Mmen Clause News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

are inherent in marbury versus madison are like delivering a seal when requested, because there is a separate statute, and the secretary of the state had two of the hats on and he was on one hand the direct agent of the president, and that could never be examinable by the courts, but on the other hand, the original statute had imposed all of the purely ministerial duties that had to do with the recordkeeping and delivering of documents and if you had a land deed that had a seal on it, and the person asked for it no, discretion at all, but the take-care clause, there is no statute tha...

Clause and the impeachment clause are the foundational law of the country and the president's immunity is based on that and that is more morality than reality as said in nixon versus fitzgerald. and as the indictment is alleging solely criminal act, and it does not say that he did anything after office, and it is solely in office, and that is a telling indication it is official acts here. and so finally, judge henderson, your question in reference to the floodgates and tie that to opposing counsel's frightening future, and the frightening future of presidents seldom prosecuted if they were imp...

Be very clear of this. >> same or related conduct? >> this prosecution which has many issues related to it, i would say that the impeach mmen clause for a president who has been impeached and -- >> okay. a hypothetical. say a president has been impeached by incitement of insurrection of the same allegations of a criminal indictment, and he has been convicted, then the government could bring a prosecution for the same or related conduct, is that correct? >> i don't disagree with that. >> that means that the conduct that is same or related, even if it is official, he could be prosecuted for it, ...

Properly brought? >> i want to be clear about this. i am not making any concession that this -- >> okay. one more time. under your interpretation of the impeachment clause, if president trump had been convicted after he was previously impeached on similar or related conduct which is in this indictment, the government could have properly prosecuted him for the same or related conduct -- yes or in? >> potentially provided it is qualified with all other legal doctrines violated in this case. >> i am asking you under your interpretation of the impeachment clause, is that proper? is that allowed? >...

Convicted, then this prosecution would be entirely proper? >> which i would say that if you were impeached and convicted for the similar conduct and -- >> is that a yes? because i think that you said in the brief that impeachment for incitement of insurrection is the same that is in the indictment? >> yes, i agree with that. >> and so if he had been convicted by the senate, then this prosecution would be entirely proper, correct? >> not phrased that way, because there is other problems with this prosecution as raised in the district court. he could have been prosecuted -- >> under the impeachm...