# what do you mean by "Impeachment"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [May 18, 2017, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947 "2017-05-18T19:50:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**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:** [May 21, 2017, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/81 "2017-05-21T16:13:30Z")
Let’s just clarify something here that the OP, as written, obscures. What started this mess was a post, by the OP, stating (I’m not using the quote function because I want to correct several spelling errors): “_In fact , No President has ever been impeached (yes, I know, due to an odd wording in the Constitution, pedants will insist that the first phase is actually “impeachment” and thus Clinton and Johnson were “impeached” but since that words means “removed from office” no they weren’t) and yes, in two cases the House voted but in the most recent case it was a opposition run House who also knew full well the Senate wouldn’t confirm._” Whatever one might think of “Impeach Trump”, the sentence quoted above cries out to be corrected. It insists that people are wrong when they say “Clinton was impeached”. I’m not sure why that poster thinks there is some confusion between “impeach” and “impeachment”, but insisting that “Clinton was not impeached” is a factually correct statement is nonsense. No eye rolling needed when that statement is corrected because not only is it wrong-- it insists that any correction is wrong. Now, who is the one insisting that the word has only one meaning? ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2017, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/82 "2017-05-21T16:24:53Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Let’s just clarify something here that the OP, as written, obscures. What started this mess was a post, by the OP, stating (I’m not using the quote function because I want to correct several spelling errors): > > “_In fact , No President has ever been impeached (yes, I know, due to an odd wording in the Constitution, pedants will insist that the first phase is actually “impeachment” and thus Clinton and Johnson were “impeached” but since that words means “removed from office” no they weren’t) and yes, in two cases the House voted but in the most recent case it was a opposition run House who also knew full well the Senate wouldn’t confirm._” > > Whatever one might think of “Impeach Trump”, the sentence quoted above cries out to be corrected. It insists that people are wrong when they say “Clinton was impeached”. I’m not sure why that poster thinks there is some confusion between “impeach” and “impeachment”, but insisting that “Clinton was not impeached” is a factually correct statement is nonsense. No eye rolling needed when that statement is corrected because not only is it wrong-- it insists that any correction is wrong. > > Now, who is the one insisting that the word has only one meaning? Oh. Yes, _that_ context is completely different. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2017, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/83 "2017-05-21T17:11:09Z")
Legally, impeachment is being charged with high crimes and misdemeanors by the House. There’s then a trial in the Senate, and only if the officeholder is convicted is he or she removed from office. But in common parlance/verbal shorthand, most people take it to mean “removed from office.” ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2017, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/84 "2017-05-21T17:19:48Z")
It would have been nice had one of the choices actually been correct. I voted for hearing in the House, but actually it should be hearing in the House and vote passes to send to the Senate for trial. ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2017, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/85 "2017-05-21T17:22:05Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Let’s just clarify something here that the OP, as written, obscures. What started this mess was a post, by the OP, stating (I’m not using the quote function because I want to correct several spelling errors): > > “_In fact , No President has ever been impeached (yes, I know, due to an odd wording in the Constitution, pedants will insist that the first phase is actually “impeachment” and thus Clinton and Johnson were “impeached” but since that words means “removed from office” no they weren’t) and yes, in two cases the House voted but in the most recent case it was a opposition run House who also knew full well the Senate wouldn’t confirm._” > > Whatever one might think of “Impeach Trump”, the sentence quoted above cries out to be corrected. It insists that people are wrong when they say “Clinton was impeached”. I’m not sure why that poster thinks there is some confusion between “impeach” and “impeachment”, but insisting that “Clinton was not impeached” is a factually correct statement is nonsense. No eye rolling needed when that statement is corrected because not only is it wrong-- it insists that any correction is wrong. > > Now, who is the one insisting that the word has only one meaning? Exactly the issue. The colloquial use of impeach to describe the entire process does not negate the validity of using to accurateky describe the House hearing/vote. ---
**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:** [May 21, 2017, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/86 "2017-05-21T17:55:10Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > Legally, impeachment is being charged with high crimes and misdemeanors by the House. Or treason or bribery. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2017, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/87 "2017-05-21T18:10:10Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Or treason or bribery. 😃 To be picky, treason and bribery are just the two high crimes and misdemeanors explicitly spelled out … the officeholder can _also_ be impeached, convicted, and removed from office for “_other_ high crimes and misdemeanors” too. 