Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Impeachment of the Presidents?

Andrew Johnson was the first of course. I'm not so smart, someone explain it all?

Democrats of the era were unhappy he bought Alaska...they wanted Russia to have the oil. Just an earlier version of Hillary’s uranium deal.

Just now trying to soak up some Johnson's impeachment. It looks like a lot of dirty dealing, not much has changed since 1868

Actually, the real rift between Johnson and Congress was over Reconstruction.

First of all, Johnson was a southerner. Next, Congress was dominated by the Northeastern "Radical Republicans" that didn't like Johnson from Tennessee.

Lincoln favored a straightforward and simple Reconstruction, whereas the Radical Republicans from the Northeast wanted their pound of flesh. After Johnson became President with the death of Lincoln, he clashed with Congress over Reconstruction. To be truthful, the powers in Congress hated Johnson and they clashed over everything which culminated in impeachment. Like our most recent impeachment, Congress looked for something to run him out of office over. He was not elected, he wasn't someone the Northeastern elite wanted (a compromise pick by Lincoln in attempt to placate the South in 1860) and Congress wanted him out.

They even went so far to pass a law that only pertained to the firing of cabinet folk.

They knew he did not want Seward as an officer so he fired him and off to the races they went.

He barley survived it .

There could be an asterisk next to the impeachment. The Tenure of Office Act passed by Congress (over Johnson's veto) was specifically passed to trap Johnson into breaking the law and initiating an Impeachment process as it was common knowledge that Stanton (and others) were going to get the axe. The clash then, just as now, was really about the supremacy of one branch over the others. Congress really wants a parliamentary system where the executive is subservient to the body. When Pelosi says "co-equal branches" she thinks SHE is co-equal, rather than the whole body of Congress which includes the Senate and McConnell.
Why the asterisk? The law passed the triggered impeachment was subsequently repealed in 1887 and finally rendered moot by the Supreme Court in the 1920s.

The closest thing to a real impeachment never actually happened- - - -Nixon would have been impeached, tried, and convicted over Watergate and the resulting coverup crimes if he had insisted on letting the process proceed to its ultimate conclusion. There was enough evidence of malfeasance on his part, and enough people in his own party were aligned against him to achieve the necessary 2/3 majority in the Senate to convict him. The fact that Gerald Ford pardoned him was probably promised before he pulled the plug.

Slick Willy probably deserved to get convicted, but the votes just weren't there on a straight party line basis, just like with Trump. I believe Clinton was probably more "guilty" in the technical sense than Trump, but that's my own biased opinion.
Jerry

"more 'guilty'"? How so? Trump wasn't guilty of ANY crime. He wasn't tried for any crime, let alone convicted. He was guilty or not guilty of made up bs by the commies. "Obstruction of Congress"? Wtff is that? "Abuse of power"? Come on. Clinton was fully guilty of lying under oath and later was disbarred IIRC. Whether Clinton's crime was serious enough to warrant impeachment is another question. Trump was not guilty of any real crime.

Lying under oath is serious. Honesty is the basis of our entire legal system and Clinton crapped all over it. Yes, it was serious enough to be convicted and removed from office.

Clinton was not removed because the American public really didn't see lying about having an affair with an intern was a big enough deal to remove a stitting President. Even Newt has said he and the House Republicans misjudged that whole deal.

At the time Senator Byrd, a KKK member, was the ranking democrat and the senate historian. When asked by a reporter if Clinton's crimes reached the level of treason, he replied "why yes they do". When asked if he would vote to impeach and remove from office he replied NO. It was pure party line voting. Romney broke a longstanding rule about voting against your party when he voted to impeach. He made history at the cost of his legacy and possibly his seat.

The public truly is gullible and will believe what the media says. The real crimes regarding China and missile technology Clinton gave away were never addressed. He should have been impeached and hung for treason along with his corrupt wife.

It pissed me off every time I saw him when Hillie was running for President. I think it did a lot of other voters too. We hadn’t forgotten Slick Willie!

Absolutely true.

Those 900 FBI files Clinton requested then went "missing", only to be "found" on a hallway table 6 weeks later had nothing to do with Bill not being convicted, surely.

That too. But "gave away"? I think not. He had the oversight of the technology transferred from DOD to Commerce.... Anyone think there wasn't a finder's fee in there somewhere?