• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why Do You Think the American Founders Intended Impeachment to be Totally Free of Politics?

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
It was designed as a tool to remove leaders that actually committed crimes not merely because Hillary lost.

Because the goal is not to impeach, it is to defame the Pres in the hopes he will lose in 2020. The DoJ, Congress, and the Supreme Court are not tools to abuse as the Dems have been doing the last year and half or so.
Don't you guys remember the last Impeachment Circus?

For better or worse, the Republican party weaponized the impeachment process back in the 90s. Rather like they weaponized the SCOTUS nomination process in 2016.

It's the willingness of Republicans to subvert USA institutions and processes that lead me to adopt a straight ticket Democrat voting habit.
Tom
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Don't you guys remember the last Impeachment Circus?

For better or worse, the Republican party weaponized the impeachment process back in the 90s. Rather like they weaponized the SCOTUS nomination process in 2016.

It's the willingness of Republicans to subvert USA institutions and processes that lead me to adopt a straight ticket Democrat voting habit.
Tom

Both of your guys sides accuse the other
of the same things.

What if it is not actually true of either?
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
The other day, I heard someone on RF criticize the current impeachment process as "political".

I did not have the leisure to respond to them at the time I came across their comment and I have by now forgotten who they were, but I have not forgotten that they appeared to believe impeachment should be totally free of politics. That is, a non-political process.

My question is, do they -- or does anyone -- really think the American Founders thought it would be best if impeachment was free of politics?


But hey, I'll play along....

So OK, you good folks who think impeachment should be a wholly non-political process, first please explain to me just why you think it should be?

Next my friends, please explain to me why -- if the Founders wanted impeachment to be as non-political as possible, they failed to assign the duty to the Supreme Court -- rather than to Congress? Were they such idiots that they could not fathom the Court might be at least a little less political than the part of government they intended to be the MOST political of all (i.e. the House)?

Third, good ladies and gentlemen, please kindly tell me how it is that impeaching an elected president is best done by non-elected persons on the Supreme Court who have been purposely isolated as much as possible from the will of the people*, and cannot claim to represent it? Would the Founders not actually want the people's will to be altered (if it must be altered) by those very people (i.e. Congress) who can at least claim to collectively represent the people's will? Does it honestly make sense that the Founders would want the will of the people to be altered (if it must be altered) by people (i.e. the Supreme Court) who are as immune to the people's will as the Founders could make them?​

Those questions will do for now, even though -- in my opinion -- I haven't even touched here on the most likely reason the Founders made impeachment just as political as they could make it. Doing so, however, would require a much longer OP.

......
* The phrase "the will of the people" is here used in the traditional sense of "the will of the people as expressed through who they voted into office". That is, the Constitution set things up so that the will of the people was originally most directly expressed by the House of Representatives, but also to a lesser extent by the President and the Senate. However, the Supreme Court was arguably the least representative of the people's will of all the branches.
The framers appeared to be very aware that the President has power and could lead astray if unchecked. The founders wanted a way for the President to be checked. These days it's about being able to lawyer the lawyers. The President these days has a whole department dedicated to protecting them from prosecution.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Phil, I think you give people too much credit and you skip a vital and important step, and that is making sure people even know what impeachment is. Left or right, dem or rep, con or lib, many Americans, perhaps most, do not know what impeachment is.

After thinking about it, Wolf, I suspect you are right.

I edited the OP accordingly.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Don't you guys remember the last Impeachment Circus?

Yup.

For better or worse, the Republican party weaponized the impeachment process back in the 90s. Rather like they weaponized the SCOTUS nomination process in 2016.

Hardly. Dems have been screaming for years about impeachment. Schiff use to claim he had hard evidence of collusion yet he had zero.

It's the willingness of Republicans to subvert USA institutions and processes that lead me to adopt a straight ticket Democrat voting habit.
Tom

You haven't watch Dems for the last few years if you think that.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Dems have been screaming for years about impeachment.
What?
You don't remember the 90s?

You know, when a lyin' cheatin' President needed to be Impeached?

Now, the Republicans think that lying and cheating are "smart". It worked for Trump. Boy, things have changed since I was young.
Tom
 

Shad

Veteran Member
What?
You don't remember the 90s?

I remember it. My point was Dems were screaming about impeachment from Day 1.

You know, when a lyin' cheatin' President needed to be Impeached?

When something of substance is brought forward. Dems have yet to do this.

Now, the Republicans think that lying and cheating are "smart". It worked for Trump. Boy, things have changed since I was young.
Tom

Hardly. You were just naive when you were young. Politicians have been lying before I was born.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
FYI. Impeachment is NOT removal from office. Instead, it is a form of indictment and it means that the impeached person must stand trial (that might or might not result is his or her removal from office).



The other day, I heard someone on RF criticize the current impeachment process as "political".

I did not have the leisure to respond to them at the time I came across their comment and I have by now forgotten who they were, but I have not forgotten that they appeared to believe impeachment should be totally free of politics. That is, a non-political process.

My question is, do they -- or does anyone -- really think the American Founders thought it would be best if impeachment was free of politics?


But hey, I'll play along....

So OK, you good folks who think impeachment should be a wholly non-political process, first please explain to me just why you think it should be?

Next my friends, please explain to me why -- if the Founders wanted impeachment to be as non-political as possible, they failed to assign the duty to the Supreme Court -- rather than to Congress? Were they such idiots that they could not fathom the Court might be at least a little less political than the part of government they intended to be the MOST political of all (i.e. the House)?

Third, good ladies and gentlemen, please kindly tell me how it is that impeaching an elected president is best done by non-elected persons on the Supreme Court who have been purposely isolated as much as possible from the will of the people*, and cannot claim to represent it? Would the Founders not actually want the people's will to be altered (if it must be altered) by those very people (i.e. Congress) who can at least claim to collectively represent the people's will? Does it honestly make sense that the Founders would want the will of the people to be altered (if it must be altered) by people (i.e. the Supreme Court) who are as immune to the people's will as the Founders could make them?​

Those questions will do for now, even though -- in my opinion -- I haven't even touched here on the most likely reason the Founders made impeachment just as political as they could make it. Doing so, however, would require a much longer OP.

......
* The phrase "the will of the people" is here used in the traditional sense of "the will of the people as expressed through who they voted into office". That is, the Constitution set things up so that the will of the people was originally most directly expressed by the House of Representatives, but also to a lesser extent by the President and the Senate. However, the Supreme Court was arguably the least representative of the people's will of all the branches.

Everything is political from international relations between nations right down to a baby crying for its mothers attention. The best we can do is to have people in public office who are publicly accountable go through a slow deliberative process that has checks and balances.
 
Top