CDZ The Constitutional Basis for Impeachment

[Leo123]

Of course that is your interpretation.
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
The Constitution leaves the interpretation of those words entirely to Congress- first the House for the articles of impeachment and then the Senate for the trial. According to the Constitution- Congress's interpretation is the Constitutional interpretation.

And Congress has interpreted them differently than you.

3 officials have been impeached for bribery.
1 judge was impeached for 'drunkenness and unlawful rulings'
1 judge for tax evasion
1 judge for filing false disclosures
And Nixon would have been impeached for obstruction of justice and abuse of power

Correct, and the Senate has the sole power to adjudicate it. However an impeachment will not take place if the House does not file a FORMAL inquiry which grants discovery. So far, Pelosi has not filed formal charges, she is trying to ride on the threat of impeachment and is bolstered by the MSM who has yet to question her on this matter. She knows they have nothing worthy of such charges.

 

[diver52]

Of course that is your interpretation.
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
The Constitution leaves the interpretation of those words entirely to Congress- first the House for the articles of impeachment and then the Senate for the trial. According to the Constitution- Congress's interpretation is the Constitutional interpretation.

And Congress has interpreted them differently than you.

3 officials have been impeached for bribery.
1 judge was impeached for 'drunkenness and unlawful rulings'
1 judge for tax evasion
1 judge for filing false disclosures
And Nixon would have been impeached for obstruction of justice and abuse of power

Correct, and the Senate has the sole power to adjudicate it. However an impeachment will not take place if the House does not file a FORMAL inquiry which grants discovery. So far, Pelosi has not filed formal charges, she is trying to ride on the threat of impeachment and is bolstered by the MSM who has yet to question her on this matter. She knows they have nothing worthy of such charges.

Where in the Constitution does it require a FORMAL inquiry be filed?

 

[Pellinore]

So, Madison added in "and other high crimes and misdemeanors" in order to provide a catch-all for future generations (us) so that American politicians wouldn't be able to weasel out of deserved charges the way that British Governor did.

So, Madison et al intended for the House of Representatives to exercise veto power over the election of a President just because a majority doesn't like him?

P.S. How do you feel about Pelosi circumventing the House rule requiring a majority vote to initiate an impeachment investigation? Did Madison intend that, too?

A. No. This isn't a veto of an election, nor is it a conviction or a removal. All the House can do is impeach, which is the Congressional equivalent of convening a Grand Jury. They can recommend charges to the Senate, and that's it.

B. There is no such rule.

 

[Leo123]

Of course that is your interpretation.
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
The Constitution leaves the interpretation of those words entirely to Congress- first the House for the articles of impeachment and then the Senate for the trial. According to the Constitution- Congress's interpretation is the Constitutional interpretation.

And Congress has interpreted them differently than you.

3 officials have been impeached for bribery.
1 judge was impeached for 'drunkenness and unlawful rulings'
1 judge for tax evasion
1 judge for filing false disclosures
And Nixon would have been impeached for obstruction of justice and abuse of power

Correct, and the Senate has the sole power to adjudicate it. However an impeachment will not take place if the House does not file a FORMAL inquiry which grants discovery. So far, Pelosi has not filed formal charges, she is trying to ride on the threat of impeachment and is bolstered by the MSM who has yet to question her on this matter. She knows they have nothing worthy of such charges.

Where in the Constitution does it require a FORMAL inquiry be filed?

Pelosi has to do more than utter the word "impeachment" *** ***** **** Impeachment requires a SUPERMAJORITY *****. Just because DEMOCRATS want to impeach Trump doesn't mean that actual impeachment can be brought. WTF is wrong with some of you people anyway?

 

[Care4all]

Of course that is your interpretation.

No, it is the plain meaning of the actual words inscribed in the Constitution.

the HIGH in high crimes and misdemeanors, is for a person holding a HIGH office, a position of power and public trust

we had no misdemeanors in our laws at the time, and misdemeanors stood for the abuses of the public trust... abuses of their HIGH position...

 

[Care4all]

Of course that is your interpretation.
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
The Constitution leaves the interpretation of those words entirely to Congress- first the House for the articles of impeachment and then the Senate for the trial. According to the Constitution- Congress's interpretation is the Constitutional interpretation.

And Congress has interpreted them differently than you.

3 officials have been impeached for bribery.
1 judge was impeached for 'drunkenness and unlawful rulings'
1 judge for tax evasion
1 judge for filing false disclosures
And Nixon would have been impeached for obstruction of justice and abuse of power

Correct, and the Senate has the sole power to adjudicate it. However an impeachment will not take place if the House does not file a FORMAL inquiry which grants discovery. So far, Pelosi has not filed formal charges, she is trying to ride on the threat of impeachment and is bolstered by the MSM who has yet to question her on this matter. She knows they have nothing worthy of such charges.

Where in the Constitution does it require a FORMAL inquiry be filed?

Pelosi has to do more than utter the word "impeachment" you stupid fool. Impeachment requires a SUPERMAJORITY, dufus. Just because DEMOCRATS want to impeach Trump doesn't mean that actual impeachment can be brought. WTF is wrong with some of you people anyway?

FYI

to impeach in the house it only takes a simple majority

to convict in the Senate it takes 2/3's

 

[Leo123]

Of course that is your interpretation.
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
The Constitution leaves the interpretation of those words entirely to Congress- first the House for the articles of impeachment and then the Senate for the trial. According to the Constitution- Congress's interpretation is the Constitutional interpretation.

And Congress has interpreted them differently than you.

3 officials have been impeached for bribery.
1 judge was impeached for 'drunkenness and unlawful rulings'
1 judge for tax evasion
1 judge for filing false disclosures
And Nixon would have been impeached for obstruction of justice and abuse of power

Correct, and the Senate has the sole power to adjudicate it. However an impeachment will not take place if the House does not file a FORMAL inquiry which grants discovery. So far, Pelosi has not filed formal charges, she is trying to ride on the threat of impeachment and is bolstered by the MSM who has yet to question her on this matter. She knows they have nothing worthy of such charges.

Where in the Constitution does it require a FORMAL inquiry be filed?

Pelosi has to do more than utter the word "impeachment" you stupid fool. Impeachment requires a SUPERMAJORITY, dufus. Just because DEMOCRATS want to impeach Trump doesn't mean that actual impeachment can be brought. WTF is wrong with some of you people anyway?

FYI

to impeach in the house it only takes a simple majority

to convict in the Senate it takes 2/3's

Yes but voting on an impeachment takes Pelosi to formally call for it. So far she hasn't. Therefore, the folks she is accusing have no power. How would YOU like to be accused of a crime and were prohibited from knowing the exact accusations, no power to call witnesses, etc? Zat OK with you?

 

[Leo123]

Of course that is your interpretation.

No, it is the plain meaning of the actual words inscribed in the Constitution.

the HIGH in high crimes and misdemeanors, is for a person holding a HIGH office, a position of power and public trust

we had no misdemeanors in our laws at the time, and misdemeanors stood for the abuses of the public trust... abuses of their HIGH position...

Pelosi and the Democrats are the only ones 'high' on false pretenses. Biden is the one who abused the public trust. He and the Democrats know it.... that is why they are belatedly trying to blame Trump for the same shit. That's what Neo-Marxists do.... blame others for what they themselves are doing which is meant to undermine a society.

 

[Care4all]

Of course that is your interpretation.

No, it is the plain meaning of the actual words inscribed in the Constitution.

the HIGH in high crimes and misdemeanors, is for a person holding a HIGH office, a position of power and public trust

we had no misdemeanors in our laws at the time, and misdemeanors stood for the abuses of the public trust... abuses of their HIGH position...

Pelosi and the Democrats are the only ones 'high' on false pretenses. Biden is the one who abused the public trust. He and the Democrats know it.... that is why they are belatedly trying to blame Trump for the same shit. That's what Neo-Marxists do.... blame others for what they themselves are doing which is meant to undermine a society.

You are being fed, fake news on Biden, and you are the one supporting all the accusations the President has made up and thrown out there without any proof of wrong doing, without any due process or means for Biden to defend himself.

This is what the Liar and chief does, and he pulls people like you in to it, to deflect from his own criminal acts.

As every day goes by, he is going to be impeached... he's self impeaching himself ever time he opens his mouth....

And the chances of the s Senate convicting him are rising.... he's admitting his own crimes on national TV, trying to make them normal, ok.....

I don't think this play from his playbook of tricks is going to work this time... he's over used it.

 

[debbiedowner]

Of course that is your interpretation.
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
The Constitution leaves the interpretation of those words entirely to Congress- first the House for the articles of impeachment and then the Senate for the trial. According to the Constitution- Congress's interpretation is the Constitutional interpretation.

And Congress has interpreted them differently than you.

3 officials have been impeached for bribery.
1 judge was impeached for 'drunkenness and unlawful rulings'
1 judge for tax evasion
1 judge for filing false disclosures
And Nixon would have been impeached for obstruction of justice and abuse of power

Still no input on what crimes he has committed. Uh oh, I feel a media "link" about to appear, lmao.

FEC chairwoman confirms accepting 'opposition research' from foreign national is illegal

 

[diver52]

Of course that is your interpretation.
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
The Constitution leaves the interpretation of those words entirely to Congress- first the House for the articles of impeachment and then the Senate for the trial. According to the Constitution- Congress's interpretation is the Constitutional interpretation.

And Congress has interpreted them differently than you.

3 officials have been impeached for bribery.
1 judge was impeached for 'drunkenness and unlawful rulings'
1 judge for tax evasion
1 judge for filing false disclosures
And Nixon would have been impeached for obstruction of justice and abuse of power

Correct, and the Senate has the sole power to adjudicate it. However an impeachment will not take place if the House does not file a FORMAL inquiry which grants discovery. So far, Pelosi has not filed formal charges, she is trying to ride on the threat of impeachment and is bolstered by the MSM who has yet to question her on this matter. She knows they have nothing worthy of such charges.

Where in the Constitution does it require a FORMAL inquiry be filed?

Pelosi has to do more than utter the word "impeachment" you stupid fool. Impeachment requires a SUPERMAJORITY, dufus. Just because DEMOCRATS want to impeach Trump doesn't mean that actual impeachment can be brought. WTF is wrong with some of you people anyway?

What it says is that the House has the sole power to impeach. It says nothing about a super majority. It says nothing about a FORMAL inquiry. How the house proceeds with impeachment is within the sole power of the House.

Why is it that people who scream the loudest about following the Constitution never seem to bother to read it?

 

[Dick Foster]

"High crimes and misdemeanors" is a phrase from Section 4 of Article Two of the United States Constitution: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Let's take a look at the entire phrase. It starts by listing Treason and Bribery, and then adding other high crimes and misdemeanors. In this context, the term "other" can only mean "similar." (Otherwise, there is no need or meaning for that term.)

Thus the "other" high crimes and misdemeanors means those of similar seriousness to treason and bribery. To claim that impeachment is nothing more than a legislative popularity contest is to ignore the specific wording of the Constitution which authorizes this procedure in the first place.

Quid Pro Quo arrangements fall within that definition. So does obstruction of justice, in trying to cover up said actions, interfering with the investigation of said actions, etc, etc.

And Trump is guilty of none of these.

 

[diver52]

Of course that is your interpretation.
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
The Constitution leaves the interpretation of those words entirely to Congress- first the House for the articles of impeachment and then the Senate for the trial. According to the Constitution- Congress's interpretation is the Constitutional interpretation.

And Congress has interpreted them differently than you.

3 officials have been impeached for bribery.
1 judge was impeached for 'drunkenness and unlawful rulings'
1 judge for tax evasion
1 judge for filing false disclosures
And Nixon would have been impeached for obstruction of justice and abuse of power

Correct, and the Senate has the sole power to adjudicate it. However an impeachment will not take place if the House does not file a FORMAL inquiry which grants discovery. So far, Pelosi has not filed formal charges, she is trying to ride on the threat of impeachment and is bolstered by the MSM who has yet to question her on this matter. She knows they have nothing worthy of such charges.

Where in the Constitution does it require a FORMAL inquiry be filed?

Pelosi has to do more than utter the word "impeachment" you stupid fool. Impeachment requires a SUPERMAJORITY, dufus. Just because DEMOCRATS want to impeach Trump doesn't mean that actual impeachment can be brought. WTF is wrong with some of you people anyway?

FYI

to impeach in the house it only takes a simple majority

to convict in the Senate it takes 2/3's

Yes but voting on an impeachment takes Pelosi to formally call for it. So far she hasn't. Therefore, the folks she is accusing have no power. How would YOU like to be accused of a crime and were prohibited from knowing the exact accusations, no power to call witnesses, etc? Zat OK with you?

The title of the thread is what is the constitutional basis for impeachment. What you are talking about are the internal House rules. So yes, when the House is ready to begin the formal inquiry stage there will probably be a vote. But that will happen when it happens.

BTW, you would consider this the grand jury phase of a case. An impeachment is an indictment. In that phase the accused gets to face no one at all. The trial phase will be in the Senate.

 

[jwoodie]

BTW, you would consider this the grand jury phase of a case. An impeachment is an indictment. In that phase the accused gets to face no one at all.

Did you forget that a grand jury must find sufficient evidence that a statutory crime was committed by the accused? (It can't just make up a new crime because it doesn't like the accused.)

Similarly, Congress is governed by the Constitution regarding the bases for impeachment: Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. "I hate Trump" is not a Constitutional basis for impeachment.

 

[debbiedowner]

Of course that is your interpretation.
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
The Constitution leaves the interpretation of those words entirely to Congress- first the House for the articles of impeachment and then the Senate for the trial. According to the Constitution- Congress's interpretation is the Constitutional interpretation.

And Congress has interpreted them differently than you.

3 officials have been impeached for bribery.
1 judge was impeached for 'drunkenness and unlawful rulings'
1 judge for tax evasion
1 judge for filing false disclosures
And Nixon would have been impeached for obstruction of justice and abuse of power

Still no input on what crimes he has committed. Uh oh, I feel a media "link" about to appear, lmao.

FEC chairwoman confirms accepting 'opposition research' from foreign national is illegal

She's a liar. LIke all progressives.

It's illegal.

 

[diver52]

BTW, you would consider this the grand jury phase of a case. An impeachment is an indictment. In that phase the accused gets to face no one at all.

Did you forget that a grand jury must find sufficient evidence that a statutory crime was committed by the accused? (It can't just make up a new crime because it doesn't like the accused.)

Similarly, Congress is governed by the Constitution regarding the bases for impeachment: Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. "I hate Trump" is not a Constitutional basis for impeachment.

The Constitution states the House has the sole power. It determines what is or is not an impeachable offense. No other agency in the government has the authority to dictate this to the House. If you actually want a literal interpretation of the Constitution, that's it.

 

[Syriusly]

Of course that is your interpretation.
The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
The Constitution leaves the interpretation of those words entirely to Congress- first the House for the articles of impeachment and then the Senate for the trial. According to the Constitution- Congress's interpretation is the Constitutional interpretation.

And Congress has interpreted them differently than you.

3 officials have been impeached for bribery.
1 judge was impeached for 'drunkenness and unlawful rulings'
1 judge for tax evasion
1 judge for filing false disclosures
And Nixon would have been impeached for obstruction of justice and abuse of power

Correct, and the Senate has the sole power to adjudicate it. However an impeachment will not take place if the House does not file a FORMAL inquiry which grants discovery. So far, Pelosi has not filed formal charges, she is trying to ride on the threat of impeachment and is bolstered by the MSM who has yet to question her on this matter. She knows they have nothing worthy of such charges.

Where in the Constitution does it require a FORMAL inquiry be filed?

Pelosi has to do more than utter the word "impeachment" you stupid fool. Impeachment requires a SUPERMAJORITY, dufus. Just because DEMOCRATS want to impeach Trump doesn't mean that actual impeachment can be brought. WTF is wrong with some of you people anyway?

FYI

to impeach in the house it only takes a simple majority

to convict in the Senate it takes 2/3's

Yes but voting on an impeachment takes Pelosi to formally call for it. So far she hasn't. Therefore, the folks she is accusing have no power. How would YOU like to be accused of a crime and were prohibited from knowing the exact accusations, no power to call witnesses, etc? Zat OK with you?

You mean like how Trump keeps accusing Joe Biden of committing crimes?

This thread is supposedly about the Constitutional basis for impeachment. There is currently an investigation into Impeachment charges. There is no Constitutional basis for anyone under investigation for possible Impeachment to know 'the exact accusations' or 'to call witnesses'

Matter of fact- there is no Constitutional basis for the accused in an Impeachment proceeding to call witnesses at all.

