Wednesday, November 20, 2013
The latest demonstration of why constitutional structures matter
Something similar happened in Boston in 2010, when a city councilor was convicted of attempted extortion and other crimes. Massachusetts law provided that an officeholder "sentenced" to prison for a felony would be automatically removed from office. In this case, there was a nearly three-month gap between the councilor's conviction and sentencing, and there was no legal way to remove him from office until he was sentenced. (The council adopted a rule that purported to allow removal of the councilor from office, but the state's Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the council lacked power to enforce such a rule.)
The U.S. Constitution, on the other hand, has the best of both worlds (sorry, Hanna Montana Movie on) and has a removal mechanism.
Who would want to change such a document?!
Are you really proposing making personal loutishness an impeachable offense?
Is Ford guilty of some form of official "maladministration"," nevertheless a crime?
Hell, recreational drug use is a resume enhancer presidents of the United States put in autobiographies.
Sandy's closing paragraph is a doozy. As Joe points out, our Constitution provides an ouster mechanism. Has it really served America well over the past 200+ years in keeping federal officials in line? Nowadays with political dysfunction there are constant threats of impeachment, especially of Pres. Obama and some of his cabinet members. We all surely recall the steps taken against then Pres. Clinton for a sexual aberration that was in private unlike Rob Ford's brouhahas. Then consider the lineup of GOP House Speakers and their sexual imbroglios, resigning perhaps to avoid impeachment with the precedent set in the case of Pres. Clinton. And consider the guilty plea just yesterday of a GOP Rep. from FL for a misdemeanor cocaine possession that he did not get a kick from and is going into rehab, but apparently no impeachment or ouster from the House = and he doesn't seem to be prepared as yet to resign.
Our SALADISTA chimes in with an obvious autobiographical reference in his quest at taking shots at Pres. Obama on just about everything. But he ignored the GOP Rep. who pleaded guilty. It should be noted that our SALADISTA comes from CO the Mile High State (of mind) that adopted recently recreational use of Ganja, joining the state of WA, combined known by some as WACO, whatever that connotes.
Impeachment procedures take a long time and divert the attention of a nation (or even a state or municipality) from addressing more important issues, including of national security, individual rights, etc. Criminal statutes may be available to pursue such as Rob Ford, especially with his admissions. Even if criminal statutes don't come into play, there is public opinion combined with the First Amendment speech and press clauses to shame such as Rob Ford. Perhaps in Toronto at least the voters may heed Ilya Somins' take on Political Ignorance. Rob Ford faces not the Scarlet Letter but the Internet Hall of Shame.
Some who have lost confidence in the Constitution's impeachment process surely do not believe that the Toronto model is a good one and do not identify with "Ford Nation" or want someone like him in government. Rather some want, insist upon good government and a knowledgable electorate. And some do not want elected officials shouting impeachment at every turn they disagree with politically. Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and other First Amendment watchdogs wil help rid us of Rob Ford and his ilk.
Can we now switch to the judicial system and George Zimmerman?
You'll be interested to know that in at least one other province, while removal can be effected for conflict of interest or for "corrupt practice" in relation to election and the like, there are no recall/removal provisions.
The rationale is pretty clear. In most if not all large Canadian municipalities mayors are elected at large.
The risk presumably has been that even if super majorities were imposed on councillors looking to oust a mayor, the effect could be to nullify a legitimate mandate.
In the absense of an epidemic, the cure may not be worth the disease
The rule of non-removal does respect popular sovereignty, but I'd support some removal mechanism at least if the person is convicted of a felony or some equivalent.
Don't worry Bart, some recent Presidents still feel the need to at least engage in oblique denials of recreational drug use (“Not only could I pass the background check and the standards applied to today’s White House, but I could have passed the background check and the standards applied on the most stringent conditions when my dad was President").
" We all surely recall the steps taken against then Pres. Clinton for a sexual aberration"
Actually, many of us recall the steps taken against then President Clinton for perjury, subornation of perjury, destruction of evidence, violations of the privacy act...
Others just recall the perjuror's excuses.
Brett continues his anarcho-libertarian backward march with judicial processes that were not fully resolved. The impeachment process was political even though presided over in the Senate trial by CJ Rehnquist who gussied up his robes a la Gilbert & Sullivan and the trial was fully resolved by the vote of the Senate.
Now can we focus on GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich and a couple of his GOP House Speaker successors who also couldn't keep it in their pants?
The articles of impeachment. Notice the lack of any relating to a "sexual aberration".
Brett should learn to read between the lines of the articles as I render unto him the Boy Scout salute. Recall Jonah Goldberg's mommie dearest and her tape recorder putting Ken Starr in a starring role fostered by GOP House Republicans. (Query: Was mls on the House staff back then making the big bucks?)
Shag should understand that you don't get to lie under oath, and suborn witnesses, just because what you're lying about had some relation to sex, in a "sexual" harassment sense.
The real irony, of course, was that Clinton himself had rather proudly and publicly signed the very law that made his testimony on the subject relevant. Making him the last person on the face of the Earth with standing to complain about it.
It's loutish to be fat and smoke crack. But it's cool to be thin and snort powder cocaine.
Just ask The President of the United States.
I'm wondering if Brett was interviewed for Michael Kimmel's "Angry White Men -American Masculinity at the End of an Era" reviewed by Hanna Rosen ("Even Madder Men") in today's NYTimes Book Section.
Also, Maureen Dowd's column in today's NYTimes on the withering "Y" chromosome may have some connection, perhaps making Brett madder yet.
Brian's comparison of Rob Ford and Pres. Obama avoids Ford's conduct with crack while serving as Mayor of Toronto whereas Obama's experience with coke was long before he finished his education.
As to Brett on Pres. Clinton, the impeachment trial was resolved in the latter's favor. As to lying under oath, suborning perjury and sex, Brett reminded me why I would not take on divorce cases as my corporate/business/tax practice developed. Brett has over the years talked about his uncontested divorce problems at this and other blogs so he may have some knowledge on the subject.
Shag should understand that you don't get to lie under oath, and suborn witnesses, just because what you're lying about had some relation to sex, in a "sexual" harassment sense.Buy Fifa 14 Coins
We all surely recall the steps taken against then Pres. Clinton for a sexual aberration that was in private unlike Rob Ford's brouhahas. Then consider the lineup of GOP House Speakers and their sexual imbroglios, resigning perhaps to avoid impeachment with the precedent set in the case of Pres. Clinton. And consider the guilty plea just yesterday of a GOP Rep. from FL for a misdemeanor cocaine possession that he did not get a kick from and is going into rehab, but apparently no impeachment or ouster from the House = and he doesn't seem to be prepared as yet to resign.lol代练价格
Buy Elo Boost
buy cheap fifa 15 coins
Perhaps in Toronto at least the voters may heed Ilya Somins' take on Political Ignorance. Rob Ford faces not the Scarlet Letter but the Internet Hall of Shame.
buy fifa 14 coins
LOL Elo Boost
buy fifa 15 coins
شراء الاثاث المستعمل بالرياض
ارقام اثاث مستعمل بالرياض
شراء اثاث مستعمل الرياض
شراء الاثاث المستعمل
محلات شراء الاثاث المستعمل بالرياض
محلات الاثاث المستعمل بالرياض
I quit therapy because my analyst was trying to help me behind my back.Post a Comment
Agen Judi Online Terpercaya