General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNow Trump wants Mitt Romney impeached
A minute or two ago (I thought he was golfing today):
Link to tweet
Ohiogal
(32,005 posts)RVN VET71
(2,692 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,208 posts)lunatica
(53,410 posts)I cant wait for Mitts nickname to be tweeted out!
Vinca
(50,278 posts)When you've lost Tucker it's time to impeach yourself. LOL.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,732 posts)And hes too ignorant to know that senators cant be impeached.
dawg day
(7,947 posts)My parents had one of those projectors!
colorado_ufo
(5,734 posts)I was glad when my Super 8 films were able to be put on DVDs!
Snackshack
(2,541 posts)Hermit-The-Prog
(33,349 posts)The one and only senator to be impeached was Blount in 1797, and the Senate dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction.
I'm jealous that The Dumbest Don hasn't called for my impeachment. I'm not special enough.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,732 posts)Article I, Section 5, of the United States Constitution provides that "Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member." Since 1789, the Senate has expelled only fifteen of its entire membership.
Blount's "impeachment" was really an expulsion.
Despite Blount's absence, his impeachment trial began in the Senate on December 17, 1798, and quickly focused on the Senate's right to try an expelled senator. In a narrow vote, the Senate defeated a resolution that asserted William Blount was an impeachable officer. In this vote, the Senate failed to make clear whether its decision stemmed from a belief that no senator could be impeached or from the belief that someone who ceased to hold a "civil office" also ceased to be impeachable.
Both Republicans and Federalists found it awkward to take political advantage of the Blount case. Federalist proponents of impeachment were in the uncomfortable position of supporting a House move to impeach a senator, thus compromising the Senates independence of the lower chamber. Republican supporters of Blount, on the other hand, faced the double dilemma of defending both the Federalist Senate and the treasonous Tennessean who had sought to benefit Great Britain, the nation the Federalists were often accused of favoring.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,349 posts)It was a futile impeachment, but that doesn't mean the House couldn't do it. If they did so again, I would expect the Senate to again refuse to convict, simply because it intrudes on the Senate's power to punish its own members.
Each house of Congress jealously guards its powers, which is as it should be.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei
Article I, Section 2:
[ ... ]
The House of Representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers; and shall have the sole power of impeachment.
Article I, Section 3:
[ ... ]
The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.
[ ... ]
Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States: but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law.
That statement including the punishment of "removal from office" implies impeachment can be brought for any person in a federal office.
targetpractice
(4,919 posts)...Because, he is very scared himself.
The only upside of Trump's presidency will be that the general population will have a better understanding of narcissistic personality disorder by the time it's over.
erronis
(15,299 posts)trump/dump/shit-hole was just a pimple on the anus of the (R)epuglicons.
Maybe a carbuncle is a good term.
Brainfodder
(6,423 posts)*
Accomplices at this point?
getagrip_already
(14,764 posts)They have to be expelled by the senate itself. It still takes a 2/3 vote according to current rules though.
Of course, the great turtle of moscow makes the rules, so who knows what will happen.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,349 posts)The House can impeach, but the Senate doesn't have to convict.
See William Blount, 1797.
yellowdogintexas
(22,264 posts)Only a few states allow this, California being one.
getagrip_already
(14,764 posts)only the senate decides its membership.
getagrip_already
(14,764 posts)blount was expelled, not impeached. The senate rejected the house vote, but decided on their own to expell him.
They don't require or recognize a house vote to remove a senator.
Article 1 stuff,
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,349 posts)Blount was expelled by the Senate, but that does not erase the fact that the House impeached.
getagrip_already
(14,764 posts)the earth is flat. It doesn't compell the senate to take it up for a vote.
"Article 1, Section 5, of the United States Constitution provides that "Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member."" - that quote is from the senates website.
That's where it says it. Both the house and senate jealously guard this right.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,349 posts)getagrip_already
(14,764 posts)They can simply ignore it. The constitution makes it clear. The senate, and only the senate, decides its membership. Period. No other options.
The house can make whatever votes they want, They can call it anything they want.
It doesn't matter to the senate.
Just like the house doesn't have to ask the senate if they can expell a member. They don't.
The constitution trumps all. Even trump.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,349 posts)Saying they can't does not change the facts.
They did. They can again. The U.S. Constitution says they can.
It does not matter that the Senate dismissed the impeachment. It does not matter whether or not they would do so again. The House has the power to do so, even if it's ultimately futile.
bullwinkle428
(20,629 posts)about 4 hours, so it's clear he decided to pull it out at the "19th hole", right after the Adderall hit.
Miigwech
(3,741 posts)to turn on one of their own, a Bishop in the Mormon Church, a beloved leader .... ain't gonna happen dotard, LOL
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)However if Trump keeps this insanity up they could very well turn on Trump.
Mormons are very family, church oriented. It's woven into the very fabric of their lives and social systems.
They are not going to like this vulgar, ethically empty excuse for a human.
tblue37
(65,403 posts)getagrip_already
(14,764 posts)Well, until the next election he runs in anyway.
It's solely up to 2/3 of the senate.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)Has just alienated the Mormon voters. And that isn't just Utah. There are lots of Mormons in Idaho and Wyoming and Arizona. There are lots of Mormons in that whole part if the country. Mormons stick together.
I lived in that area for 6 years and I am not crazy about the religion but I liked the people.
It is just such a stupid thing to do.
getagrip_already
(14,764 posts)trump was smart. He isn't even a perfect idiot. Just plain old dumb as a rock ignorant.
Otherwise I agree with you.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)just completely crippled by a personality disorder.
My mother was a narcissist and so was her sister. Those people are really broken. They are so sensitive to any perceived criticism that they can barely function. And they always keep score and they never forget. They live for paybacks. And vengeful?
My mother and her sister were smart. But they wasted so much of their lives ruminating about perceived insults and getting even. Normal people can't even begin to understand just how vicious those people can be. And they get off on it. They are constantly trying to prove to themselves and other people how superior they are.
I don't know what causes it . I tend to think they are just plain wired wrong.
There are about 8 million Mormons in the US and Trump just managed to offend probably all 8 million with just one super vengeful tweet. Most of those people probably vote the way the Bishop tells them to. (Not all of them go to church but they are still heavily influenced by their family and their society).
They are interesting people and it's a fascinating religion.
politicaljunkie41910
(3,335 posts)He's one of them, and he's everything that Trump IS NOT; a decent human being.
Jarqui
(10,126 posts)get Ukraine to impeach Mitt in exchange for some arms ...
Trump's corrupt world is starting to cave in on him.
The way it's going, it won't be long before Mitch McConnell can raise more money by assuring donors he will vote to impeach Trump.
Initech
(100,080 posts)And you never, ever go full asshole.
Cha
(297,292 posts)Initech
(100,080 posts)tblue37
(65,403 posts)bronxiteforever
(9,287 posts)malaise
(269,050 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,666 posts)liberaltrucker
(9,129 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,666 posts)never really missed a beat. Has pretty good acting chops, too.
liberaltrucker
(9,129 posts)nt
helpisontheway
(5,008 posts)cwydro
(51,308 posts)CaliforniaPeggy
(149,629 posts)highplainsdem
(49,001 posts)OnDoutside
(19,962 posts)sinkingfeeling
(51,457 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,177 posts)Everyone wants Trump impeached, so Trump will have an impeach list with 76 names on it. Soon everyone will be laughing at it.
He's a manipulator
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)jcgoldie
(11,631 posts)NO IMPEACH NO IMPEACH... YOU GET IMPEACHED!
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,732 posts)But presidents can.
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)Senator from TN was impeached in 1787
But i think that changed since. Interested in the history of this rule...
getagrip_already
(14,764 posts)United States Senate Expulsion Cases
Date: 1797
Member: William Blount (R-TN)
Charge: Anti-Spanish conspiracy; treason
Result: Expelled
The power of the house and senate to police their own members is in article 1 of the constitution. It's been that way since day 1.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,349 posts)Only the House can impeach and only the Senate can try impeachments.
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)That he not an impeachable officer.
"Despite Blount's absence, his impeachment trial began in the Senate on December 17, 1798, and quickly focused on the Senate's right to try an expelled senator. In a narrow vote, the Senate defeated a resolution that asserted William Blount was an impeachable officer."
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/expulsion_cases/Blount_expulsion.htm
getagrip_already
(14,764 posts)It doesn't require a house vote.
Fwiw, this is the only case other than civil war senators where a senator was expelled from the senate. So it isn't common by any means.
Treason is the only grounds it has worked. Hmmmmm.
dustyscamp
(2,224 posts)We need to show this conjob & the American people that the Democratic congress have been doing something, but the Cons have been sending good legislation to the graveyard
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)The next person to give lukewarm criticism of him will get the same response, and just encourage them to vote for conviction as well...
struggle4progress
(118,294 posts)Iggo
(47,558 posts)philf99
(238 posts)And bring the popcorn
Kid Berwyn
(14,909 posts)Always thinks of others. To impeach.
GoCubsGo
(32,086 posts)He's shitting his pants non-stop, and the stench must be unbearable. This is just his latest stinking pantload.
trueblue2007
(17,228 posts)Cha
(297,292 posts)psycho being "told President Obama was not born in the USA".
Fucking Lunatic
nancy1942
(635 posts)Would someone PLEASE shut him up? How I loathe this monster.
OliverQ
(3,363 posts)Are they all bots? It's just so ridiculous how many people are now calling for Romney to be impeached and claiming he's a terrible Senator just because Trump said it.
Gothmog
(145,304 posts)onetexan
(13,042 posts)Dumpster's mess.