Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Funny Math, Part II, Impeachment

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
davidswanson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 06:27 PM
Original message
Funny Math, Part II, Impeachment
There is a widespread myth that an impeachment cannot happen in the space of the nine months Bush and Cheney are scheduled to remain in office. But I'm unable to find any past impeachment that took as long as nine months. It's messy comparing one impeachment to another, as they are complicated and varying processes. But a few things are clear: most impeachment efforts achieve important results quickly, without actually achieving impeachment (think Elliot Spitzer or Alberto Gonzales); it is not uncommon for impeachment efforts to begin later in an administration than where we are now (think Andrew Johnson, Herbert Hoover, Harry Truman); while preliminary investigations of the sort that have been done on Bush and Cheney for the past year and a half can be dragged out for months, impeachments tend not to last long; and while Senate trials can be delayed and dragged out for many months, impeachments in the House tend to be short-lived events.

An impeachment of Bush and/or Cheney for an indisputable offense (refusing subpoenas, refusing to enforce contempt citations, rewriting laws with signing statements, openly violating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, etc.) could take literally one day. Such a thing would not be unprecedented. President Andrew Johnson was impeached three days after the offense for which he was impeached. Senator William Blount was impeached four days after the offense for which he was impeached.

There is no reason impeachment hearings on Cheney or Bush should be limited to the simplest crimes or rushed through at top speed. Public education might benefit from a slower process. My point is only that it is possible to impeach rapidly. A senate trial can also serve as an educational forum. Below are some of the dates I've been able to find on how long past impeachments have taken. A better researcher might add to this collection. In several cases, I have dates for the duration of the Senate trial, but not for the House impeachment, the duration of which may in fact have been negligible.

A Senate trial can also be completed quickly, and there is no requirement or precedent for including every obvious impeachable offense. (In fact, there is no precedent for elected officials being guilty of so many obvious impeachable offenses or for the public being so aware of impeachable offenses prior to an impeachment.) The Senate expelled Blount the day after he was impeached. Judge Halsted Ritter's Senate trial took 11 days. Judge John Pickering's trial took nine days. Judge James Peck's trial took three days. Judge West Humphreys' trial took one day.

Two presidents have been impeached: Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton.

Johnson was impeached three days after committing the offense for which he was impeached, and prior to drafting articles of impeachment. Within a week, a committee drew up charges, and 11 days after the offense, the House delivered the charges to the Senate. The trial process began the next day, and in under three months it was over.

The House began impeachment procedures for Bill Clinton on October 8, 1998, and impeached him on December 19th. The Senate trial lasted from January 14, 1999, to February 12, 1999. The whole four-month farce took less than half the time remaining to Bush and Cheney.

Of the presidential impeachment movements that did not reach impeachment, the most well-known is that against Richard Nixon. The House began impeachment on May 9, 1974, and passed the first of three articles of impeachment on July 27, 1974. Nixon resigned on August 8th. Of course there were lots of preliminary investigations, but those have already been done for Bush and Cheney.

Most impeachments have not been against presidents, but rather judges, cabinet officers, senators. These impeachments seem to take about as long as presidential impeachment do, and offer no support to the myth of long impeachments. In addition, much other business has been accomplished at the same time as these impeachments.

On July 3, 1797, evidence of an offense by Senator William Blount became known. Four days later, the House impeached him and the next day the Senate expelled him.

Evidence of an offense by Judge John Pickering became known on February 4, 1803, and the House voted to impeach him on March 2, 1803. The Senate didn't try him for another year, but spent 9 days on it when it did so.

Supreme Court justice Samuel Chase was impeached in late 1804 (I don't know how long the impeachment took) and 30 days later he was tried in the Senate, which completed the trial on March 1, 1805.

Judge James Peck was impeached on April 24, 1830, a month after the Judiciary Committee recommended it. The Senate took up the trial the following January and spent three days on it.

Judge West H. Humphreys was impeached on May 19, 1862. The Senate tried and convicted him in one day on June 26, 1862.

Secretary of War William W. Belknap was impeached on March 2, 1876, and the Senate trial was completed on August 1, 1876.

Judge Charles Swayne was impeached on December 14, 1904, and his trial was over on February 27, 1905.

Judge Robert W. Archbald was impeached on July 13, 1912, and the Senate trial was over on January 13, 1913.

