Gadget (fmr Marine)
07-04-2007, 08:53 AM
It seems as though you may be a little confused by the proceedings, nomenclature and process....but are correct on a few items, as well.
The right to impeach public officials is secured by the U.S. Constitution in Article I, Sections 2 and 3, which discuss the procedure, and in Article II, Section 4, which indicates the grounds for impeachment: "the President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."
Removing an official from office requires two steps: (1) a formal accusation, or impeachment, by the House of Representatives, and (2) a trial and conviction by the Senate. Impeachment requires a majority vote of the House; conviction is more difficult, requiring a two-thirds vote by the Senate. The vice president presides over the Senate proceedings in the case of all officials except the president, whose trial is presided over by the chief justice of the Supreme Court.
So you see, Clinton was impeached by the House, and the Senate did not reach the 2/3 majority needed to remove him from office, due to the nature of the "crimes" not meeting the standards as set forth, as "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."
Andrew Johnson was the only other POTUS to be impeached. Richard Nixon probably would have been, and convicted by the Senate and removed from office, had he not resigned.
The above is not arguable, nor is it up for debate, it is the fact of the matter, and the legal law of the land as written by the Constitution of the United States. Your interpretation does not matter nor does mine.
The right to impeach public officials is secured by the U.S. Constitution in Article I, Sections 2 and 3, which discuss the procedure, and in Article II, Section 4, which indicates the grounds for impeachment: "the President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."
Removing an official from office requires two steps: (1) a formal accusation, or impeachment, by the House of Representatives, and (2) a trial and conviction by the Senate. Impeachment requires a majority vote of the House; conviction is more difficult, requiring a two-thirds vote by the Senate. The vice president presides over the Senate proceedings in the case of all officials except the president, whose trial is presided over by the chief justice of the Supreme Court.
So you see, Clinton was impeached by the House, and the Senate did not reach the 2/3 majority needed to remove him from office, due to the nature of the "crimes" not meeting the standards as set forth, as "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."
Andrew Johnson was the only other POTUS to be impeached. Richard Nixon probably would have been, and convicted by the Senate and removed from office, had he not resigned.
The above is not arguable, nor is it up for debate, it is the fact of the matter, and the legal law of the land as written by the Constitution of the United States. Your interpretation does not matter nor does mine.