Sentences with phrase «impeachment if»

It's almost impossible to use any single answer for impeachment if the question contains a pronoun:

A civil rights organization, Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria, HURIWA, has warned that President Muhammadu Buhari risks impeachment if he can't put an end to...

It also lays out my position of not actually urging impeachment, but rather, of urging House members to issue a pledge to seek impeachment if Obama continues to commit major violations of the Constitution.

«It doesn't seem like an exaggeration to say that some Republican members of Congress would have called for Barack Obama's impeachment if he had ever called for taking people's guns away without due process,» The Washington Post's James Hohmann wrote on Thursday.

Since removing a president is a political process, not a legal one, anything can be grounds for impeachment if enough members of Congress say it is.

Not exact matches

But the Congressional members who voted on the impeachment measure over the weekend need to take another step in the right direction if they want to regain the trust of the Brazilian people and foreign investors; they should impeach themselves.

It is depressing, for example, to see liberals working so hard for Nixon's impeachment, as if he were the enemy, as if changing the occupant of the White House would really begin to touch the forces and powers for whom the occupant of the White House, wittingly or unwittingly, is a mere flunky.

But the Minority in Parliament has threatened to begin an impeachment process if the allegation turns out true.

In a similar way, a clear quid - pro-quo with Russia (election help in exchange for dropping sanctions) could be politically damaging enough to result in impeachment, even if it isn't clear that any laws were broken.

If a person is convicted of a crime under the laws of the United States, then that person is eligible for a presidential pardon (except in cases of impeachment).

The Constitution allows presidents to be removed if the House of Representatives votes on articles of impeachment, and if two - thirds of the Senate, after a trial, votes to impeach.

@DavidStarkey - if you make the impeachment automatic, you basically just have referendums with no need for candidates at all.

The House Judiciary Committee holds hearings and, if necessary, prepares articles of impeachment.

If 2/3 of the Senators vote for Impeachment, the President is removed from office and the Vice President takes his place.

The Los Angeles, CA City Council has passed a resolution calling on Congress to investigate if any of Trump's actions warrant impeachment.

If the office of the Governor becomes vacant by reason of death, resignation, impeachment or inability to serve, the Lieutenant Governor will fill the office until a Governor is qualified to act or until the office is filled at the next election.

«If the question of impeachment dominates the news this fall, like so many other voter concerns, it breaks along partisan lines,» says Dr. Lee M. Miringoff, Director of The Marist College Institute for Public Opinion.

If the full committee, by majority vote, determines that grounds for impeachment exist, a resolution impeaching the individual in question and setting forth specific allegations of misconduct, in one or more articles of impeachment, will be reported to the full House.

I couldn't find any constitutional or procedural prohibition for the House considering impeachment of two people as part of the same proceedings, and if the committee is investigating the same set of facts, it makes a lot of sense to not have to repeat their work.

... [Impeachment] is an option available to us to exercise and when we deem it fit, we are going to exercise it if things don't change,» Mr Fuseini added.

Donald Trump's former campaign manager said the president will have a «real problem» — including facing an impeachment effort — if Democrats take control of Congress during the 2018 midterm...

«The constitutional requirement that the impeachment proceedings be held in camera would be defeated if the petitioner were allowed to publish his or her petition to anyone other than the President.

Trump's firing of retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn may just be the beginning of investigations into Flynn's and Trump's Russian connections that could have lasting damage for his presidency, if not lead to impeachment.

For example, if a US president faces impeachment hearings for some offense, but fails to be impeached by the House, could he or she face a new impeachment hearing on the same charges if, say, a mid-term election changes the majority party?

It is not our joy to embarrass the president, if we want to get him out, we will get him out electorally, not through impeachment, given the abysmal record of the NDC.»

Have you reviewed the multitude of questions on impeachment on the SE too see if any address your question?

He said, «The truth is that if I remember carefully, Fayose won the matter that his impeachment was illegal.

If Mugabe's impeachment sails through it could see Mnangagwa, the sacked vice presient, appointed as interim president.

«If impeachment does come up, I think it works to the President's benefit, I think it works to his party's benefit,» Bloomberg's Sahil Kapur said.

If some in the NPP want to remove Mr. Afoko rather than fight the 2016 election, let them follow the procedure laid down for impeachment.

If say the President oversteps his or her powers, impeachment trials could be held to remove the person from office.

