However, the House could eject him, if it chose.
Not gonna happen.
Not with this defeatest, give-up attitude it won't! We need to put pressure on our government leaders to do something. Hannity, Rush, O'Reilly, Mark Levin, Michelle Malkin and the others can be of enormous help here IF they get this out to the people. I'm sure if they get enough demands they will! Can't we at least try?? The Left relies on the weak who sit back and say things like, "oh well, what can we do about it?". Should we always make their work that much easier for them?
A Democratic-controlled House is not going to expel a Democrat.
There are issues where your energy and work might make a difference. This isn’t one of them.
FR *bookmark* , and more later
( sometimes they’re “off’d” by their own )
Procedurally speaking, Sherman is right. Take a deep breath and consider this. Removing a member of Congress has nothing to do with the impeachment process. And contrary to popular belief, impeachment is not removal from office; it merely means to accuse.
If the House removing Conyers from office before the next election is your goal (and that’s certainly an admirable goal), then it’s more than a little important to use the right terminology to advance your argument.
Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 of the Constitution explains the correct procedure: “Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.” And in the House, punishing disorderly behavior starts with the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct; here’s its website — www.house.gov/ethics/ Theoretically, the House ethics committee can do one of the following things to Conyers: dismiss the complaints, reprimand him, censure him or remove him.
Those are the terms you need to use in making your case. To do otherwise, such as demanding impeachment of a member of Congress, serves only to undermine the credibility of your argument.
Now go get ‘em! :)