It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Impeachment Vote Begins

page: 4
38
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Thank you for your POV but I still defer to the likes of Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz on these matters.

And, since you mention Andrew Johnson, I also defer to Turley who basically said that the impeachment of Johnson was another example of a politically motivated impeachment where there were no actual crimes committed. And he further went on to say that this time it's even WORSE.

Nixon had actually broken the law and so did Bill Clinton. Those two impeachments I fully understand.

This one is a load of crap.




posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Expulsion is the most serious form of disciplinary action that can be taken against a Member of Congress.The United States Constitution (Article I, Section 5, Clause 2) provides that "Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member." The processes for expulsion differ somewhat between the House of Representatives and the Senate.[1


en.wikipedia.org...

I say Article 1 section 5 clause 2 puts impeachment on the table.

Because it does result in the same thing as expulsion.




posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU2018

Only once in history has the House attempted to impeach a Congressperson. In 1797 the House voted to impeach Senator William Blount. On the same day, the Senate voted to expel him. The Senate then proceeded to vote that members of Congress did not count as "civil officers" for the purposes of the Impeachment Clause.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

You still going on about that impeached intoxicated judge? Obviously, there is no comparison as to what is happening here with Trump. They didn't impeach that judge for simply imbibing alcohol at a party. The judge intoxication was proving to hinder his mental capacity to do his judicial duty.

The closest comparison would be if Trump were to have developed a real physical mental defunct issue and unable to perform his duties. You would be better to compare most of the Democratic leadership to that judge. They are the ones showing they are not able to perform the duties as elected due to the mental distress they have over the 2016 election.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts

Yes or no. Is chronic intoxication a crime?



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: CynConcepts

Yes or no. Is chronic intoxication a crime?



No, it isn't.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: CynConcepts

Yes or no. Is chronic intoxication a crime?


Seriously? Obviously, one can be arrested even to this day if you are publicly intoxicated and it creates a disturbance. Intoxicated at work? Yep, you are going to get fired. Drink and drive? DUI arrested.

Chronic is the clue that the judge in question was impeached because his addiction made it impossible to perform his duties. So he was impeached. Basically fired from his job.


edit on 12 18 2019 by CynConcepts because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

And yet a "civil officer" was impeached and convicted over it. So the argument that Trump cannot be impeached for Abuse of Power because it is not a crime is wrong.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: RickinVa

And yet a "civil officer" was impeached and convicted over it. So the argument that Trump cannot be impeached for Abuse of Power because it is not a crime is wrong.



I disagree.


Chronic intoxication would fall under unfit for office.
edit on 18-12-2019 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Since when does "chronic intoxication" equal "abuse of power"?

Which, btw, neither is a crime.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: toolgal462

Exactly, neither is a crime listed in the USC. But both are impeachable offenses because they can be considered high crimes.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

And if one used their position to benefit their own personal status couldn't that also be construed as a person being unfit for office?



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:32 AM
link   
FYI: The House can impeach and not pass the articles to the Senate until Chuck Schumer tells them to. That could be after November 2020.

thebulwark.com...

President Trump would carry the label of "Impeached", but not the label of "Acquitted", until the Senate is able to have a trial...which could be after election day.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: toolgal462

Exactly, neither is a crime listed in the USC. But both are impeachable offenses because they can be considered high crimes.


That's your loose interpretation but not mine.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

In a kangaroo court, they can define crimes as they see fit. Trump talks to loud could be impeachable i this day and age. Somehow, I don't think this is what the founding fathers had in mind for High Crimes no matter how much you are getting on with.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: toolgal462

Exactly, neither is a crime listed in the USC. But both are impeachable offenses because they can be considered high crimes.



Since when has being a alcoholic a "high crime"?
My neighbor was an alcoholic and I never heard anyone claim he committed "high crimes" because of his drinking.

That's absurd.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:34 AM
link   
The Nadler (sounds like a Batman villain) is speaking now.

All he's doing is telling us what HE thinks Trump meant.

No empirical evidence.

Just his opinion on what Trump was thinking and meaning.

Trump is getting impeached because the democrats inferred intent.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

So wouldn't sending rudy in to one of embassies to create his brand of chaos in my opinion...

So, has anyone on either side said anything that hasn't been said a few thousand times before or is it just the same ole whining and bickering?
Nancy show up yet?



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar




So, has anyone on either side said anything that hasn't been said a few thousand times before or is it just the same ole whining and bickering?
Nancy show up yet?


Nope, it looks like the Democrats are actually going to follow through on making the statement that half the voters in the country don't matter and shouldn't have the right to vote.



posted on Dec, 18 2019 @ 11:39 AM
link   
New drinking game,

When ever some dimbulb leftist says, "Profound Sadness". . . . take a drink!




top topics



 
38
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join