(02-08-2020, 01:25 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(02-08-2020, 12:37 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: You simply don’t understand how the government or military work. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: you don’t have to have an opinion on everything. 

The majority of the House agreeing with you means nothing when they make their decisions based on politics. Anyone with a modicum of understanding in basic criminal law / case law can tell you that there was no legal standing for obstruction and abuse of powers for impeachment. I wouldn’t use the House agreeing with Vindman as a justification for his actions. They would’ve done the same for anyone that furthered their agenda.

You simply don't understand the constitution.
The branches are co-equal and can use their delegated powers and responsibilities with their own sole discretion. High crimes and misdemeanors was understood to be a broad term, inclusive of abuse of power. But even if it were not so, The house was given some discretion to decide what high crimes and misdemeanors are, and the Senate sole discretion to decide what the consequences should be.

I have a far better understanding then you have. The bold implies that they’re free to do as they wish and would also justify any action Trump took that ultimately had him impeached. Theres a reason they couldn’t cite a criminal offense. It doesn’t matter anyway because I’m talking about Vindman’s behavior not having been justified because there’s no criminal offense or illegal activity on behalf of the President, and how it relates to undermining your boss on feelings as you suggested was appropriate.

---