16 Federal officials impeached...NO REPUBLICANS - WRONG!!!!!

[brickcitybrother]

You holier than thou democrats are aching for a history lesson. Since 1797, 16 democrats or Federalists(precursor to the dem. party), have been impeached, while in office. Not a damn one of them was a Proud Republican, even though the "Grand Old Party", is the world's first political party. These federal officials include "slick willie clinton", and probably should have included Richard M. Nixon, but he was smart enuough to resign, and not make the "Sad Sixteen". Read it and weap, my little negative, pessamistic, progressives.

I've been away on business and just saw this. I thought I'd stand up - not as either a liberal or a democrat - just as someone who likes the FACTS to be straight.

So here it is boys and girls:

Your lack of knowledge of both history and politics is nothing short of AMAZING - Yourdaddy.

Before I point that out - I'd lke to address the list of the impeached

1. William Blount, senator from Tennessee; charges dismissed for want of jurisdiction, Jan. 14, 1799.
Democrat - Yes.

2. John Pickering, judge of the U.S. District Court for New Hampshire; removed from office March 12, 1804. Democrat - No. Closer to Republican.

3. Samuel Chase, associate justice of the Supreme Court; acquitted March 1, 1805. Democrat - No. Closer to Republican.

4. James H. Peck, judge of the U.S. District Court for Missouri; acquitted Jan. 31, 1831. Democrat - No. And since his impeachment manager (essentially the prosecutor was James Buchanan - a Democrat), it is safe to say this was Peck was no friend of the party.


5 West H. Humphreys, judge of the U.S. District Court for the middle, eastern, and western districts of Tennessee; removed from office June 26, 1862. Appointed by a Democrat - Yes. Polcitical affliation questionable as he joined the secessionist movement that lead to the US Civil War and accepted an appointment to the Confederate District Court of Tennessee.

6 Andrew Johnson, president of the United States; acquitted May 26, 1868. Democrat - Yes (but elected actually on the the National Union (anti-democratic ticket).

7 William W. Belknap, secretary of war; resigned post and therefore most Senators did not vote for his conviction on Aug. 1, 1876. Democrat - No. Republican - Yes. He served under republican president Ulysses S. Grant.

8 Charles Swayne, judge of the U.S. District Court for the northern district of Florida; acquitted Feb. 27, 1905. Democrat - Yes. His impeachment was based on his 'harsh treatment of lawyers in his courtroom' among other things.

9. Robert W. Archbald, associate judge, U.S. Commerce Court; removed Jan. 13, 1913. Democrat - No. Put on the bench by Theodore Roosevelt - a very Republican president. His political affliations are also clearly republican.

10 George W. English, judge of the U.S. District Court for eastern district of Illinois; resigned Nov. 4, 1926; proceedings dismissed. Democrat - Yes.

11. Harold Louderback, judge of the U.S. District Court for the northern district of California; acquitted May 24, 1933. Democrat - No. Republican, very Republican who was a Judge, Superior Court, City and County of San Francisco, California, from 1921-1928. Put on the federal bench by Calvin Coolidge.

12 Halsted L. Ritter, judge of the U.S. District Court for the southern district of Florida; removed from office April 17, 1936. Democrat - No. Republican - very likely. No official listig of party affiliation - but like Louderback pPut on the federal bench by Calvin Coolidge, a republican president.

13 Harry E. Claiborne, judge of the U.S. District Court for the district of Nevada; removed from office Oct. 9, 1986. Democrat - Yes. Former Democratic Senatorial candidate.

14. Alcee L. Hastings, judge of the U.S. District Court for the southern district of Florida; removed from office Oct. 20, 1988. Democrat - Yes. Current member of the House of Representatives.

15. Walter L. Nixon, judge of the U.S. District Court for Mississippi; removed from office Nov. 3, 1989. Lyndon Johnson appointment. Democrat - Yes.

16 William J. Clinton, president of the United States; acquitted Feb. 12, 1999. Democrat - Of course! lol

By my count 9 on the list ... were democrats. The remaining 7 were either clearly republican or republican-leaning.


Also my history-challenged friend - the Federalists were NOT the precusors to the Democratic Party. The, hold your hat now, Democratic-Republican Party was the actual genesis of the modern democratic party. In fact, history suggests the the Federalists were the actual pre-cusors to the modern Republican party - with Daniel Webster and later like Henry Clay influencing (historically and literally) Abraham Lincoln to be the head of what is now considered the Republicans.

Also of the officals convicted and therefore removed from office - its a tie. 3 - 3. I guess both parties have had some egg on their face.

Oh if you're wondering whether I'm pulling this out of my ass - here's the backup - if you care to click.

http://www.fjc.gov/public/home.nsf
www.lexisnexis.com/academic/research_resources/impeachment/documents/
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/crecord/Impeachments
http://www.gop.com/About/AboutRead.aspx?AboutType=3
http://www.democrats.org/a/party/history.html
http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/topics_ji_bdy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Democratic_Party#Beginnings
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States#Federal_impeachme nt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Party_%28United_States%29
www.nlf.net/histimp.html
www.amendment-13.org/


I guess I just needed to rant - huh?

[chefmike]

oops...looks like yourdaddygump has been schooled, and fooled again!

[BeardedOne]

These federal officials include "slick willie clinton", and probably should have included Richard M. Nixon, but he was smart enuough to resign, and not make the "Sad Sixteen".

Help me out here...

Nixon wasn't a Republican?

Oh....Wait...He must be referring to the =OTHER= President Richard M. Nixon, from the Bizarro White House. :lol:

[Felicia Katt]

Thanks for the detailed information. I still think talking about the political affilliation of Judges is the same as talking about the favorite teams of an NFL referee. Or it should be, anyhow. But overall, it wasn't the clean sweep that Yourdaddy claimed. In fact, he forgot the broom, since very few of the people ever impeached were actually removed from office. The most prominent politician by far to face impeachment and to actually be removed from office, in disgrace, was Nixon. He left voluntarily, before the Congress mopped him up, and only Ford's pardon prevented him from going from the White house, to the big house, along with almost his entire trusted staff.


FK

[Realgirls4me]

I've been away on business and just saw this. I thought I'd stand up - not as either a liberal or a democrat - just as someone who likes the FACTS to be straight.



Oh, now, great !? Now you've done it, BCB. You done brought facts into the dialogue. Someone who can only see the world in black and white terms will certainly have a mindmelt with posts like yours. You just can't do that, son.

...Whatever -- WHAT! -- am I going to do with your type ???


;)

[yourdaddy]

Just google each of those names. Not one is a Republican. Who is the fool that said Nixon was impeached? I said he resigned BEFORE he was impeached.

[BeardedOne]

Ah, the old "You can't fire me, I quit!" defense.

[yourdaddy]

Just went back and researched 3 of "brothers " so-called Republicans. Pickering weasn't a Republican, Samuel Chase wasn't a Republican, William Belknap was a democrat who served in the Iowa legislature. This is boring, so I'm just gonna say that Brick Bro is doing the typical liberal tactic. "Lie and Obfuscate".

[brickcitybrother]

Just went back and researched 3 of "brothers " so-called Republicans. Pickering weasn't a Republican, Samuel Chase wasn't a Republican, William Belknap was a democrat who served in the Iowa legislature. This is boring, so I'm just gonna say that Brick Bro is doing the typical liberal tactic. "Lie and Obfuscate".


No lying or obfiscating... You looked at three ... two who I clearly explained were NOT - DEMOCRATS and likely republican or republican-leaning. I do not where you have ANY proof of them ALL being DEMOCRATS. William W. Belknap served as Secretary of War to Republican president Ulysses S. Grant. Also perhaps you'd like to refute what is on his grave markers at Alrington National Cemetary or what the OCTOBER 22, 1890 THE NEW YORK TIMES obituary artlcle said about the man.


http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/wwbelknap-gravesite-section1-062803.jpg


To be more clear, since yourdaddy has deep issues. Belknap "allied himself with the Republican Party, and in 1869 became Ulysses S. Grant's Secretary of War. In March 1876, he was accused of malfeasance in office for accepting over $24,000 in bribes from a post trader seeking immunity from removal.

