Profile Image

Laurence Tribe

@tribelaw ↗

Deleted No
Hibernated Yes
Last Checked Oct. 10, 2020

Created

Sat Jan 18 15:28:15 +0000 2020

Likes

8,100

Retweets

3,275

Source

Twitter for iPhone

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available
Profile Image

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

There’s no basis at all for the claim that the Framers “rejected” making “abuse of power” impeachable. What they rejected was making mere policy disagreements impeachable. They sharply distinguished doing that from removing those who use their public power for private gain. — PolitiTweet.org

TheBeat w/Ari Melber @TheBeatWithAri

Alan Dershowitz, a member of Trump's impeachment team, on 'abuse of power': "Abuse of power, even if proved, is no… https://t.co/NtVaLHa0qk

Posted Jan. 18, 2020 Hibernated

Preceded By

Profile Image

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Two questions for every Senator: “If a witness came along whose testimony would completely EXONERATE President Trump, would you vote to call that witness?” “Did you take an oath to do IMPARTIAL JUSTICE in all things appertaining to the trial of Donald Trump?” — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Jan. 18, 2020 Hibernated

Followed By

Profile Image

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Exactly, @jadler1969! The Framers rejected making “maladministration” impeachable but would NEVER have rejected making “abuse of power” impeachable. It was the ONE thing that treason, bribery, and “other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” had in common. — PolitiTweet.org

Jonathan H. Adler @jadler1969

@tribelaw Indeed, preventing/sanctioning abuse of power was the whole point!

Posted Jan. 18, 2020 Hibernated