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: DMaA who wrote (28229)	1/15/1999 4:22:00 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 67261

So, is that a type of vote or is it abstaining from the vote? If it is a type of vote, is it equal to not guilty? If it is abstaining, does the number needed to reach 66 2/3%, change?

To: DMaA who wrote (28229)	1/15/1999 4:54:00 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 67261

OK, I found part of the answer to my question in the jury rules. During votes, senators should stand at their seats and call out "yea" or "nay." Now, does the question, "Does this offense rise to the level of Impeachability," exist; Or was that already determined by the House? It would be unconscionable and indefensable for any one to vote "nay" on a question of guilty or not guilty, based on what you labeled "jury nullification." I thought that the consequences of a guilty verdict were final after the house threw out the option of sensorship.