General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTheir oath is to uphold the US Constitution!
Disbarment can happen if you fail to uphold YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY.
You can be disbarred for Ignoring a disciplinary action.
Their oath is to uphold the US Constitution, Not to Trump!
The Republican Party should take heed....
If any person fails to uphold one's oath to the US Constitution and they belong to the bar, they can be removed from the bar if they fail to exercise their constitutional duty to vote for impeachment and/or removal for high crimes and misdemeanors.
They took an oath, they are required to honor it!
Write your congressional and Senatorial lawyers and let them know if they fail their oath, you will report them to the bar for removal!
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MyMission
(1,849 posts)One of my reps was a lawyer! I'd certainly write them about this
Burr and Tillis have (only) earned a BA.
And Meadows only an AA, and he'd lied about having a BA and now acknowledges the AA.
I don't bother to contact Meadows, since it's a waste of my time.
Good idea for those who have representatives with a law degree, many do.
I had the idea to contact former military who are in the Senate, reminding them about their (double) oath to serve, protect and defend the US. Since my reps never served they wouldn't get those letters either.
(I kinda get depressed when calls go out to contact our reps, since all of mine suck.)
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)That they don't agree with you?
"You can be disbarred for Ignoring a disciplinary action."
Have disciplinary actions been levied as of today? Did I miss something?
"..they belong to the bar, they can be removed from the bar if they fail to exercise their constitutional duty to vote for impeachment and/or removal for high crimes and misdemeanors."
Absolutely FALSE. Impeachment is a political Option..not a Constitutional mandate. Art1 Sec2-3 do not mandate that any member..lawyer or not.. vote for impeachment or conviction. Not grounds to be disbarred..just isn't
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)What grounds?..... Trump ADMITTED he did the high crime.
Second, Article 1, Section 3.
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
A Senator Oath:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
When a Senator took an Oath to judge a crime was committed by Trump, they MUST not over look the crime for his allegiance. They are allegiant to USA, not to the accused.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Bill Clinton committed perjury.....that's an established fact...a Court decided that.
His Law license was suspended for it.
Several Lawyers in the Senate chose not to convict him...why weren't they disbarred?
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)He said, she said. Also defining obstruction.
Trump ADMITTED to the crime.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Obstruction was an article for Clinton...and proven perjury....the perjury is not open for debate. He Lied under oath and lost his ability to practice Law for a period of time because of it. Bill Clinton admitted he lied in 1998.
He paid over $800k to shut Paula Jones mouth.
All of the above is 100% true....and you will fail trying to show it wrong..
Clinton was impeached...dumpster will be impeached....I believe.
Convicted....'not gonna happen'.....no Lawyers will lose their license...idiocy to suggest it..does a lawyer lose a license for defending an admitted serial killer, an admitted terrorist, an admitted puppy kicker(ok I'm cool with that option)?
I'm still waiting for you to tell...you said "ignoring a disciplinary action"...what action has been decided...adjudicated?
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)Their oath is to the Constitution.....Not to Trump.
The fact they openly are denying to convict him prior of a trial is of itself violation of the Constitution.
Proof of such is the stupidity of those congressmen to hold the skiff hostage under the house basement.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)What part part of the Constitution can I find that in?
This should be interesting....I'm holding my Constitution in my hand right and I can't find that violation.....let alone it being IN the Constitution to begin with.
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)Clinton Article of impeachment:
Article I charged that Clinton lied to the grand jury concerning:[23]
1. the nature and details of his relationship with Lewinsky
2. prior false statements he made in the Jones deposition
3. prior false statements he allowed his lawyer to make characterizing Lewinsky's affidavit
4. his attempts to tamper with witnesses
Article III charged Clinton with attempting to obstruct justice in the Jones case by:[24]
1. encouraging Lewinsky to file a false affidavit
2. encouraging Lewinsky to give false testimony if and when she was called to testify
3. concealing gifts he had given to Lewinsky that had been subpoenaed
4. attempting to secure a job for Lewinsky to influence her testimony
5. permitting his lawyer to make false statements characterizing Lewinsky's affidavit
6. attempting to tamper with the possible testimony of his secretary Betty Currie
7. making false and misleading statements to potential grand jury witnesses
The Articles are nothing but covering up a sexual relationship..... the original investigation was, "Originally dealing with the Whitewater controversy"
So basically if we want to impeach every President who cheated on their wives.... that be a LOT. That is why Senate did not vote for removal. Was he wrong to lie? Yes.... were they wrong to use the their powers to pry into the private lifes between three women? " Mr and Mrs Clinton and Ms Lewinsky" yes it was. Back then Republicans were trying to find ANYTHING on Clinton... they only found a "days of our lives" show in the White House. I do believe the articles they will bring this time will be far too serious than a blow job.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)I had to Google it and this is from FoxNews.
"Judge Andrew Napolitano told Fox News host Shepard Smith on Tuesday that the president effectively confessed to a crime when he admitted he asked Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter."
Sorry, but when even FoxNews reports Trump admits to the crime..... what can you say?
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)Someone said what I have been saying!
If Lyndsey Graham does not do his job, he ought to resign and turn in his law license to the SC Bar
onenote
(42,590 posts)would post this nonsense.
No one has ever been, nor will anyone ever be, disbarred for "failing to uphold the Constitution" by voting against impeachment.
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)The NONSENSE of the Republican Party in todays times has brought this subject up. During the Nixon era, the Republican Party actually honored their oaths. REPUBLICANS only honor the allegiance to Trump, not their Oath to the US Constitution.
The reason for: "No one has ever been, nor will anyone ever be, disbarred for "failing to uphold the Constitution" by voting against impeachment."
1. Only had Three PRESIDENTIAL impeachments inquiries, Two PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENTs and Two Trials.
2. "Nor will anyone ever be" never say never!
I take MY OATH seriously. Without defending the US Constitution, what rules do we follow then? Answer.... what our founding fathers fought against...TYRANNY!
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Several Senate lawyers voted against conviction during the Pres Clinton proceedings.....every ONE of them knew there was perjury(regardless of why the Impeachment process started)....should they all have been disbarred for not voting to convict?
As you say above...they swear to the Constitution....not the person
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)They defined what was High Crimes and Misdemeanors by acquitting President Clinton.
I am not going into the details of what he perjured himself on, but being politically pushed into a judicial case of an a sexual relationship between him and intern that was outside the scope what Ken Star was to investigate; by all means was a legitimate witch hunt onto President Clinton.
What Trump is accused of is HIGH CRIMES and MISDEMEANORS.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)and Misdemeanor.....for the sake of Impeachment.
In the Constitution, there is NO definition of HC&M.....
As has been pointed out to you above..by onenote(an attorney)...this is a POLITICAL process...not a legal one and no lawyers will be disbarred for voting no in the Senate.
The best part of your post that makes my case...."Trump(I call him dumpster) is ACCUSED of......."....no Senate attorney is going lose their license for voting in opposition of Your wishes.... like it or not.
None did in previous Impeachment episodes.
Edit to add:.....no one has come into this OP you made, to support your claims.
I don't know what post 1 to it even means.....but not ONE DU attorney is supporting your position. Hmmm, I can't imagine what that may mean..said fully tongue in cheek.
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)The inquiry is being investigated by the house and once the vote is in the house for impeachment for HIGH CRIMES and misdemeanors; then the Senators are to abide by their oath to the US Constitution, not to TRUMP.
As for the US CONSTITUTION not defining High Crimes and misdemeanors, you are wrong on that; it does. The articles give the legislature's the power to create laws. Trump broke those laws and even ADMITTED to them.
The process has begun because of trumps CONFESSION of the laws he has broke.
SENATORS and congressman are required to do their oath to the US Constitution! Not to trump!
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)I dont care if an attorney is commenting that I am wrong. The over rule remark is quite often spoken by judges when attorneys are wrong. Oaths are serious and is what sets ones character.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)You can make stuff up all day...but the Constitution DOES NOT..
...define HC&M's. Try sourcing it in the Constitution....I'll wait.
Just because the House calls something a HC&M...doesn't make it a "Law".
A law requires concurrence of both chambers of Congress AND a POTUS signature.
This is the 2nd time you said dumpster confessed..but all you have is Napolitano saying he did.
You say.." The articles give the legislature's the power to create laws"...yet the House hasn't voted on even ONE article of impeachment...and wouldn't make them a "law".
Re: impeachment...
Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5
The House of Representatives shall chose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
(A political... NOT a legal process)
Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside; And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
(ZERO mandate in the Constitution to Convict).
As I said before..the House could call taking a dump in the Rose Garden a High Crime & Misdemeanor for impeachment...it would be foolish but Constitutional....and the Senate would acquit.
No Lawyer will be disbarred for a vote to acquit.
You are the only one here that has made this argument and not ONE person..let alone DU attorneys have said you are correct. This post is a prime example of "knowing the Constitution before using it"....more specifically, misrepresenting it's meaning.
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)You think I do not know what the US Constitution says.... laughable! You do not know who I am. Second, anyone can state they are a lawyer on here; there are no background checks! Third, you overlooked what I posted last.... congress create the laws, judicial branch interprets the laws and the executive branch enforces the laws.
Congress passed laws and were approved by the President many years ago. Those LAWS are what defines high crimes and misdemeanors. We refer to high crimes of today as FELONIES. Though the term felony was used within the US Constitution, it was and still is considered High Crimes. Simply as put, misdemeanor followed High Crimes and felonies are serious than misdemeanors.
Lastly... Trump confessed that he asked a foreign country for dirt on his opponent or he would hold back funding that was approved by Congress for our and their national defense.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Not with regards to Impeachment..from the posts above, stating as fact.. a Senator that's an attorney, can be disbarred if he/she vote to acquit.. I don't believe you do know.
Also that for Impeachment that the Constitution defines High Crimes & Misdemeanors(it doesn't)....I asked you to source it.. you couldn't-can't.
I'd remind you of the Speech & Debate clause. You can't punish a Senator or Representative with arrest or outside punitive action(disbarment say) for actions in their respective chambers, speeches or votes, unless it's Treasonous(defined in the Constitution) Felonious, or is a Breach of the peace
You said this on Thursday..
"They defined what was High Crimes and Misdemeanors by acquitting President Clinton.
I am not going into the details of what he perjured himself on, but being politically pushed into a judicial case of an a sexual relationship between him and intern that was outside the scope what Ken Star was to investigate; by all means was a legitimate witch hunt onto President Clinton.
What Trump is accused of is HIGH CRIMES and MISDEMEANORS."
Perjury IS a Crime on the books today, was when Clinton was Impeached..has been forever. Still a crime even though Clinton wasn't convicted by the Senate. President Clinton was punished for it.
Monica wasn't part of Ken Starr initial investigation....but eventually was part of it. The Art.'s of Impeachment were based on that part of Ken Starr's report. Totally Constitutional.
Dumpsters phone call wasn't any part of Mueller's report/investigation.
As you say..dumpster is accused, there will be a Senate trial..but there is NO..ZERO Constitutional mandate for the Senate to convict him....let alone a path to punish Senators that vote to acquit.
You made an OP similar to this on 1November.....not ONE person posted to it in agreement....at all actually.
This has been fun...you're flat out wrong on the topic.. but it's been a blast.
You should start a fresher OP on this.....the same thing will happen.
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)Jurors are asked to give a verdict of guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Their oath requires that. Are you saying that Senators are not required to do the oath as all jurors are required to do and can vote to acquit according to their political convictions or allegiance to Trump?
tritsofme
(17,370 posts)If you believe otherwise, you fundamentally do not understand the impeachment process.
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Democratic Reps that voted No in the House for the current impeachment process? If you are going to have lawyers disbarred...you must have a punishment for those 2....right?
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)If one fails to uphold their constitutional duty and their oath to their bar association, then should be disbarred.
What you deem as punishment is not punishment, it's called removing those from the court for they dishonored their oath. Big difference!
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)"If one fails to uphold their constitutional duty and their oath to their bar association, then should be disbarred. "
Except that's NOT in the Constitution re: an Impeachment process...or at all. I'll ask again....Speech and Debate Clause.....care to opine there?
"What you deem as punishment is not punishment, it's called removing those from the court for they dishonored their oath. Big difference!"
That IS the definition of a punishment.....
You appear to be making that call all by yourself "dishonored their oath" and clearly you don't know the Law from Legos.......No Bar ever would, never have....no lawyer was disbarred for voting to acquit Bill Clinton, though perjury was cut and dry.
I'll ask again....what will you do to the 2 Dem Reps that voted NO to this process?
If you think a Senate attorney can be disbarred for voting no...what do you do with House members that voted No?
Watch kids......this is going to be an EPIC mess of weirdness.
Please smack......continue....this is becoming more fun than I've had in weeks
Smackdown2019
(1,184 posts)What time I have when off duty and not doing family activities, few moments is when I turn to this for fun and frustration. I can not speak, nor post on Facebook due to my job, but I did take an oath to the US CONSTITUTION.
I will say this, my family and I experienced those government shutdowns. Though we had money in the bank, others did not. I also do have a College Degree from the 90's and have taken a Constitutional Law and other Public Policy Classes for my degree. Enough about me.
Let me ask you, did you pass the bar?
AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)As to my CV..I wouldn't disclose that on a website at gun point..
If you have taken even a Basic Constitutional studies course..you wouldn't be making these completely inaccurate claims.
Response to Smackdown2019 (Original post)
sl8 This message was self-deleted by its author.
