One legal scholar disagreed.
Guess which one the House Republicans invited to testify?
Courtesy of NBC News:
One after another, and at times using blistering language, the trio of professors sitting side by side — who were called to testify by Democrats — told the committee that, according to evidence against Trump that has been made public, Trump was guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors” and other impeachable actions.
Pamela Karlan, a professor at Stanford Law School and a former Justice Department official in the Obama administration, said the “the very idea that a president might seek the aid of a foreign government in his re-election campaign would have horrified” America’s Founding Fathers.
“But based on the evidentiary record, that is what President Trump has done,” she added.
Karlan said Trump’s “demand” that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy launch investigations into Burisma — the Ukrainian gas company that former Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden joined as a board member — and a debunked conspiracy theory that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election “constituted an abuse of power.”
“Drawing a foreign government into our election process is an especially serious abuse of power because it undermines democracy itself,” she said.
Noah Feldman, a professor at Harvard Law School, said in his opening statement: “On the basis of the testimony and evidence before the House, President Trump has committed impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors by corruptly abusing the office of the presidency.”
“Specifically, President Trump abused his office by corruptly soliciting President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to announce investigations of his political rivals in order to gain personal advantage, including in the 2020 presidential election.”
Michael Gerhardt, a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law, added that “the record compiled thus far shows that the president has committed several impeachable offenses, including bribery, abuse of power in soliciting a personal favor from a foreign leader to benefit his political campaign, obstructing Congress and obstructing justice.”
“I cannot help but conclude that this president has attacked each of the Constitution’s safeguards against establishing a monarchy in this country,” he said. “Both the context and gravity of the president’s misconduct are clear.”
One of the scholars, Professor Pamela Karlan, became a Twitter sensation with this response to Rep. Doug Collins.
Here’s Professor Karlan scolding and steamrolling Rep. Doug Collins.
“I’m insulted by the suggestion that as a law professor I don’t care about those facts.” pic.twitter.com/c59FycffJl
— Public Citizen (@Public_Citizen) December 4, 2019
That Doug Collins fellow was a particularly whiny little bitch today and often spoke in the high pitched cadence of somebody who knows they are lying through their teeth and are desperately worried that they are going to be called out over it.
As I mentioned the House Republicans invited their own legal scholar to essentially refute what the other scholars were saying.
That individual was frequent Fox News guest Jonathon Turley, and this was his contribution:
“I get it. You are mad. The president is mad. My Republican friends are mad. My Democratic friends are mad. My wife is mad. My kids are mad. Even my dog seems mad and ‘Luna’ is a golden doodle and they don’t get mad,” he testified.
“We are all mad Where has that taken us? Will a slipshod impeachment make us less mad or will it only give an invitation for the madness to follow in every future administration? That is why this is wrong.”
Turley also argued that there was no evidence that Trump broke a specific federal statute, and that impeaching him would set a dangerous precedent.
However that is not at all in line with what Turley said during the impeachment of Bill Clinton:
Today’s Republican witness Jonathan Turley opposes impeaching Trump, yet he supported impeaching Bill Clinton in 1998.
Here’s what he told Congress back then: “If you decide that certain acts do not rise to impeachable offenses, you will expand the space for executive conduct.” pic.twitter.com/Iop4kwYMYR
— Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) December 4, 2019
It would seem impossible to suggest that Bill Clinton lying under oath about receiving a blow job , as wrong as that was, rises to the same level as withholding military aid in order to coerce a foreign government into helping you to smear a politcial opponent.
If what Clinton did was impeachable, then what Trump did is impeachable times one hundred.