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.

Pastimes : Impeachment=" Insult to all Voters" -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pezz who wrote (867)	12/26/1998 12:28:00 AM
From: alan w	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2390

This high crime and misdemeanor argument is getting old. Pezz, if high crimes were the only cause for impeachment, don't you think they would have said for high crimes only, and no one will be removed for minor offenses. If misdemeanor meant high crimes only, aren't they being redundant. Also, Hillary Clinton is held in high regard by Dems, and she said the President should be removed for LYING to the public. That was her interpretation of our constitution. Please cite your source for the old definition. alan w

To: pezz who wrote (867)	12/26/1998 1:08:00 AM
From: R. Martenson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2390

Polls = <<By and large the American people do approve of his performance>>. A common foundation is the argument that because polls approve of Clinton's job performance, he should not be impeached. No...You did not used the word polls, but a carefull reading of your written intent is to say opinion polls "i.e. people approve" is stronger than the legal argument 'largely' Republicans and 4 democrats, support in the House impeachment process. The executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government are unique in this country...they are co-equal. That is to say we don't diminish the importance of a senior judge being impeached over the president. In fact the articles of impeachment are not defined any different for any member of government for that reason. Reagan killing commies...you chose to argue the funding for it, not the statement itself. Again a careful read left me with the impression you were willing to let that comment stand, apparently I was incorrect. Again, I hear.. "in 200 years" the meaning of misdemeanors has changed and again I challenge you to review an impeachment in 1803 and one in the early 1900's..I'd pass on the particulars, but that is too easy. Should I 'trust' history or your opinion on how we should feel? Enjoy the exchange, maybe we both are learning something. Cheers

To: pezz who wrote (867)	12/26/1998 10:34:00 AM
From: R. Martenson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2390

The Constitutional Convention borrowed much from old English law. Most participants at the convention voiced opinions that criminal acts were NOT the only grounds for impeachment. The New York Bar association did an extensive piece on the subject in 1974, the following are excerpts related to this topic and describe how the founders thought and discussed the misdemeanor inclusion. Randolph, for example, spoke of the need to impeach a President for "abusing his power" in connection with the public purse and the military. " Franklin argued that impeachment was necessary to prevent the drastic remedy of assassination where a President "rendered himself obnoxious." Davie also spoke broadly of impeachment as "an essential security for the good behavior of the Executive." Madison then contributed a substantial and well-known statement of his own views: [Madison] thought it indispensable that some provision should be made for defending the Community ag[ain]st the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate. The limitation of the period of his service was not a sufficient security. He might lose his capacity after his appointment. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression.... In the case of the Executive Magistracy which was to be administered by a single man, loss of capacity or corruption was more within the compass of probable events, and either of them might be fatal to the Republic." Morris added: "Corrupting his electors, and incapacity were other causes of impeachment. For the latter he should be punished not as a man, but as an officer.">> Neither Madison nor Morris envisioned the grounds for impeachment as being limited to criminal acts.