House Judiciary Chair a Junk Lawyer? Can’t define impeachable offense?

Andrew McCarthy, former fed prosecutor says, quite convincingly, that the bamster has committed impeachable offenses–and that’s clear, except to the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee.

I looked up Bob Goodlatte’s credentials, JD, Washington and Lee Law School in Lexington, VA, born and raised in Madison/Jefferson country. He is, no doubt, advised by smart lawyers, and he can’t make a decent and cogent presentation on a Sunday morning talking head show about what are impeachable offenses. a concept that we inherited from England?

Impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors are about misconduct in office, abuse or misuse of office, and not necessarily about criminal offenses, even though some impeachable offenses may be criminal offenses. What’s so hard Congressman–getting your noodle spine to stop quivering about talking impeachment of the bamster, a sacred icon?

http://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2014/07/14/gop-clueless-on-impeachment/

About these ads

9 responses to “House Judiciary Chair a Junk Lawyer? Can’t define impeachable offense?

  1. I’m sorry you’ve misunderstood the simple fact that the misconduct must be both criminal, and provable. You can’t remove a president for being incompetent, because you “suspect” he’s up to no good, or for taking actions you really, really don’t agree with.

    I’m no big O fan, but impeachment in this instance is a total waste of time to consider – unless of course you do want to boost his sagging poll numbers, and re-energize a dispirited Democratic base.

    • “I’m sorry you’ve misunderstood the simple fact that the misconduct must be both criminal, and provable. You can’t remove a president for being incompetent, because you “suspect” he’s up to no good, or for taking actions you really, really don’t agree with.”

      Patently false. All you need is for the Senate to vote the POS out. The House impeaches, the Senate tries the official – president, in this case. If the House and Senate want the President out, they CAN remove him. No one can stop them.

      There is no political will in the House or Senate to remove our fine young president, so he will stay.

      • You know nothing of history. Read about the impeachments of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, and President Andrew Johnson. They both failed because the members of the Senate decided political will alone was NOT enough to meet the standard. Nixon was forced to resign by comparison, because he was personally involved in indictable crimes.

  2. MIkey,

    Thanks for your interest, but don’t underestimate an inactive lawyer–like me, since I am interested in con law because i don’t have to make a living practicing law.

    Read what McCarthy wrote and you will agree with me about my and McCarthy’s point, not that we should impeach the bamster, but that Bob Goodlatte didn’t properly define impeachable offense–neither did you.

    An impeachment is not a criminal proceeding, it is a political proceeding about misuse or abuse of office or failure to comply with the oath of office or the duties of office. Impeachable offenses run the gamut and are not–repeat, are not–necessarily criminal offenses.

    Do not let the political problem of how to impeach and get a super majority in Senate for a conviction influence your understanding of what an impeachable offense is. It is a term of political art describing misconduct by an official of the government that abuses, misuses, demeans or brings the office into disrepute. One can be impeached without a criminal conviction. Often the high standard for criminal conviction–unanimous and beyond a reasonable doubt does not prevent impeachment. Sometimes politics prevents impeachment even if the case meets a standard for conviction of a crime. The evidence in the Clinton case clearly met the standard for sexual misconduct, maybe criminal, and abuse of office, but we know why that wasn’t enough.

    The Oath for federal officers obligates a fed official, all the way to POTUS to uphold and defend the constitution and laws of the US and the people from all enemies foreign and domestic and fulfill the duties of office. Failure by omission or intentionally may not be criminal, just a matter of will or competence, not the fulfilling the mens rea required for a criminal conviction. I’m sure you get that part. High crimes and misdemeanors is a term of art–subject to a lot of misunderstandings. .

    The Federal Oaths of office are standard oaths and in when violated is impeachable on majority vote of the house and convictable on 2/3rd vote of senate. No criminal code violation or criminal conviction is necessary.

    You sound so confident, i think you thought i was just doing a rant about how the bamster needed to be impeached. Nope.

    Impreachment with the media we have would be a mess and never succeed.

    I was doing a critique and raising McCarthy’s critique about a lawyer who is chair of the House Judiciary Committee being as ignorant as many laypeople and citizens about what an impeachable offense is.

    Goodlatte should know better. McCarthy explains it well.

    Dereliction of duty in office, misuse or abuse of official power or position may be an impeachable political or official failing, and not be criminal. , .

    • Since I’m not a lawyer, I shouldn’t have to do more than react to the post, but the standard still reads pretty simply to me. Impeachment is pointless without conviction. It’s like a grand jury indictment, where the cliche is “you can indict a ham sandwich, for all the good it does ya”. Prosecutors fail every day because of over-charging a defendant. Juries just nullify it.

  3. What difference will it make? The house brings charges and articles of impeachment, so what. The democrat controlled Senate will do nothing to act on those charges, try the president. Until there is a senate that will pursue impeachment why waste the time and give ammo to the democrats for Novembers election.

  4. Mikey, Don’t react to the post with stuff that is not legally competent.

    As for the comment by Ken, sure impeachment is a political thing–i don’t disagree with you that it ain’t gonna happen with the sacred first mulatto president.

  5. Mikey,

    You continue to miss the point. You are stuck on stupid. Don’t insist on revealing your ignorance any more or you will be condemned to the life of the ignorant and labeled, as they say in Texas, as often wrong, but never in doubt.

  6. Well to add to the confusion, it is really up to the Senate to dismiss, acquit or convict any charges brought by the House of Representatives.

    Impeachment is only the first step of the process. Like a grand jury, the House of Representatives brings in a bill of impeachment. Then the Senate either acquits or convicts.

    As to issues, this is not well-defined. The actions that constitute offensive behavior by a president are not necessarily the same as for others.

    Behavior on the part of a person before he becomes president after he has left office might be an ordinary crime. A president is not impeachable for low crimes and minor misdemeanors committed before he has taken office.

    The high crimes and misdemeanors refer to misuse of presidential power.

    The issue can be exceeding the powers of the presidential office, but such overreach should be dealt with by the federal courts case by case by the person or persons who claim to affected usually by an executive order or a regulation that exceeds the power of the presidential office..

    In these cases, there is some action that results in abuse of power. But what if the abuse of power results from inaction, from failure to uphold the laws?

    For example, in the present situation the president seems to be tolerating lawlessness, by which the borders have been breached and masses of illegal immigrants are entering the country. Meanwhile it appears that the president has instructed federal agencies not to intervene to stop the flow.

    It is up to the Congress to determine if this constitutes a high crime or misdemeanor.

    By extension, it is up to the Senate not only to determine if a president is guilty of what he is accused, but whether or not the accusations amount to a “high crime or misdemeanor”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s