The Impeachment of Trump so Far, and the Constitutional Crisis.

[genuinlysensitive]

First off a primer for those not familiar with US politics or just what impeachment actually is:

Unlike Parliamentary systems the Executive branch (The President, Vice President, The President's Cabinet) is separate from the Legislative branch (The Senate which has two Senators from each State, and The House of Representatives which has Congressmen based on population from each state as per the US Census), and the Judicial branch is also separate (all the Federal Courts including the Supreme Court), these are called The Three Branches of Government.

As such in order to create a system of Checks and Balances, the Founding Fathers created a check on the Executive by the Legislative, a process called "Impeachment". It came from English Common Law (America being a former British colony), but it is much more narrow in American Law.

So what are the specifics on impeachment?

Article 1 section 2 States that THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES shall "...have the sole power of impeachment."

https://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec2.html

Article 1 section 3 states that the Senate then tries the case of the Impeached President and weather to Convict and remove from office or Acquit.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."

https://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec3.html

*IMPORTANT* did you catch the last part? "...but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law." Yes it is Unconstitutional to indict a sitting President otherwise the Executive branch would be forever held up with indictments from partisan District Attorneys.

For those unfamiliar with American Law there is an old saying about indictments, "If the District Attorney (Prosecutor) wanted, the Grand Jury would Indict a Ham Sandwich."

The New York Prosecutor's Latest Indictment

Article 2 section 4 explains the reasons for impeachment:

"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."

Article II, Section 4

https://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/2/essays/100/standards-for-impeachment

Here are the Articles of the Constitution as well as The Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) for those who are curious:

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript

This Brings us to the current "impeachment" and Constitutional Crisis. You notice Article 1 section 2 States that THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES shall "...have the sole power of impeachment."? This Means the Whole House of Representatives, NOT ONE PARTY THEREIN!

Republicans have been denied access to impeachment hearings, not allowed to question witnesses, the democrats will "release transcripts" if they want to, and they definitely won't lie to Congress again!

https://marshall.house.gov/sites/marshall.house.gov/files/styles/congress_featured_image/public/featured_image/10.23.19%20Impeachment%20presser.jpeg?itok=dQwMAd4g

Adam Schiff who is with Pelosi and Cortez running this impeachment farce, has already lied to Congress recently regarding the Ukraine matter, lying about the contents of the Call between Trump and the Ukranian President Zelensky. Here is the actual Transcript of the call:

https://www.scribd.com/document/427425025/President-Trump-Telephone-Conversation-with-President-Zelenskyy-of-Ukraine-Unclassified09-2019#from_embed

Here is Schiff Lying to Congress about the contents:

After being called out by other Congressmen Schiff admitted it was not true, but claimed it was "parody". However none of the Corporate news outlets reported the fact that it was fake, or that Schiff himself admitted it. They ran with the headlines about Schiff fictional supposed "parody".

By taking power away from members of The House in the Impeachment process it is Unconstitutional on those grounds alone. Also, in the resolution passed today 10/31:

-The resolution gives authority to the House Intelligence Committee that it has never had before.
-The resolution does not provide the Republican minority equal subpoena power.
-The resolution dilutes minority powers over the release of Intelligence Committee transcripts.
-The resolution does not compel the release of past testimony.
-The resolution restricts the president’s right to be represented.

-Transcripts are NOT required to be made public

-Exculpatory evidence does NOT have to be turned over!

Which brings us to the OTHER reason it is Unconstitutional. Although Impeachment is a special Procedure for removal of a sitting President, he still has Constitutional Rights, he is an American Citizen after all!

The Fifth amendment states that in part, no one shall be "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;" Due Process Requires turning over Exculpatory (proving innocence) evidence so this proceeding violates the Fifth Amendment.

The Sixth Amendment guarantees in part,"to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." The President is not allowed to confront witnesses against him, allowed to present evidence in his favor, and his Lawyers not allowed to be present, thus it violates the Sixth Amendment! And yes the previous Presidents ALL had these rights, otherwise the Impeachment would be UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

RECAP;TLDR:

1. By Denying House Members access, and power, this procedure is a violation of article 1 section 2 The House NOT one party withing has the power of impeachment.

