- Joined
- Mar 17, 2014
- Messages
- 43,787
- Reaction score
- 10,985
- Location
- Earth
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Except that we don't know what the e-mails contained. Do we need to see the blow by blow of her grandkid's diapers? Some have conjectured that it contained evidence of something, but at this point it's jist conjecture. It would have been very hard to pin anything on Nixon if the tapes had been erased because there would be no evidence or wrongdoing. Which is where we are with Hillary - political adversaries conjecture that there was evidence destroyed, but there's no evidence.
That said, I wouldn't put it past her. There's also no office to remove her from, so it comes down to if the GOP can make the accusation stick. Outside of the true believers, that'll be almost impossible.
I'm not the one saying that a President should be impeached because I disagree with him.
You're still missing what I see as the critical distinction. The Twenty-Second Amendment does not say that one who has already served two terms as President is ineligible for the office; but only ineligible to be elected to that office. That does not preclude assuming the office through succession.
You're still missing what I see as the critical distinction. The Twenty-Second Amendment does not say that one who has already served two terms as President is ineligible for the office; but only ineligible to be elected to that office. That does not preclude assuming the office through succession.
Except that we don't know what the e-mails contained. Do we need to see the blow by blow of her grandkid's diapers? Some have conjectured that it contained evidence of something, but at this point it's jist conjecture. It would have been very hard to pin anything on Nixon if the tapes had been erased because there would be no evidence or wrongdoing. Which is where we are with Hillary - political adversaries conjecture that there was evidence destroyed, but there's no evidence.
That said, I wouldn't put it past her. There's also no office to remove her from, so it comes down to if the GOP can make the accusation stick. Outside of the true believers, that'll be almost impossible.
Consider this: Secretary of State William Clinton.
That's fair, but in Nixon's time, the President may have been impeached for obstruction of justice, simply for destroying the tapes once they became known. Today - wouldn't happen.
I'd rather consider root canal.
The only reason Nixon was not impeached was a back room brokered deal which allowed him to resign. The price was a pardon of crimes for which he was not yet accused.
Impeachment is off the table after Clinton turned it into a partisan circus and a matter of a blow job and not the integrity of the office. Even with the brokered deal, Nixon had more respect for the office. And clearly, Americans like liars
Impeachment does not mean removal from office. Removal from office is a whole different trial. So, no. Nixon was free to resign, he didn't need permission. His resignation stopped the impeachment (guilt) proceedings simply because there was no public will to proceed. He was never found guilty of a thing and Ford's pardon was a blanket one.
Where the **** did I even get into that?
FFS read the **** then post
Quote Originally Posted by Fearandloathing View Post
The only reason Nixon was not impeached was a back room brokered deal which allowed him to resign. The price was a pardon of crimes for which he was not yet accused.
Hillary would have been much wiser to have preserved the emails. The content of all the non government related emails never would have had to be released to the public, however a bipartisan committee could have gone through them and verified that none of them were government related. If she had nothing to hide, she would have been off the hook. Instead she obstructed justice by making 30,000 emails disappear. I am quite sure that if Hillary were a conservative republicans, you would be screaming from the mountain tops for her prosecution.
I think releasing five of the bloodiest Taliban terrorists imaginable in a trade for a US deserter certainly qualifies as "giving aid and comfort to the enemy. The other issues I mentioned are just constitutional issues. I do agree that the white house coming up with the cover story of "It was the video" also amounts to giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
You've got to be kidding me. Those are impeachable? After Reagan sold weapons to our enemy, I'd call that giving them aid, wouldn't you?
How about reading what YOU post. I quoted it above my response. Here you go, I quoted you again below.
Nixon was in little to no danger of being removed from office. Heck, he may not even have been found guilty. There was no backroom deal and he wasn't "allowed to resign". He chose to resign to preserve the dignity of the office.
Nonsense. Nixon was caught dead to rights and he knew it. He was toast.
If it is interpreted that he could succeed Clinton after her demise, he could only do so if there was less than 2 years left in her term. To wit, "no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. "No he couldn't. Theoretically, all he could do is finish her term.
That said, it's a bad idea and it won't happen.
A Modest Proposal: Barack Obama Should Be Hillary Clinton's Running Mate
Whew, now that would send some people off the deep end, now wouldn't it.
Thoughts are?
Truly, the Dynamic Duo.A Modest Proposal: Barack Obama Should Be Hillary Clinton's Running Mate
Whew, now that would send some people off the deep end, now wouldn't it.
Thoughts are?
Truly, the Dynamic Duo.
I do not suspect this proposal will get that far, but at the same time we can be for sure that Clinton will get matched with the right minority vote VP candidate.
I still think this election will come down to the economy and foreign affairs.
But, I suspect more damage can be done to Republicans baiting them into having to run on social conservatism also. If the Clinton camp can engineer ways to force Republicans to talk about Marriage Equality, Abortion, Women's Pay Equality, etc. that could be more assurance of a win.
Somewhat back to the same point for Republicans, I think the only hope they have is holding Congress.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?