16 conservative lawyers support "expeditious" impeachment inquiry

2,522 Views | 18 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by Sam Lowry
GoneGirl
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Signers include George Conway, former acting U.S. attorney general Peter Keisler; former state dept. official Andrew Sagor; and Trevot Potter, former chair of the Federal Election Commission.

https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2019/10/10/16-conservative-lawyers-say-they-support-expeditious-impeachment-inquiry/?kw=16%20Conservative%20Lawyers%20Say%20They%20Support%20%27Expeditious%27%20Impeachment%20Inquiry&utm_source=email&utm_medium=enl&utm_campaign=afternoonupdate&utm_content=20191010&utm_term=nlj

Sixteen conservative lawyers from major U.S. law firms, law schools and think tanks on Thursday asserted their support for an "expeditious" impeachment investigation, arguing in a new public statement that President Donald Trump has abused the office of the presidency.

The letter, published online by the conservative lawyers' group Checks & Balances, declared based on recent events involving Trump's efforts to enlist foreign help to investigate political rivals that "the president is abusing the office of the presidency for personal political objectives."

"We believe the acts revealed publicly over the past several weeks are fundamentally incompatible with the president's oath of office, his duties as commander in chief, and his constitutional obligation to 'take care that the laws be faithfully executed,'" the Checks & Balances letter said. "These acts, based on what has been revealed to date, are a legitimate basis for an expeditious impeachment investigation, vote in the House of Representatives and potential trial in the Senate."

Trump has dismissed claims that his call with the Ukraine president in July violated any law, and the White House counsel's office this week declared it would not cooperate with a House impeachment inquiry that was derided as "constitutionally defective." White House Counsel Pat Cipollone's eight-page letter to the House accused Democrats of using impeachment to try to negate the results of the 2016 election.
...
"I am disgusted by the conduct of Republican senators who pose as reputable people, but shamelessly hide under rocks instead of calling out the president's horrendous behavior as the gross misconduct that they know it to be," Ayer told The Washington Post.

The law professors who signed the letter include Harvard Law School professor Charles Fried, a former Reagan administration U.S. solicitor general; Orin Kerr of University of California Berkeley School of Law; J.W. Verret of George Mason University Antonin Scalia School of Law; and Jonathan Adler of Case Western Reserve University School of Law.

Thursday's letter came with a disclaimer, repeated on earlier statements, that said "each of us speaks and acts solely in our individual capacities, and our views should not be attributed to any organization with which we may be affiliated."

Arnold & Porter's John Bellinger III, who has signed earlier Checks & Balances statements, did not appear on Thursday's open letter. Bellinger told the National Law Journal in an email: "I certainly share the sentiments of my colleagues but I am representing one of the State Department officials in the Ukraine investigation and thought it better not to comment about the matter independently."

Bellinger, a former State Department legal adviser who now heads Arnold & Porter's global law and public policy practice, told the New York Times last year: "Conservative lawyers are not doing enough to protect constitutional principles that are being undermined by the statements and actions of this president."

RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I support it too. Time for the House to vote. Let's do this!!!!!
"Never underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up!"

-- Barack Obama
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

I support it too. Time for the House to vote. Let's do this!!!!!
Me too
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's getting late in the evening and the Sun is going down. Night cometh.
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

I support it too. Time for the House to vote. Let's do this!!!!!
Me too
Good deal. Now if only Trump would stop the obstruction.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not exactly a representative group of conservatives. It was formed in November 2018 specifically to attack Trump.
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Not exactly a representative group of conservatives. It was formed in November 2018 specifically to attack Trump.
Why not expeditious?
57Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Andrew Sagor opposed Trump BEFORE he was President (Thursday, July 28, 2016):
https://politicalfun.blogspot.com/2016/07/open-letter-on-donald-trump-from-gop.html

So did George Conaway.
midgett
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

Night cometh.


Goodness gracious. Cinque bringing up quotes from a few years ago.

