Re: [CTRL] Impeachment and Clinton
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 99-01-10 09:12:24 EST, you write: On Sat, 9 Jan 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To some it will seem a radical shift but I have changed my view on this whole issue, at least to a certain extent. Let me explain. I believe that there is sufficient evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Clinton to have him impeached solely on the charges against him. There certainly is a LOT more behind the scenes that he is definitely guilty of (treason, and treachery against the US which he swore to uphold, being the most damaging). I am now convinced however that this whole issue should have been dropped before it began because I don't like the puritanical emphasis that has already been the byproduct of the whole mess. Then, Teo, you are allowing them to win... Not only do you let them get away with the 'wrongdoing' you admit you believe was done, you let them get away with the blatant blackmail they are conducting... The answer is to NOT just drop it all...do you really think they will stop the 'wrongdoing' if the watchdogs go aways? I'm also surprised by your " this whole issue should have been dropped before it began" sentiments. Before Bill was impeached everyone was saying he would never be impeached. Now they're saying he won't be removed from office because they don't have the votes. If other evidence can be introduced from testimony via witnesses vis a vis the major acts of treason associated with Clinton's Presidency then he may be removed, and ironically, for the right reasons. Let's not forget that along with his litany of major and minor crimes I'm convinced he knew about the OKC bombing before-hand and used the murder of 168 people, devastating the lives of hundreds more, to vilify "militia's", "patriot's", talk radio and anybody else who was critical of his Presidency; the main objective was of course to push "The Anti-Terrorism Bill" which had stalled in Congress. The Bill gave unprecedented powers to the President and law enforcement. There is no crime, no principle, no moral, no life that he won't sacrifice in order to further the agenda's of the people who put him there. That is why he has to go. Gavin. DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Impeachment and Clinton
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 1/12/99 9:50:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm also surprised by your " this whole issue should have been dropped before it began" sentiments. Before Bill was impeached everyone was saying he would never be impeached. Now they're saying he won't be removed from office because they don't have the votes. If other evidence can be introduced from testimony via witnesses vis a vis the major acts of treason associated with Clinton's Presidency then he may be removed, and ironically, for the right reasons. Let's not forget that along with his litany of major and minor crimes I'm convinced he knew about the OKC bombing before-hand and used the murder of 168 people, devastating the lives of hundreds more, to vilify "militia's", "patriot's", talk radio and anybody else who was critical of his Presidency; the main objective was of course to push "The Anti-Terrorism Bill" which had stalled in Congress. The Bill gave unprecedented powers to the President and law enforcement. There is no crime, no principle, no moral, no life that he won't sacrifice in order to further the agenda's of the people who put him there. That is why he has to go. Gavin. Gavin, for all the peripheral reasons that you mention I am all for carrying this through, it is just disheartening to see it turn into a big cover-up to protect others in the government. It is my hope that more will come out and many more will go down but it is not likely. My concern is that this is turning into a morality issue, one in which the government will decide what moral position is "acceptable" and what one is not, which is EXACTLY where we stand now (even though those of us in the know, so to speak, know that it has nothing to do with the real issues in this whole debate). The government intrudes in my life enough, WAY too much in fact, right now and I don't want to give them any more opportunities to do so. That is my concern. I am frustrated that the real issues were not brought up immediately and that be the focus of this investigation. Teo1000 DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Impeachment and Clinton
-Caveat Lector- This may be too simplistic for some but it seems to be the truth for me. I base things under the headings of Education or Human Sacrifice. If each religion originally started as a school. Think of your typical church for example A teacher at the front and the students listening, (break) A standard curriculum for the whole church, the history, economic, interpersonal communications, international communications book called a Bible. Sometimes there would be two interpretations in a particular book of it. Why, Hypothesis - what would happen if this were true. People would learn to read just from learning the scriptures. Religion is not dead - not anymore than the teaching of English and History in our schools is dead. (continued from break) so that everyone could see that each person had their own idea of what it said. So if Religion was also a help for education what would be the end of the world, the end of Religion, the end of education? Bombs? Not likely, they are only a symptom of the disease. A way to keep us sidetracked from the true issues. We have been living at the end of the world since at least the time of "New Math" Help Return The Law To A Learned Profession - http://www.tncrimlaw.com/civil_bible/burch_speech.html Is this true of professions like doctors? How many "Professionals" how come out of our schools like Bush SR. did? Abbreviated education the followed someone else's view of the world so that they would advance that view point? How many economics have degrees simply because they would put out the right statistics when they were hired? If much of what I am putting together is true, it means that the Clintons, Bushs and others are committing the Genocide of America and Africa. Also that they are trying to make it seem that it is the will of the American people so that they can slip out and leave America holding the bag. So that we will have a war and that they will