Impeachment does not mean removal from office. It means being brought to "trial" for consideration of removal.
Bill Clinton was impeached. He was not removed from office.
The senate votes are not a limitation to impeachment, rather a limitation on the ability to remove from office, after impeachment.
impeachment = charged
it does not mean convicted
The primary value of any impeachment action by the House of Representatives would be to highlight this lawless President’s illegal actions in a public forum that would get a lot of media attention. Unfortunately, the media would make every effort to paint the current occupant of the Whitehouse as a victim hateful racial bias.
"Is freedom anything else than the right to live as we wish?
Nothing else."~Epictetus
God bless this site, this Free Republic.
Please click the pic
Senate removal is independent and irrelevant. Obama’s actions warrant impeachment - multiple times! Obama deserves the distinction of being the first president impeached TWICE!
Documentation File on the 2014 Impeachment of B. Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro a former Foreign Student from Indonesia, and still a legal Citizen of the Sovereign Nation of Indonesia.
Jonathan Turley is a lawyer. He favors making it easier to sue the Executive Branch. He would benefit financially if the laws allowing such lawsuits were to be liberalized. Impeachment doesn't offer any financial benefits for him.
The Republican “leadership” in DC is running away from impeachment as quickly as they can; frightened to death that the DIMS/MSM will call them names and fund-raise off of it.
As we sit here, the DIMS/MSM are calling the Republicans names and fund-raising off of the impeachment narrative they created.
Impeachment is a process. It may or may not lead to removal; it won’t lead to removal today. However, it might some time in the future. Whether it does or not is dependent on how well a case is made pre-impeachment (discussion going on now), and the case made during impeachment. There may come a point where impeachment is the last option to save a Republic, or even worse, waiting even longer where even impeachment won’t save it.
I basically stopped reading Mr. Turley's article after reading his first myth refuting the idea that everything is impeachable. No, not everything is impeachable. The problem is that, as a consequence of Mr. Turley probably not understanding the federal government's constitutionally limited powers, particularly Section 8 of Article I, he is essentially clueless about Obama's constitutionally indefensible actions.
Clearly Impeachable Offenses are not merely what Congress defines them as such.
Equally clearly, Obama has violated his oath of office in refusing to defend our borders, in refusing to enforce laws, in unconstitutionally changing laws, and in providing aid and comfort to the enemies of America.
If this bastard can’t be impeached, NOBODY can
As the democrats control the Senate, impeachment would only be a symbolic gesture by the House.
However, the House has the power to defund everything Obama. Boehner refuses to use the only real power he has. This silly lawsuit that the House is trying is an embarssment that emphasizes how spineless Boehner is.
Turley notes that impeachable offenses include behavior such as continuing unconstitutional abuses even after the courts have ruled against them. Somehow he misses that Boehner’s lawsuit is aimed at exactly that. They need to hurry it along, and add more cases.
New tagline ...
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.