Subject:
|
Re: Impeachment
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 31 Dec 1998 22:57:11 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpien@ctp&spamless&.IWANTNOSPAM.com
|
Viewed:
|
555 times
|
| |
|
|
Lee Jorgensen wrote:
>
> What is actually meant by "High crimes and misdemeanors"? Is it
> a grandiose crime that is considered a felony? Or is it a crime by
> an official in a high office ... Like the President?
The latter. high is a modifier of "crimes and misdemeanors" and refers
to the office held by the alleged perpetrator. See the Federalist
Papers. Once, long ago, I even posted a URL to an online version.
The other parsing doesn't make much sense, eh? A high crime would
theoretically be the exact opposite of a misdemeanor, hmm?
> Should there be two sets of laws? You or I would be prosecuted
> for doing something that Clinton did. From your tone of your
> response, I would have to agree with you.
If we are to have a government of laws, not of men, all must be held
accountable.
-Lar
Impeach Clinton! And her goofy husband too.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Impeachment
|
| What is actually meant by "High crimes and misdemeanors"? Is it a grandiose crime that is considered a felony? Or is it a crime by an official in a high office ... Like the President? Should there be two sets of laws? You or I would be prosecuted (...) (26 years ago, 31-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