profit. Two areas that they would defiantly want targeted is the Library of Congress and the Vatican, that would allow them to re-write history. The underlying theme though is that a constitutional government is not viable. That the education of the people is detrimental or that it can not happen. What has happened? Can governments like the Soviet Union be viable? Look at the money, our government has been propping them up. The Cold War over? It has just started. The biggest problem is that we are going to have to take care of it (the cold war) inside of our own borders. The US Military? Do not count on the US Military they are capable of being taken out the next time that the personal are required to be vaccinated. Opps, Bad batch of Vaccine. The Solders for this? Our Educators, Our Universities, Our Schools, Our Teachers. Will the word go out this time in total or will it end up being covered up by Headlines like "Kent State", "Kennedy is Dead" - the message corrupted by using someone like John Lenin and saying that his way of thought was true. By talking about Homosexuals, who hides behind (the true) Homosexuals? Pedophiles. What is an area that the Clintons have supported? The making of sexual movies through the art foundation. One World, Boring! Viva La Difference. But the belief in life. The Constitution was to be the next evolution of thought. Remember "History Repeats It's Self" If we do not do it now, the best we can, if we can - this will be back again. all for now. Laura AKA The Pied Piper DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Impeachment and Clinton
-Caveat Lector- HOAX IMPEACHMENT TRIAL Don't hold your breath, soon you will see a mock event that will be used to make the stupid segment of society believe an actual impeachment trial is going on. It will be just like professional wrestling filled with rehearsed moves ... Oh, oh they have the president down and he is about to be pinned splat, pow he is up and in the end part of the act is clinton's triumph against great odds. Expecting crooked politicians to up hold the law is but a joke, so don't join the ranks of the stupid. Let them know before their coming mock trial will appease the stupid, but they are but mob party bosses who's show will be used to obstruct justice and protect their criminals party partner. Instead of being stupid enough to believe the party mob is about to uphold the law, send them a post (similar to the one below) letting them know we know exactly what they are about to do. Send it to every news agency, every politician and especially the family members of the senators. Let them know what kind of dishonorable liar and crook their little senators are. They will continue to use phrases like "They want to do what is best for America" and what is "best for America" just happens to be what is best for the democrats party mob... What is "best for America" is to let a felon and sex molester remain in office, so the democratic party is not embarrassed. They will continue to use such words.. "they are taking care of America", when in fact their only goal is to save their own party ass. Allowing criminals to hold high office is not what is best for any nation, but to the contrary. Allowing criminals to hold public office is but an evil cancer that will destroy a nation from the inside out. Allowing criminals to hold office, is what is best for criminal mob families. PREPARE FOR THE MOCK IMPEACHMENT TRIAL 1) If a politician does the same things others are branded as criminals for, then why isn't that politician a criminal? 2) Has Clinton committed the VERY SAME ACTS that other citizens have been branded criminals/felons for? 3) Unless these "honorable senators" are dishonorable liars, it is not their own opinions they will use in deciding the fate of Clinton. Every senator took an oath to uphold the laws of the land and the law specifies IMPEACHMENT as the stated punishment. In federal law, there are no degrees in felonies. Crimes come in two categories, misdemeanors and felonies. Misdemeanors are low crimes and felonies are high crimes. 4) Obstruction of justice, perjury ... tell me Mr. Senator are these misdemeanors/low crimes or are they felonies/high crimes? Now because democrats are going to cover up for their criminal partner and because the republicans are afraid to lose power and money, we are about to have a mock trial. The end results will be another politician joke on the American people. 5) Tell me Mr Senator, is there one law for the politicians and another law for the village idiots? If not, as soon as you slap clinton on the wrist are you going to release every citizen who is in prison on perjury and/or obstruction charges? Are you going to strip all the obstruction and perjury laws from the books, so no other citizen can be persecuted for the very same things you are about to free clinton for? No, you do not believe in equal justice for politicians and the people. You are about to put on a sham trial for show and tell and then flip the finger at the laws you took an oath to uphold. CHESTER THE MOLESTER FOR PRESIDENT One a talk show, Jones described how Clinton ran his hand up her ... and then pulled out his ... for her to suck. If she lied, then why doesn't Clinton sue her for liable? Ask Clinton and Jones if they will take a polygraph test and see who will come. We have heard of Clinton's patsies rave on the great mind and memory of Clinton and yet this great mind "couldn't remember who Jones was". Hustler magazine used to have a cartoon about Chester The Molester. I have seen the publisher of Hustler magazine on talk shows defending Chester Clinton. Reno wasn't Clinton's first choice was she? If I remember right the first "judge" Clinton chose was a woman who posed naked in a magazine. What was clinton's "bimbo control staff" set up for? Other than the published case, how many dozens more UNWILLING women has chester the molester clinton grabbed? Tell me how it is that other men who sexually assault women like Clinton are required to register as sex predators ... and yet this sex molester is held as some great honorable president? IF Clinton wasn't a powerful politician and he would have grabbed the daughter of any of his PRESENT SUPPORTERS, then pulled out his for them to suck, he would have been jailed, fined and or sued. If it were the daughter of his present day supporters, they would probably have knocked the hell out of him.
Re: [CTRL] Impeachment and Clinton
-Caveat Lector- On Sat, 9 Jan 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To some it will seem a radical shift but I have changed my view on this whole issue, at least to a certain extent. Let me explain. I believe that there is sufficient evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Clinton to have him impeached solely on the charges against him. There certainly is a LOT more behind the scenes that he is definitely guilty of (treason, and treachery against the US which he swore to uphold, being the most damaging). I am now convinced however that this whole issue should have been dropped before it began because I don't like the puritanical emphasis that has already been the byproduct of the whole mess. Then, Teo, you are allowing them to win... Not only do you let them get away with the 'wrongdoing' you admit you believe was done, you let them get away with the blatant blackmail they are conducting... The answer is to NOT just drop it all...do you really think they will stop the 'wrongdoing' if the watchdogs go aways? Clinton as well. I wish the whole thing had never begun, BUT since it has I want to see it played out to the full and that means full trial and witnesses etc. I'm confused...I thought you always supported an impeachment and trial... It is my hope that some nugget of truth will fall out of the trial and some good will come of it. This is my feeling, also...and may be why certain parties are so against calling witnesses, I suspect...there's a fear that much more damning evidence may slip out if witnesses are allowed, evidence which will possibly lead to the impeachment and/or prosecution of some highly placed people -- perhaps Gore (explains the bleatings about the Repubs 'overthrowing' the election, which doesn't make sense on the surface, since Gore would end up in "the catbird's seat"...BUT if evidence comes out in the trial that he ALSO committed treason, well...) -- perhaps a few Administration officials -- perhaps some important Congresscritters from BOTH sides of the aisle... He should be impeached and [possibly hanged along with numerous others on both sides of the party aisle for his treason, and that should be the issue before the Senate. But it isn't. The issue is perjury and obstruction of justice. Even if it WAS treason, the Senate trial, not being a criminal trial, doesn't have any power except to remove him from office... My guess? A good possibility that 'something' comes out in the Senate trial which suddenly broadens it's scope beyond the perjury and obstruction of justice charges...something which perhaps DOES show possibly treasonous actions, not only on the part of Clinton, but possibly Gore too... The Dems complain loud and long about the Repubs conducting a 'witch hunt', and demand that the Senate trial just stick to the original charges... But the new stuff is so 'hot', it can't be completely ignored...the Senate, knowing that the only thing it can do is remove Clinton from office no matter WHAT the charges are, votes to remove him from office based solely on the perjury and obstruction of justice charges -- because of the 'hotness' of the other stuff uncovered, the Senate Dems no longer feel they can back the president and so vote to remove based on the 'lesser' charges... The Senate then turns the 'hot' stuff it uncovered over to an independent prosecutor to pursue possible criminal charges against Clinton...even if it ostensibly isn't after anything on Gore, I predict there will be enough fallout so that it will be hard to deny his involvement...as the criminal proceedings against Clinton proceed, the House Judiciary Committee commences an investigation into Gore...with a lot of 'what did he know, and when did he know it' stuff... With the end result that by the time the year 2000 comes around, Gore will effectively be unelectable... Of course, if all the 'doom-and-gloomers' are right about the Y2K problem, Gore may solve his problem by declaring martial law and suspending all elections... ...just a day dream of mine, total speculation... Clinton is scum but now I wish that they had just let him alone from the start. 'Just let him alone'? To continue his scummy acts, including treason? Let us all hope now that this will create a steamroller effect that will clear Washington of ALL of the traitors and scum and we can start fresh, that is really the only acceptable outcome. Not very likely, huh? One can only hope...and keep the pressure on one's own representatives to NOT sweep it all under the rug...if we just sit back as passive viewers and DON'T actively participate in attempting to change things, then we deserve what we get... June === The melancholy days are come, the saddest of the year, Of wailing winds and naked woods, and meadows brown and sear. -- Wm. Cullen Bryant: The Death of the Flowers
Re: [CTRL] Impeachment and Clinton
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 1/10/99 9:12:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Then, Teo, you are allowing them to win... Not only do you let them get away with the 'wrongdoing' you admit you believe was done, you let them get away with the blatant blackmail they are conducting... The answer is to NOT just drop it all...do you really think they will stop the 'wrongdoing' if the watchdogs go away? I am not for dropping anything, just, now, wish that the whole thing had never begun in the first place. Teo1000 DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Impeachment and Clinton
