There are checks and balances betweent he 2 branches. I'd like to check you on the fact you have said you Republicans have contempt for the constitution and yet the democrats say that it is impeachable because Trump used constitutionally given executive privilege to stop people from testifying. I await your contempt for them.
Executive privilege is not a Constitutional right, nor does it cover matters unless they "impair government functions", and I've yet to see any evidence to support that allowing any of these witnesses to testify would do so - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege
(citations in the article)
Democrats have been doing that since the start, by the way.The Court held that there is a qualified privilege, which once invoked, creates a presumption of privilege, and the party seeking the documents must then make a "sufficient showing" that the "presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case".
Oh you mean like Schiff doing a reenactment of a phone call. Okay, I see where you are coming from now. I can dig it. Yep, me hardcore Trump supporter that I am, you tried to finally gotcha me when I admitted I supported the President using the constitution. It took 3 years , but you got me to support Trump when he sued the constitution to his advantage. 3 years, I am sure you were salivating thinking about the day when you could catch me and that day is so underwhelming for you....or is it? Today has been great for me, I saw liberals lose it over nothing, you guys still think the senate has a chance to remove Trump, had some stranger say I mask myself as 2 people to post, and found out I have a fan on another shit forum. I thought the 65 degree weather was great but........
- - - Updated - - -
Where does the right of executive privilege come from? The supreme court says it is derived from the constitution. But what do they know.
I guess the argument is that letting those witnesses testify will make Trump's guilt and malicious intent so crystal clear that he'll be removed from office even with a Republican-controlled Senate, and that would "impair government functions", or some similar self-affirming horse shit.
In the modern sense?
United States v. Nixon.
Right? It's almost like Bolton knew Team Deplorable would lie about it and cover it up, so he waited for the perfect timing to have the most impact. God forbid the truth comes out.
As a Deplorable Defender, tell us again why you're afraid of evidence? I love hearing this explanation.
So the Supreme court says it is derived from the Executive branch area of constitutional activity. I am confused if the Supreme court says it is derived from the constitution, how is it not in there?However, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that executive privilege and congressional oversight each are a consequence of the doctrine of the separation of powers, derived from the supremacy of each branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.[2]
The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon in the context of a subpoena emanating from the judiciary, instead of emanating from Congress.[
First up I'm not entirely sure the president does have the power to block Congress from investigating him for impeachment, can you point out where that is said.
Secondly the contempt from Senate Republicans comes from them saying they will not be impartial jurors and will take the president's side in his trial. That is blatantly going against the US Constitution, it's not just a disagreement as to how exactly it should be interpreted.