Breaking: Schiff says Trump could be impeached for bribery

[Dennis Donovan]

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/470165-schiff-trump-could-potentially-be-impeached-for-bribery

BY ZACK BUDRYK - 11/12/19 06:55 PM EST

House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) suggested President Trump’s possible impeachable offenses include bribery in an interview set to air Wednesday with NPR’s Steve Inskeep.

"On the basis of what the witnesses have had to say so far, there are any number of potentially impeachable offenses, including bribery, including high crimes and misdemeanors,” Schiff said in the interview. “The basic allegations against the president are that he sought foreign interference in a U.S. election, that he conditioned official acts on the performance of these political favors.”

In the interview, Schiff said “bribery,” one of the offenses the Constitution outlines as impeachable, had a different meaning at the time the Constitution was written then how it is commonly understood today.

“It was much broader. It connoted the breach of the public trust in a way where you're offering official acts for some personal or political reason, not in the nation's interest,” Schiff said. “Here you have the president of the United States seeking help from Ukraine in his reelection campaign in the form of two investigations that he thought were politically advantageous, including one of his primary rival.”

“It doesn't have to be cash. It can be something of value,” Schiff added, saying that conditioning foreign aid on political favors could be considered bribery even in the modern context.

“And clearly, given the concerted effort that was brought about to get these investigations going by the president, by Rudy Giuliani, by Ambassador Sondland, by others, this was something of great value to the president,” he said.

</snip>

[gibraltar72]

1. Quid Quo bribery extortion.

[Poiuyt]

2. I hope to hear more Dems refer to Trump's crimes as being

bribery and extortion. Bribery because it's spelled out in the Constitution, and extortion because it has kind of a mob nastiness sound to it. I'm not sure which is the most accurate in legal terms.

Oh, and let's not forget to talk about acting without the best interests of our country's national security at heart.

[underpants]

3. Listened to it on NPR. He used the word "cult"

We can't let one party that has allowed itself to become a cult of the president to dictate whether a constitutional remedy can be employed. I would hope, if not members of the House, then members of the Senate will put their party aside, will look to their constitutional duty and oath and ask themselves the question, if it comes to this — and again, we haven't prejudged whether it's going to come to this. But if it does come to a trial in the Senate, I hope they will be prepared to ask themselves the question: Are we prepared to accept that a president of the United States can withhold taxpayer funds, deprive an ally of the ability to defend itself, withhold official acts like a White House meeting with a foreign leader and do so in order to get help in a presidential election? Can a president of the United States obstruct Congress? Refuse to allow witnesses to appear, refuse to provide documents? Are we prepared to fundamentally alter our conception of the presidency itself? These are the tough questions that members on both sides of the aisle are going to have to ask.

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/12/778524552/transcript-nprs-full-interview-with-rep-adam-schiff-on-impeachment-inquiry