Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Amita

Impeachment Amendment

117 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Amita

Only amending our Constitution will have a lasting effect. Whether thru the convention of States method or the regular difficult process, these words should be added after the line about the House having 'sole power' to impeach:  

And no Person shall be impeached without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Save one word, this is borrowed from the Senate section regarding their 'sole power' to try an impeachment case.

Edited by Amita

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029

It's an idea.  Why do you think that?  DO you think that?

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56

Seems redundant to me since that is already the rule.  The senate can't vote on an impeachment or hold a hearing if less than 2/3ds of the senators are present.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amita
1 minute ago, Doug1029 said:

It's an idea.  Why do you think that?  DO you think that?

Doug

To avoid more House partisan votes that can impeach a President with only 51% support.  A future of tit for tat between which party controls the House will result in a further destruction of this nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amita
1 minute ago, Desertrat56 said:

Seems redundant to me since that is already the rule.  The senate can't vote on an impeachment or hold a hearing if less than 2/3ds of the senators are present.

Not correct in both cases.  Study more...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amita

At end of Article One is the only mention of the House re impeachment - nothing more:

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Near the end of section 3 is this about the Senate's function:

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. [...] And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Concurrence means voting for conviction on the charges.  Should only 30 Senators be present, then the vote of 20 for conviction will do.

Edited by Amita

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029
13 minutes ago, Amita said:

To avoid more House partisan votes that can impeach a President with only 51% support.  A future of tit for tat between which party controls the House will result in a further destruction of this nation.

Since this is only the third impeachment trial in the nation;s history, how is it you consider partisanship to be a problem?

Doug

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzz_Light_Year
2 minutes ago, Doug1029 said:

Since this is only the third impeachment trial in the nation;s history, how is it you consider partisanship to be a problem?

Doug

:huh:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amita
4 minutes ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

:huh:

Because of the pattern of Dem party since they lost the Presidency.  And the fact that this is the only modern day impeachment where only one party voted for it.  Also the Dems promise more of the same...

Edited by Amita
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029
4 minutes ago, Doug1029 said:

Since this is only the third impeachment trial in the nation;s history, how is it you consider partisanship to be a problem?

Doug

Let me see if I can word this s little better.  Partisanship was evident in the Nixon impeachment hearings, yet when push came to shove, the Senators voted their consciences.

Same thing was evident during the Clinton trial with the same results.

How is this time any different, so far?  Yes.  We expect a partisan result this time, but it hasn't happened yet.  Let's wait and see if it does.

Doug

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56

@Doug1029 I don't think the senate voted in Nixon's impeachment.  He resigned before the impeachment. 

Edited by Desertrat56

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robotic Jew
53 minutes ago, Amita said:

Because of the pattern of Dem party since they lost the Presidency.  And the fact that this is the only modern day impeachment where only one party voted for it.  Also the Dems promise more of the same...

So in you're ok with the next dem president getting help from a foreign government to win an election using any means necessary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
1 hour ago, Doug1029 said:

Since this is only the third impeachment trial in the nation;s history, how is it you consider partisanship to be a problem?

Doug

Perhaps because we were warned of exactly this kind of use for Impeachment?  I don't claim to be a scholar of the Constitution but this is the first time we've seen EVERY affirmative vote FOR Impeachment being taken by a single Party while "no" votes  were actually bipartisan.  That has never happened before.  

When these mechanisms were being debated, Hamilton said this:

By its very nature, Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 65, impeachment “will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other.”

And: “In such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.”   

Not a bad prediction for an old white guy, what?  He absolutely nailed it.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

The Progs have no use for the amendment process because it requires too much public support.  They prefer to simply issue edicts from the Oval Office or have a Judge create law in a ruling.  The Amendment Process was designed to require a supermajority and these days, that just isn't going to happen.  That's why we never hear it mentioned when the Electoral College or the Second Amendment are in discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
41 minutes ago, Robotic Jew said:

So in you're ok with the next dem president getting help from a foreign government to win an election using any means necessary?

Cite the EVIDENCE that Trump "got help" from any foreign government, if you have any integrity at all on this issue you will prove what you are saying.  Because Mueller found NONE.  There definitely were examples of a candidate doing this but it wasn't Trump.  That dossier is proof of who was doing the shady dealings with Russians and Barr and Durham are apt to dump real evidence of that in a few months.  Be careful what you wish for.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
1 hour ago, Desertrat56 said:

@Doug1029 I don't think the senate voted in Nixon's impeachment.  He resigned before the impeachment. 

