Some of my less learned posters need a primer on impeachable offences.

Jarod

Jarod

Well-known member
Contributor
In Federalist 65, one of the principal architects of the Constitution Alexander Hamilton wrote that impeachable offenses are those that arise from the "misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust."He explains that "high crimes and misdemeanors" is a common law term used to describe offences that are "political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.

As you may or not have learned in your provencal schools, the executive is not the only constitutional officer who can be impeached. Judicial officers have more often been the subject of impeachment, using the same standard laid out by the Constitution, and in those cases less than a third have been impeached due to statutorily criminal offences. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44260.pdf (page 9) Interestingly, Federal Judge John Pickering was impeached and convicted for, among other things,
appearing on the bench “in a state of total intoxication.” ibid. This was not a crime.

President Johnson was specifically impeached for violating the Tenure of Office Act, which was not a criminal statute and violation of it was not a criminal act. HE was also impeached for criticizing Congress and questioning its legislative authority. These are not criminal acts.

As you can see, historical precedent illustrates, that while it appears that President Trump has committed several criminal acts, impeachment does not require such.


So PLEASE stop spewing your uneducated crap. Thank you!
 
Judges are a poor example.
they can be removed for abuse of power because the do not face an election -they are appointed.

Because Impeachment of a POTUS OVERTURNS THE DIRECT WILL OF THE PEOPLE -a higher bar
( High crimes and Misdemeanors) is used.
The text is clear. looking at Parliament isn't useful since a PM can be called on a snap election..


Bottom line impeaching a POTUS is a grave matter that effects the entire country, not just a judge
Because of such high bar, the TEXT makes it clear a crime of Office is needed to remove.

The TEXT is the ultimate authority
 
Jarod said:
In Federalist 65, one of the principal architects of the Constitution Alexander Hamilton wrote that impeachable offenses are those that arise from the "misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust."He explains that "high crimes and misdemeanors" is a common law term used to describe offences that are "political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.

As you may or not have learned in your provencal schools, the executive is not the only constitutional officer who can be impeached. Judicial officers have more often been the subject of impeachment, using the same standard laid out by the Constitution, and in those cases less than a third have been impeached due to statutorily criminal offences. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44260.pdf (page 9) Interestingly, Federal Judge John Pickering was impeached and convicted for, among other things,
appearing on the bench “in a state of total intoxication.” ibid. This was not a crime.

President Johnson was specifically impeached for violating the Tenure of Office Act, which was not a criminal statute and violation of it was not a criminal act. HE was also impeached for criticizing Congress and questioning its legislative authority. These are not criminal acts.

As you can see, historical precedent illustrates, that while it appears that President Trump has committed several criminal acts, impeachment does not require such.


So PLEASE stop spewing your uneducated crap. Thank you!
Click to expand...

Starting ANOTHER thread on the same topic, eh? You really are OCD. So, you'll get the same answers.
You have no impeachable charges.
There ARE no impeachable charges.
The transcript removes the need for humans to interpret it. The transcript is hard cold black & white
solitary evidence and facts.
President Zelensky + transcript = no need for outside interpretation/translation
 
Jarod said:
Your copying posts I made earlier today make you look pitiful. Educate yourself, you might have a better life!
Click to expand...

Jarod? I asked you to direct me to those supposed posts. You seem to have fallen silent. Hmm. Wonder why.
 
dukkha said:
Judges are a poor example.
they can be removed for abuse of power because the do not face an election -they are appointed.

Because Impeachment of a POTUS OVERTURNS THE DIRECT WILL OF THE PEOPLE -a higher bar
( High crimes and Misdemeanors) is used.
The text is clear. looking at Parliament isn't useful since a PM can be called on a snap election..


Bottom line impeaching a POTUS is a grave matter that effects the entire country, not just a judge
Because of such high bar, the TEXT makes it clear a crime of Office is needed to remove.

The TEXT is the ultimate authority
Click to expand...

That’s not what the Constitution says, the Constitution gives the same standard for jackets as they do for the executive. You should learn a little more about the country you live in.
 
Jarod said:
In Federalist 65, one of the principal architects of the Constitution Alexander Hamilton wrote that impeachable offenses are those that arise from the "misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust."He explains that "high crimes and misdemeanors" is a common law term used to describe offences that are "political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.

As you may or not have learned in your provencal schools, the executive is not the only constitutional officer who can be impeached. Judicial officers have more often been the subject of impeachment, using the same standard laid out by the Constitution, and in those cases less than a third have been impeached due to statutorily criminal offences. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44260.pdf (page 9) Interestingly, Federal Judge John Pickering was impeached and convicted for, among other things,
appearing on the bench “in a state of total intoxication.” ibid. This was not a crime.

President Johnson was specifically impeached for violating the Tenure of Office Act, which was not a criminal statute and violation of it was not a criminal act. HE was also impeached for criticizing Congress and questioning its legislative authority. These are not criminal acts.

As you can see, historical precedent illustrates, that while it appears that President Trump has committed several criminal acts, impeachment does not require such.


So PLEASE stop spewing your uneducated crap. Thank you!
Click to expand...

wait - a shit stain is coming here and telling us the constitution is what one old dead white guys say it is

and the one guy is Hamilton?


bwahahaha. you fucking idiot. Hamilton would despise you progressive shit heads. He would fucking kill you dead, dead, dead.

:rofl2:
 
zymurgy said:
wait - a shit stain is coming here and telling us the constitution is what one old dead white guys say it is

and the one guy is Hamilton?

bwahahaha. you fucking idiot. Hamilton would despise you progressive shit heads. He would fucking kill you dead, dead, dead.

