Hypocritical, arrogant, leadership-lacking GOP governor avoids impeachment:

[Ninong]

OMG! They're Eating Their Own!

"We can't impeach for hypocrisy. We can't impeach for arrogance. We can't impeach an officeholder for his lack of leadership skills," said Rep. James Harrison, the Columbia Republican who headed the panel.

In case you haven't already guessed, they're talking about South Carolina's Republican Governor Mark Sanford, defender of the "sanctity of marriage" and "family values" afficionado. Also a believer in the proposition that a marriage should be between a man and a woman and a woman in Argentina.

The man who gave an entirely new meaning to the phrase, "hiking the Old Appalachian Trail."

[Parrothead]

Can't resist,

We didn't impeach Slick Willy Clinton

Robert

[Ninong]

Can't resist,

We didn't impeach Slick Willy Clinton

Robert

Robert,

Bill Clinton was impeached. He wasn't convicted but he was most certainly impeached.

[Parrothead]

Ninong,

Maybe I'm way off base, but Ally Gore was never sworn in and the senate acquited clinton on all counts of impeachment. So if Slick Willy was impeached, why was Ally not sworn in as President.

Bill Clinton's impeachment trial ends, Feb. 12, 1999 - Andrew Glass - POLITICO.com

[Ninong]

Yes, you are way off base.

Bill Clinton was the second President of the United States to be impeached. Andrew Johnson was the first. Neither was convicted in the Senate. I think the problem here is that you misunderstand what it means to be impeached. That seems to be a common misconception.

A federal official must be impeached in the House of Representatives before he or she can be tried in the Senate. If convicted by a two-thirds vote in the Senate, he or she can then be removed from office. Impeachment takes place in the House of Representatives, the trial takes place in the Senate. Acquittal in the Senate does not alter the fact that the official was impeached.

In Andrew Johnson's case, conviction failed by only one vote. In Bill Clinton's case, the prosecution failed to get more than even 50% on either count. At the time of his impeachment, the Republicans held majorities in both houses of Congress.

Actually, had he not resigned first, Richard Nixon would have been the second president to be impeached and the first to be convicted and removed from office. A head count in the Senate showed that only four senators were likely to vote for acquittal. Nixon was wise to resign.

Obviously Spiro Agnew would have been impeached and convicted had he remained in offiice following conviction in criminal court. He cut a deal to avoid jail time with the criminal prosecutors and then resigned as Vice President. In case you're too young to remember, Agnew was guilty of bribery while he was Governor of Maryland before he became Vice President. (P.S. -- Agnew was charged with extortion, tax fraud, bribery and conspiracy. He accepted more than $100,000 in bribes.)

That's how Gerald Ford managed to become President of the United States without ever having been elected as either vice president or president.

Here's something interesting to consider. Alcee Hastings was a federal judge who was impeached in the House, tried and convicted in the Senate and removed from the federal bench. He was convicted of corruption and perjury. He's currently a member of the House of Representatives, having been elected by the voters in the 23rd Congressional District of Florida, who apparently were not put off by his past transgressions.

P.S. -- Never forget that impeachment and removal from office is a political action, not a criminal action. Following conviction in the Senate and removal from office, the former federal official might still be subject to criminal prosecution in federal or state court.

[Parrothead]

Ok, follow you now, constitution law was never my strong suit, although simple math says you and I can go do what these guys have both done, and no one cares, be in the public eye and tax payer dollars get blown down the hole to bust someone for what just about every other guy has done.

JMHO.

Robert

[Ninong]

Here is the legal definition:

Legal Dictionary

Main Entry: im·peach
Pronunciation: im-'pEch
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Anglo-French empecher, from Old French empeechier to hinder, from Late Latin impedicare to fetter, from Latin in- + pedica fetter, from ped- pes foot
1 : to charge with a crime or misconduct; specifically : to charge (a public official) before a competent tribunal (as the U.S. Senate) with misconduct in office —see also Article I and Article II of the CONSTITUTION in the back matter
NOTE: Impeachment is the first step in removing an officer from office. The president, vice president, and other federal officers (as judges) may be impeached by the House of Representatives. (Members of Congress themselves are not removed by being impeached and tried, but rather are expelled by a two-thirds majority vote in the member's house.) The House draws up articles of impeachment that itemize the charges and their factual bases. The articles of impeachment, once approved by a simple majority of the House members, are then submitted to the Senate, thereby impeaching the officer. The Senate then holds a trial, at the conclusion of which each member votes for or against conviction on each article of impeachment. Two-thirds of the Senate members present must vote in favor of conviction. Once convicted, the officer can be removed from office. Although the Constitution specifies that an officer is to be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, impeachment can also occur for misconduct that is not necessarily criminal (as violation of the Constitution). Because impeachment is the first step taken to remove an officer from office impeach is often used in general contexts to refer to the removal itself, but that is not its specific legal meaning. An officer generally cannot be impeached for acts done prior to taking office.

[Ninong]

Here is the way dictionary.com explains the common misconception:

Usage Note: When an irate citizen demands that a disfavored public official be impeached, the citizen clearly intends for the official to be removed from office. This popular use of impeach as a synonym of "throw out" (even if by due process) does not accord with the legal meaning of the word. As recent history has shown, when a public official is impeached, that is, formally accused of wrongdoing, this is only the start of what can be a lengthy process that may or may not lead to the official's removal from office. In strict usage, an official is impeached (accused), tried, and then convicted or acquitted. The vaguer use of impeach reflects disgruntled citizens' indifference to whether the official is forced from office by legal means or chooses to resign to avoid further disgrace.

[TimH07]

wow i thought this thread was going to be about sarah palin

[SPasse]

Hi All,

“OMG! They're eating Their Own!”

…or maybe they are finally cleaning house.

Regards,

Scott

[Ninong]

…or maybe they are finally cleaning house.

Scott,

If they want to clean house, I think Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) would be a much more obvious choice than Gov. Mark Sanford. His extra-marital affair including hiring his girlfriend's teenage son as a "policy consultant" and, later, having his parents pay his girlfriend and her husband a $96,000 bribe to keep quiet. Since that didn't work, maybe his parents should ask for a refund? Maybe they should ask Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) for the refund since he's the one who set up the payoff.

Or, if they insist on starting with Republican governors, I think Gov. Jim Gibbons (R-NV) is even more scummy than Mark Sanford. At least Sanford doesn't get drunk and beat up his girlfriends.