2. By withholding exculpatory evidence it violates the 5th Amendment to due process.

3. By refusing to allow the President and his lawyers to be present question witnesses or present evidence/witnesses in his favor (yes ALL Presidents had these rights!) it violates the 6th Amendment!

These people are TRAMPLING the Constitution, do not let their Rhetoric Fool You!

The Constitution was Made as a Safeguard against would be Tyrants such as the democrats in Congress! WE MUST NOT LET THEM TRAMPLE IT ANYMORE!

[TadCurious]

You did a fine job with this. And you're absolutely right that the Democrats are trampling on the Constitution in the way they're going about their impeachment farce. It is a dog and pony show for them to distract the American people from the fact that their presidential candidates are disasters. This impeachment circus is all they've got. Open borders and "free" taxpayer paid health care for illegal aliens isn't going over well with the American people.

[TadCurious]

Thanks for MHO! Well done.

[slatyb]

The Supreme Court will decide whether the Congress is proceeding lawfully. The House Republicans will lose. Recent election returns in Virginia suggest that Trump-ism isn't going over well there.

[HeyMikie]

Very well written! Sharing on Facebook.

[Lliam]

That was a very well researched, clear and completely accurate MyTake, genuinlysensitive.

I agree with you 100%.
I have been following the proceedings with marginal interest and some amusement. It's a farce; a dog and pony show; a transparent ploy by the Democratic party to hamstring the president and win voters in November.

I am no Trump fan. I didn't vote for either him or Hillary in 2016 but was viscerally relieved when Hillary lost because, although I had no respect for Trump, I think Hillary is a megalomaniacal, grasping, thieving, mass murdering psychopath to whom honesty and ethics are alien concepts.

This impeachment serves several purposes:
1. Vengeance for Hillary's loss.
2. To give the impression that Trump was the worse of the two candidates.
3. To motivate the Democratic base.
4. To distract from the crimes of Hillary and DNC during the 2016 campaign. Among other things, it's ironic that, in hiring Fusion GPS to get dirt on Trump, they are guilty of the same thing that they are accusing Trump of doing. Also, in accusing Trump of collusion with "the Russians", they distract from Hillary's collusion in selling U. S. uranium resources to a Russian owned company in exchange for large payments to... the Clintons. When guilty of a crime, accusing your opponent of doing the same thing is a tried and true tactic.

I disagree with almost everything Republican except for gun control. But the Democratic party has become utter despicable. Aside from, possibly, Tulsi Gabbard, there isn't a Democrat I would vote for. I want both parties to implode. They are working together to destroy this country, the environment, and every progressive and/or non-aligned nation on the planet, all for personal profit.

I hope this impeachment blows up in the Democrat's face.

[genuinlysensitive]

I used to be a democrat myself. Until November 2016 democrats supported free speech, immigration law, and putting an end to the wars in the Middle East. Now so many democrat friends I know did a complete 180 on everything they claimed they stood for! The party is pathetic! Found this video, I related, see if you do too:

https://youtu.be/4Pjs7uoOkag

[Lliam]

Good video. I agree. I thought I was a liberal all my life for the same reasons and now reject the label for the same reasons.
I voted Democratic all my life but voted independent for the first time when Bill Clinton (Ronald Reagan II) ran for his second term. I voted independent until Obama ran in 2008. I enthusiastically voted for him. But he violated almost every one of his campaign promises and turned out to be Dubya II). So I voted independent in 2012 and have ever since.

[DWornock]

The house with the Democrats in a majority may impeach but impeachment is worthless because it will be impossible to get a conviction in the Senate. Most everyone knows it is politics including those that support it so it will not change the minds of more than 2% of the voters if that.

Impeachment may make Trump haters feel good for a few days, but then they will feel worse when the Senate quickly votes to acquit. The best strategy for the Democrats may be to keep it in the news for a year but to never actually vote and thereby allowing the Senate to acquit.

