Laurence Tribe

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

.@harrylitman agrees with me that the @AlanDersh argument is all wrong, but he sees it as providing a way for Senators to condemn Trump for abusing his power dangerously yet still acquit him. But that would set the scariest precedent of all! https://t.co/MVCYwML5RE — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Why #abuseofpower is the quintessential impeachable offense: — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Excellent thread on why abuse of power most certainly IS an impeachable offense: https://t.co/AvMt7rTRij — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

RT @JRubinBlogger: It would be funny if the impeachment trial (demanding senators' presence) regarding Trump trying to get rid of Biden hel… — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

That pretty much sums it up, @JRubinBlogger! Frankly I expected something at least slightly substantive from the Dream Team. But no such luck. Just more BS. — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Nothing Trump’s lawyers have said provides a reason for any impartial Senator to acquit him on either Article of Impeachment. https://t.co/YNosmP0KY8 — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Btw, Trump’s use of WH Counsel to defend him could be illegal & is clearly improper: Trump is on trial as an individual who happens to be POTUS. Pat Cipollone is paid by all of us as WH Counsel to defend THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, not the dude We the People are seeking to fire. — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

People ask me why I’m not arguing in the Senate opposite @AlanDersh to defend the House view of the Constitution. Here’s why: 1. No need. My views are known & the Dersh view refutes itself. 2. Trump can name anyone to defend him, but the House rules say it must use its managers. — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Fair and unfair critiques of @AlanDersh: 1. Fair: He’s all wet on the meaning of “high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” 2. Unfair: He has represented lots of crooks and dirtbags. 3.Halfway: He’s saying he’s not exactly representing the dirtbag in the White House but the Constitution — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Very disturbing, @AmbassadorRice. Very. — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

The @AlanDersh theory, if it’s to be dignified with that label, is that Hamilton was just musing about the nature of impeachable offenses, not actually identifying them. That’s frankly preposterous. In 232 years, no sane historian or constitutional theorist has read it that way. — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Right, @theblatt. There mustn’t have been a stable genius among them. — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

From @AlanDersh’s 2018 book: “Assume Putin decides to ‘retake’ Alaska, the way he ‘retook’ Crimea. Assume further that [President Trump] allows him to do it ... That would be terrible, but [not] impeachable.” That’s really Trump’s legal position??????!!!@lisamurkowski take note! — PolitiTweet.org

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

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

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

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Of course the dudes who worked for Trump are shady characters: they worked for Trump, didn’t they? https://t.co/soMa5dNWTr — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

On @AC360, @AlanDersh says “abuse of power” is too open-ended. Then he says impeachable offenses must be misconduct that’s “crime-like.” Oh come on! That’s not every bit as open-ended? Of course it is! — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

.@GeorgeWill was just flat wrong on @HardballChris that something must be a federal crime in order to be an impeachable offense. No real constitutional scholar makes that mistake, although the criminal defense expert @AlanDersh does intend to make it in his Senate presentation. — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

.@LawProfButler is clearly right that “abuse of power” is an impeachable “high Crime and Misdemeanor,” but he misspoke on @HardballChris when he lumped it with what the Framers REJECTED as impeachable — namely, “maladministration.” — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Why does @AlanDersh feel he has to distance himself from his client, the @realDonaldTrump? If he’s not content to be on Trump’s “legal team,” what’s his role? Is he “testifying” but not under oath? Stay tuned, I guess . . . — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

The Supreme Court just agreed to rule by late June 2020 on how the Electoral College works: Are electors free agents, or can states bind their electors to vote the way their legislatures decide to translate voters’ preferences into electoral votes? — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

I’ll be on @allinwithchris at 8 eastern (MSNBC) tonight, helping @chrislhayes set the stage for the Senate impeachment trial — the strategy, the legal teams on both sides, the Chief Justice’s role, the role of politics, the search for “impartial justice,” the historic stakes . . — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

.@JonathanTurley has raised a genuinely puzzling issue here. I’d favor judicial abstention in light of the Senate’s “sole” power to try impeachments, which I’d say includes deciding on all privilege claims. But it’s a really tough question. https://t.co/eVz7Pwzmr3 — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

The “dangerous constitutional precedent” I worry about — the one that has led me into this fight — is the precedent that would be created if any president could use his awesome public powers for his own personal and political benefit, immune from indictment or impeachment. — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

The Royal third person? Or just a Trumpian trope? — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

In a 2018 book, Alan Dershowitz kindly previewed the anti-impeachment arguments he’ll make for Trump. I explained why they’re all wrong on pgs 258 — 266 of the 2019 epilogue to my impeachment book with @JoshuaMatz8, “To End A Presidency: The Power of Impeachment” (paperback ed.). — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

In breaking the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, Trump violated the Constitution’s separation of powers. That was the main mechanism for his shakedown of Ukraine to benefit himself with illegal foreign help in the 2020 election. That’s impeachment Art. I. https://t.co/oRyvwdRNw4 — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

The House Managers’ document demands will be crucial https://t.co/vZ71VjFRz6 — PolitiTweet.org

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw

Surreal, @ChrisMurphyCT? Yes, I’m sure it was that in part. But, above all, what strikes me is how REAL it has become. No more “reality tv,” but REALITY. The clownish antics of the likes of Jordan, Collins, and McCarthy will dissolve in the face of undeniable fact. — PolitiTweet.org