Articles of Impeachment -- comment

Thank you for admitting Trump committed NO High Crimes and NO misdemeanors.

 

Border security, less wars, more prosperity. Could more be done? Yep, call your congressman or congresswomen today to address issues in our nation.

 

Which basically means it's enforced by the diktat of a judge, correct? AH, now we're getting somewhere. A Subpoena is a request, a warrant by contrast is an authoritative decree.

 

No. It is enforceable as it is. You comply or YOU go to a Judge and have the subpoena nullified. You cannot just sit on your hands. Until you get the Judge to set it aside, you are smoked.

 

In this case the dem clown show took a subpoena to court but decided they were in a hurry and could not wait for the court decision in January. They shelved the rest.

Apparently Congress cannot just simply breech the separation of powers on a whim. They have to let the third branch decide that.

 

What punitive measures are in place?

 

You go to a judge that will compel the recipient to comply, or you sit on your finger and sulk

 

A subpoena isn't a law

 

Link, please. (I have never heard that suggested before.)

 

Down Here.....it ranges from immediate arrest through to Contempt of Court. I dunno about the USA.

 

Not sure I understand what you are trying to say.

 

It is a potent instrument of the Law.

 

Isn't that an admission that the Shiff-Nadler impeachment process was purely politics? That's what you're saying, isn't it?

 

No more "political" than the Clinton Impeachment.

 

Maybe if you ignore Clinton's perjury, suborning perjury, obstruction and eight other offenses. What law has Trump broken again?

 

Good for it.
If a judge won't enforce it, it's useless

 

A judge can compel the recipient to comply

 

If you have a judge enforce it and apply the punitive measures.

 

True, but first, the recipient must take it to a Judge.

 

Yes he can, as the subpoena itself does.

 

Who will apply the punitive measures for failing to comply, if not a judge?

 

Are you aware of the separation of powers? In this case they sent strongly worded letters instead of subpoenas because they didn’t want to go to court. The court decides the differences between Congress and the Executive branches.

 

Okay, but then is this impeachment really legitimate? I don't mean "legal". The Clinton impeachment and the Trump impeachment are both "legal". I'm going to use some definitions of "legitimate" from Merriam-Webster to help define my question.

being exactly as intended or presented : neither spurious nor false
genuinely good, impressive, or capable of success
conforming to recognized principles or accepted rules and standards
fair or reasonable

So what is "legitimate" is really in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?

And shouldn't the impeachment and removal of a president be both legal and legitimate? In the Clinton case, the impeachment was legal, but by their votes and statements, the Senate decided that removal from office didn't pass the "legitimacy" test. Didn't they?

So when you say the impeachment of Trump is no more "political" than the Clinton impeachment, aren't you also taking a shot at the legitimacy of the Trump impeachment as well?

 

I will tell you what, Seth.

Here is my take.

Both of the Impeachments (Trump and Clinton) were (essentially) "Political".

And, just as with Clinton's, Trump's will enter the Senate with ZERO Chance of Conviction.

 

So the next time we have a Democrat President and Republican majority in the House you think we should investigate and work for impeachment the day of his inaugeration????.....or just this one?