Impeachment?

Is gross incompetence grounds for impeachment?

I might be able to come up with 144 reasons.

.

Armon Ayers wrote:Is gross incompetence grounds for impeachment?

No, as the Cheney-Bush administration years showed us. Only "high crimes and misdemeanors" qualify.

I agree with Ziggy.

It happens so very infrequently that I feel compelled.

There is a constitutional standard--treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

If it can be shown that Obama did a quid pro quo, then that would be impeachable, but I'm yet to see that (besides the usual influence that money buys in Washington, and to impeach for that would leave almost nobody standing).

SheikBen wrote:I agree with Ziggy.

It happens so very infrequently that I feel compelled.

There is a constitutional standard--treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

If it can be shown that Obama did a quid pro quo, then that would be impeachable, but I'm yet to see that (besides the usual influence that money buys in Washington, and to impeach for that would leave almost nobody standing).

Maybe that's what we need- to mow 'em all down for influence buying-selling, and then hire a new bunch or kindler and gentler crooks.

I will say, Zig, that I wish the lines were drawn more clearly. I remember quite clearly how much attention was paid to the better funded interest groups compared to our little group from WVA, when we went to visit a certain member of the US House whose name shall remain "porkfat." Porkfat walked right by us as we were speaking with his secretary to have his picture taken with a delegation from an interest group from Kentucky.

The thing is, I really liked porkfat, and I still do. He's one of the better ones, but it was obvious that he went to the folks who were better able to butter his bread. Now that might not be bribery per se, but again, I'd like to see different standards.