This is the best of the film versions of Grisham novels, I think, and it has been directed with skill by Joel Schumacher.īut as I watched the film, other thoughts intruded.
Jackson as Carl Lee Hailey, the avenging father, and Matthew McConaughey as Jake Brigance, the lawyer.
Here is the column: Continue reading “Biden’s Use of False Names Could Cost Him” →Įnter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.I was absorbed by “A Time to Kill,” and found the performances strong and convincing, especially the work by Samuel L. Conversely, using White House staff to cover up any wrongdoing could make this situation far worse for the President. In other words, this is a war that can be avoided by simple transparency. If these records show legitimate transactions and innocent messaging, as claimed, they will exonerate the President. Yet, he can forestall any impeachment inquiry by simply releasing his financial and email records. In the meantime, the President has established a “war room” to deal with impeachment. It will win if this goes to court but the Biden Administration is still delaying release. However, in the midst of a major corruption scandal, there is an obvious reason why Congress must be able to review these emails. For example, one message concerning Ukraine also mentioned his plans to go to Delaware. There may be innocent explanations of why the President used aliases to send information to Hunter Biden. Here is the column: Continue reading “Five Facts That Compel the Biden Impeachment Inquiry” →īelow is my column in The Hill on the growing list of aliases used by President Joe Biden in prior years and the unsuccessful efforts of public interest groups and Congress to gain access to the emails. While the President deserves a presumption of innocence in this process, the public deserves answers to these questions. That does not mean that grounds for impeachment will be found in this inquiry. A House impeachment holds both constitutional and historical significance separate from any conviction. The Senate has its own constitutional function under the Constitution that it can either choose to fulfill or to ignore.
JOHN GRISHAM WITNESS TO A TRIAL SUMMARY FULL
My objection to the Trump impeachments were first and foremost the failure to fully investigate the underlying allegations and to create a full record to support the articles of impeachment. The House has a separate constitutional duty in the investigation of potential impeachable offenses and to pass articles of impeachment if those allegations are found to be valid. I rejected the same argument made by some Republicans during the Trump impeachment. I also reject the notion that, because a conviction is unlikely in the Democratic-controlled Senate, the House should not go down this road. I do not believe that a case for impeachment has been made, but there is clearly a need for an investigation into a growing array of allegations facing the President in this corruption scandal. Below is my column in The Messenger on the reason why an impeachment inquiry is warranted.
0 kommentar(er)
