Author Topic: Mission Accomplished! (Read 1680 times)

DiabloTX · « **Reply #45 on:** November 11, 2006, 09:10:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
An impeachment is nothing more than formal allegations. It's the trial that matters, not the charge.

Ok, so he was impeached by the House...so he wasn't impeached? What are you saying? He wasn't removed from office, no, but he WAS impeached by the House. That's all that Dago said, that Clinton was impeached...and he's right.

DiabloTX · « **Reply #46 on:** November 11, 2006, 09:14:31 PM »

"Bill Clinton was impeached on December 19, 1998 by the House of Representatives on grounds of perjury to a grand jury (by a 228–206 vote) and obstruction of justice (by a 221–212 vote). Two other articles of impeachment failed — a second count of perjury in the Jones case (by a 205–229 vote), and one accusing Clinton of abuse of power (by a 148–285 vote). He was acquitted by the Senate."

From the Wiki.

Sandman · « **Reply #47 on:** November 11, 2006, 09:15:48 PM »

Sure, he's right that Clinton was impeached, but it doesn't really mean anything because he was acquitted.

Formal accusations are still just accusations.

DiabloTX · « **Reply #48 on:** November 11, 2006, 09:22:28 PM »

If it doesn't mean anything why are you making something of nothing (in your opinion)?

Sandman · « **Reply #49 on:** November 11, 2006, 09:31:45 PM »

Actually, I'm making nothing of a statement you think means something.

DiabloTX · « **Reply #50 on:** November 11, 2006, 09:44:56 PM »

An impeachment does mean something to me. I am sorry to see it means nothing to you.

Dago · « **Reply #51 on:** November 11, 2006, 11:51:13 PM »

I could point out the facts of Clintons behavior, including his disbarrment by the Supreme Court for his illegal conduct (while in office).

Sandman · « **Reply #52 on:** November 12, 2006, 12:27:33 AM »

Nevertheless.

Clinton was acquitted.

ByeBye · « **Reply #53 on:** November 12, 2006, 12:28:41 AM »

Clinton was impeached too.

Sandman · « **Reply #54 on:** November 12, 2006, 12:29:56 AM »

What of it?

cav58d · « **Reply #55 on:** November 12, 2006, 12:30:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
Sure, he's right that Clinton was impeached, but it doesn't really mean anything because he was acquitted.

Formal accusations are still just accusations.

So why even have a two house impeachment process???? Maybe we should go right into the trial with the senate, because according to you, the investigation and filing of impeachment by the house isn't legitimate.

cav58d · « **Reply #56 on:** November 12, 2006, 12:34:38 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
Sure, he's right that Clinton was impeached, but it doesn't really mean anything because he was acquitted.

Formal accusations are still just accusations.

And yes, it does mean a lot...Thoughout the history of the US Presidency, only two out of 43 have been found to have impeaching grounds by the US House.....Hey...Maybe Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were just really special

Sandman · « **Reply #57 on:** November 12, 2006, 12:36:53 AM »

Andrew Johnson was also acquitted.

Sandman · « **Reply #58 on:** November 12, 2006, 12:39:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by cav58d
So why even have a two house impeachment process???? Maybe we should go right into the trial with the senate, because according to you, the investigation and filing of impeachment by the house isn't legitimate.

The Articles of Impeachment are the accusations. The Senate conducts the trial.

I didn't say illegitimate. I said meaningless. Accusations aren't the same thing as convictions. This just in.

cav58d · « **Reply #59 on:** November 12, 2006, 12:41:36 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
The Articles of Impeachment are the accusations. The Senate conducts the trial.

I didn't say illegitimate. I said meaningless.

ummm...I didn't say different...