Posted on Feb 8, 2020
9
9
0
Background: In a response to Cpl William OHara from another post {https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/is-the-speaker-of-the-house-of-representatives-violating-the-6th-amendment-to-the-us-constitution?page=5&urlhash=5536912} Cpl William OHara might have an excellent idea.
Discussion: He has suggested that if it takes 2/3's to convict in the Senate, it should take 2/3's to levy (aka refer) charges from the House in the 1st place! In this way "bipartisanship" would naturally endorse for removal of the CoC even before the Senate takes up the case.
However, that would mean that the for the party in power to have a 2/3's major to pass would have to have 291-292 members from the same party to pull off what the DEMS just attempted to do. Any party in the simple majority could still do all the investigation in committee and open congressional hearings they want, but proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt for any POTUS would reduce the likelihood of partisan behaviors, without a REAL reach across the aisle, such as with Nixon.
While I am not a Clinton fan the bar for the impeachment of Clinton under Cpl William OHara's standard would have been higher about his is lying regarding Monica. Frankly that would have, I think, forced a Censure resolution by the Republican Congress vs Impeachment.
Here are some references that can be considered regarding Cpl William OHara's idea:
- https://www.infoplease.com/us/government/legislative-branch/composition-of-congress-by-political-party-1855-2017 {Note: It would seems that ONLY the 67th Congress (1921-1923) where 435 would have been able to meet the standard you suggest above.}
- https://history.house.gov/Institution/Party-Divisions/Party-Divisions/
Some serious food for thought!
If such an amendment came to a floor debate and vote before 2026 and was approved by that same time that would make politics very interesting!!! If one looks at the current political landscape (https://www.270towin.com/) the nation's potential desire to make such an amendment part of the US Constitution could be achieved with the right strategy addressed to the American electorate.
I think both Democrats and Republicans could support this if the right language for such an Amendment were developed to include some other benchmarks!
I would think Cpl William OHara is onto something.
So, my question is this:
If such an Impeachment Threshold Amendment (ITA) were to be developed in a bipartisan manner would you PERSONALLY support it and would you ADVOCATE to your House and Senate members for it's immediate adoption to the US Constitution?
Also, if you respond to this post I'd also like to know what hazards such an amendment might post that the nation could not right now foresee and might be hamstrung by in the near future if put in place say, in the next five years.
As always, this topic could generate some very interesting feedback. Please always state your position and support it with facts vs emotion. While some emotion is fine, I am, as always looking for rational input positive or negative to the intent of this post.
Discussion: He has suggested that if it takes 2/3's to convict in the Senate, it should take 2/3's to levy (aka refer) charges from the House in the 1st place! In this way "bipartisanship" would naturally endorse for removal of the CoC even before the Senate takes up the case.
However, that would mean that the for the party in power to have a 2/3's major to pass would have to have 291-292 members from the same party to pull off what the DEMS just attempted to do. Any party in the simple majority could still do all the investigation in committee and open congressional hearings they want, but proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt for any POTUS would reduce the likelihood of partisan behaviors, without a REAL reach across the aisle, such as with Nixon.
While I am not a Clinton fan the bar for the impeachment of Clinton under Cpl William OHara's standard would have been higher about his is lying regarding Monica. Frankly that would have, I think, forced a Censure resolution by the Republican Congress vs Impeachment.
Here are some references that can be considered regarding Cpl William OHara's idea:
- https://www.infoplease.com/us/government/legislative-branch/composition-of-congress-by-political-party-1855-2017 {Note: It would seems that ONLY the 67th Congress (1921-1923) where 435 would have been able to meet the standard you suggest above.}
- https://history.house.gov/Institution/Party-Divisions/Party-Divisions/
Some serious food for thought!
If such an amendment came to a floor debate and vote before 2026 and was approved by that same time that would make politics very interesting!!! If one looks at the current political landscape (https://www.270towin.com/) the nation's potential desire to make such an amendment part of the US Constitution could be achieved with the right strategy addressed to the American electorate.
I think both Democrats and Republicans could support this if the right language for such an Amendment were developed to include some other benchmarks!
I would think Cpl William OHara is onto something.
