Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Congressman Bob Goodlattte assures us that there is no impeachment in the offing
Hot Air ^ | July 13, 2014 | Jazz Shaw

Posted on 07/13/2014 4:02:13 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

Representative Bob Goodlatte took to the Sunday morning chat circuit, specifically ABC’s This Week, to assure his fellow Americans that there was no need to impeach the President and no plans to do so in the foreseeable future. The Corner has the details.

Representative Bob Godlattte (R., Va.) does not believe President Obama has done anything that would merit impeachment under the Constitution.

“We are not working on or drawing up articles of impeachment,” Goodlatte, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, told George Stephanopoulos on This Week Sunday. “The Constitution is very clear as to what constitutes grounds for impeachment of the president of the United States,” Goodlatte continued. “He has not committed the kind of criminal acts that call for that​.”

Before we get to the specifics of the crimes in question, here’s the video.

(VIDEO-AT-LINK)

I personally haven’t shown much interest in impeachment, primarily because the odds of it being successful seem even less likely than with Clinton, particularly given the current structure in Washington. But Goodlatte does leave room for some long standing questions to be addressed. What sort of criminal acts would it take for Bob to change his answer?

The Constitution isn’t exactly crystal clear for those reading it in 21st century language on this subject. Article II, Section 4 says that it would happen on conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Treason is pretty well defined in the founding documents and would be a hard case to make. The same with bribery. But I’ve always struggled with the “high crimes and misdemeanors” part. Obviously the use of misdemeanors is a bit different than what we think of today, or else you’d be impeaching people for jay walking. But the origins are apparently quite different. Jon Roland of the Constitution Society has a pretty good primer for the layman.

The question of impeachment turns on the meaning of the phrase in the Constitution at Art. II Sec. 4, “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”. I have carefully researched the origin of the phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” and its meaning to the Framers, and found that the key to understanding it is the word “high”. It does not mean “more serious”. It refers to those punishable offenses that only apply to high persons, that is, to public officials, those who, because of their official status, are under special obligations that ordinary persons are not under, and which could not be meaningfully applied or justly punished if committed by ordinary persons.

Under the English common law tradition, crimes were defined through a legacy of court proceedings and decisions that punished offenses not because they were prohibited by statutes, but because they offended the sense of justice of the people and the court. Whether an offense could qualify as punishable depended largely on the obligations of the offender, and the obligations of a person holding a high position meant that some actions, or inactions, could be punishable if he did them, even though they would not be if done by an ordinary person.

One of the chief and most likely applicable examples Roland cites is that of “perjury.” (Which quickly swings us back around to Bill Clinton if we’re not careful.) But the current understanding of the word – as in lying under oath – isn’t the same as what the founders had in mind when it comes to those in high office. Roland makes the case that they defined it differently for Presidents, translated as “violation of one’s oath (or affirmation)”.

The oath in question is pretty easy to find also:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Since I’m not a constitutional scholar, I won’t even try to break that down for every possible scenario, but by Roland’s reading, it certainly seems to leave a lot of gray area where a variety of failings of the chief executive could apply. But in any event, assuming Goodlatte is correct, this remains an academic discussion anyway.


TOPICS: Virginia; Issues; Parties; U.S. Congress
KEYWORDS: congress; gop; impeachment; obama
Yep, that's our GOP!
1 posted on 07/13/2014 4:02:13 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Thank God! I was afraid there was still some vestige of the rule of law that remained.


2 posted on 07/13/2014 4:04:09 PM PDT by gorush (History repeats itself because human nature is static)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Not one single vertebrae in the whole bunch.


3 posted on 07/13/2014 4:08:24 PM PDT by TigersEye ("No man left behind" means something different to 0bama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Please! They can’t even stand up to him on the budget. And they would pursue impeachment?


4 posted on 07/13/2014 4:12:24 PM PDT by rbbeachkid (Get out of its way and small business can fix the economy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I don’t think impeachment is a good idea, because I’m sure it would fail, as it failed with Clinton, because it is a political remedy and I’m very extremely sad to say the politics just aren’t there.

But I think Goodlatte is very wrong to say there are not grounds to impeach, very wrong.


5 posted on 07/13/2014 4:14:41 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet; All
"Yep, that's our GOP!"

Rep. Goodlatte was presumably present when HoR read Constitution, including Congress's Article I, Section 8-limited powers, and also executive branch duties, out loud at beginnings of 2010 and 2012 legislative sessions. So it does sound like a case of “terminal” GOP.

6 posted on 07/13/2014 4:15:37 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Well before you can have an impeachment vote followed by a Senate trial you first have to pick the jury — and the voters will do that in November.

Then we will see —


7 posted on 07/13/2014 4:17:36 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

there was no need to impeach the President and no plans to do so in the foreseeable future. Oh thank God, now I can go back to sleep


8 posted on 07/13/2014 4:18:11 PM PDT by ronnie raygun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

You either impeach Obama, or you support Obama...


9 posted on 07/13/2014 4:42:33 PM PDT by DisorderOnBorder (They are Illegal Aliens...not immigrants)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I am way past sick and tired of the GOP.

They are very, very close to worthless.


10 posted on 07/13/2014 4:45:11 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Virginians seem to be among the most obscure and useless of the GOP “leadership” class.


11 posted on 07/13/2014 4:47:25 PM PDT by Theodore R. (Liberals keep winning; so the American people must now be all-liberal all the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Re: “Well, before you can have an impeachment vote followed by a Senate trial, you first have to pick the jury — and the voters will do that in November.”

The polls do not look promising, Chip.

We need 6 seats for a majority.

We lead in only 4 Senate races, and one of those, Arkansas, is within the margin of error.

We are tied or trail in all the other close Senate elections.

There is also a chance we could lose a Republican seat in Kentucky or Georgia.

And, there has not been a poll in Mississippi since Thad Cochran enraged the Conservatives by using Democrats to win his primary.

Bottom Line - the Republican Party leadership stands for nothing.

It’s just a question of time before Conservatives walk away by the millions.


12 posted on 07/13/2014 4:55:20 PM PDT by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10

Wonder how much $$$ of the 3.3B border location he got for saying that?


13 posted on 07/13/2014 5:04:00 PM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001

Wonder how much $$$ of the 3.3B border allocation he got for saying that?


14 posted on 07/13/2014 5:05:27 PM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

.


15 posted on 07/13/2014 6:09:01 PM PDT by RetSignman (obama: "For the love of Alinsky, how much more do I have to do to get them to impeach me"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

There’s nothing a liberal likes better than a good latte.

Me, I prefer an iced Muslimacano.


16 posted on 07/13/2014 7:10:43 PM PDT by Peter ODonnell (Sectarian warfare -- no dog in that hunt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001; All

Giving Obama $3.8 billion to fix his border problem would be about as smart as giving Hitler any amount of money to fix his concentration camp problem.


17 posted on 07/14/2014 4:29:00 AM PDT by mazda77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson