Jump to content

impeachable crime?


eisely

Recommended Posts

To go back to the title of the thread, impeachment is for "high crimes and misdemeanors." Even if the president exceeded his authority (and I'm not convinced that he did), this would be a matter for a civil lawsuit -- not a criminal act or a "misdemeanor." I'm pretty sure there is no federal criminal statute on making an appointment when the Constitution says you can't. It's a civil matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 34
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yah, I just couldn't parse all of SR540's list as anything other than silly partisan nonsense. Do people who put out such blather in da echo chambers actually read the legislation? Probably a third of those bills wouldn't be acceptable to an average Republican. There shouldn't be any surprise if the democrats in the Senate don't take 'em up.

 

At quick glance, I'd also guess that half of those bills have not a lick to do with employment. Net neutrality, really? Other than the backbone providers who are just rent seeking, who isn't in favor of net neutrality? Do yeh really want AT&T to be able to decide whose phone call costs more? If you're a Republican, you get charged double for internet access to Fox News? That will certainly increase jobs. :p

 

Of course all of that is just ordinary legislative process in a bicameral legislature. None of it has a thing to do with ratifying appointments within the executive branch.

 

B

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recess appointments were included in the constitution because it was assumed that the congress would only meet for a few months out of the year so that a death or resignation could leave a position open for an extended period of time. Recess appointments are no longer needed so I would favor an amendment to abolish the recess appointments and would require all presidential appointments to come up to a vote on the Senate floor within a reasonable length of time. Parliamentary shenanigans should be outlawed.

 

That said, the congress staying in sham sessions to prevent recess appointments is disgusting. The congress is a disgrace for such petty tactics that have been used by both parties over the years. However, Obama's ignoring that the congress considers itself to be in session and ignoring the constitution violates his oath to uphold the constitution. Since that undermines the constitution, it undermines the republic and it rises to a possibly impeachable offense. Obama's cavalier attitude is very detrimental to the republic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yah, I'd be all in favor of a very simple agreement. From presidential appointment to senate confirmation vote in 60 days. If the vote isn't taken, either because the Senate isn't around or because it's filibustering or because it can't get its act together, then the appointment is confirmed by default.

 

Part of da problem is the sheer numbers of positions requiring advice and consent. At the time the Constitution was framed, the founders didn't anticipate that over a thousand different positions would fall into this category. It should be limited once again to just the most significant positions in the executive and judicial branches. Appellate and supreme courts, cabinet level secretaries, and maybe a half dozen other major positions. That way congress can't try to muck with individual laws through appointment blocking, nor can congressional leaders try to get cronies jobs.

 

All that can be done with simple legislation and no need for a constitutional amendment. Just takes adult supervision, eh? Somethin' that the BSA has but Congress doesn't. :p

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beavah, I like the 60 day deadline. In addition, effective October 1 of each year, I'd like to see an absolute cessation of Congressional funding, including all member & staff salaries, travel expenses, as well as utilities, telephone, & internet for all Congressional offices until a budget is passed. I like to think they'd move a bit faster if the lights went out and their blackberries stopped working! And CR's don't count!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congress should not be allowed to leave chambers starting October 1 until a budget is passed (a CR is not a budget). Food could be brought in and they could take short bathroom breaks. They can sleep at their desks and wait to shower until they do their constitutionally mandated task. They do swear an oath to uphold the constitution and whenever they fail to have a budget, they violate that oath. The current political shenanigans are not acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Congress should not be allowed to leave chambers starting October 1 until a budget is passed (a CR is not a budget)."

I strongly agree with this.

After doing a career with the feds and living the last decade or so with the CR approach intruding at unpredictable times, I can tell you with great confidence that it greatly diminished the ability to get anything done. Forget morale or initiative...it didn't even allow us to let contracts to private companies in a lot of cases. To me it was fundamentally dishonest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any member of congress must also refrain from any campaign activity, expenditure of campaign funds or receipt thereof.

 

Furthermore any member of congress leaving early will lose their senority for the purpose of congressional office space allocation --they bump down to the crummy building.

 

And we turn off their government provided blackberry's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, let's not get mean. Some of 'em deal with classified information, so it's OK to give 'em a secure blackberry. ;) But I like SA's nuclear option of just confiscating their lobbyist dollars if they don't get the work done.

 

I think da Catholic folks do something like what a few are advocating when electing a pope, eh? Lock everybody in and then slowly reduce the amount of food and water provided, until they're on hard-tack and a glass a day. Sounds good to me, though I might be tempted to start reducin' the amount of air provided, too!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recess appointments are in the constitution because congress used to be a part-time job.

 

If an important government vacancy occured during the six months that congress was not in session, a president actually needed to able to fill that vancancy before congress was planning to ride their horses back into DC.

 

You really did know that, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...