Perhaps yourdaddy should read what the man's family had to say about him!!! I made it small type - because this isn't going to be THAT interesting to 99% of the board. But I thought I'd back my research up ... here and now. So that we can put a stop to the falsities.

BELKNAP, WILLIAM W., GEN., is the son of Gen. William G. Belknap, of the United States Army, who distinguished himself in the war of 1812, in the Florida war, and at Resaca and Buena Vista in the war with Mexico, and died in the service in 1851, Texas. He was born at Newburg, New York, in 1829, and, after attending the high school and academy there, and pursuing his studies in Florida, where his father was stationed, he entered Princeton College in 1846, and graduated in 1848. After studying law in Georgetown, D.C., and being admitted to the bar in Washington City, he went, in July, 1851, to Keokuk and commenced the practice of the law, shortly afterward forming a partnership with Hon. R.P. Lowe (who was soon after elected ) District Judge, and later Governor and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the State), and brought his mother and two sisters there in 1852. He was a member of the Legislature from Lee County, in 1857, as a representative of the Democratic party; but, being a strong Douglas Democrat, and not uniting with the members of that party who favored what was known as the Lecompton Constitution of Kansas, which was an important and exciting question in the politics of the party, he joined the Republican party. He was appointed Major of the 15th Iowa Vols., by Gov. Kirkwood, in 1861, of which regiment Gen. Hugh T. Reid was Colonel, and participated in that capacity in the battle of Shiloh, where he was wounded and had his horse shot under him. He remained in the army until the close of the war, rising gradually through the grades of Lieutenant Colonel and Colonel; was appointed Brigadier General of Volunteers, by President Lincoln, in 1864, on the recommendation of his commanders, Gens., Blair and Sherman, and was brevetted Major General in 1865 for gallant and meritorious services during the war. Having, as Brigadier General of Volunteers commanded the 3d Brigade, 4th Division, 17th Army Corps (Blair's) of the army of the Tennessee (McPherson's ); he was in numerous battles; among them, Shiloh, Corinth, the several battles near Atlanta, and the battle of Bentonville, N.C. He was engaged in the siege of Corinth, Vicksburg and of Atlanta, and commanded his Brigade (composed of the 11th,13th,15th, and 16th Iowa Regiments), under Sherman in his march from Altanta to the sea; thence to Goldsboro', Raleigh and Washington. He was repeatedly mentioned for coolness and courage, and in the battle of Atlanta, July 22, 1864, he took prisoner Col. Lampley, 45th Alabama, by pulling him over the works, by his coat collar.

At the close of the war, he was appointed Collector of Internal Revenue for the 1st District of Iowa. On the accession of General Grant to the Presidency, he was offered the choice of either one of three important public positions in another State, and one at Washington, which he declined, and remained Collector of the 1st District (comprising the counties of Lee, Des Moines, Louisa, Washington, Jefferson, Van Buren, Henry, and Davis), until October, 1869, when he was appointed Secretary of War by President Grant, and his many friends point to the records of that office for the proof of his faithful labors for a term of over six years. Prior to this appointment, he was selected as the orator for the Army of the Tennessee at the re-union of all the Western armies, at Crosby's Opera House, Chicago, December, 1868, and delivered the address at the great Re-union of Iowa soldiers, at Des Moines, in September,, 1870.

After his resignation of the office of Secretary of War, articles of impeachment were presented against him, and after a protracted and thorough trial, he was acquitted by the Senate.

General Belknap married, in 1854, Miss LeRoy, of Keokuk the sister of Mrs. Hugh T. Reid, and their son, Hugh Reid Belknap, is now a student at Phillips academy, Andover, Mass. His present wife, Amanda, whom he married in 1873, formerly Miss Tomlinson, of Harrodsburg, Kentucky, is the daughter of the late Dr. John Tomlinson, an able and famous physician of that locality. They have one child, a daughter, Alice Belknap. Since leaving the War Department Gen. Belknap has been engaged in legal practice; his residence is Keokuk but his business before the Departments at Washington, a large part of which results from his employment as attorney by several Railroad Corporations, requires him to be absent from home during a portion of each year.

