1. Impeachment does remove the people's choice, & so does tamper with the democratic process. Why not to do it lightly. But that's also inherent in the Framers' design....https://twitter.com/NoahCRothman/status/1220183281804685312 …
Which is fine, but that also means granting a similar level of legitimacy to the decision not to remove.
-
-
Don’t see how these are really related. If you think Senators have a duty to try an impeachment a certain way, you can criticize them for doing otherwise. You can argue that they’re acting contrary to the Constitution, and you might be right. But what they decide is what it is.
-
Cf. Electoral college. If some members had decided to revolt and voted for Hillary, one might strongly disapprove, but it is what it is. They could be the absolute worst (or not), but Hillary would be President.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Your point exposes the absurdity of
@skepticalsports' argument: if 67 votes makes a Prez ipso facto as guilty as sin, then 66 must make him pure as the driven snow. Nonsense, of course, on both counts. -
This has nothing to do with guilt or innocence. I’m only talking about process.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I see what you did there
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.