Jpizzle

Not the new Donald Trump Presidency thread

75,664 posts in this topic

The more I think about the Ukraine scandal, the more I think that one of the articles of impeachment should be bribery.

Yes, federal bribery statutes set difficult standards for prosecutors to prove.  However, the Constitution was written well before those laws, which means that the Founding Fathers weren’t talking about those statutes when they listed bribery in the Constitution.

And from what I’ve been reading, it seems like Trump’s actions would absolutely fit into the Founders’ definition of soliciting a bribe or bribery more generally.  So Dems wouldn’t have to prove each element of a federal law, but instead just demonstrate that Trump’s misbehavior fits bribery as the Founders understood it.  

There’s no indication that Dems are moving in that direction, but I think it’s something they should consider.

Sn4tteRBoxXeR likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mdrake34 said:

Because of the inflammation at the surgical site, Waylon doesn’t really have control over his ***  hole, so he’s just been leaking ****. We’ve washed every blanket in the house. He won’t take a ****, he just keeps seeping boom boom. 

 

CommentPhotos.com_1406633191.jpg

Serge and SpongeDad like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The third level of Dante’s Inferno is a Boston Terrier’s leaky ***  hole. My wife and I are on the verge of nervous breakdowns. We’re going to board him with the vet tomorrow so they can watch him and keep the wound clean. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mdrake34 said:

The third level of Dante’s Inferno is a Boston Terrier’s leaky ***  hole. My wife and I are on the verge of nervous breakdowns. We’re going to board him with the vet tomorrow so they can watch him and keep the wound clean. 

Have you considered diapers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Leon Troutsky said:

Have you considered diapers?

The incision is right above his butt hole. I think it would just smear feces on it more than is already happening. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SpongeDad said:

Totally forgot about daylight savings time last night. Me and Mike partied hard. I smoked some **** called "Money Bag Runtz" around 2am. I got high as **** and came back in the house to see that it was 1 am again. Weed plus time travel really fcks with your mind. 

Gone are the days when I could get some weed and all we ever asked was it homegrown or not (cuz homegrown sucked)!!  :lol: 

SpongeDad likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s a great Lawfare article about the original meaning of “bribery” and why meeting specific conditions of federal bribery statutes isn’t necessary for impeachment...

https://www.lawfareblog.com/constitution-says-bribery-impeachable-what-does-mean

^^^Given all the evidence that’s come out showing a quid pro quo, I’m leaning towards thinking the Dems should have that as an article of impeachment.  

Also, it seems likely that Trump’s behavior COULD actually meet all the elements of federal bribery laws, but the Dems don’t need to prove that for impeachment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Leon Troutsky said:

Here’s a great Lawfare article about the original meaning of “bribery” and why meeting specific conditions of federal bribery statutes isn’t necessary for impeachment...

https://www.lawfareblog.com/constitution-says-bribery-impeachable-what-does-mean

^^^Given all the evidence that’s come out showing a quid pro quo, I’m leaning towards thinking the Dems should have that as an article of impeachment.  

Also, it seems likely that Trump’s behavior COULD actually meet all the elements of federal bribery laws, but the Dems don’t need to prove that for impeachment.

I read half of that but I don't know man... Republicans don't give a ****. Even if I know the legal arguments for impeachment, that knowledge won't do me any good. It's not going to win over Republicans and my mind is already made up... that there is enough evidence for impeachment and removal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sn4tteRBoxXeR said:

I read half of that but I don't know man... Republicans don't give a ****. Even if I know the legal arguments for impeachment, that knowledge won't do me any good. It's not going to win over Republicans and my mind is already made up... that there is enough evidence for impeachment and removal.

The entire game is convincing the American public that Trump’s actions warrant removal.  Bribery is much simpler to explain than how abuse of power is a “high crime and misdemeanor”.  

Trump proposed a corrupt exchange with a foreign government — military aid (an official act) in exchange for helping his political campaign (a thing of personal value).  That’s bribery as the Founders defined it. And it’s clearly impeachable because the Founders actually listed it as impeachable.

I think it’s a much simpler argument to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, the bribery issue is why I think that Trump has been so loud yelling “no quid pro quo” all the time.  I think his lawyers told him that if prosecutors can establish a quid pro quo that he could be prosecuted for bribery.  

IOW, it might be about Trump’s legal culpability out of office more than an impeachment defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One last thing about the bribery stuff...

I think the big tell will be when the Judiciary Committee holds hearings.  The first few weeks of hearings will be the Intelligence Committee and it will still be fact-gathering.  But once they’re done, they’ll send it over to Judiciary to consider articles of impeachment.

The Judiciary Committee will almost definitely (like almost 100% chance) call constitutional scholars to offer public testimony about the scope and nature of impeachment.  If Dems start asking those scholars about bribery then it suggests they are heading that direction.  If they limit their questions to things like “abuse of power” and “high crimes and misdemeanors”, then it suggests a general “abuse of power” focus to the articles.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now