Russia!
riflebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

It's getting late in the evening and the Sun is going down. Night cometh.
Yup - Barr & Durham are getting closer and closer. Just be patient.
ABC BEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jinx 2 said:

Signers include George Conway, former acting U.S. attorney general Peter Keisler; former state dept. official Andrew Sagor; and Trevot Potter, former chair of the Federal Election Commission.

https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2019/10/10/16-conservative-lawyers-say-they-support-expeditious-impeachment-inquiry/?kw=16%20Conservative%20Lawyers%20Say%20They%20Support%20%27Expeditious%27%20Impeachment%20Inquiry&utm_source=email&utm_medium=enl&utm_campaign=afternoonupdate&utm_content=20191010&utm_term=nlj

Sixteen conservative lawyers from major U.S. law firms, law schools and think tanks on Thursday asserted their support for an "expeditious" impeachment investigation, arguing in a new public statement that President Donald Trump has abused the office of the presidency.

The letter, published online by the conservative lawyers' group Checks & Balances, declared based on recent events involving Trump's efforts to enlist foreign help to investigate political rivals that "the president is abusing the office of the presidency for personal political objectives."

"We believe the acts revealed publicly over the past several weeks are fundamentally incompatible with the president's oath of office, his duties as commander in chief, and his constitutional obligation to 'take care that the laws be faithfully executed,'" the Checks & Balances letter said. "These acts, based on what has been revealed to date, are a legitimate basis for an expeditious impeachment investigation, vote in the House of Representatives and potential trial in the Senate."

Trump has dismissed claims that his call with the Ukraine president in July violated any law, and the White House counsel's office this week declared it would not cooperate with a House impeachment inquiry that was derided as "constitutionally defective." White House Counsel Pat Cipollone's eight-page letter to the House accused Democrats of using impeachment to try to negate the results of the 2016 election.
...
"I am disgusted by the conduct of Republican senators who pose as reputable people, but shamelessly hide under rocks instead of calling out the president's horrendous behavior as the gross misconduct that they know it to be," Ayer told The Washington Post.

The law professors who signed the letter include Harvard Law School professor Charles Fried, a former Reagan administration U.S. solicitor general; Orin Kerr of University of California Berkeley School of Law; J.W. Verret of George Mason University Antonin Scalia School of Law; and Jonathan Adler of Case Western Reserve University School of Law.

Thursday's letter came with a disclaimer, repeated on earlier statements, that said "each of us speaks and acts solely in our individual capacities, and our views should not be attributed to any organization with which we may be affiliated."

Arnold & Porter's John Bellinger III, who has signed earlier Checks & Balances statements, did not appear on Thursday's open letter. Bellinger told the National Law Journal in an email: "I certainly share the sentiments of my colleagues but I am representing one of the State Department officials in the Ukraine investigation and thought it better not to comment about the matter independently."

Bellinger, a former State Department legal adviser who now heads Arnold & Porter's global law and public policy practice, told the New York Times last year: "Conservative lawyers are not doing enough to protect constitutional principles that are being undermined by the statements and actions of this president."


Barnacles attached to the great ship of state.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not exactly a representative group of conservatives. It was formed in November 2018 specifically to attack Trump.
Why not expeditious?
Because it shouldn't be happening in the first place. No impeachable offense has been alleged.
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
midgett said:

cinque said:

Night cometh.


Goodness gracious. Cinque bringing up quotes from a few years ago.

Russia!
Only a fool would fail to see where this is headed. As I told you before, Trump has gotten by, but he won't get away.
corncob pipe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not exactly a representative group of conservatives. It was formed in November 2018 specifically to attack Trump.
Why not expeditious?
Because it shouldn't be happening in the first place. No impeachable offense has been alleged.
Then get it finished
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not exactly a representative group of conservatives. It was formed in November 2018 specifically to attack Trump.
Why not expeditious?
Because it shouldn't be happening in the first place. No impeachable offense has been alleged.
Then get it finished
I don't expect them to finish the investigation until it accomplishes its purpose, which is to build as much public support for removal as possible.
fadskier
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jinx 2 said:

Signers include George Conway, former acting U.S. attorney general Peter Keisler; former state dept. official Andrew Sagor; and Trevot Potter, former chair of the Federal Election Commission.

https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2019/10/10/16-conservative-lawyers-say-they-support-expeditious-impeachment-inquiry/?kw=16%20Conservative%20Lawyers%20Say%20They%20Support%20%27Expeditious%27%20Impeachment%20Inquiry&utm_source=email&utm_medium=enl&utm_campaign=afternoonupdate&utm_content=20191010&utm_term=nlj

Sixteen conservative lawyers from major U.S. law firms, law schools and think tanks on Thursday asserted their support for an "expeditious" impeachment investigation, arguing in a new public statement that President Donald Trump has abused the office of the presidency.

