During today’s S.C. hearing regarding presidential immunity, it was repeatedly admitted by all that bribery is a prosecutable offense by the terms of our Constitution. What was repeatedly ignored with respect to our President is, if there is an accusation of our president engaging in bribery or another criminal offense, our Constitution provides the remedy and venue . . . impeachment first, and then a trial by the Senate.
The bottom line is, our nitwitted S.C. in general, has today babbled on and on over a subject matter constitutionally left in the hands of the House, and then Senate.
With regard to any prosecution of the president if found guilty of a crime by the Senate, the president can then be prosecuted for that crime in a public venue, probably initiated by the United States Attorney General.
JWK
Why have a written constitution, approved by the people, if those who it is meant to control are free to make it mean whatever they wish it to mean?
The bottom line is, our nitwitted S.C. in general, has today babbled on and on over a subject matter constitutionally left in the hands of the House, and then Senate.
With regard to any prosecution of the president if found guilty of a crime by the Senate, the president can then be prosecuted for that crime in a public venue, probably initiated by the United States Attorney General.
JWK
Why have a written constitution, approved by the people, if those who it is meant to control are free to make it mean whatever they wish it to mean?
Last edited: