IG's FISA Probe May Hamper Dems' Impeachment Plans

[Mountain Man]

You have no idea what "high crimes and misdemeaners" even means. Want me to tell you?

It's generally matters that involve national security -- the two examples given in the Constitution are conviction for treason and bribery.

But go ahead give me your explanation. I'm having a bad day and could use a laugh.

[One Bad Pig]

You have no idea what "high crimes and misdemeaners" even means. Want me to tell you?

How about you manage to spell the term correctly before opining on what it means.

[JimL]

It's generally matters that involve national security -- the two examples given in the Constitution are conviction for treason and bribery.

But go ahead give me your explanation. I'm having a bad day and could use a laugh.

Fundamentally it means "abusing the power of the office," which may or may not involve illegal actions, and which Congress determines if said actions make the President unfit to serve. The term originated way back in 1386 in the English Parliment.
Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay wrote concerning this in the Federalist papers. High crimes and misdemeanors he said, are "those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, (not necessarily an illegality,) or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated, political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself."

[JimL]

How about you manage to spell the term correctly before opining on what it means.

How about you focus on substance for a change instead of just focusing on my spelling!

[Mountain Man]

Fundamentally it means "abusing the power of the office," which may or may not involve illegal actions, and which Congress determines if said actions make the President unfit to serve. The term originated way back in 1386 in the English Parliment.
Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay wrote concerning this in the Federalist papers. High crimes and misdemeanors he said, are "those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, (not necessarily an illegality,) or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated, political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself."

It's customary to provide a source when you quote something. What, you really didn't expect us to believe you wrote that yourself, did you?

Also, that's only one possible interpretation and not necessarily the best one since the Founding Fathers rejected "maladministration" as an impeachable offense because it would open the process up to political abuse. They explicitly used the term "high crimes and misdemeanors" and included two examples -- treason and bribery -- to illustrate the nature and seriousness of the offense that would compel impeachment.

No reasonable reading of the Constitution allows Congress to use impeachment to remove a president from office for purely political reasons.

[JimL]

It's customary to provide a source when you quote something. What, you really didn't expect us to believe you wrote that yourself, did you?

Also, that's only one possible interpretation and not necessarily the best one since the Founding Fathers rejected "maladministration" as an impeachable offense because it would open the process up to political abuse. They explicitly used the term "high crimes and misdemeanors" and included two examples -- treason and bribery -- to illustrate the nature and seriousness of the offense that would compel impeachment.

No reasonable reading of the Constitution allows Congress to use impeachment to remove a president from office for purely political reasons.

They rejected the term Maladministration, because of the political nature of the term. Maladministration according to who? But nevertheless, High crimes and misdemeaners amounts to the same thing without the political emphasis. That included such actions as misconduct, abuse of office, abuse of authority, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, unbecoming conduct, refusal to obey lawful orders, chronic intoxication, tax evasion, obstruction of justice, cronyism, circumventing justice, violation of oath. Impeachment isn't necessarily a criminal trial, it's political, although in the case of this President it goes way beyond the strictly political.
Though they can be included, these aren't all illegal actions, and wouldn't be criminal offences except in the case of public officials. That's why impeachment is a necessary process when it comes to public officials who hold positions of public trust.

http://www.constitution.org/cmt/high_crimes.htm

[Mountain Man]

They rejected the term Maladministration, because of the political nature of the term. Maladministration according to who? But nevertheless, High crimes and misdemeaners amounts to the same thing without the political emphasis.

No, it doesn't amount to the same thing, and to make that point clear, the Founding Fathers included two examples of serious criminal violations that were breaches of the law far beyond matters of mere civil misconduct.

In other words, the president must have committed an actual crime to be impeached. There is no provision whatsoever in the Constitution for Congress to act purely as political gamesmanship.

[One Bad Pig]

How about you focus on substance for a change instead of just focusing on my spelling!

Make the effort to make your substance presentable, and I'll focus on it.

In this case, you're transparently looking for any potential excuse you can latch onto in order to get Trump out of office. Even Pelosi recognizes just how thin it is.

[Cow Poke]

How about you focus on substance for a change instead of just focusing on my spelling!

Jim, until you can post without glaringly childish spelling and grammar issues, how about you not call everybody else idiots, dummies, morons....

[JimL]

No, it doesn't amount to the same thing, and to make that point clear, the Founding Fathers included two examples of serious criminal violations that were breaches of the law far beyond matters of mere civil misconduct.

In other words, the president must have committed an actual crime to be impeached. There is no provision whatsoever in the Constitution for Congress to act purely as political gamesmanship.

Yes, it basically does amount to the same thing, it's maladministration which doesn't necessarily amount to criminal activity. The two examples cited are criminal, and a President can be impeached for criminal activity, and this President is obviously guilty of crimes, but high crimes and misdemeaners means much more than that and they are encompassed in the phrase "abuse of power." But we don't even have to concern ourselves with what is actually meant by "high crimes and misdemeanors" here, because Trump is obviously guilty of actual illegalities. Try reading the Mueller report!

[lilpixieofterror]

Would you like to make a bet on that Lilpix. Not a single crime has to be committed for Congress to put the President on trial, a process we call impeachment, nor does a crime have to be proven in order for the Senate to convict.

So much for 250 years of guilty till proven innocent. Do you even know what the word ‘impeach’ means?

[Cow Poke]

....Try reading the Mueller report with the utmost hatred and prejudice alongside the current issue of LiberalTalkingPointsForDummies....

fify

[lilpixieofterror]

First off, crimes were committed, or if you wish, there is abundent evidence of crimes having been committed. The Constitutional bases for impeachment is called congressional oversight. That's a trial by congress which is based on that evidence as put forth by the Special Councils investigation. You shouldn't be afraid of impeachment, it's a trial, and if the President is innocent then there is nothing to be concerned about. Apparently you are all very afraid which makes it look as though you believe Trump is guilty as well.

Than you should have no problem providing a list of crimes committed. List the already.

[JimL]

Make the effort to make your substance presentable, and I'll focus on it.

You don't want to focus on the issue, then don't.

In this case, you're transparently looking for any potential excuse you can latch onto in order to get Trump out of office. Even Pelosi recognizes just how thin it is.

Okay, so now you have something to say. I'm not latching on to anything, read the report, stupid. Pelosi knows what she's doing, she knows she has to better inform the brain dead like yourself before Congress actual files for impeachment. She doesn't want to further divide the country like republicans did when they filed for impeachment, after the bogus whitewater investigation, because Clinton lied about a sexual affair. Impeachment is coming, don't worry your pretty little head about that, but it is coming only after you dunderheads are better informed, if that is, Pelosi can hold off the more aggressive members of the party.

[JimL]

Jim, until you can post without glaringly childish spelling and grammar issues, how about you not call everybody else idiots, dummies, morons....

What's glaring is your hypocrisy, CP. Try practicing what you preach and you might gain more respect.