@no1marauder saidBelknap isn't a "civil officer of the United States" if he is out of office is he?
You're talking gibberish. A House member isn't a "civil officer of the United States" either for impeachment purposes and can be expelled by a 2/3 House majority for misconduct.
Belknap is precedent for someone out of office still being impeached for conduct in office. There is no precedent to the contrary.
1 edit
@no1marauder said"So the Senate rejected the idea that a Senator was "a civil officer of the United States within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States"
The article.
Read it.
EDIT: Here I'll help:
"In January of 1799, after three days of exhaustive arguments, the Senate deliberated behind closed doors, then voted on two resolutions. On January 10, 1799, the Senate failed to pass the following resolution by a vote of 11–14:
That William Blount was a civil officer of the United States within the meaning of the C ...[text shortened]... uld not be impeached because he had already resigned and the majority in Belknap rejected that idea.
Of course, he was no longer a senator.
You are claiming that applies to any senator. What is your source of information?
@metal-brain saidMy God. Do you even read anything that is posted?
"Senators may be immune from impeachment by the House, but they are subject to removal for misconduct in office."
How?
No1 posted the direct text for you which explains the decision making process, the difference between impeachment and punishment and the ability of each house to remove someone on office without impeachment.
@shavixmir saidMy God. Do you even read anything that is posted?
My God. Do you even read anything that is posted?
No1 posted the direct text for you which explains the decision making process, the difference between impeachment and punishment and the ability of each house to remove someone on office without impeachment.
I asked No1 "how?" and he didn't explain it yet. MORON!
@metal-brain saidIt has some advantages to talk to a wall as compared to you. Fast intake of ideas comes to mind.
My God. Do you even read anything that is posted?
I asked No1 "how?" and he didn't explain it yet. MORON!
@metal-brain saidWhat part of the Constitutional provision I already cited that provides that each house of Congress can discipline and even expel a member for misconduct was unclear to you?
My God. Do you even read anything that is posted?
I asked No1 "how?" and he didn't explain it yet. MORON!
@metal-brain saidHe did. You are a moron or a troll.
My God. Do you even read anything that is posted?
I asked No1 "how?" and he didn't explain it yet. MORON!
Choose wisely.
@no1marauder saidYou have not proven that and you know it.
What part of the Constitutional provision I already cited that provides that each house of Congress can discipline and even expel a member for misconduct was unclear to you?
@metal-brain saidHow?
"Senators may be immune from impeachment by the House, but they are subject to removal for misconduct in office."
How?
1 edit
@metal-brain saidOMG.
You have not proven that and you know it.
I already cited the provision in Article I, Section 5 of the US Constitution which says each house of Congress can discipline and even expel a member. Try reading the Constitution for a change.
@metal-brain saidYou're still not getting this eh?
When someone is impeached by the house but is not impeached what does that mean?
This conversation has devolved into an Abbott and Costello comedy skit.
@no1marauder saidYou didn't copy and paste anything to prove it.
OMG.
I already cited the provision in Article I, Section 5 of the US Constitution which says each house of Congress can discipline and even expel a member. Try reading the Constitution for a change.
Why the need for impeachment then?
@wildgrass saidIt is an obvious contradiction except for morons.
You're still not getting this eh?
This conversation has devolved into an Abbott and Costello comedy skit.