Posted on Leave a comment

‘You Don’t Need an Underlying Crime to Remove a President’

High crimes and misdemeanors what? If you thought MSNBC hosts were severely lacking in their constitutional knowledge before, you have not heard Ari Melber’s latest commentary. During Wednesday’s MSNBC impeachment special coverage, Melber tried to change the standards for impeachment by claiming that no crime is needed for the President to be removed from office.

Acting as though he was designated the moral arbiter of the panel, Melber made his “legal” analysis while stressing the importance that Americans’ hear his words; “There is a larger stupidity here that’s important. Because Americans are watching this. You don’t need an underlying crime to remove a President.”

 

Seeing as Melber is an attorney, this assessment makes one question how he ever passed a bar exam.

Always eager to speak on topics she knows relatively little about, fellow MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace then made a point to drag the Russia investigation into the conversation: “You also don’t need an underlying crime to obstruct justice. Which was the parallel, right.”

Melber then continued to dig himself further into a hole of embarrassment by suggesting a President can commit certain crimes without consequences: “No, you don’t. Exactly. And the reason is very simple before you get to all of this big, fancy talk. There’s all sorts of things that are criminal but are not an abuse of power. It is a felony to deface a mailbox. It just is.”

The bizarre tangent went on as Melber seemed to excuse select individuals for select crimes:

But everyone understands that any president could go out on Fifth Avenue, don’t shoot anyone, deface a mailbox, you just committed a crime definitely not impeachable. I don’t think you’ll find serious constitutional scholars who will suggest otherwise…On the flip side, you have abuses of power that may not technically be a felony, why? This is really important for everyone to understand. Why? Because most citizens don’t have those powers to wield. So they don’t always pass laws saying, you can’t steal the Office of Management and Budget’s money for a foreign country because most people aren’t in the position to seize and reappropriate those funds…

It’s amazing to see how supposed legal experts in the media have to contort themselves to try and justify impeaching a president who has committed no discernable crime.

Transcript below:

MSNBC Impeachment Hearings

12/4/19

1:41:38 PM

 

ARI MELBER: There is a larger stupidity here that’s important. Because Americans are watching this. You don’t need an underlying crime to remove a President. Not only because of the-

NICOLLE WALLACE: You also don’t need an underlying crime to obstruct justice. Which was the parallel, right-

MELBER: No, you don’t. Exactly. And the reason is very simple before you get to all of this big, fancy talk. There’s all sorts of things that are criminal but are not an abuse of power. It is a felony to deface a mailbox. It just is.

WALLACE: To drink and drive.

MELBER: That one is even dangerous, although it’s generally a personal mistake, although you could hurt other people. But everyone understands that any president could go out on fifth avenue, don’t shoot anyone, deface a mailbox, you just committed a crime definitely not impeachable. I don’t think you’ll find serious Constitutional scholars who will suggest otherwise. And yet right, that would be the crime, what Turley said in his opinion is an extra prerequisite he wants to add. On the flip side, you have abuses of power that may not technically be a felony, why? This is really important for everyone to understand. Why? Because most citizens don’t have those powers to wield. So they don’t always pass laws saying, you can’t steal the Office of Management and Budget’s money for a foreign country because most people aren’t in the position to seize and reappropriate those funds…

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *