesn’t trigger double jeopardy.

https://www.justice.gov/file/19386/download
 
cville deac said:
No, partisan impeachment doesn't play well politically. Why do you think Pubs were campaigning on that issue last year while Dem leadership was telling Dem candidates to STFU about impeachment? Even Nancy Fucking Pelosi got this. A failed impeachment proceeding isn't something that will make Dems in purple or reddish districts look good in 2020. Add in that a failed impeachment would harm or maybe even prevent a future criminal prosecution. I don't do criminal law. Any criminal attorneys care to speculate on double jeopardy attaching from an impeachment?
Click to expand...

I'm trying to wrap my head around this. Why are you calling it partisan impeachment? Because only one side would be doing their job? People were saying to slow the roll on impeachment last year when there wasn't any clear cut evidence of a crime. This discussion assumes proof of felonies. That's not partisan impeachment. That's doing your job. And putting aside the fact that it would be the right thing to do for lots of reasons, there is no good evidence it would hurt the Dems politically. If anything, the opposite has been true historically. And I have no idea why a nakedly partisan failed impeachment (again assuming the GOP ignores incontrovertible evidence) would have any standing at all on future criminal prosecution.
 
cville deac said:
No, partisan impeachment doesn't play well politically. Why do you think Pubs were campaigning on that issue last year while Dem leadership was telling Dem candidates to STFU about impeachment? Even Nancy Fucking Pelosi got this. A failed impeachment proceeding isn't something that will make Dems in purple or reddish districts look good in 2020. Add in that a failed impeachment would harm or maybe even prevent a future criminal prosecution. I don't do criminal law. Any criminal attorneys care to speculate on double jeopardy attaching from an impeachment?
Click to expand...

60% of registered voters think Trump should be impeached or censured. Once all of the shit Donald’s done (likely including shit we don’t know about yet) is laid out in a nice organized fashion with wall to wall coverage, I suspect the censure part of that 60% will become virtually nonexistent (basically just Mitt and Junebug).

If that’s the case, forcing a vote in the senate places a ton of pressure on Senators in purple and even light-red states that are up in 2020.
 
It is hilarious to see the board conservatives trying to play the mora high ground card re: some posters thinking not impeaching is the right decision. I disagree with that camp, but you conservatives don’t get to act superior and snarky about this. You just get to sit there quietly and think about your shitty decision to back Trump.
 
Fishbelt Deac said:
I think double jeopardy would turn closely on the DoJ's OLC opinion on whether a sitting president can be indicted. That opinion is debatable, but assuming the opinion that the only avenue against a sitting president is impeachment, then once the Senate is "sworn" as a jury on article of impeachment passed by the House, jeopardy would attach.
Click to expand...

What jeopardy is the president in when he's impeached? Potential removal from office. That's not jeopardy of being subject to criminal prosecution.
 
Jamison2Carter said:
What jeopardy is the president in when he's impeached? Potential removal from office. That's not jeopardy of being subject to criminal prosecution.
Click to expand...

My logic in the hypo was impeachment would be the only avenue available for criminal prosecution, with the only sentence being removal from office. But after reading the more on-point OLC opinion, I defer to that.
 
If you are or were a Trump supporter, you should feel really fucking stupid right now. I mean, you had to know that there was a good possibility it was going to end up like this but yet you did it anyway.
 
tiltdeac said:
I'm trying to wrap my head around this. Why are you calling it partisan impeachment? Because only one side would be doing their job? People were saying to slow the roll on impeachment last year when there wasn't any clear cut evidence of a crime. This discussion assumes proof of felonies. That's not partisan impeachment. That's doing your job. And putting aside the fact that it would be the right thing to do for lots of reasons, there is no good evidence it would hurt the Dems politically. If anything, the opposite has been true historically. And I have no idea why a nakedly partisan failed impeachment (again assuming the GOP ignores incontrovertible evidence) would have any standing at all on future criminal prosecution.
Click to expand...

What I mean by partisan is that the charges are voted for solely by members of the majority party, much like what happened to Bubba in his 2nd term. If charges are brought right now, no Pubs would vote to impeach or convict. And right now, the only charges that have been fleshed out well enough publicly are obstruction and maybe suborning perjury. While I don't know what cards Mueller is still holding, I'm betting there are some more significant charges that could come, and some of them might be treasonous. So yeah, don't do shite until Mueller publishes his report.

107, thanks for weighing in on the double jeopardy issue. I still say that if you don't have 20 Pub senators on board, an impeachment acquittal would be welcome evidence for his defense team in a later criminal trial. As for the poll numbers, I haven't seen that 60% support impeachment. Right now, the 538 and RCP approval rating is 40-41% and disapproval is 55-56%. I'm surprised the pro impeachment number is higher than that.
 
