🚀 go-pugleaf

(TO REPLY VIA E-MAIL, STRIP 'XYXYX' FROM THE ADDRESS)

<rocket@ccnet.com> writes: 

>Merlin Dorfman wrote in message ...
>
>>     Well, there you have it.  Clinton did not commit a crime, but
>>the Impeachment Party almost unanimously dislikes him enough to try
>>to run him out of office.
>
>Have what?!?  Read again.  I didn't say he "did not commit a crime", guilt
>or innocence may be determined later in a court of law, I said it does not
>matter.  At this point he could be removed from office simply for not
>answering the question.

You're right.  If this is merely a political process with no concern for the
legalities, he could be.  I think most peoples' view is that it's not really
a very good reason for doing so, however.

>>So much for the Constitution, and so
>>much for THEIR oath to "preserve, protect, and defend" the
>>Constitution.
>
>>     I noticed in the news this morning, however, that some of the
>>Impeachment Party members who voted for impeachment are now saying
>>that Clinton really should not be removed from office; some form of
>>censure is what is needed.  These guys all voted for a resolution
>>that said Clinton deserves to be removed from office.  Is that like
>>lying under oath, or what?
>
>What a dufus!  The House vote for impeachment merely indicates that they
>feel there is enough for the Senate to consider removing him from office,
>not that he should be removed.  Pay attention to the details my man.

Well, perhaps they should change the Constitution, then.  Why bother to have
these things go through the House of Representitives if they're not going
excersise any discretion?  Just put the president on trial periodically for
anything the Senate wants to consider.  That'd be more efficient.

Myself, I don't think there's a good argument for saying the Senate should
consider removing him from office based on what's currently there.

>PS: At this time polling has 16 Democratic Senators supporting a trial.

Would you please indicate the exact question they were asked?  I doubt
16 Democrate Senators were likely to have desired the House pass articles
of impeachment just so they could try him.  I wouldn't doubt that they might
be in favor of going through with the trial now that the House has gone and
done it.  Otherwise, it might make them look like they were just sweeping
the whole thing under the rug.

Besides, the way the polls are breaking out, the longer this goes on, the
worse hit the Republicans are gonna take in long run.  If the Senate just
meekly censures BC without a little bit of a show, the voters might forget
about this in two years.  (I kid you not!  The polls show Bill Clinton
stronger this week than last - and the Congressional Republicans are *less*
popular.)

Fred