Originally posted by Mountain Man
View Post
Telling your staff not to cooperate is not challenging the investigation in court. Its purposefully interfering in an investigation - obstruction.
Similarly, bribery and treason are crimes, but the definitions the Democrats include in their report are absurdly broad to the point of being all but meaningless. For instance, they define bribery as "when the President offers, solicits, or accepts something of personal value to influence his own official actions."
You dont appear to understand the emoluments clause, because it is there precisely to prevent what is outlined in the sentence you are complaining about. No, it is not acceptable to accept anything of personal value in return for specific official actions. It has never been ok. It has always been against the law and the constitution.
By that standard, what politician isn't guilty of "bribery"? They even go so far in their report as to defend the impeachment of Andrew Jackson which is widely regarded as a textbook example of how not to impeach a president! Furthermore, they attempt to establish the absurd rule that a president can be impeached without ever committing a crime, and that second- and third-hand hearsay -- which is to say office gossip -- is good enough evidence to remove a president from office.
I can't imagine you would be you be so supportive of the Democrat party's efforts if they were against a president you actually liked, but in your obsessive anti-Trump mindset, anything goes as long it removes the bad orange man from power.
Comment