:rofl2:
Click to expand...


So you do not have an educated response? Just uneducated tripe? I figured. Where did you get your education? A whore house?
 
Hello Jarod,

Jarod said:
In Federalist 65, one of the principal architects of the Constitution Alexander Hamilton wrote that impeachable offenses are those that arise from the "misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust."He explains that "high crimes and misdemeanors" is a common law term used to describe offences that are "political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.

As you may or not have learned in your provencal schools, the executive is not the only constitutional officer who can be impeached. Judicial officers have more often been the subject of impeachment, using the same standard laid out by the Constitution, and in those cases less than a third have been impeached due to statutorily criminal offences. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44260.pdf (page 9) Interestingly, Federal Judge John Pickering was impeached and convicted for, among other things,
appearing on the bench “in a state of total intoxication.” ibid. This was not a crime.

President Johnson was specifically impeached for violating the Tenure of Office Act, which was not a criminal statute and violation of it was not a criminal act. HE was also impeached for criticizing Congress and questioning its legislative authority. These are not criminal acts.

As you can see, historical precedent illustrates, that while it appears that President Trump has committed several criminal acts, impeachment does not require such.


So PLEASE stop spewing your uneducated crap. Thank you!
Click to expand...

Very interesting.

Thanks.

Didn't know that.

I had heard that basically, an impeachable offense is anything the House says it is.

This guy was doing his own work on our dime. And what he did was actually acting against our common interest. His shadow foreign affairs operation acted AGAINST the policy of the US State Department. Not only was he doing his own work on our dime, but what he did undid what we paid to have done.

And then to realize that this imperiled an ally, and was meant to rig an election in his favor, that an attempt was made to cover it up, and that US House (We the people) was obstructed in it's oversight of the Executive branch, well, I don't care if an actual law was broken or not, though it would be hard to believe all of that is legal, THAT, to me is quite enough to warrant impeachment.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Jarod,



Very interesting.

Thanks.

Didn't know that.

I had heard that basically, an impeachable offense is anything the House says it is.

This guy was doing his own work on our dime. And what he did was actually acting against our common interest. His shadow foreign affairs operation acted AGAINST the policy of the US State Department. Not only was he doing his own work on our dime, but what he did undid what we paid to have done.

And then to realize that this imperiled an ally, and was meant to rig an election in his favor, that an attempt was made to cover it up, and that US House (We the people) was obstructed in it's oversight of the Executive branch, well, I don't care if an actual law was broken or not, though it would be hard to believe all of that is legal, THAT, to me is quite enough to warrant impeachment.
Click to expand...


This, thank you for your educated and intelligent response.
 
The rabble do not understand impeachment and should simply leave it to the more educated.
 
"Anything the House says", eh?
Looks like every president going forward then will be impeached for SOMEthing. LOL
Great precedent Dems.
 
Jarod said:
In Federalist 65, one of the principal architects of the Constitution Alexander Hamilton wrote that impeachable offenses are those that arise from the "misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust."He explains that "high crimes and misdemeanors" is a common law term used to describe offences that are "political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.

As you may or not have learned in your provencal schools, the executive is not the only constitutional officer who can be impeached. Judicial officers have more often been the subject of impeachment, using the same standard laid out by the Constitution, and in those cases less than a third have been impeached due to statutorily criminal offences. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44260.pdf (page 9) Interestingly, Federal Judge John Pickering was impeached and convicted for, among other things,
appearing on the bench “in a state of total intoxication.” ibid. This was not a crime.

President Johnson was specifically impeached for violating the Tenure of Office Act, which was not a criminal statute and violation of it was not a criminal act. HE was also impeached for criticizing Congress and questioning its legislative authority. These are not criminal acts.

As you can see, historical precedent illustrates, that while it appears that President Trump has committed several criminal acts, impeachment does not require such.


So PLEASE stop spewing your uneducated crap. Thank you!
Click to expand...

You are arguing against a claim nobody is making dumb ass

The House can impeach him for ANYTHING they want. LEGALLY speaking

However they will still have to answer to voters. So they better have a good reason that will fly with voters.

If you and your party think this is it then go for it

You seem to be moving the goal posts. For weeks you have maintained that Trump broke laws. Now you are saying he doesn’t have to have broken laws.

Let’s get on with articles of impeachment. Bring it on
 
Jarod said:
The rabble do not understand impeachment and should simply leave it to the more educated.
Click to expand...

That certainly would not be you. Now, when are you going to show me the posts that you are lying about me with? Some fucking lawyer you must be.
 
Jarod said:
In Federalist 65, one of the principal architects of the Constitution Alexander Hamilton wrote that impeachable offenses are those that arise from the "misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust."He explains that "high crimes and misdemeanors" is a common law term used to describe offences that are "political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.

As you may or not have learned in your provencal schools, the executive is not the only constitutional officer who can be impeached. Judicial officers have more often been the subject of impeachment, using the same standard laid out by the Constitution, and in those cases less than a third have been impeached due to statutorily criminal offences. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44260.pdf (page 9) Interestingly, Federal Judge John Pickering was impeached and convicted for, among other things,
appearing on the bench “in a state of total intoxication.” ibid. This was not a crime.

President Johnson was specifically impeached for violating the Tenure of Office Act, which was not a criminal statute and violation of it was not a criminal act. HE was also impeached for criticizing Congress and questioning its legislative authority. These are not criminal acts.

As you can see, historical precedent illustrates, that while it appears that President Trump has committed several criminal acts, impeachment does not require such.


So PLEASE stop spewing your uneducated crap. Thank you!
Click to expand...


They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top