 

[Syriusly]

BTW, you would consider this the grand jury phase of a case. An impeachment is an indictment. In that phase the accused gets to face no one at all.

Did you forget that a grand jury must find sufficient evidence that a statutory crime was committed by the accused? (It can't just make up a new crime because it doesn't like the accused.)

Similarly, Congress is governed by the Constitution regarding the bases for impeachment: Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. "I hate Trump" is not a Constitutional basis for impeachment.

Congress- or more specifically the House- under the Constitution- has the sole authority to determine what "Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors" are.

And in the past that has included 'high crimes' such as drunkenness.

It certainly can include soliciting foreign governments for dirt on political opponents in the United States, or offering the quid pro quo of a meeting in the White House if the foreign government PUBLICLY announces it will be looking for dirt on the President's political rival.

 

[Leo123]

Of course that is your interpretation.

No, it is the plain meaning of the actual words inscribed in the Constitution.

the HIGH in high crimes and misdemeanors, is for a person holding a HIGH office, a position of power and public trust

we had no misdemeanors in our laws at the time, and misdemeanors stood for the abuses of the public trust... abuses of their HIGH position...

Pelosi and the Democrats are the only ones 'high' on false pretenses. Biden is the one who abused the public trust. He and the Democrats know it.... that is why they are belatedly trying to blame Trump for the same shit. That's what Neo-Marxists do.... blame others for what they themselves are doing which is meant to undermine a society.

You are being fed, fake news on Biden, and you are the one supporting all the accusations the President has made up and thrown out there without any proof of wrong doing, without any due process or means for Biden to defend himself.

This is what the Liar and chief does, and he pulls people like you in to it, to deflect from his own criminal acts.

As every day goes by, he is going to be impeached... he's self impeaching himself ever time he opens his mouth....

And the chances of the s Senate convicting him are rising.... he's admitting his own crimes on national TV, trying to make them normal, ok.....

I don't think this play from his playbook of tricks is going to work this time... he's over used it.

No that's what the Democrats do, accuse others, give it to their fake news outlets and try to 'convict' in the court of public opinion. Trump is telling you the truth. Biden even admitted getting rid of the prosecutor (who was investigating his son Hunter) by extorting Ukraine with the withholding U.S. funding unless they fired prosecutor.

 

[Syriusly]

Of course that is your interpretation.

No, it is the plain meaning of the actual words inscribed in the Constitution.

the HIGH in high crimes and misdemeanors, is for a person holding a HIGH office, a position of power and public trust

we had no misdemeanors in our laws at the time, and misdemeanors stood for the abuses of the public trust... abuses of their HIGH position...

Pelosi and the Democrats are the only ones 'high' on false pretenses. Biden is the one who abused the public trust. He and the Democrats know it.... that is why they are belatedly trying to blame Trump for the same shit. That's what Neo-Marxists do.... blame others for what they themselves are doing which is meant to undermine a society.

You are being fed, fake news on Biden, and you are the one supporting all the accusations the President has made up and thrown out there without any proof of wrong doing, without any due process or means for Biden to defend himself.

This is what the Liar and chief does, and he pulls people like you in to it, to deflect from his own criminal acts.

As every day goes by, he is going to be impeached... he's self impeaching himself ever time he opens his mouth....

And the chances of the s Senate convicting him are rising.... he's admitting his own crimes on national TV, trying to make them normal, ok.....

I don't think this play from his playbook of tricks is going to work this time... he's over used it.

No that's what the Democrats do, accuse others, give it to their fake news outlets and try to 'convict' in the court of public opinion. Trump is telling you the truth. Biden even admitted getting rid of the prosecutor (who was investigating his son Hunter) by extorting Ukraine with the withholding U.S. funding unless they fired prosecutor.

LOL
Trump accuses others of crimes all the time- Clinton, Biden- hell he even accused a member of Congress of Treason.
Trump only tells the truth by accident.
Biden admitted getting rid a prosecutor who was failing to prosecute corruption- as part of official U.S. policy- whose action was supported by Republican Senators and the EU.
That prosecutor was not investigating Hunter.

Just more lies by the Trump spin machine.

Now Trump is actually extorting Ukraine to dig up dirt on his political rival- and insisting that Ukraine announce it in public.

Because Trump cares about 'corruption'?

The only corruption Trump pretends to care about is when he can use the name Biden in the same sentence.