How do you expect impeachment to get past the Senate?

[cynatnite]

Two thirds is required and the Senate is split almost evenly. If the majority of repukes won't even break from bush on the war, what makes you think they'd be willing to support impeachment?

[Barack_America]

1. I don't.

In fact, I don't expect it to make it to the House floor.

But, it could be noted that numerous House Republicans voted today for it to go to the Judiciary. Did they do it because they support it? Or did they do it because they wanted to bury it?

I don't know. But I guess there could be hope for it.

[cynatnite]

5. The only hope there is would be waiting until after the election...

It is possible to impeach after bush is out of office when the votes are there. It'll be a matter of if anyone thinks it's a worthwhile effort then.

[LakeSamish706]

2. I don't think that it would pass the Senate, but at least it's on record now...n/t

[rocktivity]

3. Focus on the ones who ALSO have to re-apply for their jobs in November?

:shrug:
rocknation

[Individualist]

4. The Senate does NOT impeach

All it takes is a simple house majority. This stupid strawman gets thrown up every time impeachment is mentioned. And forget the phony "what I meant was conviction" that always follows when people are called on the strawman.

[cynatnite]

10. Clinton was impeached and stayed in office...

That's because of the senate. Two thirds have to support it.

That's why impeachment has no hope here. bush would stay in office and war goes on. As much as I want him impeached...it's not going to happen.

To think impeachment is going to happen is delusional.

[Qutzupalotl]

12. I'm not concerned about removal.

He's going to be gone in January either way.

Impeachment by the House would send a signal that the American people do not condone this kind of behavior. Think of the children! :)

[MonkeyFunk]

13. and he would be ACQUITTED in the Senate

that doesn't help us.

People act like there's no downside to impeaching and failing to convict.

There is a huge downside.

[Qutzupalotl]

16. It wouldn't even be voted on in the Senate.

Reid knows there aren't the votes to convict.

The greater downside is in NOT impeaching. That is giving Bush tacit approval!


(edit: it does have to be brought up, but the Senate does not have to have a vote on conviction)

[MonkeyFunk]

20. Wrong

if the House impeaches, the Senate has to hold a trial. It's not optional.

[Qutzupalotl]

23. The senate can vote to suspend trial.

http://www.abanet.org/publiced/impeach2.html
Q. Could the Senate consider alternatives to an impeachment trial?
A. It is generally agreed that the Senate could, by a simple majority vote (i.e., 51 votes if all 100 Senators are present), adjourn or suspend an impeachment trial at any point in the process.

[cynatnite]

18. Then what's the point of it..

He won't be removed, he won't be convicted and it would be nothing more than an empty political statement.

Doesn't that make impeachment meaningless?

[Qutzupalotl]

21. It would not be empty.

His name would be taught as one of only a handful of presidents who were impeached. That will have an impact on how our system of government is viewed by future generations -- and thus impact history itself.

Impeach him, then after he leaves office ... criminal investigations.

[MonkeyFunk]

33. That's a pretty silly reason

What percentage of Americans could you tell that Andrew Johnson was impeached, and why he was impeached?

Do you think 50 years from now Clinton will be stigmatized by having been impeached? He's not stigmatized by it NOW! It's widely seen as a political attack on him that boosted him and hurt Republicans.

The notion that there'll be any serious historical impact to a failed impeachment is silly.

[Qutzupalotl]

36. That's a pretty shortsighted view.

Clinton's not stigmatized by impeachment because it was trumped up bullshit. A Bush impeachment would be based on the facts of his many crimes.

Impeachment doesn't "fail" if it passes the house, silly!

[Individualist]

14. You're comparing Clinton's lie about sex with the numerous crimes committed by the Chimperor???

Who's delusional??

[stillcool]

11. Articles of impeachment are passed...

by the Congress, but the Senate tries the accused. So what does 'impeached' mean?

[Individualist]

15. Impeached means the House is empowered to impeach.

The Senate is empowered to convict. Do you nderstand now?

[stillcool]

24. I think so...

the articles of impeachment, if passed means the official has been impeached. Then the Senate tries the person on each of the articles of impeachment? And regardless of the outcome, the person has still been impeached?

[Individualist]

25. Precisely.

Clinton was impeached by the House. When the Senate acquitted him of lying about sex, that did not change the fact of his impeachment.

[stillcool]

35. thank you...

for helping to clear that up for me!:hi:

[Igel]

34. "Accused" or "charged"

It can mean undermining credibility ("to impeach a witness' credibility"), to accuse, or to formally charge a public official before a tribunal.

Root is the same as in "impeccable": peccare "to sin". So "impeach" would be to attribute some flaw to, if that helps.

[TahitiNut]

6. The VOTE is more important. Let the criminals be known to history.

The principle of "Do The Right Thing" has less to do with outcome than it does with standing up for justice.

The major faults with "pragmatism" are myopia and pessimism. Such a stance is mere cover for cowardice and criminality.

[Selatius]

7. The point of impeachment is to politically wreck what little is left of Bush at this point.

The Senate would not convict. There are not enough votes.

[tekisui]

8. One step at a time. Articles beget Hearings.

Hearings beget House vote to Impeach. With evidence and non-executive-privilege sworn testimony aired, Senate can rule.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

9. What caused Nixon to resign? Hearings, hearings, hearings.

MSM will not be able to ignore a Senate trial. They will have to cover it and all of Shrub's crimes and misdemeanors will come out.

[Ghost in the Machine]

17. At this point it doesn't matter. What matters is that *someone* is willing to stand up for the

RULE OF LAW AND OUR CONSTITUTION. PERIOD.

The rest of the world has their eyes on us, watching to see what we do. We, as a Nation, are doomed if we don't stand up for our own rule of law.

Let the appeasers and those who are complicit in the crimes vote *against* impeachment & removal. Make them stand up in front of the Country and condone the crimes. It's an excellent way to smoke those snakes out of their holes so we can identify them and remove them from office in future elections.

Not doing *anything* is complicity.

[cynatnite]

19. Then impeachment becomes meaningless, doesn't it?

Nothing will come of it. So what's the point? I only want impeachment if it's going to do what it's intended..remove bush and cheney, bring them up on charges and throw them in jail. Without that..impeachment is nothing.

[Ghost in the Machine]

27. Not in *my* opinion. Does arresting murderers become meaningless

because a few of them are found not guilty due to technicalities?

We still need to have someone uphold their oath of office and "protect the Constitution of the United States against *all* enemies, foreign and domestic".

I'm not holding my breath on impeachment, but I sure hope the I.C.C. steps up soon and arrests Bush/Cheney & the gang for war crimes. Of course, I won't hold my breath for *that*, either...

I just feel that *someone*, *somewhere* HAS to make a stand... I admire & respect Dennis Kucinich for his unwavering Patriotism.

[cynatnite]

30. It's not the same at all...apples and oranges...

If nothing happens to bush or cheney as a result...it means nothing. War still continues and Iran may get attacked. People still die.

Someone somewhere took a stand and people keep dying. Obama stands a better chance of ending the bloodshed than Kucinich...well, that is if this stunt doesn't cost Obama the WH.

I call it a stunt because it has no teeth.

[Ghost in the Machine]

32. No, it's exactly the same.. apples and apples, no matter how you slice them..

If someone is found not guilty of murder, and nothing happens to them, does it increase or decrease the murder rate? No, it doesn't. Life keeps rolling on just the same. Does that mean we shouldn't continue to try other murderers? No, it doesn't, does it?

I see you're stuck on the DLC meme about it hurting the Dems' chances in the elections. Please provide a link showing how impeachment hurt the republicans after impeaching Clinton. Keep in mind that losing a few seats didn't "hurt" them, they still held the majority.

[Gman]

22. A year ago people were swearing they'd never support the Democratic Party

because Congress would not impeach Bush.

A year later people got flamed and were "bitter", "delusional" and other assorted insults in the old GD: P if they even mentioned any disaffection at all with Obama and the Democratic Party.

Gee how things change around here.

[Duer 157099]

26. How do you know the verdict before the trial has been had?

Isn't the whole point of a trial to bring the evidence to light?

Do you really believe that everything that should be known is already known by everybody? I don't. That's part of the point of a trial, to bring the evidence out.

Even if we don't believe the Senate will act with integrity, let's give them the benefit of the doubt and expose them to the evidence first, and then let them decide.

[Occam Bandage]

29. Because we know the jury. n/t

[Breeze54]

28. NOVEMBER........

;)

[elocs]

31. In spite of all of the howling and self righteous indignation here (by the only "real" Democrats)

impeachment will not even reach the House floor for a vote much less go to the Senate for trial. Not everybody who is indicted is convicted and in this case we know who the jury will be ahead of time and also have a good idea of how they will vote. Many prosecutors will not indict if they believe there is no chance of conviction, especially if they know who the jury will be ahead of time and if they would vote to convict. (Sorry, that's not a strawman argument, that is reality. I understand the difference.)

[Cleita]

38. A very sad but true statement about our government by the people and

for the people. Unfortunately, we the people are still here and those who chose to ignore us may be in for a big surprise.

[elocs]

39. "May" is a big word that doesn't strike too much fear in most people.

When I cross the street today I "may" be hit by a bus. Even though it could happen, I'm not to worried.

[Cleita]

37. I don't expect it to get past, however, to not push on and make them

comfortable for being invulnerable is unacceptable to me. Let them not enjoy their fat cat rewards. They need to have the wolves nipping at their heels all the time.