Posted on 08/04/2014 8:37:39 AM PDT by centurion316
Some 40 years after Richard Nixon resigned to avoid his likely impeachment by the House of Representatives, Washington is again talking impeachment. Members of Congress are denouncing the president’s contempt for constitutional law, while the president is raising money to fight the effort to remove him. But this time, the money pouring in would be just as well spent on defense against Bigfoot. Much of the debate has been more mythological than constitutional...
But Congress’s exclusive power to impeach does not license it to abuse that power, any more than the Supreme Court’s final say on laws gives it license to deliver arbitrary rulings. The framers carefully defined the grounds for impeachment as “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors” — language with British legal precedent. They clearly did not want removal of the president subject to congressional whim. Indeed, they rejected the addition of “maladministration” after James Madison cautioned that “so vague a term will be equivalent to a tenure during pleasure of the Senate.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Yes - you are definitely in the weenie camp. You are scared to impeach because you say that will “give them ammunition”. That is defense. We need to be on offense. We should not worry about what the other side says. They speak lies and propaganda. Ignore them.
Did the president commit impeachable acts? Yes or no? If you believe the answer is yes then our congressional reps have a duty to impeach.
Impeach now and again and again as needed.
“Yes - you are definitely in the weenie camp.”
Nobody in congress is going to touch this with a 10 foot pole till after the election is over. I’m not in the weenie camp. I’m just telling you how it is.
But go ahead and live your impeachment fantasy. Clinton was in office for two tears after he was impeached.
Removal from office is separate from impeachment. What the Senate does is irrevelant to the house’s duty to impeach a president for high crimes.
Do you believe Obama has committed impeachable crimes? Yes or no? You didn’t answer the question.
In practice, impeaching and convicting a president means shame and humiliation for the impeached president. Politicians don’t like to do that to other politicians. For one thing, it sets a precedent that can be used to unseat a president of their own party. The impeachment process is also likely to be considered partisan and a waste of time by much of the public. So in practice, an impeachable offense does have to be something very like an actual crime, even if the Founders didn’t intend it to be.
Exactly what my husband keeps saying.
Very insightful observations. I am impressed.
“Do you believe Obama has committed impeachable crimes? Yes or no? You didn’t answer the question.”
Tell me what his high crime is and I will tell you if he should be impeached.
>> “Tell me what his high crime is and I will tell you if he should be impeached” <<
.
The highest possible crime: Total disregard of the separation of powers, and his oath of office to uphold the constitution.
.
Impeach.
“The highest possible crime: Total disregard of the separation of powers, and his oath of office to uphold the constitution.”
Impeach. No question about it.
So it seems the only difference is you want him impeached now and I want to wait until the new congress is seated?
I haven’r weighed in on when and how to do it.
“Tell me what his high crime is and I will tell you if he should be impeached.”
At least you answered the question. Now ... if you don’t believe he has committed high crimes then why were you OK with impeaching him after the election? If one doesn’t believe he has committed crimes then they shouldn’t support impeachment at all... period. The reverse is also true. If one truly believes he has committed crimes then they should support immediate impeachment. Anything else is just playing political games.
Only reason I dialogue with you at all is I find it interesting to try and understand how people think ... or not .. when it comes to this topic.
“Only reason I dialogue with you at all is I find it interesting to try and understand how people think ... or not .. when it comes to this topic.”
Why wouldn’t I answer the question? There isnt one person on this forum who doesn’t want to see Obama impeached. Sounds like you are looking for justification for calling congress back and impeaching him tomorrow morning and anyone who doesn’t agree with you are, what did you say? Oh yes, Weenies.
Everyone on this forum wants Obama impeached tomorrow morning. And if you asked everyone on this forum, if Republicans get control of the senate should they do a Harry Reid, go nuclear and demand Obamas removal from office? Some would say yes to that also. The ones who would say no, would say no because the Constitution doesn’t provide for that.
The reality however is it will not get done tomorrow. It will not get done in September. There is a right thing to do and a politically expedient thing to do and politicians aren’t touching this till after the election because that is the politically expedient thing for them to do,especially in an election year. Is it right? No.
Hopefully that answers your question. With that said, when you choose to call someone a name rather than have a clean debate based on the facts, we have a name for that person. They are called a liberal. And that was exactly what you demonstrated on this thread by your remarks to me. And that “Only reason I dialogue with you” comment up top it the icing on the cake.
You are all over the place. No, you really didn’t answer my my simple question of whether Obama has committed high crimes or not. An answer was inferred by your weak response of “list his crimes and then I will say whether he should be impeached”. That implies you don’t already know the crimes.
After probing with you all we have is ... you don’t know whether Obama has committed crimes but everyone at this site wants to impeach him so sure you are OK with impeachment. But not now .. because it will make dems mad and you are scared to death of what the dems will do or some such weak defensive political nonsense.
I say get on offense and forget defense. Impeach him now ... and then repeat multiple times as necessary. No need to wait .. what else are they doing up there? We pay them to uphold the Constitution.
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.