False. “Under current policy, an individual may be considered for DACA if he or she has not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, or three or more “non-significant” misdemeanors..or does not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.” -USCIS https://t.co/DsiCkmDLbN
Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) on Sunday argued that President Donald Trump may not be guilty of a quid pro quo with Ukraine if he did not have a “culpable state of mind” when he allegedly tried to extort the country’s president.
Kennedy made the remarks while speaking to CBS News host Margaret Brennan.
“The quid pro quo, in my judgment, is a red herring,” Kennedy opined before agreeing that it would be “over the line” for Trump to ask Ukraine to conduct an investigation into Joe Biden.
But the Louisiana senator suggested that the president may be in the clear if he did not have a guilty “state of mind” while extorting Ukraine.
To be clear, proposing a quid pro quo isn't necessary for Trump's action to be a crime. Calling on a foreign leader to provide dirt on a domestic political opponent is itself illegal. But Trump, Lindsey Graham and others have insisted that a quid pro quo was necessary and there was no quid pro quo. All a quid pro quo adds to what is already illegal are the dimensions of bribery and extortion.
Not only does the so-called 'transcript' show the solicitation, but it also shows the quid pro quo. But that isn't all. Numerous first-hand witnesses have now testified that the solicitation (demand) and the quid pro quo were explicitly and persistently pursued over the course of several months.
So now the defense is going to be that Trump didn't have a "culpable state of mind" when he committed the crimes? Maybe he didn't have a culpable state of mind because he believes that he's above the law. Both his history and his claim that the Constitution gives him the right to do anything he wants indicate that he believes that the law don't apply to him. But if lack of culpability because one thinks they're above the law were a legitimate defense, it would give every psychopath and narcissist out there a free pass to commit any crime they please without consequence. I'm pretty sure it doesn't work that way.
Rudy Giuliani said Friday that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., has "completely trashed the Constitution" in overseeing the impeachment investigation of President Donald Trump. "Basically, Schiff has completely trashed the Constitution: no right of counsel, no right of cross-examination, no right to call witnesses," Giuliani, 75, the president's personal attorney, said on the "War Room: Impeachment" podcast.
Giuliani was a federal prosecutor, and he's still an attorney. He knows that there is no right to cross-examine witnesses in an investigation. And Trump has the right to counsel, but counsel is not entitled to be part of the investigation. The right to confront witnesses only occurs at trial, after an indictment. No criminal charges have been filed against Trump.
Prior to trial, law enforcement and prosecutors can investigate crimes and interview witnesses or potential witnesses to their hearts' content without a target's lawyer present and, if they choose, without even telling a target they're under investigation. It happens all the time.
Trump wants 6thAm rts to counsel, confrontation & speedy trial. Sometimes it's hard for people to see how to get what they want, so I'll help! To get 6thAm rts, Donny, you must be charged with a crime. That can happen NOW if you order the OLC memo withdrawn. See? You're welcome.
President Trump is a con man. He conned people into giving to his now-defunct foundation only to use the donations for personal expenses. He conned people into spending more money than they could afford on the now-dissolved Trump University. He conned lenders into subsidizing his floundering real estate projects. The list goes on, and, as is made clear on a near-daily basis, it’s not limited to Trump’s life as a private citizen.
The pettiest grift of Trump’s presidency may be a scheme that was recently uncovered by Popular Information’s Judd Legum. As Legum notes, the Trump campaign has held at least 15 online contests in which the winner was promised a meal with Trump. Many of them also promised travel accommodations. All supporters had to do to enter the contests, which were promoted heavily on social media, was donate to the campaign. “I just saw the most recent list of Patriots who have contributed to win a trip to meet me in Chicago on October 28th, and I noticed you STILL haven’t entered,” read one email regarding a contest for a supporter and a guest to have lunch with Trump in Chicago.
Rand Paul knows that the 6th Amendment right to confront one's accuser only applies to witnesses who testify at trial. In an impeachment, that right would extend to the Senate trial. The Sixth doesn't apply to tipsters or anonymous sources who are not witnesses at trial. Police accept and even solicit anonymous tips all the time. If those tips lead to independent evidence of a crime, the anonymity of the tipster is legally irrelevant.