😃 ---
**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:** [May 21, 2017, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/88 "2017-05-21T18:18:31Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > To be picky, treason and bribery are just the two high crimes and misdemeanors explicitly spelled out … the officeholder can _also_ be impeached, convicted, and removed from office for “_other_ high crimes and misdemeanors” too. > 😃 Actually, I think we might both be wrong. “High crimes and misdemeanors” are crimes that only a “(high) official” can commit. That covers bribery, but not treason-- which anyone can commit. Perhaps it should be read: Treason, [bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors]" with bribery being redundant but treason not. But I could be wrong… ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2017, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/89 "2017-05-21T18:32:53Z")
[For our mutual interest:](https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Senate_Impeachment_Role.htm) > [@](#): > > … There was also considerable debate at the convention in Philadelphia over the definition of impeachable crimes. In the early proposals, the president and other officials could be removed on impeachment and conviction for “corrupt conduct,” or for “malpractice or neglect of duty.” Later, the wording was changed to “treason, bribery, or corruption,” and then to “treason or bribery” alone. Contending that “treason or bribery” was too narrow a definition, George Mason proposed adding “mal-administration,” but switched to “other high crimes and misdemeanors against the state” when Madison commented that “mal-administration” was too broad. A final revision defined impeachable crimes as “treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” > > While the framers very clearly envisaged the occasional necessity of initiating impeachment proceedings, they put in place only a very general framework to guide future action. Perhaps most important, they did not clearly define what they meant by “high crimes and misdemeanors.” … > > … Since 1789, one principal question has persisted—how to define “high crimes and misdemeanors.” This question has been hotly debated by members of Congress, defense attorneys, and legal scholars from the first impeachment trial to the most recent. Were misdemeanors lesser crimes, or merely misconducts? Did a high crime or misdemeanor have to be a violation of written law? Over the years, “high crimes and misdemeanors” have been anything the prosecutors have wanted them to be. In an unsuccessful attempt to impeach Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas in 1970, Representative Gerald Ford declared: “An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.” The phrase is the subject of continuing debate, pitting broad constructionists, who view impeachment as a political weapon, against narrow constructionists, who regard impeachment as being limited to indictable offenses. … ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2017, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/90 "2017-05-21T23:30:39Z")
> [@Alan\_Smithee](#): > > When you run out of milk or something, do you ever say, “I need to go to the store?” Why? Don’t you realize that you actually have to BUY MILK once you’re there? That’s what you actually mean isn’t it, that you need to buy milk? Going to the store is only the first step in the process, and won’t accomplish anything by itself. But if you go to the store, and wind up deciding that the milk is too expensive, so you return home without any milk, it will still be false to say that you didn’t go to the store. ---
**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:** [May 21, 2017, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/91 "2017-05-21T23:35:37Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > But if you go to the store, and wind up deciding that the milk is too expensive, so you return home without any milk, it will still be false to say that you didn’t go to the store. And if the president goes to the store to buy milk, but commits treason instead, we can say that he did the go the store, did not buy milk, but did commit an impeachable offense. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2017, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/92 "2017-05-21T23:40:42Z")
Man, I hate it when that happens. That’s the last time I go to the store without my list. ---
**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:** [May 21, 2017, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/93 "2017-05-21T23:44:15Z")
let’s see: - Eggs - Milk - Bread - Meet Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in the cheese aisle and give him our bombing plan for the next 6 months ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2017, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/94 "2017-05-22T01:37:41Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > If someone says, “Clinton wasn’t impeached,” that’s the sort of statement that could use clarification; but it requires no redefinition of the word, since one of the common definitions of the word is that “impeach” means to remove from office. > > I know it’s not the legal definition, but it’s absolutely a common definition in use. I think here you have an uphill battle with the dictionary. You can make the argument that no redefinition is required, but when you look to the actual definitions this doesn’t bear out. Look here from [google](https://www.google.com/search?q=impeachment&oq=impeachment&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l2j69i65j35i39j69i60.2581j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#safe=off&q=impeachment+definition): > [@](#): > > the action of calling into question the integrity or validity of something. > “the prosecutor’s detailed impeachment of the character witness” > US > a charge of misconduct made against the holder of a public office. > “the president is facing impeachment over the scandal” > BRITISH > a charge of treason or another crime against the state. > “the king cynically abandoned him, encouraging his impeachment” [Dictionary.com:](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/impeachment) > [@](#): > > noun > 1. > the impeaching of a public official before an appropriate tribunal. > 2. > (in Congress or a state legislature) the presentation of formal charges against a public official by the lower house, trial to be before the upper house. > 3. > demonstration that a witness is less worthy of belief. > 4. > the act of impeaching. > 5. > the state of being impeached. > > … > > noun > 1. > (rare) (in England) committal by the House of Commons, esp of a minister of the Crown, for trial by the House of Lords. The last instance occurred in 1805 > 2. > (in the US) a proceeding brought against a federal government official > 3. > an accusation or charge > 4. > (obsolete) discredit; reproach [Merriam Webster:](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/impeach) > [@](#): > > a : to bring an accusation against > b : to charge with a crime or misdemeanor; specifically : to charge (a public official) before a competent tribunal with misconduct in office > **c : to remove from office especially for misconduct** > 2 > : to cast doubt on; especially : to challenge the credibility or validity of impeach the testimony of a witness [Cambridge Dictionary:](http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/impeach) > [@](#): > > politics & government to formally accuse a public official of a serious crime in connection with their job > impeachment [Vocabulary.com:](https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/impeach) > [@](#): > > Impeach means to charge someone with doing something wrong, specifically a high government official, such as the US president, a senator, or a Federal judge. Fortunately, very few presidents have had the dishonor of being impeached. > > bring an accusation against; level a charge against > … > charge (a public official) with an offense or misdemeanor committed while in office > … > challenge the honesty or veracity of Now, in the interest of full disclosure I bolded the one definition (which was #3 in that sequence from M-W) that matches how you’re using the term, so I think it’s fair to say that’s one possible definition, but I would contend that’s inaccurate. When DrDeth says that no president has been impeached, or Bill Clinton wasn’t impeached, that’s wrong. The only way it’s not wrong is to simultaneously explain that the word is being used in a non-standard way. Bill Clinton was impeached - full stop. With that, no explanation is needed. Alternatively, if you say that Bill Clinton was NOT impeached, then it does in fact require explanation, and that explanation involves defining the word in a non-standard way. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2017, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/95 "2017-05-22T02:06:43Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I think here you have an uphill battle with the dictionary. You can make the argument that no redefinition is required, but when you look to the actual definitions this doesn’t bear out. Look here from [google](https://www.google.com/search?q=impeachment&oq=impeachment&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l2j69i65j35i39j69i60.2581j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#safe=off&q=impeachment+definition): > [Dictionary.com:](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/impeachment) > [Merriam Webster:](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/impeach) > [Cambridge Dictionary:](http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/impeach) > [Vocabulary.com:](https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/impeach) > Now, in the interest of full disclosure I bolded the one definition (which was #3 in that sequence from M-W) that matches how you’re using the term, so I think it’s fair to say that’s one possible definition, but I would contend that’s inaccurate. When DrDeth says that no president has been impeached, or Bill Clinton wasn’t impeached, that’s wrong. The only way it’s not wrong is to simultaneously explain that the word is being used in a non-standard way. > > Bill Clinton was impeached - full stop. With that, no explanation is needed. Alternatively, if you say that Bill Clinton was NOT impeached, then it does in fact require explanation, and that explanation involves defining the word in a non-standard way. I state that it requires no definition to say that the word can mean “remove from office,” since that’s one of the definitions, and you dispute that by citing several dictionary definitions, including one that says “remove from office,” but you disagree with that one? I’m sorry, but that’s not exactly a slam-dunk counterargument :). Given the context of DrDeth’s original posts, in which he complains that only a pedant would think it means anything OTHER than “remove from office,” I wanna be clear that I’m not 100% on his side here. He’s wrong about that; the word has multiple meanings, and folks are not wrong to use other understood meanings of the word. But you can’t quote the dictionary at me to show I’ll have a hard time claiming it can mean “remove from office,” when that’s one of the definitions in the dictionary. Wouldn’t it have been better to have done that research for your post, see that definition, and say, “Huh, ignorance fought, guess it can mean that after all”? ---
**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:** [May 22, 2017, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/96 "2017-05-22T02:54:08Z")
Impeach **Bone**! ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2017, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/97 "2017-05-22T03:08:19Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Given the context of DrDeth’s original posts, in which he complains that only a pedant would think it means anything OTHER than “remove from office,” I wanna be clear that I’m not 100% on his side here. **He’s wrong about that;** the word has multiple meanings, and folks are not wrong to use other understood meanings of the word. This was my point. And yeah, I could have not posted, or omitted that section, but that would not be above board. Frankly I think it’s there so that in the context of “Impeach Trump” that works but saying that Bill Clinton was not impeached is simply wrong. I was surprised to see it there, but I never considered not posting it. M-W has lost stature for this, by a tiny amount, in my estimation:) ---
**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:** [May 22, 2017, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/98 "2017-05-22T05:16:12Z")
If you asked people what the difference between speed and velocity is, a lot of folks would say they are the same. But in physics, we say that velocity is a vector, consisting of speed (the scalar) plus direction. If I was lecturing a class in physics, I would take care not to use one when I meant the other. In the context of a Great Debate, I would do my best to treat a legal term of art the same way. I would strive to use the legal term of art for what it means in the context of our legal system. And if I used a legal term of art incorrectly, I would welcome being connected since it means leaning something. If I was in one of the millions of internet chit-chat rooms, I wouldn’t care so much. And I hope that the vast majority of us posting on this MB don’t want GD to devolve into just another chit-chat room. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2017, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/99 "2017-05-22T13:48:13Z")
“Something else” is the only correct answer. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2017, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947/100 "2017-05-22T15:11:31Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I state that it requires no definition to say that the word can mean “remove from office,” since that’s one of the definitions … Stealing from an article (about Google and education) in the [NYT yesterday](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/opinion/sunday/you-still-need-your-brain.html) … this is a bit > [@](#): > > … like the student who looked up “meticulous,” saw it meant “very careful,” and wrote “I was meticulous when I fell off the cliff.” Yes, there is a context in which “impeach” will be understood to remove from office and when the average person discusses the possibility of Trump being impeached it usually is shorthand for that, for the full process inclusive of conviction and removal from office. In the context of stating “No President has ever been impeached”? That’s meticulously falling off a cliff. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-mean-by-impeachment/786947.md?page=6)