But Mr. Trump was put off by the fact that Mr. Flood, a Republican, had represented Bill Clinton during his impeachment process, and Mr. Flood has made clear that he will not represent the president if Marc E. Kasowitz, his brash longtime personal lawyer, has any role in the effort.

Citing an example, he said, «If you were to impeach the President, for instance, you go through the impeachment process and involve the House.

So therefore, I would suggest that if they really believe that to be the case, they should immediately push for the impeachment of both the President and both houses of Congress which are willing to ignore such an obvious threat to the continued existence of humanity and instead waste time on (what this relegates to) trivial issues like Iraq, Social Security, Medicare, taxes, terrorism, fiscal budget deficits, Katrina, abortion, Bird flu, the Supreme Court, education, etc..

So therefore, I would suggest that if they really believe that to be the case, they should immediately push for the impeachment of both the President and both houses of Congress which are willing to ignore such an obvious threat to the continued existence of humanity and instead waste time on (what this relegates to) trivial issues like Iraq, Social Security, Medicare, taxes, terrorism, fiscal budget deficits, Katrina, abortion, Bird flu, the Supreme Court, education, etc..

If he won't, I ask you to support the impeachment of Pruitt and remove him yourselves.

The Vice President is also responsible for temporarily replacing the President if something happens to the current one, such as their death or impeachment.

If so, the deposition will be less useful for impeachment and other purposes.

Article II of the Constitution prohibits a President from using the pardon power to overturn an impeachment.5 The Framers of the Constitution placed only this limitation on the ability of the President to exercise his pardon power, 6 and the only sanction for the abuse of the pardon power is the removal of the President through impeachment.7 The Constitution is silent, however, as to whether the President may grant himself a pardon from prosecution and, if so, when such a pardon may be issued.8 In the over 20,000 instances that Presidents have used this exclusive power, 9 no President has used this power to pardon himself.10

So if you had a real runaway president who was clearly making decisions that were directly treasonous, for example, or ordering others to ignore a court order and then pardoning them, he could be removed by impeachment and support for NATO could be ordered.

According to the Times, Trump disliked the fact that Flood had represented former President Bill Clinton during his impeachment, and Flood didn't want to represent Trump if another lawyer, Marc Kasowitz, had any involvement with the team.

In a court room, inconsistencies can be surfaced through impeachment of the witness - that is, if an inconsistency is found, you then make note of this to the court.

What if an AG advises a president or a governor to do X illegal act because the only penalty is impeachment and the legislature is controlled by his own party so he can get away with it?

Rule 30.09 of the Rules of Civil Procedure requires that if surveillance is to be used as substantive evidence at trial, then counsel must give the opposite party notice of its intention to use the evidence, and the evidence itself must be produced to the opposite party at least 90 days before the commencement of trial.7 If counsel fails to do so, the Court will limit the use of that evidence to impeachment purposes only, except where a trial judge grants leave to use the evidence for substantive purposeif surveillance is to be used as substantive evidence at trial, then counsel must give the opposite party notice of its intention to use the evidence, and the evidence itself must be produced to the opposite party at least 90 days before the commencement of trial.7 If counsel fails to do so, the Court will limit the use of that evidence to impeachment purposes only, except where a trial judge grants leave to use the evidence for substantive purposeIf counsel fails to do so, the Court will limit the use of that evidence to impeachment purposes only, except where a trial judge grants leave to use the evidence for substantive purposes.

If the facts have been misreported, the impeachment process would allow Judge Keller to set the record straight.

It's also pretty arguable that his popularity on Twitter is a direct result of his office as President, and hence making money by publicly and messily leaving their service will result in a breach of accepted ethical standards and potential impeachment even if no specific law has been broken.

On request of any party in a case tried before a jury, deposition testimony offered other than for impeachment purposes shall be presented in nonstenographic form, if available, unless the court for good cause orders otherwise.

If you've to go back three pages to find out who «he» and «him» refers to, it makes the deposition transcript very unmanageable as an impeachment tool.

Impeaching Your Own Witness: Even though Evidence Rule 607 authorizes a party to impeach the credibility of his own witness, a party is forbidden from placing a witness on the stand if his sole purpose in doing so is to present otherwise inadmissible evidence cloaked as impeachment.

(I spent months if not years arguing against them on Geraldo Live during the Clinton impeachment years.)