P.S. - Thank you yourdaddy for NOT arguing with what the GOP and the Democratic Party has to say about their own origins.

[brickcitybrother]

Ooops... Let me just highlight one portion of the famliy's statement about Belknap

[N]ot uniting with the members of that [Democratic] party who favored what was known as the Lecompton Constitution of Kansas, which was an important and exciting question in the politics of the party, he joined the Republican party.

[brickcitybrother]

Thanks for the detailed information. I still think talking about the political affilliation of Judges is the same as talking about the favorite teams of an NFL referee.


FK - I think you're partly correct. Judgeships are a very political appointment - Witness both the Roberts and Alito confirmation hearings ... as well as ... the Bork, Thomas, Wood, Miers... etc. The only thing that has even the greater potential for being politically motivated... Impeachments. lol

[yourdaddy]

Just Google William Belkbap, and read the biography. He was a democrat member of Congress from Iowa, then appointed by Ulysses S. Grant, to be Secretary of War. Lincoln was a Republican, but I don't think Grant was.

[brickcitybrother]

Just Google William Belkbap, and read the biography. He was a democrat member of Congress from Iowa, then appointed by Ulysses S. Grant, to be Secretary of War. Lincoln was a Republican, but I don't think Grant was.

Excuse me.... Perhaps you would like to READ ... what the White House Biographical page says about Grant? It says he was a REPUBLICAN. But then again, maybe you don't trust the George W. Bush White House's information. Click if you dare http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/ug18.html

Perhaps you'd prefer the Ulysses Grant homepage

http://www.mscomm.com/~ulysses/

Or you could try Minnesota's College of St. Scholastica ...

http://faculty.css.edu/mkelsey/usgrant/index.html

Or you could admit that Grant was a republican... Then again ... if you don't know what party one of our president's came from ... perhaps I need to stop the debate/discussion.

As far as Belknap... He WAS a democrat early in his career ... did not like it and then switch to the REPUBLICAN PARTY ... he then accepted over $24,000 in bribes.

P.S. Its Belknap and NOT Belkbap... in case someone cuts and pastes or google/yahoo for your post.

[Felicia Katt]

the only obfuscation that is going on here is that rather than focusing on all of the many present Republicans who are either indicted, or under investigation; Libby, Rove, Delay, Frist, Ney et al, we are talking about a long dead Republican.

Congrats, Yourdaddy. You took the heat off them for a little while. But its back on and this time, if you can't stand it, get out of the kitchen.

FK

[brickcitybrother]

the only obfuscation that is going on here is that rather than focusing on all of the many present Republicans who are either indicted, or under investigation; Libby, Rove, Delay, Frist, Ney et al, we are talking about a long dead Republican.

Congrats, Yourdaddy. You took the heat off them for a little while. But its back on and this time, if you can't stand it, get out of the kitchen.

FK

FK - Astute observation. I think between you, me and yourdaddy. You should get the prize for maintaining focus.

[chefmike]

Senator Specter says the "I" word re shrubya...

Specter Skeptical of Domestic Spy Program Sun Jan 15, 10:03 AM ET

WASHINGTON - The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee expressed skepticism Sunday over President Bush's domestic eavesdropping program, joining a chorus of Republicans and Democrats who are questioning its legal justification.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who will hold hearings next month on the decision to allow the National Security Agency program without court approval, said he has told Bush administration officials that he believes they are on shaky legal ground.

Bush has pointed to a congressional resolution passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that authorized him to use force in the fight against terrorism as allowing him to order the program. The program authorized eavesdropping of international phone calls and e-mails of people deemed a terror risk.

"I thought they were wrong," Specter said on ABC's "This Week." "There still may be different collateral powers under wartime situations. That is a knotty question."

A number of members of Specter's committee, including GOP Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, have expressed doubt about the administration's legal basis. The hearings, planned for early February, will feature Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Specter, speaking in general terms, noted that impeachment and criminal prosecution are possibilities in the event a president acted unconstitutionally.