Fishbelt Deac said:
My logic in the hypo was impeachment would be the only avenue available for criminal prosecution, with the only sentence being removal from office. But after reading the more on-point OLC opinion, I defer to that.
Click to expand...

The position of the DOJ is not that the president can't be prosecuted, it's just that he can't be prosecuted while he's in office. Impeachment is not a criminal prosecution.
 
SC DEAC said:
If you are or were a Trump supporter, you should feel really fucking stupid right now. I mean, you had to know that there was a good possibility it was going to end up like this but yet you did it anyway.
Click to expand...

Look 1 post below at Sailor's post. Chris Wallace, arguably the fairest person at Fox (I assume it's him or Shep), is taking this with a block of salt. That means 40% of the country is taking it with a block of salt, and many news folks at Fox and the like will still be calling this a witch hunt. The big problem with our country is we're residing in separate but unequal parallel universes.

I miss Walter Cronkite.
 
Can we all agree to stop comparing any potential impeachment of Trump to the GOP impeaching Clinton? They aren’t even in the same ballpark.
 
Jamison2Carter said:
The position of the DOJ is not that the president can't be prosecuted, it's just that he can't be prosecuted while he's in office. Impeachment is not a criminal prosecution.
Click to expand...

I got that, but does being President toll the statute of limitations?

Let's get back on target since RC107 provided the best answer.
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
Can we all agree to stop comparing any potential impeachment of Trump to the GOP impeaching Clinton? They aren’t even in the same ballpark.
Click to expand...

Yeah but which 1 is more like a foot massage? I agree that lying about a hummer ain't anywhere near the same as potential money laundering for crooked Russians and conspiring with same or similar crooked Russians. First, we don't have many impeachment situations to compare it to. I mean, there's Johnson, Nixon and Bubba. What is comparable is that what Clinton was impeached on as I recall was obstruction of justice charges, and, if that is all you have on Trump, which is what we have so far, I guarandamntee you that you'll see a similar result. Now, if Mueller lays down some money laundering and conspiracy bombshells, then you're going to see some congressional Pubs squirming. At that point, I'd hope (though not hold my breath) that Trump's poll #s would deteriorate, as would some of his congressional support. And at that point, an impeachment becomes more practical. And what I'm saying right now is let's wait till Mueller issues his report and go from there. If impeachment becomes more practical, then impeach. If congressional Pubs still aren't budging, then it becomes a yuge 2020 campaign issue.

Now I have to go drink beer with the usual Friday suspects.
 
Just because new House Dems didn’t run on impeachment in 2018 doesn’t mean they wouldn’t be inclined to impeach if the topic came up.
 
cville deac said:
What I mean by partisan is that the charges are voted for solely by members of the majority party, much like what happened to Bubba in his 2nd term. If charges are brought right now, no Pubs would vote to impeach or convict. And right now, the only charges that have been fleshed out well enough publicly are obstruction and maybe suborning perjury. While I don't know what cards Mueller is still holding, I'm betting there are some more significant charges that could come, and some of them might be treasonous. So yeah, don't do shite until Mueller publishes his report.
.
Click to expand...

But part of the impeachment process IS an investigation. The purpose of the proceedings is the flesh out those charges in the public way. Very likely it would help those things come to light. And in the wildly unlikely scenario that nothing comes to light during the months of impeachment proceedings, he's acquitted, and then there is proof of treason, he would be immediately impeached again.
 
cville deac said:
Yeah but which 1 is more like a foot massage? I agree that lying about a hummer ain't anywhere near the same as potential money laundering for crooked Russians and conspiring with same or similar crooked Russians. First, we don't have many impeachment situations to compare it to. I mean, there's Johnson, Nixon and Bubba. What is comparable is that what Clinton was impeached on as I recall was obstruction of justice charges, and, if that is all you have on Trump, which is what we have so far, I guarandamntee you that you'll see a similar result. Now, if Mueller lays down some money laundering and conspiracy bombshells, then you're going to see some congressional Pubs squirming. At that point, I'd hope (though not hold my breath) that Trump's poll #s would deteriorate, as would some of his congressional support. And at that point, an impeachment becomes more practical. And what I'm saying right now is let's wait till Mueller issues his report and go from there. If impeachment becomes more practical, then impeach. If congressional Pubs still aren't budging, then it becomes a yuge 2020 campaign issue.

Now I have to go drink beer with the usual Friday suspects.
Click to expand...

We have far more than that. Just based on what has been publicly reported, there is likely enough evidence to indict Trump on campaign finance violations, election fraud, hacking, wire fraud, tax fraud, money laundering, etc. We also know he has violated the Emoluments Clause on a nearly daily basis since he took office.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top