Nadler’s appearance of hypocrisy

[hislegacy]

The last time this committee considered impeaching a president in 1998, Democratic leaders, including Chairman Nadler, insisted the president deserves the presumption of innocence, the right to confront witnesses, and “due process quadrupled.”

Have Democrats lived up to that standard? Not even close. Today marks the first time the president’s lawyers have been invited to participate, but, rather than asking questions of fact witnesses, the president’s counsel gets to question law professors. I don’t think that meets Democrats’ standard of “due process quadrupled.”

 

[Albion]

Did you catch the latest gimmick charge being used against the president by Nadler? It's #6 or something like that since just last week.

He said that the president must be impeached because he thinks himself a "monarch" instead of a democratically elected leader. This charge, creative as it is absurd, has a purpose. We have heard it said that the purpose behind the impeachment is to damage the reputation of the president, thus helping the Democrats in the upcoming election. Nadler appeared to verify that thinking during his nationally televised interview today.

 

[whatbogsends]

The last time this committee considered impeaching a president in 1998, Democratic leaders, including Chairman Nadler, insisted the president deserves the presumption of innocence, the right to confront witnesses, and “due process quadrupled.”

Have Democrats lived up to that standard? Not even close. Today marks the first time the president’s lawyers have been invited to participate, but, rather than asking questions of fact witnesses, the president’s counsel gets to question law professors. I don’t think that meets Democrats’ standard of “due process quadrupled.”

And, surprise, surprise, Republicans have done the same thing.

Politicians changing their stances based on the party of the people involved? Color me shocked.

Have Republicans held to their standards they set during Clinton's impeachment? Not even close.

Lindsey Graham during Clinton's impeachment:

“You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job (as president) in this constitutional republic if this body determines your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role, because impeachment is not about punishment,” he said. “Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”

https://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article217126395.html

 

[GodLovesCats]

Did you catch the latest gimmick charge being used against the president by Nadler? It's #6 or something like that since just last week.

He said that the president must be impeached because he thinks himself a "monarch" instead of a democratically elected leader. This charge, creative as it is absurd, has a purpose. We have heard it said that the purpose behind the impeachment is to damage the reputation of the president, thus helping the Democrats in the upcoming election. Nadler appeared to verify that thinking during his nationally televised interview today.

There is no reason to deny Donald Trump MUST be impeached for what everyone KNOWS HE DID.

 

[Bobber]

There is no reason to deny Donald Trump MUST be impeached for what everyone KNOWS HE DID.

Sure you don't want to dial that back? I'd suggest it's extremely presumptuous for you to claim YOU KNOW what everyone believes which according to you is something wrong.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Sure you don't want to dial that back? I'd suggest it's extremely presumptuous for you to claim YOU KNOW what everyone believes which according to you is something wrong.

It is obvious the Republicans have been trying to prevent the Democrats from getting information proving guilt by ignoring subpoenas and spouting lies. If they were really innocent, they would want to testify and hand over all of the documents Democrats subpoenaed to prove no wrongdoing occured. In addition, new reports have been spilling out about the same people who argue Trump did nothing wrong being involved themselves.

 

[Belk]

The last time this committee considered impeaching a president in 1998, Democratic leaders, including Chairman Nadler, insisted the president deserves the presumption of innocence, the right to confront witnesses, and “due process quadrupled.”

Have Democrats lived up to that standard? Not even close. Today marks the first time the president’s lawyers have been invited to participate, but, rather than asking questions of fact witnesses, the president’s counsel gets to question law professors. I don’t think that meets Democrats’ standard of “due process quadrupled.”

What exactly is a "fact witness"? How do they differ from a regular old witness?

 

[iluvatar5150]

The last time this committee considered impeaching a president in 1998, Democratic leaders, including Chairman Nadler, insisted the president deserves the presumption of innocence, the right to confront witnesses, and “due process quadrupled.”

Have Democrats lived up to that standard? Not even close. Today marks the first time the president’s lawyers have been invited to participate, but, rather than asking questions of fact witnesses, the president’s counsel gets to question law professors. I don’t think that meets Democrats’ standard of “due process quadrupled.”

This is a pretty absurd comparison. In the Clinton impeachment, the House didn't have much in the way of hearings since Ken Starr did all the leg work. In the Senate, the witness testimony consisted of exerpts of pre-recorded depositions.

Impeachment of Bill Clinton - Wikipedia

Trump hasn't been denied any due process.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

We have heard it said that the purpose behind the impeachment is to damage the reputation of the president, thus helping the Democrats in the upcoming election.



Nadler appeared to verify that thinking during his nationally televised interview today.

Good luck with that.
Guess it's all they got?
M-Bob