Without Impeachment...
Fri Mar 1, 2019 9:36am (XFF:

...there is nothing in the law that would explicitly remove the President from office.

The country would have faced an untenable position.

So, they wrote in the process to remove the President from office should the need arise. It seems to be a perfect fit to the way it was written.


  • But would they have put in a system where a POTUS theoretically COULD be indicted for murder, tried, convicted, and sentenced to prison, yet STILL be POTUS?
    • Without Impeachment... — Amadeus, Fri Mar 1 9:36am
      • I agree... Sprout, Fri Mar 1 10:33am
        Which is why, to me, it makes sense that the sequence of events would be impeachment, indictment, trial, conviction, sentencing... Kind of how Hamilton described it.
        • Perhaps In The Best Case Scenario...Amadeus, Fri Mar 1 11:45am
          ...that would make the most sense. You know, when the political party of the President wasn't being complicit in protecting the President from the consequences of his actions. However, in such a... more
          • Hamilton discussed all of the possible arrangements for impeachment, who would impeach, who would conduct the trial, who would preside. They had considered all of the implications of Party politics.... more
            • remotely. They completely opposed the kind of powerful 2 party system that we have today. So, NO, they had NO CLUE what the world of today would bring to such situations or that a political party... more
            • Obviously NotAmadeus, Fri Mar 1 3:45pm
              You cannot seriously say that Hamilton thought that it would be best for a president guilty of various offenses to be protected by his party from impeachment - and therefore shielded from any... more
              • Yes, I'm seriously saying that Hamilton and the Convention considered the influence of Parties on the impeachment process, among other things, before deciding that the Senate was "the most fit... more
Click here to receive daily updates