Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleWhat makes me a liberal bright boy? The fact that I mentioned Trump being impeached?
and John McCain is a Republican right?
So what if he actually did sexually assault a woman? Should he get the boot if he did?
18 Dec 17
Originally posted by @mott-the-hooplePossibly the only honorable man in that Party.
and John McCain is a Republican right?
Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleYes, those impeached must be convicted as well. But it has been established since 1798 that the impeachment process does not apply to members of Congress, so Waters is correct:
no one is removed because they were impeached. Impeach simple means to indict.
Impeach/indict is just deeming a case worthy of trial.
http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/11/impeachment
a U.S. Senator (William Blount of North Carolina in 1797) have also been impeached.
Blount’s impeachment trial—the first ever conducted—established the principle that Members of Congress and Senators were not “Civil Officers” under the Constitution, and accordingly, they could only be removed from office by a two-thirds vote for expulsion by their respective chambers. Blount, who had been accused of instigating an insurrection of American Indians to further British interests in Florida, was not convicted, but the Senate did expel him.
http://history.house.gov/Institution/Origins-Development/Impeachment/
I do not agree the article you cited conclusion that because the House has the sole power of impeachment it can impeach for anything it pleases and the judiciary cannot review it. Article II, Section 4 clearly gives provides: "“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 and Misdemeanors.” and Article III just as clearly states: "Section 2.
The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution,
In theory, if the House choose to impeach someone for reasons not amounting to "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" or impeach someone not a "civil official of the United States" the aggrieved party would have a case in that arose under the Constitution and thus within the judicial power of the United States.
Originally posted by @athousandyoungJohn McCain honorable?
Possibly the only honorable man in that Party.
Here we have a man who threw the doctors under the bus who tried to break the story of the VA putting veterans on secret death lists. As soon as they contacted his office, they were shortly afterwards fired for some lame excuse such as violating patient confidentiality. If it were not for some obscure Congressman in Florida, the story probably would have been swept under the rug.
Then there is McCain who ran for office on the premise of needed to repeal and replace Obamacare. Then when the vote comes his way he votes no?
Honorable? Pfft. From what I hear, he will never return to Congress cuz he is on the verge of death. What I do know is that he is getting state of the art medical care, something Veterans around this nation never get.
18 Dec 17
Originally posted by @no1marauderCongress could have only removed Moore, not Waters.
Yes, those impeached must be convicted as well. But it has been established since 1798 that the impeachment process does not apply to members of Congress, so Waters is correct:
a U.S. Senator (William Blount of North Carolina in 1797) have also been impeached.
Blount’s impeachment trial—the first ever conducted—established the principle that Memb ...[text shortened]... se in that arose under the Constitution and thus within the judicial power of the United States.
I believe there is some provision in the Constitution that only Marauder is privy to.
18 Dec 17
Originally posted by @no1marauder'I do not agree the article you cited conclusion that because the House has the sole power of impeachment it can impeach for anything it pleases and the judiciary cannot review it. Article II, Section 4 clearly gives provides: "“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 and Misdemeanors.” and Article III just as clearly states: "Section 2.
Yes, those impeached must be convicted as well. But it has been established since 1798 that the impeachment process does not apply to members of Congress, so Waters is correct:
a U.S. Senator (William Blount of North Carolina in 1797) have also been impeached.
Blount’s impeachment trial—the first ever conducted—established the principle that Memb ...[text shortened]... se in that arose under the Constitution and thus within the judicial power of the United States.
The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, "
The judiciary part comes after impeachment.
18 Dec 17
Originally posted by @whodeyNot congress as a whole...only the senate could have removed Moore had be been elected.
Congress could have only removed Moore, not Waters.
I believe there is some provision in the Constitution that only Marauder is privy to.
18 Dec 17
Originally posted by @no1marauderThe house of representatives cannot remove Senator waters or any other senator.
Why do you lie so shamelessly?
My post specifically says Waters could be removed by the House (though not impeached).
18 Dec 17
Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleMaxine Waters is a House member not a Senator.
The house of representatives cannot remove Senator waters or any other senator.
18 Dec 17
Originally posted by @no1maraudermy bad, your statement is correct
Maxine Waters is a House member not a Senator.