-Caveat Lector- On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am not for dropping anything, just, now, wish that the whole thing had never begun in the first place. But that wouldn't have solved anything, either...in fact, it may have gotten worse, as they felt they could blatantly shred the Constitution to their hearts content... June === The melancholy days are come, the saddest of the year, Of wailing winds and naked woods, and meadows brown and sear. -- Wm. Cullen Bryant: The Death of the Flowers === *---* revcoal AT connix DOT com *---* It is UNLAWFUL to send unsolicited commercial email to this email address per United States Code Title 47 Sec. 227. I assess a fee of $500.00 US currency for reading and deleting such unsolicited commercial email. Sending such email to this address denotes acceptance of these terms. My posting messages to Usenet neither grants consent to receive unsolicited commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial email. ** DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Impeachment and Clinton
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 1/10/99 9:20:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: itnesses, etc. My problem is with the mentality that pervades all of this and that is that this is about sex (you and I both know that is not the issue here but Joe Blow apparently thinks it is) and the possibility that this will turn into more laws infringing upon my freedom to do what I want without people peering into every area of my life. That is the main problem I have with it all. It's all about marketing. Marketing. Marketing. Marketing. It was marketed as sex. Everything is marketed. Government is marketed. New laws imfringing upon our freedoms are marketed. The marketing is general Hegelian. Interestingly, this applies to getting Clinton on a sex rap (yes, it's perjury and obstruction, but marketed as sex) when they really wanted to get him on things that were too hot for them to touch (besides the fact that he covered his ass pretty well - shredded, bribed, blackmailed, killed, etc.). The interesting thing is... the sad thing is... that it might have backfired. All things considered, I was willing the go along with the "Capone Prosecution," eventhough I felt as you do - it should have been done right. But now, backfired or not, it's turned awfully ugly. Here's the origingal miscalculation: Going after a man with NO character in the same way you would go after a man WITH character. They just didn't know what they were bargaining for. Jim DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Impeachment and Clinton
-Caveat Lector- On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are several things that I am now confused on. Yes, circumstantial evidence seems to indicate that Clinton should be investigated for treason. However, the "trial" that is now taking place in the Senate does not include that charge. I don't understand how evidence of a crime not a part of the original indictment could be brought, It shouldn't == UNLESS a witness lets 'something slip'...then that witness's testimony becomes part of the record...and as I pointed out in a prior post, the only thing the SENATE can do, no matter HOW many charges are levied against the president or their severity, is to vote to remove him from office... But...if Monica Lewinsky is called to testify, and happens to mention that Clinton was snorting coke on a couple of occasions during their trysts...or that she overheard a conversation between Bill and a Chinese bigwig where Bill promised state secrets in exchange for sizeable donations...if Linda Tripp lets out something regarding Ron Brown...if Kathleen Willey mentions something about Vince Foster... Well, you get the picture...suddenly, the Senate has testimony which, in theory, they could use to request ADDITIONAL witnesses to provide corraborating testimony and perhaps evidence of these allegations... Again, the most they can do is vote to remove Clinton...but if they get any of this additional stuff testified on, it lays the groundwork for possible criminal proceedings against Clinton after he is removed from office...and perhaps possible criminal proceedings against some other important personages, too... unless that evidence was in support also of the crimes being charged, ie perjury and obstruction. Should such evidence be admitted, The Senate trial can admit anything they please, since it isn't a criminal trial...they could decide to listen to testimony that Clinton didn't get a required license for his dog Buddy, if they wanted to... but when it comes to the final vote, they'd only be able to vote on the actual charges, e.g. perjury and obstruction of justice... But that's not to say the D.C. dogwarden couldn't then turn around and slap the Clinton's with a fine for not licensing their dog... I would think that it would lead to a separate indictment, either other articles of impeachment or indictment in criminal court. Exactly. It'd be highly unlikely that they'd try to draw up additional articles of impeachment, the practical route would be that if damning evidence of something like treason gets introduced into the Senate trial, Clinton's Democratic supporters in the Senate would be hard pressed to keep defending him, and will probably swing towards voting to remove him from office on the perjury and obstruction of justice charges...and let the other stuff be brought up in a possible criminal indictment afterwards... According to the Constitution, a president can not be criminally indicted until after he is out of office, either via the natural ending of his term, or via impeachment... By the way, does anyone know if the concept of double jeopardy applies to impeachment? Probably it doesn't, since it isn't a CRIMINAL proceeding... Could the President be impeached twice? There is nothing in the Constitution to preclude it...but in practice, it would be highly unlikely to happen, to Clinton or any OTHER president... The Constitution says something like, ...not to exceed removal from office. This would indicate that the Senate could do any number of things as punishment but leave him in office. "Says something like"??? In cases like this, one should make it a point to find out the EXACT wording "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath of Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside. And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrance of two thirds of the Members present. "Judgement in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment, according to Law." -- The U.S. Constitution Article I, Section 3 See above. However, when the Articles arrived at the Senate they contained the wording, "and removal from office." Are you saying that since the Articles contain this wording this precludes any other action by the Senate? I might not be up to date on this little wrinkle. The Senate could decide to put a dunce cap on Clinton and make him sit in the corner...but it's highly unlikely...especially if even more damning stuff comes out in the trial, the Senate would be
Re: [CTRL] Impeachment and Clinton
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 1/10/99 2:29:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: (snip beginning) I can't disagree with you (I rarely do) I only assume that you are right, that the Senate can do pretty much anything that it wants since it's not a criminal trial and there's not much precedent for presidential impeachment trials. It just seems that bringing evidence, including slips of the tongue by witnesses, would turn the whole thing into a circus. Don't get me wrong though, I would like to see it come down just as you describe. I've said long ago that the Democrats' worst nightmare is having to actually vote on this thing. Of course I felt that this would apply to the committee hearings first, but that came out down party lines. Then I figured that there would be more honest Dems who would vote for impeachment in the House. Wrong again. So, with limited testimony and limited evidence presented in an abbreviated trial, we can expect the same thing - Slick will slide. The only hope is that the scenario that you hope for plays out and then it will only be effective if it changes public opinion. This is what the Dems most fear. In my opinion a charge of treason could be proved conclusively in this trial and if the polls didn't change, nothing more would happen. Even if all hell breaks loose in the trial, as you and I hope, you'd probably have to have people go around to 90% of the homes in the US and physically lock their TV sets onto C-Span. BTW, yes I'm aware that the Republicans are just as slimey as the Democrats, they just happen to be lucky enough to be on the right side of this particular issue. The Constitution says something like, ...not to exceed removal from office. This would indicate that the Senate could do any number of things as punishment but leave him in office. "Says something like"??? In cases like this, one should make it a point to find out the EXACT wording "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath of Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside. And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrance of two thirds of the Members present. "Judgement in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment, according to Law." -- The U.S. Constitution Article I, Section 3 OK... what I said has precisely the same meaning as the EXACT wording. They don't have to kick him out of office. What I was wondering was whether the wording in the Articles of Impeachment mandated removal. See above. However, when the Articles arrived at the Senate they contained the wording, "and removal from office." Are you saying that since the Articles contain this wording this precludes any other action by the Senate? I might not be up to date on this little wrinkle. The Senate could decide to put a dunce cap on Clinton and make him sit in the corner...but it's highly unlikely...especially if even more damning stuff comes out in the trial, the Senate would be hardpressed to do anything but to agree to remove him from office based on the charges sent to them... But do you know this for sure? However, it's probably not a very important point. Starr has supposedly agreed not to pursue a criminal trial if there is a censure agreement. So they appoint another independent prosecutor... It's highly unlikely that if evidence of something like TREASON comes out in the Senate trial, that the matter would just be dropped if Clinton's removed from office... Do you think that they could effectively appoint another special prosecuter against Clinton? On something like treason? Sure. June = Anyway, keep on daydreaming! I am too. It's just that I'm getting awakened too often. Thanks, Jim DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
