Kintenbo Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Okay, after that very deservingly so little halt...Oh, well, looks like they won't need to do that, seeing as Blagojevich was ousted from office. Comments? He definitely could have handled the situation MUCH better. If you're accused of something, getting mad and evasive is the last thing you should do. Especially if you're innocent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YokaiKnight Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Oh, well, looks like they won't need to do that, seeing as Blagojevich was ousted from office. Comments? I hope nobody thought he was going to stay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Wozzeck Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 He definitely could have handled the situation MUCH better. If you're accused of something, getting mad and evasive is the last thing you should do. Especially if you're innocent. And especially if it's something like this, since it only makes people point more fingers at you than needed. I hope nobody thought he was going to stay. I certainly didn't expect him to stay after he became a whiny little bitch about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YokaiKnight Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 I certainly didn't expect him to stay after he became a whiny little bitch about it. Nah, even before that. The whole "tapes of him making the deals" and "convicted by the media/general public" thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Wozzeck Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 (edited) Nah, even before that. The whole "tapes of him making the deals" and "convicted by the media/general public" thing. I actually didn't hear about the tapes until I heard about him being whiny about the procedures. Once I heard he was being whiny about the whole thing, I had lost hope. I was at least hoping he would take the Nixon approach to impeachment, though. (I.E., getting the hell out of there before the proceedings occur and then turning all reliable resources in so you can at least keep some of your dignity (We all know Nixon resigned, but at least he's not known as the first president to be kicked out of office. Blagojevich will wish he could say something similar about himself in a few years.)) Edited January 30, 2009 by Edgard Varése Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erk Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 I watched his corrupted arse get voted off. It ironicaly reminded me of survivor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esau of Isaac Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 An impeachment is a trial. A government official must be accused of legal misconduct in order to be impeached, and must be convicted of said legal misconduct in order to be removed from office. An impeachment is separate from an indictment - though both involve legal charges, an impeachment can only result in removal from office while an indictment can result in actual legal consequences.Clinton was not impeached because he cheated on Hillary, nor was Johnson impeached solely because the Senate was fed up with him. Clinton's impeachment charges had to do with his alleged perjury in a separate sexual harassment case and Johnson's impeachment charges had to do with him violating an act that the Senate had passed in order to get him impeached (because they knew he would probably violate that act). This is true. The Senate, under Andrew Johnson, passed an act called the Tenure of Office Act, which required any government-level removal of members to be approved by them. Johnson, being Johnson, naturally fires Stanton, his Secretary of War at the time, for disagreeing with him on too many levels. And of course the Senate uses this as they had planned to impeach him. But as most of us know, he was saved by a vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Wozzeck Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 This is true. The Senate, under Andrew Johnson, passed an act called the Tenure of Office Act, which required any government-level removal of members to be approved by them. Johnson, being Johnson, naturally fires Stanton, his Secretary of War at the time, for disagreeing with him on too many levels. And of course the Senate uses this as they had planned to impeach him. But as most of us know, he was saved by a vote. The law by which Johnson got impeached was eventually declared unconstitutional in the Roaring 20's, though, and the Senate overrode Johnson's veto on that law. Also, the guy that would've replaced him was in the party that controlled Congress at the time. So through that, you could deduce that it was in fact political anger that led to Johnson's veto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florete Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 lol Pointless spam, deleted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
California Mountain Snake Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Pointless spam, deleted. I've had three posts deleted on this website, and no mod has ever posted to tell me they deleted my post. Do I detect post inflation, Ms. Board's-top-poster? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ϲharlie Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 (edited) I've had three posts deleted on this website, and no mod has ever posted to tell me they deleted my post.Do I detect post inflation, Ms. Board's-top-poster? After seeing this irrelevant and off-topic post, I'm beginning to detect the same thing from you Mr. Boner-killer. Edited February 1, 2009 by Musashi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esau of Isaac Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 The law by which Johnson got impeached was eventually declared unconstitutional in the Roaring 20's, though, and the Senate overrode Johnson's veto on that law. Also, the guy that would've replaced him was in the party that controlled Congress at the time. So through that, you could deduce that it was in fact political anger that led to Johnson's veto. I agree; of course it was political anger. The entire premise of their choices were that Johnson was not seeing eye to eye with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Wozzeck Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 I agree; of course it was political anger. The entire premise of their choices were that Johnson was not seeing eye to eye with them. Sarcasm much? And I never said all that with certainty; I'm saying that you could arrive at that conclusion. (Could being the key word.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canas is back Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 (edited) Just another sad man in the word of politics, honestly, I don't see how anybody could want to get into politics especially when things are like this. EDIT:I just hit 400 posts (yay for me) Edited February 1, 2009 by canas is back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grandjackal Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Just another sad man in the word of politics, honestly, I don't see how anybody could want to get into politics especially when things are like this.EDIT:I just hit 400 posts (yay for me) When politics get bad is the PERFECT time to pay attention to it. They fuck up, we suffer. Unless you meant like becoming a senator or something...That point it's all on motive, which everyone would HOPE is good, but not everyone's a saint on the inside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esau of Isaac Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Sarcasm much?And I never said all that with certainty; I'm saying that you could arrive at that conclusion. (Could being the key word.) I'm not being sarcastic, I was being serious; that is the reason that he was impeached; it was their attempt to oust him from his seat of power for a variety of reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.