Currently Online 
SanAndreasX said:
Impeachments without the two-thirds Senate margin needed to convict are not only empty political gesture, but they often backfire, since both impeachments and Senate trials happen largely along party lines. They backfire because every time an acquittal happens, the accused is told, in no uncertain terms, that they can pretty much do what they want as long as just one-third of the Senate has their back. Setting aside Trump, we saw this in Texas when attorney general Ken Paxton, who has had federal felony indictments hanging over his head for a decade now, was acquitted by the Republican-majority Texas Senate along party lines of misappropriating campaign funds to cheat on his wife, despite his impeachment in the Texas House being bipartisan. It pretty much gave Paxton license to even worse abuses of his power, and he has taken those licenses knowing that nothing will ever be done about it. He's now running to unseat John Cornyn in the Senate. That's one of the serious flaws of presidential republics. It should never have required anything more than a simple no-confidence vote in the House of Representatives to be able to fire any member of the executive branch, including the president. Impeachment is a mechanism that exists in the U.K. government, but it hasn't been utilized in centuries because it is considered antiquated and because the issue can be addressed by holding a vote of confidence in the Prime Minister's government. Yet this elaborate, long-shot political process is the only way to effectively reprimand the combined heads of state/government in almost every country in the Americas except Commonwealth realms, as well as Asian nations like Korea and the Philippines. Korea recently had a near-miss with Yoon, and they were almost unable to do anything about him because his own party was backing him up. |
Forget impeaching her, I'd rather she got rabies. Would serve her right for shooting a puppy.