Judge Harold Louderback resigned before his impeachment went to trial.

Judge Halsted L. Ritter was impeached on March 2, 1936, and the 11-day Senate trial ended on April 17th of the same year.

Judge Harry E. Claiborne was impeached on July 22, 1986, and the trial ended on October 9, 1986.

Then Judge and now Congressman Alcee L. Hastings, was impeached on August 3, 1988, and the Senate trial was over on October 20, 1988.

Judge Walter L. Nixon was impeached on May 10, 1989, and the Senate trial was completed on November 3, 1989.

There are nine months remaining to Bush and Cheney. If you think that is a short time, you are not a mother.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. thank you ! K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guyanakoolaid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
2. K&R
I value life and law, and would hope my political party does as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yukari Yakumo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
3. And just what do we charge him with?
And with what evidence is there to prove it?

And do you seriously think there are enough votes in the House to get it passed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidswanson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. glad you should ask
Edited on Tue Apr-29-08 06:49 PM by davidswanson
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harry Monroe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Jesus H. Christ!!! Did you ask what evidence there is to impeach??
Have you been living under a rock??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
4. They won't do it.
I wish they would, but they won't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
6. Bush will not be impeached. He will leave office in January and enjoy a rich and happy retirement.
He will be paid millions for books and speeches. He will never be investigated or prosecuted.

Believe it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Of all the candidates, it would only have been Kucinich who would have chased down
these criminals . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 07:08 PM
Response to Original message
8. Too many people, average citizens included, don't want it to happen for a host of fucked reasons
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Like what reasons . . . ????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. I've read many posts here at DU against impeachment as unseemly/"bad for the country"
...you know, of the preserve the status quo at all costs sort. The same ones who honestly believe that any "electable" Name Brand candidate is somehow going to make it all the bad go away...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Well . . . I haven't read that . . . I've read that many think it couldn't succeed . . .
I can't think of anything HEALTHIER for the nation than bringing these criminals to justice!!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 05:58 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. Note how few replies there are in this thread compared to other bullshit threads...
...that are about less important matters, yet receive a high # of posts and views.

Also, read post #17.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
9. Kind of ironic, isn't it, that Nixon was never actually impeached . . .
he simply resigned under threat of a successful impeachment ---

Sadly, most of what we are suffering new stems from the poison spewing out of that administration ---
Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush ....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
12. Kick, Recommend, and IMPEACH.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paparush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
13. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 08:55 PM
Response to Original message
14. k&r! Thank you david...
Edited on Tue Apr-29-08 08:55 PM by wildbilln864

Impeach, Indict, and Imprison the Bush/PNAC cabal!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zambero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-29-08 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
17. It's an election year
The Republicans staged their ultimate witch hunt against Bill Clinton back in '98 expecting the proceedings to boost their fortunes come November. The exact reserve happened and impeachment mastermind Gingrich was forced to resign. Even though there are legitimate reasons to impeach at thsi time, it won't ever happen against the backdrop of a presidential election. The "plus" for Democrats: Bush's failed policies will likely cost the GOP dearly come November. Perhaps Pelosi and Reed figure that Bush-Cheney are more "valuable" as incumbents who will be held accountable by voters for economic woes and foreign policy blunders, instead of being the focus of yet another impeachment. In other words, let the voters, and not Congress, pass final judgment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #17
24. Well... two years ago, we weren't near an election ---
Edited on Wed Apr-30-08 12:59 PM by defendandprotect
And, I certainly strongly objected to the Clinton "impeachment" which was based on nothing --
and I think that's exactly what the public was reacting to and why they voted against the GOP.

Pelosi and Reid are huge disappoints as far as I can see --
even if you overlook the impeachment, they have let the war continue on.

Signing statements . . . ??
This is the basis of Congressional lawmaking -- which Bush/Cheney are turning upside down!!!
That's an impeachable offense in itself --

The idea that the Constitution is ours to protect ---
and protect it we should!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blarch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 06:16 AM
Response to Original message
19. The constitution has an enemy...
That enemy is Bush/Cheney...

Pelosi is protecting the enemy of the constitution...this is treason.

