POLITICS What deserves impeachment of an elected official?

First, this is not a gotcha attempt, or an attempt to bring it back to Trump. In fact, the opposite. I would hope that we don't even need to mention the current events going on at the Capitol.

With that said, the Constitution is pretty vague on impeachment:

Article 1, Section 3:
6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

7: 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.

Article 2, Section 2:
1: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Article 2, Section 4:
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.


That's it. And of course, Article 2, Section 4 is probably the one that is most troublesome because it actually lays out the events that can lead to impeachment. Treason. Bribery. Those are pretty clear. Or are they?

And then...

"other high crimes and misdemeanors."

So, what are high crimes and misdemeanors? What would you think are things that would be so gross and and beyond the pale that the person would need to be removed from office?

 

Obamacare.

 

Paris Climate Accord.
Not enforcing immigration laws.
Shipping planes loaded with cash to Iran.
America not being first.
Singing the false song of globalism.
Not fighting against socialism.

 

This went nowhere fast.

 

So you're saying you want Obama back?

 

Yes, passing laws you don't like isn't cause for impeachment, though it seems to happen in every presidency.

I think using the power of the office, particularly funds appropriated by Congress, in a manner which is designed to benefit you personally and/or attack your political opponents is a pretty rock solid standard for losing your job as president.

 

Would rather just get all the information and evidence out there and then let the people decide with the vote.

 

That is no good. There has to be means to remove someone that is blatantly breaking laws as a public official. A Senator is in office for six years. You cannot wait three or four years if something so horrible as to warrant impeachment was done.

 

Public wearing of Alabama or Kentucky paraphernalia

 

It would probably be best if these decisions were given to me, with complete incontestable authority.

 

And sometimes have women brought to you.

 

I’m speaking about the current situation, specifically.

 

so we should all vote on whether a crime deserves any consequence on an individual basis, ideally?

 

A lot of these situations aren’t going to be black and white, crime or no crime. You say Trump was using taxpayer $$$ to go after his political rival, he says he was using it to go after corruption in general.

The entire thing is partisan. Demo are pushing to have him removed because they’re dems and he’s Trump. Republicans in the Senate won’t remove him because he’s a republican.

With it being this close to an election, just put all the information out there in plain sight for everyone to see, and then let the American people decide if what he did was bad enough to warrant keeping him out of office. It’s the best way I can see to avoid having one side look like they cheated the system to keep/gain power.

 

hypothetically, what sort of information would distinguish between such an action being against a political opponent, and it being aimed at corruption in general?

 

It's always going to be murky.

 

I chuckled at least.

 

so in your mind, there is no distinguishing it?

 

It's a lot of back and forth.

The closest thing to distinguishing it would be solid proof that he was asking for an investigation of Biden and his son, and nothing else, with no mention of corruption in general. But even then, if he feels there's reasonable evidence to suggest Biden might have been doing something he shouldn't have been doing, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with investigating it. The problem is that he's having a foreign government do the investigating, and allegedly pushing them to do it by withholding aid. But at the same time, Trump clearly feels he can't trust his own bodies to properly investigate the situation (and I don't necessarily disagree with him there).

The other big issue here is that dems have been trying to impeach the man since he stepped in office. They've started at the end (impeachment) and tried to find every avenue they can to get there, which lowers credibility. I don't think the American people trust them to do the job fairly.

 

this is pretty irrational, imo. so long as "general corruption" is invoked, one can name a political opponent as being the target while withholding funds?

what reasonable evidence do you refer to that biden did anything wrong? why is investigating it not inherently wrong, but investigating trump (an impeachment inquiry) is?

why can't US investigators be trusted, and if so can we trust them when they find no wrong doing with the potus?

impeachment murmuring began when emoluments concerns arose at the start of his presidency because, unlike his predecessors, he didn't separate himself from his assets and in fact has directly profited off his presidency. how does the fact that he has been entangled with multiple impeachable offenses affect the independent credibility of each, reasonably?

I don't think anyone trusts their government right now, be it congress or the WH. But why do the people decide in 2020, when they also decided in 2018? you said they were trying to impeach since he took office, so doesn't that mean the voters in 2018 knew and approved this possible action?