When Obama was President, the right argued that the Constitution limited the power of Government.

You might have a point if only it occurred. You and the Dems are saying, "We are going to have ham and eggs! Now if only we had some ham and if only we had some eggs."

 

When Obama was president the Democrats said it was ok that the president make law through executive order and had unlimited power, now that a Republican is in office they have changed their mind, what is that Dims.

 

Who's Obama?

And how does this ... O'Bama fella (whoever that is) give license to Trump to commit criminal acts against We The People and overturn our Democratic Republic.

 

Yes. That is not exactly what Dershowitz said. He said the president cannot be impeached for what the Dems are now calling abuse of power. There is abuse of power and then there is abuse of power. Abuse of power is a nebulous indistinct undefined phrase in either common law or statute which can mean anything anybody wants it to mean, and so cannot be an illegality. Note that abuse of power or abuse of office, which is defined in statute, are not any of the things the Constitution says the president can be impeached for. I am aware that the Articles kind of use both terms but none of Trump's actions are anywhere near what is defined for abuse of office.

I know you cringe when Obama is mentioned because it must be painful, but for explanation Obama clearly violated the Abuse of Office statute during the Benghazi episode.

 

Sure. You are wrong. Conservatives still understand the bill of rights exists to limit the power of government. Just as the republicans impeached Clinton for lying about a sexual tryst and been acquitted, so Trump should be acquitted for attempting to gain a political advantage. Neither case caused meaningful harm to the U.S. Neither impeachment should have happened and we should stop doing this.

 

I tend to agree, but at least Clinton had real tangible illegal known evidence against him. Whether it rose to the level of impeachment is doubtful IMO... and yours. But Trump has ZERO of anything other than hate against him.

 

1. Alan Dershowitz is a Democrat. He is not part of the right.
2. Alan Dershowitz never said that the Constitution doesn't limit the power of Government.

So, what is your point of this thread?

 

ase

Hate and the desire to harm his political reputation. Personally, I think it has backfired.

 

Yeah, he responds as a successful and experienced commercial real estate contractor in New York City like he is, which is much different than the more manby pamby demeanor of other presidents (with maybe the exception of Jackson ) and not at all what the Democrats are used to and they know not what the hell to do. True this bothers ands upsets many. But Trump still draws tens of thousands of enthusiastic people wherever he goes.

 

I think the hatred is deeper than that. Trump is a reformer. He has attacked the "swamp" and the "swamp" hates it and fears it. Nearly everything he does upsets the "way we have always done it." People tend to fear and avoid change. It is personal for them.

 

All that is correct, I agree. The swamp hate stemmed from their suspicion that Trump meant his campaign promise to drain the swamp. There were thousands in the bureaucracy who wanted to do everything they could to keep or get the president out of the white house (including the whistle blower it is reported.)

 

Wrong!!! Damn wrong! He said he could not be impeached for abuse of power... period!

You're attempt at twisting this fact is indication that you are as disturbed as we are about this allegation. That's a good thing!

Clearly....

25 CFR § 11.448 - Abuse of office.​

§ 11.448 Abuse of office.
A person acting or purporting to act in an official capacity or taking advantage of such actual or purported capacity commits a misdemeanor if, knowing that his or her conduct is illegal, he or she:

(a) Subjects another to arrest, detention, search, seizure, mistreatment, dispossession, assessment, lien or other infringement of personal or property rights; or

(b) Denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity.​

 

What LAW did Trump break? "Abuse of power" is not a law.

 

Name a POTUS that didn't abuse their power and was impeached for it besides Trump.

 

The house proved he could be impeached for abuse of power. He could have been impeached for wearing mismatched socks for that matter. Impeachment isn't about laws. It is about politics.

 

How would the bill of rights limit the powers of the President if he decides to abuse his power?

If the President decided to issue an executive order instructing the military to go out and confiscate all guns in the hands of the public Or order Seal Teams to covertly steal the weapons of all the citizens and destroy them.

He has power over the military, it's not bribery, it's not treason.... so, according to Dershowitz, he can't be removed.

It's just an example but I want to understand your position.

 

Who the hell cares if he's a Democrat or... what he is! His argument is just as idiotic one way or another. And the right embraces that idiotic argument.

My point is easy. Pay attention. I'll dumb it down for you as much as I can. He said that a President cannot be remove for abuse of power. So how does the constitution, in reality, limit him? Is it just by saying "No no no... don't do that... behave like a good boy" and that's it?

 

Your argument is so compelling. I can't believe the founders didn't discuss this prior to writing the Constitution and record their thoughts for posterity.

They could have used the word "maladministration".

You don't see that word much.

Such a missed opportunity.

 

Definitely not Trump. Because Trump is a POTUS that did abuse his power and was impeached for it.

 

True. But I'm pretty sure Dershewitz knew that before he made his remarks.

 

Are you paying attention? It's not my argument. It's Dershowitz's. And it's beyond idiotic.

I actually think they may be bluffing. I don't think in the end they'll go with such an argument. It would be too embarrassing for Republicans. I'm sure at least Lindsey Graham must have pleaded with them to not use that nonsense. But... you never know....

 

"Abuse of power" does not equal unlimited government. And yes the people decide except the today Schiff said the people could not longer be trusted to vote for the President and the Congress should decide if a President to serve. Is that an abuse of power?

 

Why do so many on the right repeat that but they don't answer the followup question: If the President cannot be removed for abuse of power, what limits his power? He can just not follow any laws and claim that Article 2 gives him that right. As, in fact, Trump has done.

 

The Constitution. You guys keep talking breaking the law and Trump is not accused of breaking the law.

 

Or, they decided not to be a bunch of shrieking freaks