Posted on 05/25/2019 5:01:29 AM PDT by Saveourcountry
If President Trump has not committed any Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors, then it would be unconstitutional to impeach him just for politics, wouldn't it? What am I missing here? I mean, have they even uncovered a misdemeanor? Has he had a traffic ticket or something? The constitution clearly sets the grounds for impeachment, and it is pretty broad, but to me, it doesn't look like they have any grounds.
Am I wrong to believe that if they go ahead and impeach him for political reasons without any sort of crime whatsoever that the impeachment could be overturned on a constitutional basis?
Didn’t classical Athens regularly try their leaders after their terms in office? I seem to recall that banishment was the punishment. Would be fun to see Obama living out his twilight years in Zimbabwe. Except it would probably be Davos with all his ill-gotten wealth.
> But, clearly “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” are crimes. <
By “High Crimes”, the Founders did not mean felonies. Instead they meant inappropriate actions or behavior by a person in office. So an average citizen could not be accused of a High Crime. But a Senator could.
As an example, Benjamin Franklin said that a President being obnoxious was a High Crime!
“The Constitution clearly says natural born citizen.
Obama is not one.”
Neither is Heels-up Harris.
unconstitutional ? LOL...
Progressives think the Constitution is piece of paper locked in a hermetically sealed nice wooden box for rubes like us to look at...
Means nothing to them.....
“other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”
Congress can define that any way they damn well please.
As long as they have the votes.
The Democrats seek to impeach anyone with whom they disagree. It's their regular drumbeat, like calling everyone who disagrees with them "nazis" or "racists."
Democrats have only contempt for the Constitution--and the rule of law.
We live either under the law or under the law of the jungle.
Democrats prefer the law of the jungle because they don't mind violence and destruction, and they have no qualms about using power to oppress anyone who disagrees with them or gets in their way.
If they cannot achieve their goals, they will destroy.
In this way, they hold benevolent, peace-loving truth-seekers hostage: the benevolent seek freedom, justice, and the rule of law; the evil (Democrats et al.) seek oppression, power, injustice, and the law of the jungle.
Overturned by whom? You want judges to decide everything?
Conservatives are ok with the political branches deciding political questions.
Lowlife Democrats (but I repeat myself) have been seeking revenge since Bill Clinton was impeached.
I am a conservative. If something is unconstitutional I would like it to be overturned.
Looks like this isn’t unconstitutional after all as the original intent of the term “high crimes and misdemeanors” does not necessarily mean actual crimes.
The “crime” is whatever congress says it is.
If you have the votes in the House, you can impeach.
If you have the votes in the Senate you can convict.
It’s a political removal process, not a criminal court.
Agree. Well said. We have become a banana republic. Democrats use Soviet tactics supported by their cohorts in the press.
Oh, and there is no appeal process.
Define “high crimes and misdemeanors “. I know, you can’t define that. Whomever is in charge of congress can and will define that in Ny manner they deem politically survivable.
The Court is involved, as the Chief Justice presides over the Senate trial.
The question is how much judicial authority does the Chief Justice really have during the trial?
On the one hand, separation of powers still exists. It's still the Senators' chamber and the Chief Justice is a guest there. It's the Senators who vote on the rules of the trial, and the Chief Justice has no say in the matter. The House Managers act as the attorneys, but the Senators can still vote on whether to allow witnesses or not.
During the Clinton trial, the House Managers several times referred to the Senators as "the jury," until Iowa Senator Tom Harkin objected, insisting that they were still Senators.
The bottom line is that the Chief Justice was turned mostly into a figurehead, as the Senators themselves controlled most of the proceedings.
-PJ
Some of them think that declining Congressional subpoenas is a kind of misdemeanor.
Trump committed the worst possible crime: He defeated Saint Hillary.
High crimes originally were not meant to be criminal offenses of a more serious nature but those offenses engaged in by "high" or public officials that were supposed to act according to their oath of office, unlike what ordinary citizens were subject to.
IOW, high crimes did not necessarily mean felonies but any offense committed by officials in "high" positions of public trust. Offenses against the oath of office.
And misdemeanors did not necessarily mean crimes of a lesser nature but any offense that the House saw as dereliction of official duties of the "high" office.
Impeachment for misdemeanors embraces serious wrongs of a "political" nature like misconduct, contempt of congress or abuse of power, as well as more common pedestrian offenses punishable by ordinary criminal law.
So the House democRATS could bring impeachment charges against Trump for directing his employees to not testify in front of the House committees when called upon or subpoenaed.
Don't be looking for some criminal misdemeanor that Trump has committed as the only reason they can impeach him. It could be for simple doing something in office the House considers to be misconduct, like his outrageous behavior or Tweeting constantly.
Impeachment is a political process and like an indictment, and as you know you can indict a ham sandwich. Personally Trump should tell them to go ahead, because it’s going to pale in comparison to the sedition and treason indictments he is going to charge most of the democraps with, and to make sure it never happens again, seek the death penalty for all involved. Hold it in front of a military tribunal because the judicial system is also involves. And if they render a guilty verdict, take them out to the court yard and execute them. Watch the liberal media disappear.
Of course it’s unconstitutional. They’re talking about a coup as their final act to end the rule of law and restore the power they that elitists think is their right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.