So, my question is this:
If such an Impeachment Threshold Amendment (ITA) were to be developed in a bipartisan manner would you PERSONALLY support it and would you ADVOCATE to your House and Senate members for it's immediate adoption to the US Constitution?
Also, if you respond to this post I'd also like to know what hazards such an amendment might post that the nation could not right now foresee and might be hamstrung by in the near future if put in place say, in the next five years.
As always, this topic could generate some very interesting feedback. Please always state your position and support it with facts vs emotion. While some emotion is fine, I am, as always looking for rational input positive or negative to the intent of this post.
Office of the President (POTUS)
Constitution
Posted 5 y ago
Responses: 7
3
3
0
A reasonable question. I wish I had a reasonable answer. The problem is that impeachment is not an issue of justice. It's political theater. I'm not sure how changing the type of majority needed to impeach would alter that reality.
(3)
(0)
CPO Nate S.
CPT Jack Durish In part, I agree with 1SG (Join to see), regarding lower threshold for establishing charges has merit. Yet, I think allowing the various committees which is a "low threshold" anyway to investigate and then assemble charges in a manner based on a solid investigation should, if they have done their job be able, to levy charges that are compelling, to be able to stick in a trial.
After all, Capone, was a slippery character, but investigators did their job and made a case to put that eel in jail, after slipping out so many times. If they met a high level that he force them to meet, then those attacking this or any POTUS, need to be able convince not just the Senate, but the American people.
Also, I agree that "....impeachment is not an issue of justice. It's political theater..." But, we have allowed toooooooooooooooooooooooo much political theater and it is time a message is sent to tighten things up! I think, when challenged to meet an even higher standard, those inclined the theatrics might reconsider their acting prowess for better angles!
In closing, to 1SG (Join to see)'s point regarding "...making future scurillous accusers think twice about pulling this stunt again..." is part of the thought behind the idea, that was originally from Cpl William OHara, a young US Marine! Frankly, I think we are all tired of this crap and anything "We the people..." can do to push for higher standards and improved processes that are more transparent seems worthy of what the Founders envisioned. I could be wrong, but my take on history is that the Founders and those since them who have lead us through difficult times believed in our better angles and higher standards. Just saying......................
After all, Capone, was a slippery character, but investigators did their job and made a case to put that eel in jail, after slipping out so many times. If they met a high level that he force them to meet, then those attacking this or any POTUS, need to be able convince not just the Senate, but the American people.
Also, I agree that "....impeachment is not an issue of justice. It's political theater..." But, we have allowed toooooooooooooooooooooooo much political theater and it is time a message is sent to tighten things up! I think, when challenged to meet an even higher standard, those inclined the theatrics might reconsider their acting prowess for better angles!
In closing, to 1SG (Join to see)'s point regarding "...making future scurillous accusers think twice about pulling this stunt again..." is part of the thought behind the idea, that was originally from Cpl William OHara, a young US Marine! Frankly, I think we are all tired of this crap and anything "We the people..." can do to push for higher standards and improved processes that are more transparent seems worthy of what the Founders envisioned. I could be wrong, but my take on history is that the Founders and those since them who have lead us through difficult times believed in our better angles and higher standards. Just saying......................
(2)
(0)
3
3
0
I'm just fine with the way things are. The threshold in the Senate is very difficult to reach, but establishing charges should be worthy of investigation at a lower threshold.
I don't want to see what just happened happen again, but I think the consequences of this will make future scurillous accusers think twice about pulling this stunt again.
As an aside, I bet the Dem House caucus meetings this week were ON FIRE!
Nancy almost certainly said "I told you so".
Progressives turning on Nadler and Schiff for their bumbling.
Old Guard people on defense.
No wonder Nancy has been so salty all week.
I don't want to see what just happened happen again, but I think the consequences of this will make future scurillous accusers think twice about pulling this stunt again.
As an aside, I bet the Dem House caucus meetings this week were ON FIRE!
Nancy almost certainly said "I told you so".
Progressives turning on Nadler and Schiff for their bumbling.
Old Guard people on defense.
No wonder Nancy has been so salty all week.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
The Constitution of the United States is the most well thought out & brilliantly written document in history.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google 