Professor Dershowitz: Six ways the Democrat House violated the Constitution

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
68,915
Reaction score
17,097
Points
2,290
“We all hear that the president is not above the law, but Congress is not above the law: When Congress impeached the president earlier this week, they committed six independent violations of the Constitution,” Dershowitz said on “Saturday Report.”

“First, it violated the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from abridging free speech. By impeaching Trump for free speech that was protected by the unanimous Supreme Court decision in the case of Brandenburg versus Ohio, the First Amendment was violated.”


“Second, the House violated the substantive impeachment criteria in the Constitution, which limits impeachment to ‘treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.’ It cannot be a high crime or misdemeanor for a president to deliver remarks protected by the Constitution.

If Congress can pass no law abridging free speech, then it certainly cannot pass one impeachment resolution abridging free speech of a president.”


“Third, it violated due process by giving the president and his legal team no opportunity to present a defense or to formally challenge the articles of impeachment.”


“Fourth, by trying to put Trump on trial in the Senate after he leaves office, the House violated the provision that allows Congress to remove a sitting president [emphasis added] and, only if the Senate decides to remove him by a vote, could it add the sanction of future disbarment from running for office.

Congress has no authority over any president once he leaves office. If Congress had the power to impeach a private citizen to prevent him from running in the future, it could claim jurisdiction over millions of Americans eligible to be candidates for president in 2024.

This would be a dangerous reading of the Constitution that would allow the party in Control of Congress to impeach a popular candidate and preclude him from running.”


“Fifth, if the Senate were to conduct a trial of a private citizen, including a former president, then it would violate both the spirt and the letter of the prohibition against bills of attainder.

In Great Britain, Parliament had the authority to try kings, other officials and private citizens. The Framers of the Constitution rejected that power of Congress and also limited its trial jurisdiction to impeaching government officials only while they served in office and could be removed.

To conduct a show trial of a past president would be in violation of the prohibition against bills of attainder.”


“Sixth, Congress voted in favor of a resolution calling on [then] Vice President Mike Pence to violate the 25th Amendment of the Constitution by falsely declaring that Trump is unable to continue to perform his duties.

It is clear that the Framers of the 25th Amendment had intended it to apply on to presidents disrupted by physical illnesses, such as a stroke or by obvious mental incapacity, such as advanced Alzheimer’s, or by being unconscious after having been shot.

To call on the vice president to improperly invoke the 25th Amendment was to act in violation of the Constitution.”




You'll have to on the click on the link to see the various comments of what the Professor said, but two I'd like to point out: One is that Dershoitz is correct. If they can impeach a private citizen which would stop anybody they targeted from running for the office of the presidency, then the Democrats could impeach any threatening contender from running against such a misfit like Joe Biden. And don't say Democrats would never do such a thing because these power hungry SOB"s will do anything they can get away with. Secondly is the fact that the reason Trump couldn't mass deport illegals in the country is because our law allows those invaders the right to defend themselves from such actions. So how is it invaders get the right of defense and a US President doesn't?

The congressional oath of office:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

Nancy Piglosi without a doubt violated her oath of office, and she should be removed.
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
157,477
Reaction score
21,747
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
All-right! Now according to Dershowitz you can say anything you want even if it causes people to riot...There is now no limitations on speech and all terroristic threatening charges must be dismissed that are on file and being being processed in the USA.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
63,798
Reaction score
14,291
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
"Fuck the Constitution, and fuck you."

-- The Democratic Party of the United States
What is the penalty for violating your oath of office in the Congress? It seems to me there is none, and people who violate their oath should be removed from their seat.
That's racist. Because reasons.

There, USMB leftists. I covered your response for you.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
63,798
Reaction score
14,291
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
All-right! Now according to Dershowitz you can say anything you want even if it causes people to riot...There is now no limitations on speech and all terroristic threatening charges must be dismissed that are on file and being being processed in the USA.
The Democrats who encouraged riots and violence will be glad to hear that.
 