The reason we haven't impeached is because Pelosi is a traitor. simple as that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 06:34 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. From 1984
"Yet he still sees too clearly and speaks too plainly for his own safety, and, as Winston realizes at an early stage, is marked down for vapourization."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 06:59 AM
Response to Original message
21. Too Many Moving Parts That Don't Move
As always any discussion about impeachment at this time has to mention that as long as 33 Repugnican Senators enable this regime, there won't be a conviction or removal...and in turn would be portrayed by the corporate media as a vindication for this regime. Also that impeachment only addresses a short-term fix...letting lots of the criminals who did the dirty work slip away to come back (just like in Watergate) to create more havoc in the future.

You can't calculate a political impeachment without calculating in the corporate media. They have enabled this regime since the outset and will step up big time...calling impeachment an attempt at overthrowing an "elected" government and distorting all charges and revising history. This regime also has the courts locked up so that subpoenaes aren't even being honored, yet can real charges be brought that would be the framework for an impeachment. An impeachment purely on political grounds without criminal convictions and backing (which this regime has committed, but yet has been directly implicated) of fact and findings...a referal...will be seen as a political power play.

While I wish this wasn't the case, and I strongly support defacto impeachment...I want a total accounting and justice. There's no way that can happen right now. There's a totally politicized DOJ and a judiciary that's been loaded with right wing toadies. Any serious investigation is all but on hold until this regime is removed as any indictment will be met with a pardon and this regime will stonewall and go to court whereever to run out the clock.

Best to work on the real crimes and keep investigating and cataloging the crimes. My bets are we have just scratched the surface...what we've learned have been from leaks and stupidity. Our goal must be to remove Repugnicans from all levers of power and then demand Democrats to follow through on investigating the crimes of this regime...not to "move on".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 07:25 AM
Response to Original message
22. simplistic analysis, to say the least
First, as is evident from the OP itself, impeachments of judges are more common than impeachments of presidents. And because the voters don't elect judges but do elect presidents, and because the public at large cares more about the one person who is president than one of the literally hundreds of federal judges, comparing the gravity -- and thus the due deliberation -- that will be involved in any process to impeach a president with the impeachment of a judge is silly.

Second, using the Andrew Johnson impeachment as an example also is silly. The country is a far different place today than it was in the 1860s. Communications in particular are far different. Its fair to say that most of the country probably had little idea of what was going on in the Johnson impeachment. Whereas every single minute of a presidential impeachment today will be immediately reported and disseminated to the public, something that inherently will create a "braking" effect. We also have more sophisticated notions of due process today than we did in 140 years ago (not they're always honored). Keep in mind also that Johnson's impeachment reflected the rather unique situation of its times: he came to the presidency by succession, not election, was of a different party than the president he suceeded, and was serving at a time of the greatest upheaval in the nation's history. Finally, the rush to judgment in the Johnson case hardly counsels for fast action now, since (a) Johnson was acquitted and (b) history later established that his actions were constitutionally valid.

Third, while the Clinton impeachment process formally began in October 1998, that step occurred only after the Starr report was completed and that took a very long time. Also, keep in mind that 1998 wasn't a presidential election year. It makes a difference, whether or not it should.

Fourth, and last, the two most recent non-presidential impeachment involved Walter Nixon and Alcee Hastings. In the Nixon case, before the Congress took up impeachment proceedings, Nixon had been tried and convicted by a jury of making false statements to a grand jury. It was only after that trial and conviction that the House undertook to impeach him and that process still took six months.
Hastings' impeachment was triggered by an investigation by the Judicial Council of the Eleventh Circuit that last four years and found that Hastings, notwithstanding his acquittal in an earlier trial, had not only taken a bribe, but also had lied in court about it.

If you are seeking a particular outcome, as is the case with the OP, you can manipulate and simplify the facts to get there. If you live in the real world, the answer is clear -- impeachment isn't going to happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Senator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
23. Cool, The Naysayers Are Back.
It may be that some inside the beltway are finally waking up to the fact that only impeachemnt can win in November and stop the seamless continuance of bushcheney neo-fascism.

Let's keep hammering folks. All the rationalizations for inaction sound more hollow than ever.

We can still reunite our once-great nation around its core, democratic, American principles.

Impeachment remains our ONLY moral, patriotic, (and legal, legislative, electoral, diplomatic...) option.

We need to get on with it.

----
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
25. Now 8 months.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 03:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC