# In the USA what is the balance to impeachment? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 11, 2015, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168 "2015-12-11T15:28:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/41 "2015-12-12T18:41:29Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > Can the American people overrule an impeachment? The penalty for conviction after impeachment is removal from office, and that’s it. A president who had been removed from office could in theory run again in the next election if he had not previously been elected twice. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/42 "2015-12-12T18:54:53Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > It’s a bit late for that: Clinton was impeached, the Democrats talked a lot about impeaching Bush, and the Republicans talked a lot about impeaching Obama. Again, the backlash from the Clinton impeachment means that impeachment will never be used politically in the lifetimes of people who remember it. The American people have overturned that impeachment: they love Bill. People talk about everything, and much of that talk is stupid beyond belief. Actions are a whole 'nother thing. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/43 "2015-12-12T18:55:29Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > It’s a bit late for that: Clinton was impeached, True, but I think that is widely regarded now as a mistake even by many Republicans. > [@](#): > > the Democrats talked a lot about impeaching Bush, and the Republicans talked a lot about impeaching Obama. Talk isn’t doing. Dennis Kucinich introduced [articles of impeachment against Bush](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efforts_to_impeach_George_W._Bush) but they ultimately went nowhere, even though the House of Representatives had a Democratic majority. Despite some threats on the part of some Republicans none have actually drawn up [articles of impeachment against Obama.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efforts_to_impeach_Barack_Obama) As has been said, impeachment is generally regarded as a nuclear option against a president, which should only be employed in extreme circumstances (Clinton’s case notwithstanding). ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/44 "2015-12-12T18:56:41Z")
There may be a precedent for that: Before Gray Davis in California, the only governor to be recalled was Lynn Frazier of Montana, in 1921. The next year he was elected to the United States Senate! ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/45 "2015-12-12T19:27:12Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > The penalty for conviction after impeachment is removal from office, and that’s it. A president who had been removed from office could in theory run again in the next election if he had not previously been elected twice. Art I, Sec 3, Clause 7: > [@](#): > > Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, **and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States** : but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law. (emphasis added) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/46 "2015-12-12T19:28:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Art I, Sec 3, Clause 7: > > (emphasis added) Damn. A minute too slow… But good catch. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/47 "2015-12-12T19:59:52Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > What would be the result if a party attempted a coup for purely partisan political reasons? Charles I gets his head cut off. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/48 "2015-12-12T20:16:56Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Art I, Sec 3, Clause 7: Yes, but it’s not automatic. For instance, Alcee Hastings was convicted and removed from his position as a federal judge, but has since been elected to the House. ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/49 "2015-12-12T21:15:23Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > Because your party will quickly lose its majority. The US electorate doesn’t really like uncertainty and impeaching a president makes thing very uncertain. And if you succeed all you’re going to do is get the President’s hand picked successor. More than likely you’ll lose (because you need 2/3 of the Senate to convict and even the biggest majorities rarely reach that) and you look like a bunch of incompetent, partisan hacks. That’s what got to me about all the calls to impeach George W. Bush when he was President, and I was no Bush supporter. Dick Cheney would have become President if Bush were removed from office, and he would not have been an improvement. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/50 "2015-12-12T22:38:10Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Art I, Sec 3, Clause 7: Oops. I only looked at Article II, which says: > [@](#): > > The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. [QUOTE=Frank] Yes, but it’s not automatic. For instance, Alcee Hastings was convicted and removed from his position as a federal judge, but has since been elected to the House. [/QUOTE] Yes, disqualification is an additional punishment in addition to removal. Looking at the list of impeached officials, a number were removed from office but apparently not disqualified in the future. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/51 "2015-12-12T22:41:47Z")
> [@cochrane](#): > > That’s what got to me about all the calls to impeach George W. Bush when he was President, and I was no Bush supporter. Dick Cheney would have become President if Bush were removed from office, and he would not have been an improvement. In Nixon’s case, the joke was that Spiro Agnew was his insurance policy against assassination. In the event, Agnew’s resignation opened the door for Nixon to be impeached. If Agnew had been VP instead of Ford, impeaching Nixon would have been much less palatable. (It probably still would have happened, but it would have taken longer to get people on board.) ---
**Author:** ![erysichthon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d07c76/32.png) [@erysichthon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erysichthon)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2015, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/52 "2015-12-12T22:54:45Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Sells more papers. So you’re saying that newspapers using the word “impeachment” _correctly_ is just a crass ploy to sell more newspapers. Got it. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2015, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/53 "2015-12-13T02:02:11Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Yes and no. Altho it’s true in the US Constitution, Impeachment is a two step process, generally we only say someone has been impeached when they are removed from office. > [@NeonMadman](#): > > I don’t think it’s correct to say that “generally we only say someone has been impeached when they are removed from office.” It’s commonly said that two presidents in US history have been impeached (Clinton and Andrew Johnson), but no president has ever been convicted by the Senate and thus removed from office after being impeached. > [@DrDeth](#): > > Sells more papers. It’s not about selling newspapers. You are simply wrong and the newspapers are right. Clinton was impeached. Andrew Johnson was impeached. Not sure why you are insisting on doubling down on incorrect information in a forum dedicated to factual answers. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2015, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/54 "2015-12-14T01:56:18Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Impeachment is the last resort of all last resorts. It was not designed as a political move but as a way for truly dangerous, criminal, or incompetent office holders to be safely removed without a coup. Otherwise, as with Clinton, it was indeed seen as an attempt at a coup and quickly backfired. > > Impeachment is not the same as a lack of confidence vote. How many actual coups has the U.K. parliament had? What would be the result if a party attempted a coup for purely partisan political reasons? Something I recall reading about the impeachment and trial of Andrew Johnson said that had it succeeded, it would have become a standard tool of recall for any party that disagreed with the executive policies. The fact that it failed gave it a bad name for decades (century?) after, and made it a tool of last resort. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2015, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/55 "2015-12-14T02:36:31Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Impeachment is the last resort of all last resorts. It was not designed as a political move but as a way for truly dangerous, criminal, or incompetent office holders to be safely removed without a coup. Otherwise, as with Clinton, it was indeed seen as an attempt at a coup and quickly backfired. How could it have been a “coup” when the result would have been Al Gore becoming president? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2015, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/56 "2015-12-14T02:38:12Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Art I, Sec 3, Clause 7: > > > [@](#): > > > > Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, **and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States** : but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law. > > (emphasis added) My reading of that entire sentence, (relying only on English grammar and not on the nuance of legal precedent), indicates limits placed on the impeachment process, but does not indicate that the bolded section is a required result. Am I reading that wrong? And what is the process that might invoke the bolded portion if it is not explicitly stated in the bill of impeachment or in some aspect of the trial? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2015, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/57 "2015-12-14T02:57:58Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > My reading of that entire sentence, (relying only on English grammar and not on the nuance of legal precedent), indicates limits placed on the impeachment process, but does not indicate that the bolded section is a required result. > > Am I reading that wrong? And what is the process that might invoke the bolded portion if it is not explicitly stated in the bill of impeachment or in some aspect of the trial? No, you’re right: it’s a possible punishment but not a required one. The judgement of conviction by the Senate would have to include the explicit penalty in the resolution of conviction. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2015, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/58 "2015-12-14T03:00:17Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Impeachment is the last resort of all last resorts. It was not designed as a political move but as a way for truly dangerous, criminal, or incompetent office holders to be safely removed without a coup. Otherwise, as with Clinton, it was indeed seen as an attempt at a coup and quickly backfired. > > Impeachment is not the same as a lack of confidence vote. How many actual coups has the U.K. parliament had? What would be the result if a party attempted a coup for purely partisan political reasons? > [@John\_Mace](#): > > How could it have been a “coup” when the result would have been Al Gore becoming president? As was the attempt with Andrew Johnson, it was a partly a political way to remove the leader who belonged to a rival party- a form of recall. Had it succeeded, it would have weakened the office of President. (IMHO Clinton got what he deserved - the historical ignominy of actually going to a trial, as an indication of broad disapproval, but not removal from office.) ISTM impeachment exists because criminal conviction is not necessarily also a consequence or outcome of some actions, and even so the criminal penalties do not include removal from office. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2015, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/59 "2015-12-14T03:35:10Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > How could it have been a “coup” when the result would have been Al Gore becoming president? Seriously? You can do better. ---
**Author:** ![buddha\_david](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ee7513/32.png) [@buddha\_david](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buddha_david)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2015, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168/60 "2015-12-14T05:06:58Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > (IMHO Clinton got what he deserved - the historical ignominy of actually going to a trial, as an indication of broad disapproval, but not removal from office.) Ignominy? Clinton’s approval rating after his failed impeachment was 73%, one of the highest ratings for any president ever. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-usa-what-is-the-balance-to-impeachment/740168.md?page=4)