OP
Ray From Cleveland

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
68,915
Reaction score
17,097
Points
2,290
All-right! Now according to Dershowitz you can say anything you want even if it causes people to riot...There is now no limitations on speech and all terroristic threatening charges must be dismissed that are on file and being being processed in the USA.
The problem is that what Trump said never incited a riot. That was yet another leftist lie. The attack took place while Trump was giving a speech miles away. It was a planned insurrection that even the FBI admits to. In fact they warned the Capital police about it days earlier. So how can you impeach a President for something he never did?
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
63,798
Reaction score
14,291
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
All-right! Now according to Dershowitz you can say anything you want even if it causes people to riot...There is now no limitations on speech and all terroristic threatening charges must be dismissed that are on file and being being processed in the USA.
The problem is that what Trump said never incited a riot. That was yet another leftist lie. The attack took place while Trump was giving a speech miles away. It was a planned insurrection that even the FBI admits to. In fact they warned the Capital police about it days earlier. So how can you impeach a President for something he never did?
Ask Democrats and their bootlickers.

Oh, sorry -- you did.
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
35,686
Reaction score
11,847
Points
1,410
All-right! Now according to Dershowitz you can say anything you want even if it causes people to riot...There is now no limitations on speech and all terroristic threatening charges must be dismissed that are on file and being being processed in the USA.
..if they impeached/etc every politician that gave a ''fiery''' speech, they would have to get rid of over half of them--DUH
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
58,763
Reaction score
16,589
Points
2,180
Location
In a Republic, actually
“We all hear that the president is not above the law, but Congress is not above the law: When Congress impeached the president earlier this week, they committed six independent violations of the Constitution,” Dershowitz said on “Saturday Report.”

“First, it violated the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from abridging free speech. By impeaching Trump for free speech that was protected by the unanimous Supreme Court decision in the case of Brandenburg versus Ohio, the First Amendment was violated.”


“Second, the House violated the substantive impeachment criteria in the Constitution, which limits impeachment to ‘treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.’ It cannot be a high crime or misdemeanor for a president to deliver remarks protected by the Constitution.

If Congress can pass no law abridging free speech, then it certainly cannot pass one impeachment resolution abridging free speech of a president.”


“Third, it violated due process by giving the president and his legal team no opportunity to present a defense or to formally challenge the articles of impeachment.”


“Fourth, by trying to put Trump on trial in the Senate after he leaves office, the House violated the provision that allows Congress to remove a sitting president [emphasis added] and, only if the Senate decides to remove him by a vote, could it add the sanction of future disbarment from running for office.

Congress has no authority over any president once he leaves office. If Congress had the power to impeach a private citizen to prevent him from running in the future, it could claim jurisdiction over millions of Americans eligible to be candidates for president in 2024.

This would be a dangerous reading of the Constitution that would allow the party in Control of Congress to impeach a popular candidate and preclude him from running.”


“Fifth, if the Senate were to conduct a trial of a private citizen, including a former president, then it would violate both the spirt and the letter of the prohibition against bills of attainder.

In Great Britain, Parliament had the authority to try kings, other officials and private citizens. The Framers of the Constitution rejected that power of Congress and also limited its trial jurisdiction to impeaching government officials only while they served in office and could be removed.

To conduct a show trial of a past president would be in violation of the prohibition against bills of attainder.”


“Sixth, Congress voted in favor of a resolution calling on [then] Vice President Mike Pence to violate the 25th Amendment of the Constitution by falsely declaring that Trump is unable to continue to perform his duties.

It is clear that the Framers of the 25th Amendment had intended it to apply on to presidents disrupted by physical illnesses, such as a stroke or by obvious mental incapacity, such as advanced Alzheimer’s, or by being unconscious after having been shot.

To call on the vice president to improperly invoke the 25th Amendment was to act in violation of the Constitution.”




You'll have to on the click on the link to see the various comments of what the Professor said, but two I'd like to point out: One is that Dershoitz is correct. If they can impeach a private citizen which would stop anybody they targeted from running for the office of the presidency, then the Democrats could impeach any threatening contender from running against such a misfit like Joe Biden. And don't say Democrats would never do such a thing because these power hungry SOB"s will do anything they can get away with. Secondly is the fact that the reason Trump couldn't mass deport illegals in the country is because our law allows those invaders the right to defend themselves from such actions. So how is it invaders get the right of defense and a US President doesn't?

The congressional oath of office:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

Nancy Piglosi without a doubt violated her oath of office, and she should be removed.
Dershowitz failed to cite the Supreme Court ruling which held that the House’s actions were ‘un-Constitutional.’