But Specter added: "I don't see any talk about impeachment here. I don't think anyone doubts the president is making a good-faith effort. He's acting in a way that he feels he must."

abcnews

"He's acting in a way that he feels he must."
I'm sure that tricky Dick (resigned in disgrace before being impeached) Nixon felt just the same.

[yourdaddy]

Well, EXCUSUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSE ME !!!!! I just thought Grant might have been a dem. That wasn't the gist of my post. But Boy, you libs are defending another Proud Republican, General Ulysses S. Grant. Don't we make the best Presidents?

[Felicia Katt]

Well, EXCUSUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSE ME !!!!! I just thought Grant might have been a dem. That wasn't the gist of my post. But Boy, you libs are defending another Proud Republican, General Ulysses S. Grant. Don't we make the best Presidents?
The "gist" of your post was that only Democrats were impeached. That was flatly wrong. More "gist" implied that all 16 were guilty. That was also way off. Still more "gist" was that only Democrats had scandals and that Nixon was somehow noble in his resignation. Way way off.

Your "gist" is anyone elses jest. it can't be taken seriously because its so provably wrong.

Your excused. Now go :)


FK

[brickcitybrother]

You're excused. And in no way was my response partisan. I just wanted the set your partisan ways straight ... since they were more crooked than 'Tricky Dick's' C.R.E.E.P. friends.

[chefmike]

The only impeachment that matters...

Blue Mass. Group

Reality-based commentary on politics and policy in Massachusetts and around the nation
Holy crap! A Republican Senator says the "I" word!

Our rights as citizens,The dissemination of truth, And, Impeachment

Whether or not Specter is sincere is probably not as important as having it said at all. If we do not seek Impeachment, we are threatening our right to have a secure, meaningful Constitution.
Figuring that my NSA file is probably already quite stuffed, I will chance my opinion here, to comment on two statements in this thread:

"So many of us quickly forget 911 and the resultant devastation to this country...but we do know that we havn't been hit since 911 , so he must be doing something right."

"Don't ever underestimate the political skill of Republicans to use reverse psychology for political purposes"

Having patiently waited for Democrats to finally find their elusive 'backbone,' it appears that we are now poised to stand tall. I suggest that we dust off our brains, and bombard the Internet with all of the 'things' we have conveniently forgotten, or, been too troubled to dare say in public.

As far as Presidential Authority goes 'in times of war', I suggest that we define the validity and origins of the phrases used by the Bush White House to defend their usurping of our Constitution in regards to limitation of power and the stripping of our rights granted within it's Articles.

Are we truly at war? What about the "War on Terror?" Consider the possibility that this has largely been inflated through the spurious actions of a megalomaniacal body of Cheney-Rumsfeld led hawks in Washington aided by people like Hughes and Rove to keep their 'need to know' agenda in check. The WHIGS psyops tool has served them well. Even Bin Laden, in his very last statement to America(which was never released here in full)warned us to look closely at our own government to find the real truth; adding that America could easily be bled dry financially through our Actions alone.

Next, what about our abiding citizens who so want to believe that justice is being served, that the events of the past five years have been necessary? They have been 'guided' through tactics such as fear.

Consider the spread of fear, with 'terror levels' and statements such as "it's not a matter of if, but, when." Think of people we know that have truly become spooked. This is far worse than what was seen in the years of the 'cold war.' Far worse than Vietnam. Think of all the families who will never recover. They have effectively been destroyed. Others will follow in the wake. This is our greatest sin. What Constituional protections have been disallowed in this debacle?

It is my determination that if the Democrats are finding their backbone, the awareness level of the American Public is about to do a 180 if the truth is forced to come out.

As this unfolds, people will not be too happy to have had fear forced upon them. As the cloud of deception lifts, there are a good many Americans who will be abhorred at what comes to light. It will be seen that our country has been divided on purpose, that those of strong faith have been used, their deep religious leanings have been mocked--as tools for the personal agendas of an Administration that has needed the blinded backing of a 'majority,' even if that 'majority' has in truth also been inflated. Mocking dissenters and instituting a news-blackout has allowed the agenda to continue. Fear is a powerful tool. It is an Orwellian tactic that has led too many Americans to gladly give up freedom in order to be free.

