Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: edge919

Dude, this was YOUR point, suggesting that Obama could be impeached. I’m simply pointing out that he can’t when his own party has helped protect him. The ‘jury’ in this case would not be impartial. Do you comprehend the words that I’m typing or are you going to keep going all Drama Queen here??


I guess you haven’t heard. There’s a mid-term election being held in a matter of weeks and in a few months, the balance of power and the leadership of Congress may change.
Impeachment always has been and always will be a political process. That’s the way the Founders planned it and that’s the way the Founders wanted it to be. They knew what they were doing and they wanted it to be extremely difficult to remove a sitting president. In today’s terms, that means 67 votes in the Senate. If that number of votes cannot be achieved and that will usually mean bipartisan votes, then the next general election is the way to fire a president.


272 posted on 10/14/2010 8:46:16 AM PDT by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies ]


To: jamese777
... they wanted it to be extremely difficult to remove a sitting president.

Interesting how you keep moving the goalposts here, because earilier, you made it sound like it was easy, "A less dramatic answer is to impeach, convict and remove an illegitimate person occupying the office of the president."

275 posted on 10/14/2010 9:06:52 AM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson