Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dougjn who wrote (4277)	9/21/1998 4:11:00 PM
From: j_b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<It is overturning an election. And that is how the founders regarded it. >> In the Federalist Papers and other documents published by the founding fathers, their understanding of impeachment was fairly well documented. It had nothing to do with overturning an election and everything to do with a political cleansing when someone became abusive of their elected position. The question is still open as to whether Clinton's actions qualify as abuse of power.

To: dougjn who wrote (4277)	9/21/1998 4:17:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Well then, let's call your argument "willful blindness" as opposed to "specious".. United States Constitution, Article III, Section 4. 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 andMisdedemeanors.* It is for the Congress to decide whether this President's offences constitute grounds for articles of Impeachment. Article I Section 3 (paragraph 6) The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments..... You obviously don't like the constitutional process for impeachment, but the facts are the facts and quite frankly any further arguments you put forth can be deemed questionable due to your insistence in ignoring the underlying constitutional requirements. Reasonable people can agree or disagree as to what constitutes "impeachable offenses" but using the "overturning of elections" argument is patently false. bp