This amounts to treasonous acts. ANY ADMINISTRATION THAT FORCES SUCH ACTIONS UPON IT'S CITIZENS is willfully stripping them of their Constitutional rights. How dare they call US traitors if we ask questions, or dissent!

I, for one, refuse to accept the statement that we are "at war." No one 'declared war' on the United States. We are in Iraq solely because certain people, with the grand designs they helped to formulate many Administrations ago, KNEW they would have their 'in' with a Bush presidency. No one will EVER convince me that 9-11 took Washington by surprise. This is AS FAR AS I WILL GO HERE, yet, I suggest that people start truly educating themselves of the facts surrounding the origins of this 'war on terror.' Consider who we really should be fearing, then, consider why "we havn't been hit since 911."

Google the chatter on the 22nd Amendment. Wonder how far presidential privilege is willing to go to keep their agenda on the table. DO NOT GIVE THEM THE CHANCE TO SHUT DOWN ANY MORE CITIES to 'prove' we are still targets, or, allow them to avert our attention from what's REALLY going on. We must NOT delay.

Consider what Syria and Iran means at this junction, as Iraq is no longer important to the Administration. Keep up with the news on which countries we are condemning, which ones we are courting, and ask yourself : "WHY?" Look for the news that cannot be blacked-out on the Internet.

While you're at it, find out what 'depleted uranium' really is. I apologize for suggesting this, for, it is the one topic I wish I was ignorant about.

Considering the aforementioned 'reverse' psychological machinations of the current administration, realize that the only way to stop the machine is to gather up all the wrenches we can muster to throw at it from all sides, all angles, every minute of every day from here on in.

Be good citizens. Let our reps know the time has come to take back America.!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by: swampfox @ January 18, 2006 at 04:02:32 EST

[yourdaddy]

Why won't waffle boy answer my question. chefmike, why are all red-staters redneck hillbillies, except Robert Byrd, Jimmy Carter, bill clinton, al gore, et al. ? How come liberals seem to escape your "wrath"? Why won't you explain your hypocritical assumations and blanket condemnations? Why do you ALWAYS say I asked another person that question. It's because you are a PUSSY BOY>

[chefmike]

Why won't waffle boy answer my question. chefmike, why are all red-staters redneck hillbillies, except Robert Byrd, Jimmy Carter, bill clinton, al gore, et al. ? How come liberals seem to escape your "wrath"? Why won't you explain your hypocritical assumations and blanket condemnations? Why do you ALWAYS say I asked another person that question. It's because you are a PUSSY BOY>

http://photobucket.com/albums/a78/chefmike_/th_trollcrossing.jpg

[yourdaddy]

Answer me PUSSY BOY !!!! Being cute doesn't get it. You're looking like a fool in front of your only audience.

[chefmike]

Answer me PUSSY BOY !!!! Being cute doesn't get it. You're looking like a fool in front of your only audience.

http://photobucket.com/albums/a78/chefmike_/th_trollcrossing.jpg

[Legend]

Answer me PUSSY BOY !!!! Being cute doesn't get it. You're looking like a fool in front of your only audience.

Why do you have to resort to childish name calling isnt that the mark of a fool??

[yourdaddy]

What a lame response. Waffle boy is sucking hind-tit again. All hat...no cowboy.

[chefmike]

What a lame response. Waffle boy is sucking hind-tit again. All hat...no cowboy.

http://photobucket.com/albums/a78/chefmike_/th_trollcrossing.jpg

[Trogdor]

What a lame response. Waffle boy is sucking hind-tit again. All hat...no cowboy.

http://photobucket.com/albums/a78/chefmike_/th_trollcrossing.jpg


Keeep it up, dude. You're really getting on yourdaddy's nerves........and I love it. :lol: :D :mrgreen:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/Primacron/Comics/anime-123.gif

[yourdaddy]

Not really Trog, I'm laughing at his impotency. I'd have to call it "put up or shut up". He sure is quiet, isn't he?

[chefmike]

The usual troll drivel...

http://photobucket.com/albums/a78/chefmike_/th_trollcrossing.jpg

[TomSelis]

Pwn3d!!!