U.S. Rep. Ron Paul | impeach |
impeach
Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton
19 December 1998 1998 Ron Paul 125:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of all four articles of impeachment against the President. There is neither pleasure nor vindictiveness in this vote and I have found no one else taking this vote lightly. It seems though many of our colleagues are not pleased with the investigative process; some believing it to have been overly aggressive and petty, while others are convinced it has been unnecessarily limited and misdirected. It certainly raises the question of whether or not the special prosecutor rather than the Congress itself should be doing this delicate work of oversight. Strict adherence to the Constitution would reject the notion that Congress undermine the separations of power by delivering this oversight responsibility to the administration. The long delays and sharp criticisms of the special prosecutor could have been prevented if the Congress had not been dependent on the actions of an Attorney General’s appointee.
impeach
Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton
19 December 1998 1998 Ron Paul 125:3
But there are many people in this country and some members of Congress who sincerely believe we have over concentrated on the Lewinsky event while ignoring many other charges that have been pushed aside and not fully scrutinized by the House. It must not be forgotten that a resolution to inquire into the possible impeachment of the President was introduced two months before the nation became aware of Monica Lewinsky.
impeach
Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton
19 December 1998 1998 Ron Paul 125:6
There is a major irony in this impeachment proceeding. A lot has been said the last two months by members of the Judiciary Committee on both side of the aisle regarding the Constitution and how it must be upheld. But if we are witnessing all of a sudden the serious move toward obeying constitutional restraints, I will anxiously look forward to the next session when 80 percent of our routine legislation will be voted down.
impeach
Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton
19 December 1998 1998 Ron Paul 125:9
The public’s acceptance of the President’s behavior may reflect the moral standards of our age, but I’m betting there’s a lot more to it. It is true that some conservative voters, demanding the Republicans in Congress hold the President to a greater accountability, “voted” by staying home. They did not want to encourage the Republicans who were seen as being soft on Clinton for his personal behavior and for capitulating on the big government agenda of more spending, and more taxes. But hopefully there is a much more profound reason for the seemingly inconsistent position of a public who condemns the President while not having the stomach for punishing him through impeachment.
impeach
Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton
19 December 1998 1998 Ron Paul 125:16
The President, his advisors, and the friendly media were all aware that the sexual privacy issue would distract from the serious charges and knew it was their best chance to avoid impeachment.
impeach
Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton
19 December 1998 1998 Ron Paul 125:21
Even though we might claim a victory of sorts, the current impeachment process reveals a defeat for our political system and our society. Since lack of respect for the Constitution is pervasive throughout the Administration, the Congress and the Courts and reflects the political philosophy of the past 60 years, dealing with the President alone, won’t reverse the course on which we find ourselves. There are days when I think we should consider “impeaching” not only the President, but the Congress and the Judiciary. But the desired changes will come only after the people’s attitudes change as to what form of government they desire. When the people demand privacy, freedom and individual responsibility for everyone alike, our government will reflect these views. Hopefully we can see signs in these current events that more Americans are becoming serious about demanding their liberty and rejecting the illusions of government largesse as a panacea.
impeach
Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton
19 December 1998 1998 Ron Paul 125:24
And to add insult to injury both military operations ordered by Clinton were quickly praised by the Republican leaders as good and necessary policy. These acts alone should be enough for a serious consideration of impeachment, but it’s never mentioned — mainly because leadership of both parties for decades have fully endorsed our jingoism and bellicosity directed toward other nations when they do not do our bidding.
impeach
What We Would Be Doing By Amending The Constitution To Make It Illegal To Desecrate The American Flag
22 June 1999 1999 Ron Paul 63:10
Mr. Speaker, in recent weeks we have had many Members in this Congress cite the Constitution. As a matter of fact, the Constitution is cited all the time. Sometimes I see it inconsistently cited, because when it pleases one to cite the Constitution, they do; and when it does not, they forget about it. But just recently we have heard the citing of the Constitution quite frequently. In the impeachment hearings: We have to uphold the Constitution, we have to live by our traditions and our ideals. Just last week we were citing the Constitution endlessly over the second amendment which I strongly support, and which I said the same thing. We must uphold the Constitution to defend the second amendment. But all of a sudden here we have decided to change the Constitution that we are in some way going to restrict the freedom of expression.
