General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat do you think of censuring trump in lieu of impeaching?
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04/barring-impeachment-democrats-could-still-censure-trump.htmlThere is one alternative approach that is quicker and simpler than impeachment, and doesnt necessarily require any cooperation from the Senate. Washington Post columnist Karen Tumulty endorsed it in the wake of the Mueller release, while noting its shortcomings:
There is another option: Either house, could, with a majority vote, formally censure Trump, something that has not happened to any chief executive since the Senate censured Andrew Jackson in 1834. (trump would Hate!)
While this would be dismissed in some quarters as merely a symbolic act, it would be a historic rebuke of the Trump presidency and would, properly, leave it to the voters to decide whether they have had enough of it.
Unlike impeachment, a presidential censure has no specific constitutional authorization. Censure has been more customarily meted out by Congress to its own members (most famously Joe McCarthy in 1954) as a disciplinary measure short of the constitutionally sanctioned remedy of expulsion. As Tumulty noted, the Senate (controlled by the opposition Whigs) censured Jackson during a dispute over the Bank of the United States, but Democrats had the measure expunged from the record when they regained control of the chamber. Censure resolutions have been introduced but not enacted during multiple presidencies. Indeed, Trumps behavior has already inspired the introduction of two House resolutions (one for his comments after the white-nationalist riot in Charlottesville, and another after his racist reference to Haiti and African nations as shithole countries).
The most relevant recent precedent, however, is almost certainly the effort by Democrats (encouraged by the White House) to censure Bill Clinton instead of impeaching him; Republicans defeated measures in both chambers (one in the House Judiciary Committee and the other on the Senate floor) to substitute censure for action on impeachment. In the hypothetical scenario Tumulty lays out, the shoe would be on the other foot with Democrats proposing to censure Trump, with or without any Republican cooperation.
More at link
rampartc
(5,385 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Mueller report critical because he is considered nonpartisan. Of course trump still trashing him as biased. Hes placing that chess piece out there strong.
MrsCoffee
(5,801 posts)Bettie
(16,069 posts)sternly worded, I'm sure, but with zero meaning.
shanny
(6,709 posts)NRaleighLiberal
(60,006 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Makes repukes have to take a stand. If they vote no, good campaign fodder...you mean you approve of trumps illegal actions? Appeases staunch impeachment supporters like me a tiny bit, plus trump will go ballistic being in the history books as the only other prez to be censured except for Jackson! If we play it up big time it could be all over news.
Keep on investigating and we will have more and if it happens in time we can impeach.
shraby
(21,946 posts)The donald needs to be gone permanently and asap
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Chin music
(23,002 posts)Only if we can start censuring citizens in lieu of prison.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Chin music
(23,002 posts)take the wind out of the sails of impeachment, doing censuring. IMPEACH THIS SECRET SELLING TRAITOR.
Cetacea
(7,367 posts)Paraphrasing Al Sharpton
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)the voters in Nov 2020 will render judgement and we do outnumber conservatives
Chin music
(23,002 posts)Special election even.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,153 posts)Because I would support censuring that.
But only that.
Anything else it would be comically underwhelming and not nearly enough.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,548 posts)Congress must use every weapon at its disposal, not half measures.
A malignant narcissist wouldn't be phased by a censure motion in the least.
Censure is the Coward's way out.