What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Impeach George Santos

BluesLegend

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
63,670
Reaction score
35,666
Points
2,645
Location
Trump's Army
considering the level of crimes being found acceptable on Trump's behaviour.
Disagreeing with the left's world view is not a crime.
 

WorldWatcher

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
8,806
Reaction score
2,036
Points
255
Location
VA
There is no process to impeach a house member.

RetiredSgt in post #2 is spot on correct. Impeach George Santos

So, unless any of his lies could yield an actual criminal conviction somehow, he really can’t be removed from office. There is no such thing as a “recall election” for Congresscritters, either.

In any event, it is unlikely he will ever be a voice for any change in the way America operates. He’s basically a ridiculous non-entity at this point.

Technically both are true, as "impeachment" as most people understand it requires action by both the House and the Senate. The House bascially brings the charges (indicts) and the Senate has the trial for conviction or not.

However, under the Constitution Article I, Section 5, Paragraph 2: "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member."

So technically the processes isn't impeachment, it simply takes a 2/3rds vote of that chamber to expel a member.

No actual criminal conviction is required (technically), simply a 2/3rds vote. However with such a slim majority and the fact that the seat would only be filed by special election (required for the House, Senate vacancies are the ones that can be filled by gubernatorial appointments), that will never happen.

If the "Red Wave" had occurred and the GOP had a 20-30 majority, Santo's would have already be expelled.

WW
 

blackhawk

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2012
Messages
32,578
Reaction score
14,563
Points
1,590
Location
Deep in the heart of Texas.
When all else fails, tards always resort to moral equivalency.
I see so only the lies from those you don’t support matter good to know tard. If any of the lies told by Santos go into criminal activity that would make impeachment a real possibility go for it if not then how long he serves in Congress is up to the voters in his district not self righteous partisans in Congress, the media or on a message board.
Here endth the lesson Sean Connery The Untouchables.
 

g5000

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
112,976
Reaction score
29,249
Points
2,180
I see so only the lies from those you don’t support matter good to know tard. If any of the lies told by Santos go into criminal activity that would make impeachment a real possibility go for it if not then how long he serves in Congress is up to the voters in his district not self righteous partisans in Congress, the media or on a message board.
Here endth the lesson Sean Connery The Untouchables.
You almost put together a cogent sentence somewhere in there.

Almost.

As for Santos, he is probably going to be indicted for violating campaign finance laws.

As for Sean Connery, you are the one who brought a flower basket of tu quoques to a gunfight, kid.
 

BackAgain

Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Joined
Nov 11, 2021
Messages
23,436
Reaction score
23,210
Points
2,288
Location
Now a resident of a Red state! Hallelujah!
Technically both are true, as "impeachment" as most people understand it requires action by both the House and the Senate. The House bascially brings the charges (indicts) and the Senate has the trial for conviction or not.

However, under the Constitution Article I, Section 5, Paragraph 2: "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member."

So technically the processes isn't impeachment, it simply takes a 2/3rds vote of that chamber to expel a member.

No actual criminal conviction is required (technically), simply a 2/3rds vote. However with such a slim majority and the fact that the seat would only be filed by special election (required for the House, Senate vacancies are the ones that can be filled by gubernatorial appointments), that will never happen.

If the "Red Wave" had occurred and the GOP had a 20-30 majority, Santo's would have already be expelled.

WW
That ^ is correct. But, to amplify, the SCOTUS did interject some finer points about what even that Constitutional provision entails.

Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969). That case clearly holds that, in doing so, the houses are NOT permitted to merely override the democratically expressed will of the voters.​


… [W]hat evidence we have of Congress' early understanding confirms our conclusion that the House is without power to exclude any member-elect who meets the Constitution's requirements for membership.
Id at 547.

A fundamental principle of our representative democracy is, in Hamilton's words, "that the people should choose whom they please to govern them." 2 Elliot's Debates 257.
Id at 548.

It would indeed require 2/3rds of the House to concur in the removal of Santos to overcome the “will” of the voters who put him into that seat.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
69,957
Reaction score
24,418
Points
2,260
A deep dive into the records and backgrounds of many of our Dim politicians would prove disastrous. To them. And sure. I’m guessing the same is more or less true for many GOP politicians.

So, yeah. Why start something if you’re not looking forward to it being done into you. (As the Dims are now finding out about.)

Kind of like finding classified documents wherever people look?
 
OP
Independentthinker

Independentthinker

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2015
Messages
8,799
Reaction score
6,084
Points
938
Impeachment is a constitutional authority given to indict those who commit treason, bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors. Santos' crime is ridiculously embellishing his resume which, like Biden, calls his character into question, but it does not fit into any of the criteria for impeachment.
According to the Democrat's House, impeachment is whatever the House decides it means.
 

BlindBoo

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
50,021
Reaction score
12,579
Points
2,180
The lady in Canada sending Trump ricin was incited by all the lefty rhetoric against Trump.

“We are facing a defining moment,” the president said. “We must with one overwhelming, unified voice speak, as a country, and say there’s no place for voter intimidation or political violence in America.”

Of course she:

1489.jpg


is over the rainbow crazy.
 

Foxfyre

Eternal optimist
Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Messages
60,437
Reaction score
25,067
Points
2,330
Location
Desert Southwest USA
According to the Democrat's House, impeachment is whatever the House decides it means.
Yes. Made up crimes. Manufactured authority. No due process. Every Democrat and the Republicans who voted for impeachment should be brought up on charges for no due process alone.
 
OP
Independentthinker

Independentthinker

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2015
Messages
8,799
Reaction score
6,084
Points
938
“We are facing a defining moment,” the president said. “We must with one overwhelming, unified voice speak, as a country, and say there’s no place for voter intimidation or political violence in America.”

Of course she:

1489.jpg


is over the rainbow crazy.
You're talking about saying something after the fact. I'm saying that the left and the lefty media incited this lady to do this through all of their constant nonstop anti-Trumpness.
 

Dante Reawakened

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
May 4, 2022
Messages
2,933
Reaction score
1,183
Points
178
Says the party who has been going after Trump with nonstop witch hunts for six years now, saying Trump will be in jail soon? Last I looked he's still running around free and running for president in 2024 and not convicted on anything.
Witch hunts? You're regurgitating Trump's whines
 

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

Forum List

Top