[genuinlysensitive]

It isn't JUST that it is futile in the present or near future. It is that this is setting a PRECEDENT for this type of Unconstitutional, illegal, behavior in the future. That is why it must be stopped!

[Anonymous]

It is simple. Joe Biden is on video bragging about threatening to withhold $1 billion in aid in order to get the Ukraine to fire a prosecutor. That prosecutor was reportedly investigating Hunter Biden, Joe's son. To a casual observer that looks like a violation of federal laws governing extortion, blackmail, and/or bribery. Under Article 2, Section 1's "executive power vesting clause and under Article 2, Section 3's "take care" clause, it can be argued that Mr. Trump has a duty to investigate, which would naturally include getting input from the alleged victims, the government of the Ukraine.

I posted anonymously so that the many, many, many Leftist Snowflakes who have blocked me can perhaps learn something about the Constitution that they seem to hate.

- Liam Hayden

[genuinlysensitive]

https://youtu.be/urTk6O4c0mU?t=28

In his admission he also implicates Obama!

[Opinion Owner]

True. Of course the other issue is the Left's cognitive dissonance in that "Obama had the right to investigate candidate Trump because of accusations." while "Trump should be impeached for allegedly investigating Biden because of accusations."

[genuinlysensitive]

Are you referring to the illegal FISA warrant based on the Steele Dossier that the Obama administration lied about to get, in order to spy on Trump and anyone associated withing 6 degrees of him or his campaign based on calling him a "Russian Agent"?

[LoU_Hades]

American politics is like in most democratic countries, a show for the plebs. The real orders and tasks come from lobby groups which are financiers of politicians and their election campaigns. Those lobby groups compete sometimes with each other but no one of them sets all their influence only one 'horse'.
In brief, It's irrelevant for me... and I'm not an American.

[skyboy64]

Well we Americans have voted for Prez Trump and I and including the republic an party have been getting work done as ask by us Americans people and the Demoncrats doesn't want to work for us Americans people , Again why do we need the Demoncrats anyway since they didn't do any work. Trump have done so much for us Americans people by himself without a help from Demoncrats. I say impeach the Demoncrat party off our USA soils.

[genuinlysensitive]

Unfortunately people keep voting them in. Personally its not they they are democrats, its that they are Unconstitutional, Tyrant wannabes!

[skyboy64]

Yes.

[slatyb]

No, we didn't. Three million more people voted for Clinton, but the electoral college system gives disproportionate power to residents of rural states.

[genuinlysensitive]

The way Presidents were elected have been known for over 200 years. The fact that one side wants to act like it is a recent revelation is quite disturbing.

[slatyb]

But "the people" didn't vote for Trump. He won the election, but most of the people voted for Clinton.

[genuinlysensitive]

The process for electing a president has been known by all for 200 years. To try and overthrow the board because "your" candidate lost is what a 2 year old would do.

[ObscuredBeyond]

They know they have nothing except butthurt over him derailing the Whore of Babylon. So this coup is all about butthurt. The "Whistleblower" is nothing more than a wolf-crier who has to twist what he leaked, and was planted by John Brennan as petty revenge because Trump wouldn't let Brennan and Bolton profiteer off a war with North Korea that they were about to engineer. Brennan and Bolton are the real life Iron Monger.

[Massageman]

You're right. This is SUCH a sham. But, Pelosi got backed into a corner by "the squad". She KNOWS it's futile. This "investigation" is SO unconstitutional on SO many grounds it's laughable. My guess is that her last hop- a Hail Mary- is to just keep stirring the political pot right up until election time and hope to discredit Trump.

[Blitzkrieg_88]

It's an attempt at a coup because they know American voters will vote him in again at the next election.

[Lurdie]

Okay a few things. One you're referring to the call between the President of the United States (POS) and the Ukraine as a transcript, it's a memo. There are sections missing were the translators and writers didn't write out/missed. Not saying it's completely dismissed just that it's a memo not a complete transcript of the call.
Second of all, Republicans in the House are not being barred from the investigations, some chose to walk out and others were not part of the committee. Lastly, the hearings have not been public for a number of reasons. There no time limits for questioning and most importantly for national security reasons. I think the impeachment hearings are quite necessary because of the whistleblower and after reading the memo between the POS and Ukraine it was concerning.
Also I'm not quite sure why this is a dividing issue between party lines when it's just an investigation based on valid accusations made by reputable sources.

