More than 500 law professors say Trump committed ‘impeachable conduct’
- Thread starter Kenneth Griffin
- Start date
Could be 5,000. As long as the GOP can find one that says he may not have, it will be good enough for them.
This! Wtf do a bunch of professors know about the constitution?!?!
You give them too much credit. They don't need to find a law prof who says he may not have.
They will just ask Donald Trump if he committed impeachable conduct and they will just go with what he says.
After all Donald Trump is a self proclaimed "Very stable genius" who is also a self proclaimed expert in many different fields including the military, terrorism, firefighting, history, theology, and law.
Last edited:
Always love when people bash the educated. So smrt.
I don't think random lawyers or law school professors have any unique insight. What is or is not an impeachable offense is a political decision to be made by the Senate.
That's true. They use the fact that Trump told Sondland to say it wasnt a quid pro quo as proof that it wasnt a quid pro quo so I am sure they would believe him if he said even if I did what they say I did that doesnt meet the threshold for impeachment.
That's bullspit.....Facebook and my Uncle Bob's emails that he forwards to me every morning say he did nuttin' wrong. ivory tower egg heads with their book learnin'
You don't need a law degree to reach that conclusion.
Liberal law professors think a republican president committed an impeachable offense? I'm shocked. They may be right, they may be wrong. Law professors get things wrong sometimes. Just ask president Obama on his changing views of what is and isn't constitutional.
they are all liberals? interesting, I see several of my former law professors listed and at least 30 years ago they weren't liberals.
I haven't seen the names on the list and obviously have no way to know, but are you seriously disputing that a large majority of law professors are liberal?
Are all 500 constitutional scholars with some level of expertise impeachment? Of course not. And yet they are allowing themselves to be portrayed in this manner. It is incredibly unethical for them in their role to pretend to have expertise they do not and then allow their false positioning to be used in this manner.
University professors get fired for these types of things even if they have tenure.
University professors get fired for these types of things even if they have tenure.
List the specific scholars that don't have the proper expertise.
Even constitutional law professors can have fluid opinions of constitutionality which change based upon politics. They are all just people. That is why I cited president Obama. Things he stated he couldn't do due to the constitution, he changed his mind on when it was politically advantageous to do so.
Well 2400 law professors signed an open letter stating that Kavanaugh was unfit for the Supreme Court. So I'd say only 500 is a ringing endorsement for Trump.
Any and all that have a different opinion than me.
That's one way to look at it. Another way of looking at it, almost 3000 law professors are against Kavanaugh and Trump.
FUNFACT: The Senate has NOTHING to do with "impeachment".
Other than trying the impeachment and returning the verdict, the Senate has nothing to do with it. You're amazing.
FUNFACT: The Senate doesn't "try" an impeachment. The HOUSE impeaches. The Senate votes on removal from office.
The HOUSE votes on the Articles of Impeachment
FUNFACT II: Per the Constitution, any crime outlined in an Article of Impeachment is un-pardonable. Ever. That means if the Senate identifies crimes, but shirks their Constitutional responsibilities, those crimes may be charged and tried at a future date, with no ability to "overturn" or stop them.
You always seem to portray yourself as a "lawyer" on here: you are a rather poor one if that is your profession. Your level of attention to legal details is woefully lacking.
Your an idiot. I'll quote it for you -
Article I, sec. 3, clause 6 -
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.
Indeed. That is AFTER the impeachment has occurred.
Again, legal language doesn't seem to be your strong point.
The fact that he was confirmed by a partisan Senate does not dismiss their opinions.
