"Congress has no business investigating the president for conduct that occurred before he took office." That's hilarious! Isn't that what tthe GOP Congress spent much of the 1990's doing??????
Clinton was impeached for lying under oath and arranging for Monica to furnish a false affidavit to the Court, and for obstructing Justice. He committed these crimes while holding office. Criminal Investigation is an Executive Branch Function, the Legislative Branch does not wield this Federal power. Congress has identified three general types of conduct that constitute grounds for impeachment: (1) improperly exceeding or abusing the powers of the office; (2) behavior incompatible with the function and purpose of the office; and (3) misusing the office for an improper purpose or for personal gain.
this may be complicated for Congress via the courts. Congress wrote a statute and Congress wrote its own remedy to its abuse in the statute. That remedy required a joint resolution and a presidential signature or a two thirds supermajority to override a veto. SCOTUS may not be inclined to intervene to protect Congressional authority that Congress handed over in 1976, because Congress cannot find the votes to use its own chosen remedy. Then Congress waits to find a President who will willingly sign away his own power and meanwhile we can hope someone else with standing can come up with legal argument broad enough to nullify the declaration or the funding mechanism he chooses to fund his wall and that the court will do something more broad than nibble away at a few of the explicit powers provided under the act, which trouble the plaintiff's cicumstance materially.
Not sure extreme embarrassment reaches the standard of a high misdemeanor, but if it did, the case is already in the can and the vote is a bipartisan sweep
your first sentence was accurate, your second one was a conclusion you shared with Henry Hyde but not the Senate. He was in fact acquitted of all charges, so it stays your own personal assertion with no more judicial merit than your opinion on most absorbent toilet paper. 'Criminal investigation' is not a power. Its an activity that even a private investigator, common journalist or a senate committee can engage in. Indictment, the formal request for a warrant, detainment, and prosecution are executive powers which are applied to the process when the executive does the investigating. .
And Arkansas Bar, which disbarred him, and The US Supreme Court which removed his privilege to practice before The Supreme Court. It's certainly not a power granted to Congress. Article 1 states: All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. There is no grant of power to Congress to investigate crimes. You have never wondered why all criminal referrals are sent to DOJ, a part of the Executive Branch, rather than Congress completing the criminal investigation? Think! Well they may engage in investigations in order to produce legislation, but not in production of criminal convictions. Consider SCOTUS' decision in Kilbourn v. Thompson, a House investigation into the bankruptcy of Jay Cooke and Company had exceeded its authority simply because because no clear legislation could result from the inquiry. Yup! You're getting it!
What lawsuits? Likely there will be one and the Court will hear it almost immediately, they will side with Trump and the construction will begin.
And what? A president doesn't need to do anything you know. But when there is a national emergency it's probably a good idea if they do. You're reaching so hard for anything at this point aren't you? I can smell your desperation through my monitor and what a sweet smell it is.
An emergency declaration by Trump will lead to lawsuits. Lots of them. WASHINGTON - If President Donald Trump declares a national emergency to construct a wall on the southern border, only one thing is certain: There will be lawsuits. Lots of them. From California to Congress, the litigation will multiply. Litigants will file suit in numerous jurisdictions.. Want to Challenge Trump’s Border Wall ‘Emergency’? Get in Line Now that he has declared a “national emergency,” all that stands between President Donald Trump and the money he wants to pay for his promised border wall is the American judiciary. And the Constitution. And the attorneys general of California, Nevada, New Mexico and New York. And a vast array of land owners and local governments. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...hallenge-trump-s-border-emergency-get-in-line Oh, and Congress.
Educate yourself.. or don't. Not my job to do that for you nor to feed into your contrived denial nonsense.
1200 kids have died in gun violence in the past year, but that doesn't qualify as a national emergency, but some brown people sneaking across the border in ever shrinking numbers, according to the president's own tweets, does. You don't even understand how stupid this clown sounds because it's music to your own ears.
Mostly documentaries I've seen on smuggling and the techniques they use. I've found the topic interesting since I was a teenager. It's not a political thing for me. And the one thing that everyone seemed to agree on, was that there was nothing that would work for long. Smuggling is a interesting topic, there are so many ways to do it that I believe as long as there is a demand there will be a supply. And what if we spend all the money needed and got the wall that Trump wants just to find out it didn't do much? What then? And whats up with Mexico paying? I don't see that happening. Do you? And I don't mean some creative money shuffle. I mean a strait forward Mexico cuts a check.
Yes the bar association investigates ethical breaches of its members. It does not convict them of crimes. The Arksansas Bar decided Clinton breached his duty as an officer of the court. They did not hold him criminally liable for Obstruction because they did not apply any of the legal standards involved in a criminal conviction. As for your citation. You aren't getting it. As long as any results of said investigation 1. may result in a legislative purpose or 2. are sent to proper executive authorities for further formal inquiry / prosecution there is no conflict at all. In other words They just have to do the referring you mentioned. Its about what powers congress intends to employ in their investigation and what they do with information they get. All they have to do is investigate all they want and do their civic duty and provide what they learn to the FBI or Justice Dept, or state attorney general or state police rather than acting as a substitute and detaining or jailing them on their own authority. That's what they tried to do in this case They cited Kilbourn with contempt of Congress for refusing to submit to questioning and then The speaker ordered the House Sargent of Arms to literally hold him in custody as a punishment for disobeying the House summons instead of referring the matter to the executive branch for enforcement. Its when Congress replaces its process and results for a co-existing executive process as it did in this case, and seeks to enforce its sentence on persons who are not members of Congress as it did here that the conflict between the branches occurred.. You see evidence of the House or senate turning their sargent of arms into a jailer here?
I didn't insult anyone. Clean up your own house before claiming someone's windows are dirty. And get a new writer....
Keep wondering, it's apparent it hasn't improved your current knowledge on the subject. They have provided border funding in previous appropriation bills. And the crisis on the border has gotten worse. It wasn't until the NDP took control of the house that Politics have replaced National priorities. Where do you think the funding came from for new wall construction in NM and Texas? https://www.kob.com/new-mexico-news/border-wall-santa-teresa/4858006/ https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/border-wall-construction-project-begin-texas
Correct. Didn't have to address the emergency on the border by declaration, if Congress was able to respond quickly. Why do you think the President is given the power to declare an Emergency? This seems to be a question you're really afraid to answer.
So I see you pushed the limits of your intellect to come up with this one. The Southern Border is actually a metaphor for Progressives and their New Democratic Party, incomplete, and never able to do the job it was promised to do.
The only reason anyone ever knew about Monica Lewinsky was because of an investigation into Clinton's activities BEFORE HE WAS PRESIDENT, that went on for years. Try again. My point stands, and you did make a fool of yourself.
I don't believe Congress needs to be involved, although it sould. There are only two of the list that the right wing spin doctors that involved usurping the approporiation process. He also, in his own words, undermined his own argument in court, and did so on live television All Trump really cares about is distracting his base from his humiliating legislative defeat. His entire buffonish performance yesterday was aimed entirely at entertaining his reactionary base. That is why he repeated every discredited lie on the topic. He was pushing their buttons.
Sometimes trump is too honest for his own good And in this case he is wrong We need border security as soon as possible