[genuinlysensitive]

1. The released transcript by the President, confirmed by Zelensky, isn't reliable, but a whistleblower, who was fired for leaking, helped create the FALSE pissgate dossier, worked to fuel the Russian collusion hoax, and admittedly had no first hand knowledge of the call is more trustworthy? You think that is a "more reliable" source?

2. House Republicans were kicked out, not allowed to question the "whistleblower" and the whistleblower isn't even going to testify outside of Schiff's secret kangaroo court.

3. You obviously didn't read my take, even the TLDR section, which makes me think you are so intellectually weak you can't handle anything more complex than Trump = POS. If you would like to read it and have a grown up conversation let me know.

[Lurdie]

I don't appreciate the personal attacks, there's no need for that. I've been nothing but polite. Second of all, I didn't say that the memo wasn't reliable just that you were referring to it as a transcript which is incorrect. As for the whistleblower, I do find them to be credible as well as a lot of the people who were brought in for questioning who seem to bring to light concerning allegations. As I said before Republicans werent barred from the hearings. It was committee only and members of the House who aren't in the committee can't sit in.
I personally think that this isn't something that should be drawn between party lines. What the POS is being accused of is very serious, Americans should be concerned.

[Jersey2]

It’s a circus for political reasons. And now we will have many more impeachment’s in the future as our federal government descends to the depths of the Italian government. Fun times ahead.

[Adam_INTJ]

I'm a conservative and see the democrats as being political hacks here, but your reasoning is shoddy at best.

Saying that the house of representatives has the power of impeachment does not mean that it must be bipartisan.

Bipartisan support is NOT necessary. My proof: American political parties did not exist before the constitution. The founding fathers were mostly concerned with states trying to cheat each other, not political ideologies striving for power.

The closest you get to them talking about party politics is James Madision writing about the potential rise of "factions" in the federalist papers.

No parties: no indication of a necessary bipartisan support for impeachment.

[genuinlysensitive]

Incorrect, The House, NOT ONE PARTY, NOT A SMALL NUMBER has sole impeachment power. It even without political parties certain members of the House cannot band together to take power from the whole House. It is like only counting votes from "certain" states when electing a President, or allowing the President to campaign in "certain" states. It is Unconstitutional!

[Adam_INTJ]

Face it. A majority of the house voted on this. Said majority has the right to set up the investigation however they want. I agree that it is set up in dishonest way right now, but that does not change the fact that they have the legal flexibility to do what they're doing.

[genuinlysensitive]

But not all members of the House was not allowed access to the proceeding, or to evidence or to present evidence. The Tyranny of the majority is something the founders took great care to guard against. Face it is spelled out in Black and White. The HOUSE not a small number of members has power. You are also neglecting the Unconstitutionality of the blatant violations of the 5th and 6th Amendments. I don't know if its extreme political bias on your part, or simply a lack of reading comprehension skills. Face it. It is Unconstitutional in multiple ways!

[Adam_INTJ]

The tyranny of the majority is already prevented by districts and the division of voting by both population and state.

I'm not blinded by ideology, you are.
I'm reading the constitution as a document to be taken literally while you're taking it as some sort of piece of poetry where you can extrapolate values and apply those percieved values how you wish. That's called being a partisan hack.

I'm not interested in shilling for Trump. The dude makes mistakes, but if the Democrats push much harder on impeachment, they'll damage tgeirvcredibility for the next decade of elections.

You're going to have to use specific sections of the constitution: the article concerning impeachment and any areas defining terms from that section.
You can't take your own definitions of words and say that that is what the document means. Your definitions don't mean squat to anyone but you.

[genuinlysensitive]

If you are reading it to be taken literally, then the Whole House has the right to question witnesses, view the evidence, and even subpoena witnesses. Again, not just a few Congressmen chosen by a self appointed dictator who is Speaker of the House!