Acts of government are presumed to be Constitutional until the Supreme Court rules otherwise (see, US. v. Morrison (2000)).

Absent such a ruling, this is nothing but subjective opinion and speculation, completely devoid of merit or authority.
 

colfax_m

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
22,521
Reaction score
7,176
Points
265
Dear C-fax,
You don't know spit!

Regards,
Alan D.
I know that Dershowitz was great friends with Epstein.

Care to explain the nature of your friendship to the class?
 

B. Kidd

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
27,121
Reaction score
9,818
Points
900
Location
Western Lands
..if they impeached/etc every politician that gave a ''fiery''' speech, they would have to get rid of over half of them--DUH
I’m trying to think of the last politician that gave a speech that lead directly to a riot.

Any ideas?
You're paralyzed in a State Media narrative that is sooo, yesterday.
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
9,315
Reaction score
1,667
Points
160
Location
North Carolina
“We all hear that the president is not above the law, but Congress is not above the law: When Congress impeached the president earlier this week, they committed six independent violations of the Constitution,” Dershowitz said on “Saturday Report.”

“First, it violated the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from abridging free speech. By impeaching Trump for free speech that was protected by the unanimous Supreme Court decision in the case of Brandenburg versus Ohio, the First Amendment was violated.”


“Second, the House violated the substantive impeachment criteria in the Constitution, which limits impeachment to ‘treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.’ It cannot be a high crime or misdemeanor for a president to deliver remarks protected by the Constitution.

If Congress can pass no law abridging free speech, then it certainly cannot pass one impeachment resolution abridging free speech of a president.”


“Third, it violated due process by giving the president and his legal team no opportunity to present a defense or to formally challenge the articles of impeachment.”


“Fourth, by trying to put Trump on trial in the Senate after he leaves office, the House violated the provision that allows Congress to remove a sitting president [emphasis added] and, only if the Senate decides to remove him by a vote, could it add the sanction of future disbarment from running for office.

Congress has no authority over any president once he leaves office. If Congress had the power to impeach a private citizen to prevent him from running in the future, it could claim jurisdiction over millions of Americans eligible to be candidates for president in 2024.

This would be a dangerous reading of the Constitution that would allow the party in Control of Congress to impeach a popular candidate and preclude him from running.”


“Fifth, if the Senate were to conduct a trial of a private citizen, including a former president, then it would violate both the spirt and the letter of the prohibition against bills of attainder.

In Great Britain, Parliament had the authority to try kings, other officials and private citizens. The Framers of the Constitution rejected that power of Congress and also limited its trial jurisdiction to impeaching government officials only while they served in office and could be removed.

To conduct a show trial of a past president would be in violation of the prohibition against bills of attainder.”


“Sixth, Congress voted in favor of a resolution calling on [then] Vice President Mike Pence to violate the 25th Amendment of the Constitution by falsely declaring that Trump is unable to continue to perform his duties.

It is clear that the Framers of the 25th Amendment had intended it to apply on to presidents disrupted by physical illnesses, such as a stroke or by obvious mental incapacity, such as advanced Alzheimer’s, or by being unconscious after having been shot.

To call on the vice president to improperly invoke the 25th Amendment was to act in violation of the Constitution.”




You'll have to on the click on the link to see the various comments of what the Professor said, but two I'd like to point out: One is that Dershoitz is correct. If they can impeach a private citizen which would stop anybody they targeted from running for the office of the presidency, then the Democrats could impeach any threatening contender from running against such a misfit like Joe Biden. And don't say Democrats would never do such a thing because these power hungry SOB"s will do anything they can get away with. Secondly is the fact that the reason Trump couldn't mass deport illegals in the country is because our law allows those invaders the right to defend themselves from such actions. So how is it invaders get the right of defense and a US President doesn't?

The congressional oath of office:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

Nancy Piglosi without a doubt violated her oath of office, and she should be removed.
Dershowitz failed to cite the Supreme Court ruling which held that the House’s actions were ‘un-Constitutional.’

Acts of government are presumed to be Constitutional until the Supreme Court rules otherwise (see, US. v. Morrison (2000)).

Absent such a ruling, this is nothing but subjective opinion and speculation, completely devoid of merit or authority.
It's funny watching these Trump Humpers take anything Dershowitz says and run with it like it is the law of the land. Dershowitz and Giuliani are two of the oldest fools running today.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top