The letter, published online by the conservative lawyers' group Checks & Balances, declared based on recent events involving Trump's efforts to enlist foreign help to investigate political rivals that "the president is abusing the office of the presidency for personal political objectives."

"We believe the acts revealed publicly over the past several weeks are fundamentally incompatible with the president's oath of office, his duties as commander in chief, and his constitutional obligation to 'take care that the laws be faithfully executed,'" the Checks & Balances letter said. "These acts, based on what has been revealed to date, are a legitimate basis for an expeditious impeachment investigation, vote in the House of Representatives and potential trial in the Senate."

Trump has dismissed claims that his call with the Ukraine president in July violated any law, and the White House counsel's office this week declared it would not cooperate with a House impeachment inquiry that was derided as "constitutionally defective." White House Counsel Pat Cipollone's eight-page letter to the House accused Democrats of using impeachment to try to negate the results of the 2016 election.
...
"I am disgusted by the conduct of Republican senators who pose as reputable people, but shamelessly hide under rocks instead of calling out the president's horrendous behavior as the gross misconduct that they know it to be," Ayer told The Washington Post.

The law professors who signed the letter include Harvard Law School professor Charles Fried, a former Reagan administration U.S. solicitor general; Orin Kerr of University of California Berkeley School of Law; J.W. Verret of George Mason University Antonin Scalia School of Law; and Jonathan Adler of Case Western Reserve University School of Law.

Thursday's letter came with a disclaimer, repeated on earlier statements, that said "each of us speaks and acts solely in our individual capacities, and our views should not be attributed to any organization with which we may be affiliated."

Arnold & Porter's John Bellinger III, who has signed earlier Checks & Balances statements, did not appear on Thursday's open letter. Bellinger told the National Law Journal in an email: "I certainly share the sentiments of my colleagues but I am representing one of the State Department officials in the Ukraine investigation and thought it better not to comment about the matter independently."

Bellinger, a former State Department legal adviser who now heads Arnold & Porter's global law and public policy practice, told the New York Times last year: "Conservative lawyers are not doing enough to protect constitutional principles that are being undermined by the statements and actions of this president."


I'll take posting stuff without researching it first to prove my point which actually backfires, Alex for $200.
Salute the Marines - Joe Biden
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not exactly a representative group of conservatives. It was formed in November 2018 specifically to attack Trump.
Why not expeditious?
Because it shouldn't be happening in the first place. No impeachable offense has been alleged.
Then get it finished
I don't expect them to finish the investigation until it accomplishes its purpose, which is to build as much public support for removal as possible.
So Dems don't want it finished. Sooner it is over the better. Get it finished
contrario
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not exactly a representative group of conservatives. It was formed in November 2018 specifically to attack Trump.
Why not expeditious?
Because it shouldn't be happening in the first place. No impeachable offense has been alleged.
Then get it finished
I don't expect them to finish the investigation until it accomplishes its purpose, which is to build as much public support for removal as possible.
So Dems don't want it finished. Sooner it is over the better. Get it finished
There is no way this is finished before the election. The cloud of a potential impeachment will he used against Trump in the election and if that fails and he wins again, then they will pull the trigger to impeach him. And democrat challengers for key senate seats will use that as their platform to be elected.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Osodecentx said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not exactly a representative group of conservatives. It was formed in November 2018 specifically to attack Trump.
Why not expeditious?
Because it shouldn't be happening in the first place. No impeachable offense has been alleged.
Then get it finished
I don't expect them to finish the investigation until it accomplishes its purpose, which is to build as much public support for removal as possible.
So Dems don't want it finished. Sooner it is over the better. Get it finished
I think that's what Trump is trying to do. They're going to impeach regardless. By not offering a defense, he's telling them to go ahead and vote. If that's expeditious, fine. But I don't think that's what the Never Trumpers who wrote this letter mean by expeditious. What they mean is that Trump should cooperate. IMO that would only prolong the spectacle and open the way for more fishing by Democrats.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.