[Bman4907]

They were demanding to impeach him 17 minutes after he sore in, dems are a joke

[genuinlysensitive]

They have gone beyond that, actually engaging in illegal, Unconstitutional actions. This is a Star-Chamber Kangaroo Court!

[Girther10]

Outstanding mytake. It should be required for every American to read this.

[markscott]

Bull carp. The Republicans have not been denies access to the hearings. Fourth eight Republicans have access to the proceedings. They also have access to ask questions. Trey Gowdy once said about hearing he was directing, that having them behind closed doors gives better opportunity to find the facts, as there is less grandstanding when in private. Of course, Republicans not want it all open. They want grandstanding, so they can muddy the waters more effectively.

[genuinlysensitive]

1. It is the WHOLE HOUSE not "certain members".

2. This is Impeachment, not some closed door hearing.

3. It doesn't matter what one party wants it matters what the Constitution says.
-It Says the WHOLE HOUSE
-It Says all Americans, including the President, have a right to due Process (5th amendment)
-It Says all Americans, including the President, have the right to Consul, the right to face their accusers, the right to present witnesses/evidence in their favor (6th amendment!)

Basically despite all the rhetoric about "this is for the Constitution" Pelosi, Schiff, Cortez, et al, are ignoring it!

external-content.duckduckgo.com/.../

[markscott]

genuine: Obviously, like many Trump supporters, you give a lot of BS.
1. There is nothing in the constitution that says the whole house has to be on board in order to proceed with impeachment. That's a ridiculous argument. As you must know, in any impeachment, only certain members agree on impeachment. If this were not so, then there could never be any impeachment, ever. And the constitution does include impeachment.
2. There has been no closed door impeachment. This is an investigation. Open hearings will follow. Even right wing Trey Gowdy said you get to the truth better in closed door meetings. The real problem here, is Trump supporters want to block the truth.
3. You are making the ridiculous argument that an investigation means a person, here being Trump, has a right to due process, etc., during an investigation. That's nonsense. Do mafia members have a right to be present during investigations? Do mafia members have a right to be present during a grand jury investigation? Of course no. And Trump has no right to be present, or to have counsel there. And he has no right to question witnesses. But the 48 Republican legislators who often don't even attend the testimony, do have the right to ask questions of those being interviewed. And they do ask questions, and support Trump at the hearings.
4. You are simply making up supposed rights, to block smear the investigators.

[genuinlysensitive]

1. The House, not a small number of members has the power.

2. Thank you for admitting this is an impeachment proceeding! As such it is a Constitutional Legal proceeding and such they are violating the 5th and 6th amendments.

I know TDS is real, and people criticize Trump for being "too nice" to Kim Jun Un. But those people are the ones ACTING LIKE KIM JONG UN!

3. Calling witnesses, presenting evidence, creating transcripts, this is a LEGAL PROCEEDING. Every President, including the ones impeached has had their 5th and 6th amendment rights honored.

"Do mafia members have a right to be present during a grand jury investigation?" YES, seriously, I am getting a little embarrassed by your lack of knowledge here... EVERYONE has a constitutional right to testify in a Grand Jury and guess what? THE WHOLE jury gets to hear it! If we accept the "grand Jury" analogy what you are saying is only a small number of jurors selected by the prosecutor will be able to hear any of the evidence or ask questions. It is illegal prima facie!

4. These are not made up nor, supposed, all Americans have these rights, even you, not only that All former Presidents at this stage had these rights, because if not it would be UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

I don't know why you want to give up your rights and why you hate Trump so much you are willing to hand over all of your rights, and all Americans, just for the small possibility for making Trump look bad for something he not only didn't do but Biden admitted he and Obama did, but its not going to happen!

Hear is the actual transcript of the phone call:

www.scribd.com/.../President-Trump-Telephone-Conversation-with-President-Zelenskyy-of-Ukraine-Unclassified09-2019

Here is what Schiff said was in the transcript:

https://youtu.be/GN4CJ8MYLTY?t=214

Here is Biden admitting to quid pro quo and implicating Obama:

https://youtu.be/urTk6O4c0mU?t=27

Of course the truth won't come out in the Kim Jong Un style secret trials they got going in Congress!

[markscott]

genuin: Obviously, you think you can make up the rules that the house of representatives goes by. 1. There is no constitutional requirement for a vote, in order to start an impeachment investigation. Requiring a vote to start the investigation is simply made up by Trump supporters, with no constitutional basis. 2. Acting like Kim Jun Un? That's a laugh. They are simply doing their constitutional duty of oversight of the president, and investigating abuse of presidential power. Trump supporters just make up these things to protect Trump in his abuse of power. 3. You are simply making up supposed rights, to discredit the investigation of Trump's abuse of power, and endangerment of Americans.

[genuinlysensitive]

Feel free to actually read my take, the Constitution, any history book on previous impeachments. In the mean time stop pretending what these criminals that have hijacked the democrat party are doing is even remotely Constitutional! This is why democrats are going to loose. Everyone who isn't a cult member has already left, myself included. #walkaway

[markscott]

genui: Obviously, you are under the spell of a demagogue. To think bribery and extortion, for personal purposes, of an ally at war with our enemy, is not an impeachable offense, is ludicrous. I hope you don't mistakenly call yourself a patriot.

[genuinlysensitive]

Again, there is no bribery with Trump, only, admittedly with Biden/Obama. Since when is Ukraine at war with "our enemy"? They are in a Civil war. Are you talking about the literal Neo-Nazi factions backed by Obama?
I guess just like blackface, sexual assault, rape, and posing/wearing KKK robes, its ok when democrats back literal Neo-Nazis... right? By the way did you hear? The original whistleblower worked on the FAKE PISSGATE dossier! This is who the dictator wannabe democrats think is credible? Even their Unconstitutional Kangaroo Court couldn't stop the Truth!

www.huffpost.com/.../the-neo-nazi-question-in_b_4938747

[markscott]

genu: Again, you can only give garbage to protect Trump. It's Trump withholding vital military aid, in order to get Ukraine to announce a spurious investigation on Biden, who had done no wrong whatsoever. Trump did this for his own political purposes. Trump was involved in a shake down, that a mafia don would be proud of. Any true patriot would be appalled at this. Many Republicans, and Trump devotees, have shown their true colors. They are more devoted to Trump, and their own jobs, than they are to America.

[genuinlysensitive]

I am appalled. Appalled that this illegal, unconstitutional farce has been allowed. As for Trump "witholding" here is the transcript:

www.scribd.com/.../President-Trump-Telephone-Conversation-with-President-Zelenskyy-of-Ukraine-Unclassified09-2019

Here is Zelensky denying there was any quid pro quo:

time.com/.../

Here is his minister saying this as well:

www.reuters.com/.../us-envoy-sondland-did-not-link-biden-probe-to-aid-ukraine-minister-idUSKBN1XO1HK

Meanwhile you have a "whistleblower" Eric Ciaramella, fired for leaking, who says he heard something 3rd hand, who already worked on the FALSE pissgate dossier, and the Russian Hoax... dude, stop drinking the Kool-aid, no one is buying this bullshit!

Again here is Biden admitting to witholding $1billion in military aid unless the prosecutor investigating his son and the company he served on the board of was fired.

https://youtu.be/urTk6O4c0mU

[markscott]

Trump is the one taking away our rights. He has become the Imperial President. He extorts foreign powers for his own political gain, Trump tells those around him to ignore subpoenas, and himself refused to supply documentation required by subpoena.

[genuinlysensitive]

They were not subpoenas they were "Congressional Requests" for information. The media lied and said they were subpoenas. The whole "Separation of Powers" and the 3 branches I covered in mytake, why am I not surprised you didn't even bother to read it.

This isn't even just about Trump, this is about setting a precedent to TAKE EVERYONE'S Constitutional Rights, yours, mine, everyone's!

[markscott]

genuinlysensitive: You watch too much fake news on fox Trump support network. The House did issue subpoenas, and the subpoenas were ignored by the white house and others.

