You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #95: I'll take the final question.... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #90
95. I'll take the final question....
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 01:05 AM by jberryhill
But all I can say is that the 20th amendment refers to a situation in which a President elect is not qualified. That condition has to go somewhere.


what's your analysis of the congress (certainly the Senate) knowing fully of this general issue, and just saying nothing and then taking advantage of the opportunity to re-decide the election?


If the House and Senate were of a mind to "re-decide the election" on some ground of "qualification", and did so precipitously, then that same House and Senate effect the same result even without being the arbiters of "qualification".

Consider - Let's say that you are absolutely correct, and that Congress assembled, even if intent on a perverse "qualification" objection as mere cover for a legislative coup, did not have the mechanism we are discussing. The same bunch of 538 jokers could simply impeach their way down - "Saturday Night Massacre" style - to whomever they wanted. Right?

So let's agree with everything you've said so far. What is your analysis of the congress taking advantage of impeachment to re-decide the election? Hmmm?

I can't see standing on some general "the people spoke" notion as the bulwark against usurpation of "the people's will" as to the identity of the President by a nefarious House and Senate, when the House and Senate could exercise impeachment.

Your point boils down to, "They can't keep him/her out on January 20th at noon, but can kick him/her out by 1 PM".

You tell me - what happens if Congress impeaches the President before he/she makes it down the street to the White House?

(and granted, we are well into late night silliness here, but I can't see why you want to make such an issue over whether Congress can prevent installation of a President, when the self-same Congress can REMOVE a President)

Or maybe I'm assuming too much, and you don't think impeachment is Constitutional?

(oh, and the freeps have this one covered - the impeachable offense in their "minds" is perjury upon taking the oath of office by a non-qualified President)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC