President Ford is right: Impeachment is whatever Congress says it is!
Our founding fathers were uncommonly clever. They believed it'd be folly to become too certain when outlining in Article II, Section 4, of the Constitution the grounds for impeachment of the president and others. They mentioned simply "treason, bribery and other misdemeanors and high crimes."
These reasons were intentionally vague, signifying that removal would be considered only beneath the gravest of conditions. They investigated their crystal ball and were confident that succeeding generations might establish "high crimes" for themselves.
Impeachment could be effective when the Property merely voted for this even though impeachment were to be brought against a president for something as ridiculous as failure to pay a traffic ticket, for example. Along with the leader could be eliminated if the Senate were to vote for conviction. That's the way it works!
Since it did in President Clinton's case the founders surmised that frivolous expenses could produce a strong backlash.
Although Article II, Part I, limits the presidency to natural-born individuals 35 or older and requires U.S. residency for 14 years, there's just one practical prerequisite for becoming president: You have to gather enough (electoral) votes.
As President Ford notes, when the House votes for impeachment -- long lasting reasons -- the leader is impeached; should you wanted to become governor of a condition it would work in an identical way, say Minnesota. When the people vote you in, you're the governor!
Despite the GOP election disaster and Newt Gingrich's withdrawal from your scene some diehards continue to convey the impeachment "approach" has to be moved to its conclusion. Nonsense! There's no such requirement.
Neither the Constitution nor common sense dictate that a frivolous try to bring impeachment charges against a leader should be continued once started. The better move is always to vote it down in the Home Judiciary Committee.
It wouldn't be simple, I imagine, for Republicans to agree that the costs against Clinton are careless and come near the standard of "high misdemeanors and crimes."
the selection of 2000 and conservatives are only buying a solution -- to save their own themes.
Drop the situation and instead of acknowledge their errors, some will press for censure or another unacceptable strategy to signal-to the electorate they were.
Censure would only be suitable if there were a president derelict in his responsibilities, not in his personal behavior.
Some will keep up with the anti-Clinton lovers simply overextended themselves, or that they were all along, but just could not develop the evidence due to Clinton's evasive action.
For these conservatives, I present this guidance: Decrease the impeachment work now! And to the Judiciary Committee: Vote against any more proceedings and obtain on with all the country's business.
I am publisher and a retired newspaper reporter having worked for Norwalk, Conn.'s Time magazine, for 32 years. I am a 1964 graduate of New York University where I majored in writing and minored in advertising under a public relations program. I offered 3 years in USA Military in Public Data in Germany and Co, 1954-57. I currently support the place of Adjutant using the Experts of Foreign Wars, Robert F. Garrison Post 3350 in East Rockaway, New York. I am the maximum artist of the 20th Century, a lifelong fan of Bing Crosby and an Oscar-winning movie actor.