Yes, he did.  That was an example of how Impeachment is supposed to work.  BOTH parties came together, investigated and had public hearings for 14 MONTHS to collect evidence.  The outcome was assured in a bipartisan manner and a group of Republican leaders from House and Senate went to him and told him, you can leave on your own or you'll be pushed out.  In this travesty, the only thing that has been bipartisan at any level is opposition to what is happening.  Not one R voted to Impeach and 3 Dems voted NO.  This travesty does nothing but weaken what was meant as a sober, thoughtful means of removing an obvious traitor or thief for actions he took WHILE IN OFFICE.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
1 hour ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

:huh:

Boggles the mind, eh?  The frightening thing is that they seem to actually believe their own rhetoric.  Just imagine how they'll react if/when Comey, McCabe, Strozk, Clapper and Brennan are indicted or imprisoned for their crimes.  It's going to be a freak show.   The MSM media zombies are in for a real wake-up call.  It ain't gonna be nuthin nice, either.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029
8 minutes ago, and then said:

Yes, he did.  That was an example of how Impeachment is supposed to work.  BOTH parties came together, investigated and had public hearings for 14 MONTHS to collect evidence.  The outcome was assured in a bipartisan manner and a group of Republican leaders from House and Senate went to him and told him, you can leave on your own or you'll be pushed out.  In this travesty, the only thing that has been bipartisan at any level is opposition to what is happening.  Not one R voted to Impeach and 3 Dems voted NO.  This travesty does nothing but weaken what was meant as a sober, thoughtful means of removing an obvious traitor or thief for actions he took WHILE IN OFFICE.  

Nixon resigned under threat of impeachment, although no Articles of Impeachment were ever introduced.  Technically, he was not impeached.

"You can't fire me!  I quit!"

 

It is a travesty in that we do not expect an impartial hearing in the Senate.  But that is part of Pelosi's strategy.  Get a fair trial or show everybody how the Rubs have rigged the system.  If that strategy works, Trump will not be re-elected and we might well have a Democratic House, Senate and President in about a year.  THEN we could get something done.

 

I am amazed at how warped out of shape you wingnuts are getting over this run-of-the-mill political maneuvering.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robotic Jew
36 minutes ago, and then said:

Cite the EVIDENCE that Trump "got help" from any foreign government, if you have any integrity at all on this issue you will prove what you are saying.  Because Mueller found NONE.  There definitely were examples of a candidate doing this but it wasn't Trump.  That dossier is proof of who was doing the shady dealings with Russians and Barr and Durham are apt to dump real evidence of that in a few months.  Be careful what you wish for.

I never stated that he got help from a foreign government...he's being impeached for ATTEMPTING to do so...and him and his team have openly admitted it multiple times. Never mentioned russia or mueller and find it laughable that you of all people are trying to put my integrity into question. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amita
22 hours ago, Amita said:

Only amending our Constitution will have a lasting effect. Whether thru the convention of States method or the regular difficult process, these words should be added after the line about the House having 'sole power' to impeach:  

And no Person shall be impeached without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Save one word, this is borrowed from the Senate section regarding their 'sole power' to try an impeachment case.

Rethinking this notion a little more, suggest changing the wording of the proposed amendment to the House section. The House section does not apply only to the office of President. This change below permits a simple majority vote for all other impeachments of judges, members etc.

No President shall be impeached without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Edited by Amita

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
21 hours ago, Amita said:

Rethinking this notion a little more, suggest changing the wording of the proposed amendment to the House section. The House section does not apply only to the office of President. This change below permits a simple majority vote for all other impeachments of judges, members etc.

No President shall be impeached without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

So the president is held to lower standards than other elected officials. Interesting. 

Obviously, this is all just completely out of the blue and absolutely nothing to do with current events and your preferred party getting its comeuppance. Oh heavens no. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
On 1/21/2020 at 7:06 PM, Doug1029 said:

It is a travesty in that we do not expect an impartial hearing in the Senate. 

 But you're happy that it did not get an impartial hearing in the House ? :P 

Impeachment trials have ALWAYS been partisan. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029
1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

 But you're happy that it did not get an impartial hearing in the House ? :P 

Impeachment trials have ALWAYS been partisan. 

It got an impartial hearing in the House.  What disappoints me is the lack of impartiality in the Senate.  And, yes, impeachment trials have always been partisan.  That was certainly the case with Nixon.  That trial was extremely partisan right up to thre moment the Rubs dumped him.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
1 hour ago, Doug1029 said:

It got an impartial hearing in the House.  What disappoints me is the lack of impartiality in the Senate.  And, yes, impeachment trials have always been partisan.  That was certainly the case with Nixon.  That trial was extremely partisan right up to thre moment the Rubs dumped him.

Doug

the vote in the House fell almost entirely on partisan party lines. The Democrats voted to Impeach, the Republicans voted against it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doug1029
48 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

the vote in the House fell almost entirely on partisan party lines. The Democrats voted to Impeach, the Republicans voted against it. 

Like I said.  It got an impartial hearing in the House.

Impartiality may or may not align with party.  In this case, it did.

Doug

Edited by Doug1029
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.