(November 19, 2015 at 2:43 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:Some people, not me, think that he's traitor. Maybe they have evidence to support that.(November 18, 2015 at 9:00 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: The SCOTUS can't reverse a presidential impeachment. It has no jurisdiction in the matter other than the Chief Justice presides over it. But once the Senate convicts it's a done deal.
Perhaps. If you remember your high-school civics, the Court didn't have the power of review either; nowhere in the Constitution is it written that one of the Court's functions is to ensure that laws comport with the Constitution.
(November 18, 2015 at 8:56 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: What was Andrew Johnson charged with?
"Unfit to be president
There were 11 counts, nine of which repeated over and again that he had violated the Tenure of Office Act by firing Stanton. The last two accused him of bringing Congress into "disgrace, ridicule, hatred, contempt and reproach" by speeches he had given, and the 11th summarized the other 10 and said Johnson's conduct demonstrated his unfitness to be president."
https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/...care-today
So if the House does actually impeach the President and if the Senate does actually convict him who is going to overturn the proceedings?
So what you're telling me is that they charged him with the illegal act of firing Stanton. I get that the other stuff was window-dressing ... but they charged him with a violation of the law.
How, exactly, is that supposed to contradict my point? If you want to contradict my point, find us an impeachment which has no mention of illegal behavior.
Oh, and hey, are you ever going to answer my question? What charges would you level against Obama? Given your silence on the matter, I'm starting to think you got nothin'.
http://www.petition2congress.com/10013/i...a-treason/