[genuinlysensitive]

Just because you disagree with something does not mean it originated from "fox news". The Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the Separation of Powers within all predate modern media, and are vital to the functioning of The United States of America, and the protection of all our Individual Liberties.

The Constitution Created 3 separate branches of government, The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial:



Although there are checks and balances on the Three Branches of Government, no one branch has absolute authority, despite what the Current House of Representatives think. Executive Privilege, is a modern term that the Executive Branch can go about its business without complying with Unconstitutional, illegal, partisan witch hunts from Congress:

www.britannica.com/topic/executive-privilege

"Executive privilege, principle in the United States, derived from common law, that provides immunity from subpoena to executive branch officials in the conduct of their governmental duties."

Although the term "executive privilege" was not coined until a few decades ago, the separation of powers has and it has been in American Law since George Washington:

georgewashingtonlegacy.com/executiveprivilege.html

In fact George Washington specifically denied a House of Representatives REQUEST (as they CANNOT subpoena The Executive), because it was... Wait for it... UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

If you would like to brush up on this topic you can read the take, or one of the links to the Constitution, itself.

[markscott]

You got it wrong. It's Trump that thinks he is the imperial president. He can ignore subpoenas, obstruct justice, by refusing to turn over required documents by subpoenas, tell people not to testify, despite having a tenuous link to him, etc. The constitution has a remedy for these abuses of power, but the Republicans protect Trump, and support his Imperial Presidency. This portends poorly for our democracy down the road. As Franklin said; 'It's a Republic, if you can keep it.' And an imperial presidency is just the kind of president that those who approved the constitution feared.

[genuinlysensitive]

I am not wrong it is American law. So is having borders, so is Article 1 section 2, which states the WHOLE HOUSE not a small secret Congressmen chosen by the Speaker, has the power to impeach, present evidence, and ask questions. So is the 5th amendment garanteeing in part the right to due process. So is the 6th amendment granting the right to council, and present witnesses/evidence in your favor.

Seriously read the take.

[markscott]

genuine: I read the take, but not seriously. You are making up things. You make applications where they do not apply.

[Juxtapose]

The Democrats are going to fail miserably and cost themselves any significant support they had. This is just a PR stunt or a very desperate measure.

[Anonymous]

Democrats hillary clinton just called her own parties Presidental canadites russian assets. Somethings fishy about hilary. Now trumps again being called out and impeachment? CNN Clinton fake news network needs to be shutdown. Hilary put on stand.

[Sha84]

trump is so guilty is very obvious to all intelligent people but republicans are about power not justice for all

[genuinlysensitive]

I am not a republican, I am a registered democrat, and proud American #walkaway.

https://youtu.be/4Pjs7uoOkag

Its clear you did not read the take, even the TLDR section, so I doubt you are very smart or educated yourself. If you would like to read it, and have a grown-up conversation in the future, let me know.

[supercutebutt]

This Trump shit is a cult. The man is a fucking sociopath. It's so obvious.

[genuinlysensitive]

Because you don't like him, that justifies throwing away the Constitution and Due process? What happens when someone doesn't like you?

[supercutebutt]

Trump is the one who throws away the Constitution. Wake up.

[genuinlysensitive]

It is obvious you didn't read mytake at all, if you did you would know that this illegal hearing is Unconstitutional in many ways; it violates Article 1 section 2, the 5th amendment, and the 6th Amendment. Democrats always say smart, educated voters vote democrat, but so far, I have seen none that can even read a mytake, even with a TLDR section, and debate on the merits. This is in part why I left. #walkaway

https://youtu.be/4Pjs7uoOkag

[supercutebutt]

Give it a rest.

[genuinlysensitive]

Wake up, it is Hillary and the current democrat party that is a cult! The fact that so many "democrats" have done a 180, on Liberty and Due Process, since November 2016, makes me sick!

[worldscolide]

It still won't make it past the senate..

[Rob171977]

Two simple words to sum all this up WHO CARES

[genuinlysensitive]

Who cares that a small group of criminals are ignoring the rule of law in an attempt to overthrow the elected government of the United States, and install a North Korean style dictatorship with Concentration Camps?