Specter of Nixon impeachment looming over Republican Party

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Archibald Cox said years later that he had NO case against Nixon...if it had been held in a criminal court under standard rules of jurisprudence. Impeachment is a political animal though. Nixon probably would have been impeached but convicted...no one talks about that. The dems would have needed at least four republicans to sign on. Seems like a slam dunk but in 1867 there were 54 republicans, 8 democrats, and 20 vacant seats. That means 36 votes for a conviction but it didn't happen. Johnson was a democrat but the trial fell one vote short of a conviction. Seems that some senators realized the gravity of the situation; overturning the results of an election because of politics... too bad we don't have people like that today. Instead we have Romney, Schumer, Sanders, and Warren.

Two additional notes on Johnson's impeachment. 1) The Supreme Court, in another, later matter, eventually upheld the right of a sitting president to fire a sitting cabinet member without any input from the Senate. The Supreme Court's later decision belatedly affirmed Johnson's right to fire Stanton and that it was the president's right alone and, therefore, did not require the consent of Congress. 2) The individual leading the charge for impeachment was Benjamin "Spoons" Butler, and he was a self-promoting asshole much like Schitty. In the days before the 1864 election, Lincoln had considered Butler as a possible choice for his vice presidential running mate, but opted for Johnson instead because Lincoln viewed him as more 'unifying' than the arrogant, Yankee politico from Massachusetts. For that reason, Butler held a personal grudge against Johnson and led the charge for impeachment.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Archibald Cox said years later that he had NO case against Nixon...if it had been held in a criminal court under standard rules of jurisprudence. Impeachment is a political animal though. Nixon probably would have been impeached but convicted...no one talks about that. The dems would have needed at least four republicans to sign on. Seems like a slam dunk but in 1867 there were 54 republicans, 8 democrats, and 20 vacant seats. That means 36 votes for a conviction but it didn't happen. Johnson was a democrat but the trial fell one vote short of a conviction. Seems that some senators realized the gravity of the situation; overturning the results of an election because of politics... too bad we don't have people like that today. Instead we have Romney, Schumer, Sanders, and Warren.

Interesting. Thanks.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

In the meantime, President Trump filling up stadiums. People waiting 24 hours for seat. The Republican Party gets it. .

[oeb11]

Stay away from the Jones koolaid - wtf.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Archibald Cox said years later that he had NO case against Nixon...if it had been held in a criminal court under standard rules of jurisprudence. Impeachment is a political animal though. Nixon probably would have been impeached but convicted...no one talks about that. The dems would have needed at least four republicans to sign on. Seems like a slam dunk but in 1867 there were 54 republicans, 8 democrats, and 20 vacant seats. That means 36 votes for a conviction but it didn't happen. Johnson was a democrat but the trial fell one vote short of a conviction. Seems that some senators realized the gravity of the situation; overturning the results of an election because of politics... too bad we don't have people like that today. Instead we have Romney, Schumer, Sanders, and Warren.

interesting. something just occurred to me reading this post ... should not all the Democratic senators running for president recuse themselves from voting if there is a formal vote in the Senate to impeach Trump?

that would be Bennet, Booker, Harris, Klobuchar, Sanders and Warren.

of course several could drop out before any trial is held like Gillibrand who has formally dropped out.

i think any Senator still in the race should recuse themselves from voting.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Two additional notes on Johnson's impeachment. 1) The Supreme Court, in another, later matter, eventually upheld the right of a sitting president to fire a sitting cabinet member without any input from the Senate. The Supreme Court's later decision belatedly affirmed Johnson's right to fire Stanton and that it was the president's right alone and, therefore, did not require the consent of Congress. 2) The individual leading the charge for impeachment was Benjamin "Spoons" Butler, and he was a self-promoting asshole much like Schitty. In the days before the 1864 election, Lincoln had considered Butler as a possible choice for his vice presidential running mate, but opted for Johnson instead because Lincoln viewed him as more 'unifying' than the arrogant, Yankee politico from Massachusetts. For that reason, Butler held a personal grudge against Johnson and led the charge for impeachment.

interesting fact about butler... that goes into the never knew that file.


that explains lincoln's odd choice of Johnson. I think he may have regretted his pick when he found out Johnson showed up drunk.

[oeb11]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

interesting. something just occurred to me reading this post ... should not all the Democratic senators running for president recuse themselves from voting if there is a formal vote in the Senate to impeach Trump?

that would be Bennet, Booker, Harris, Klobuchar, Sanders and Warren.

of course several could drop out before any trial is held like Gillibrand who has formally dropped out.

i think any Senator still in the race should recuse themselves from voting.

a very interesting thought - TWK - and a clear conflict of interes of the DPST candidates. t.

The DPST's would scream bloody murder about any attempt to bring up that idea in an Impeachment Trial. But, They don't set the Senate rules. Yes, it would be viewed as a partisan move by the DPST's - but, of course, they would not vote in a partisan fashion in a Trump impeachment trial, now would they ?????
LOL