High Crimes Quotes

I rise to perform a painful but, nevertheless, to me, an imperative duty; a duty which I think ought not longer to be postponed, and which cannot, without criminality on our part, be neglected.… I charge Andrew Johnson, Vice President and acting President of the United States, with the commission of acts which in contemplation of the Constitution, are high crimes and misdemeanors, for which, in my judgment, he ought to be impeached … I do impeach Andrew Johnson, Vice President and acting President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors: I charge him with a usurpation of power and violation of law: In that he has corruptly used the appointing power; In that he has corruptly used the pardoning power; In that he has corruptly used the veto power; In that he has corruptly disposed of public property of the United States; In that he has corruptly interfered in elections…

There have been high crimes and misdemeanors, but they have been committed by the special prosecutor and the Congress, not the president.

“Treason” and “bribery” will not reach many great and dangerous offenses including attempts to subvert the Constitution.

According to the weight of opinion, impeachable offenses include, not merely acts that are indictable, but serious misbehavior which may be considered as coming within the category of high crimes and misdemeanors

… high crimes and misdemeanors …

I am neither accusing President Obama of having committed high crimes and misdemeanors nor advocating his impeachment.

There is not a morsel of evidence backing up any of the claims or any of the narratives or any of the premises that make up today's news. There is not a morsel of evidence on anybody. There's not a morsel of evidence on Flynn! On Manafort! On Carter Page! There's no evidence on Trump! And yet the reporting goes on. Convicted of high crimes already without a trial. It's a great piece by Eli Lake.

CEOs of fossil energy companies know what they are doing and are aware of long-term consequences of continued business as usual. In my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature.

A President could be impeached only for an error of the heart, and not of the head.

I regard myself as a grand juror waiting to hear the evidence from the prosecutor, the Judiciary Committee. I'm diametrically opposed to Nixon and everything he stands for, but I want to see the evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors first.

Administrator McCarthy committed perjury and made several false statements at multiple congressional hearings and as a result, is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors - an impeachable offense.

If a president makes a reasoned decision about what best serves the nation's interests, even if he turns out to be wrong, he has committed no impeachable offense. The Framers didn't intend, through impeachment, to transform such policy disputes or mistakes into high crimes.

If a politician takes a bribe to do what he thinks would have been best for the public anyway, he still goes to jail. If he's president, under a Constitution that refers to impeachment specifically for 'bribery,' as well other 'high crimes and misdemeanors,' he should still be removed.

I think it absolutely necessary that the President should have the power of removing [his subordinates] from office; it will make him, in a peculiar manner, responsible for their conduct, and subject him to impeachment himself, if he suffers them to perpetrate with impunity high crimes or misdemeanors against the United States, or neglects to superintend their conduct, so as to check their excesses.

There are only two ways to remove the president - if he violates the constitution or commits high treason. How could anyone accuse me of treason after I had terminated Israel's occupation of South Lebanon in 2000.

It is a coup because while the Brazilian Constitution allows for impeachment, it's necessary for the person to have committed what we call high crimes and misdemeanors. And President Dilma did not commit a high crime nor misdemeanor. Therefore, what is happening is an attempt by some to take power by disrespecting the popular vote.

Impeachment really is not a criminal proceeding. The American people have been conditioned to believe that, you know, high crimes and misdemeanors means what? Impeachment is a purely political process. And it can only succeed if there is the political will for it out there in the country. You can have all the misdemeanors and high crimes you want, but if the president's popular, you're not gonna succeed.

Impeachment is the direct constitutional means for removing a President, Vice President or other civil officers of the United States who has acted or threatened acts that are serious offenses against the Constitution, its system of government, or the rule of law, or that are conventional crimes of such a serious nature that they would injure the Presidency if there was no removal.

Impeachment is not confined alone to acts which are forbidden by the Constitution or Federal statutes. The better sustained and modern view is that the provision for impeachment in the Constitution applies not only to high crimes and misdemeanors as those words were understood at common law but also acts which are not defined as criminal and made subject to indictment, and also to those which affect the public welfare. Thus an official may be impeached for offenses of a political character and for gross betrayal of public interests. Also for abuses or betrayal of trusts, for inexcusable negligence of duty, for the tyrannical abuse of power, or, as one writer puts it, for “a breach of official duties…

All societies make necessary moral distinctions between high crimes and misdemeanors, mortal and lesser sins.

Clinton's egregious act of self-indulgence was outdone by an impeachment based not on constitutionally required high crimes and misdemeanors but on a vindictive determination to bring down a president who had offended self-righteous moralists eager to put a different political agenda in place.

There's a political reality about impeachment. It's purely a political process. The interpretation of "high crimes and misdemeanors" can reach a long way, all the way to sex in the Oval Office, which was an absurd use of the impeachment clause.

The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law. The person of the King of Great Britain is sacred and inviolable: There is no constitutional tribunal to which he is amenable, no punishment to which he can be subjected without involving the crisis of a national revolution.