Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
Sat Jun 8, 2019, 09:44 AM Jun 2019

A quick note on impeachment...

Andrew Johnson was impeached specifically for firing his Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton. in violation of the Tenure of Office Act. This act was repealed not long after as being likely unconstitutional-- interfering with the separation of powers.

Johnson got off by one vote, but no doubt we could find similar actions in the present administration.

And, of course, our boy Clinton was investigated for all sorts of things they couldn't prove, but finally got nailed for lying-- about a blowjob. Irony is in overload when one president gets impeached for being the "gentleman" and not admitting the affair while the other gets off scot-free for flaunting it.

This brings us to that "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" wording. When Hamilton wrote Federalist #'s 65 and 66, he barely mentioned the term. That's because it had been in use in English common law since the 1300s and it was assumed everyone already knew all about it.

In England, it meant pretty much whatever Parliament wanted it to mean at the time, and that's how Hamilton saw it. The law is constantly changing and evolving, so one can't be too specific about what's covered lest an official does something they never thought of. So, sez Hamilton, it is what the House says it is. And it is made difficult enough to throw out the malefactor to hopefully ensure it won't be used trivially.

It is, ultimately, a political tool to occasionally correct the mistakes of the polling booth.

1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A quick note on impeachment... (Original Post) TreasonousBastard Jun 2019 OP
He wasn't impeached for "lying about a blowjob", he was impeached for comitting perjury ... marble falls Jun 2019 #1

marble falls

(56,357 posts)
1. He wasn't impeached for "lying about a blowjob", he was impeached for comitting perjury ...
Sat Jun 8, 2019, 10:03 AM
Jun 2019

about that blowjob under oath. He gave up his law license over it.

Do I think this impeachable as an offense? Nope. And neither did the Senate. The other charge was obstruction of justice. If I understand it correctly, the perjury was the obstruction, which seems to me kinda like over charging.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A quick note on impeachme...