impeach
The Price Of War
5 September 2002 2002 Ron Paul 83:25
Clinton’s bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan on the eve of his indictment over Monica Lewinsky shattered a Taliban plan to expel Osama bin Laden from Afghanistan. Clinton’s bombing of Baghdad on the eve of his impeachment hardly won any converts to our cause or reassured the Muslim people of the Middle Eastern countries of a U.S. balanced policy. The continued bombing of Iraq over these past 12 years, along with the deadly sanctions, resulted in hundreds of thousands of needless Iraqi civilian deaths, has not been beneficial to our security and has been used as one of the excuses for recruiting the fanatics ready to sacrifice their lives and demonstrating their hatred toward us.
impeach
We The People Act
4 March 2004 2004 Ron Paul 13:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the We the People Act. The We the People Act forbids federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning state laws and policies relating to religious liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving sexual practices, sexual orientation or reproduction. The We the People Act also protects the traditional definition of marriage from judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme Court cannot abuse the equal protection clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold federal judges accountable for abusing their powers, the act also provides that a judge who violates the act’s limitations on judicial power shall either be impeached by Congress or removed by the president, according to rules established by the Congress.
impeach
Big Lies and Little Lies
November 2, 2005 2005 Ron Paul 116:2
This case, like almost everything in Washington, has been driven by politics — not truth, justice, or the Constitution. It’s about seeking political power, pure and simple, not unlike the impeachment process during the last administration.
impeach
Introducing We The People
17 November 2005 2005 Ron Paul 122:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the We the People Act. The We the People Act forbids Federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning State laws and polices relating to religious liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving sexual practices, sexual orientation or reproduction. The We the People Act also protects the traditional definition of marriage from judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme Court cannot abuse the equal protection clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold Federal judges accountable for abusing their powers, the act also provides that a judge who violates the act’s limitations on judicial power shall either be impeached by Congress or removed by the President, according to rules established by the Congress.
impeach
Introduction Of The We The People Act
29 June 2006 2006 Ron Paul 51:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the We the People Act. The We the People Act forbids federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning state laws and polices relating to religious liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving sexual practices, sexual orientation or reproduction. The We the People Act also protects the traditional definition of marriage from judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme Court cannot abuse the equal protection clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold federal judges accountable for abusing their powers, the act also provides that a judge who violates the act’s limitations on judicial power shall either be impeached by Congress or removed by the president, according to rules established by the Congress.
impeach
Introducing We The People
5 January 2007 2007 Ron Paul 9:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the We the People Act. The We the People Act forbids federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning state laws and polices relating to religious liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving sexual practices, sexual orientation or reproduction. The We the People Act also protects the traditional definition of marriage from judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme Court cannot abuse the equal protection clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold federal judges accountable for abusing their powers, the act also provides that a judge who violates the act’s limitations on judicial power shall either be impeached by Congress or removed by the president, according to rules established by the Congress.
impeach
Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones
17 January 2007 2007 Ron Paul 18:17
I don’t believe it. If tomorrow Bush took out Iran’s nuclear facilities, would a Senate that lacks the courage to cut funds for an unpopular war really impeach him for denying a nuclear capability to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Bush’s lawyers would make the same case Nixon made for the 1970 “incursion” into Cambodia — and even a Nixon- hating Democratic House did not dare to impeach him for that.
impeach
Question Of The Privileges Of The House
6 November 2007 2007 Ron Paul 102:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise, reluctantly, in favor of the motion to table House Resolution 799, Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors, and in favor of referring that resolution to the House Judiciary Committee for full consideration. I voted to table this resolution not because I do not share the gentleman from Ohio’s desire to hold those responsible for the Iraqi debacle accountable; but rather, because I strongly believe that we must follow established protocol in matters of such importance. During my entire time in Congress, I have been outspoken in my opposition to war with Iraq and Iran. I have warned my colleagues and the administration against marching toward war in numerous speeches over the years, and I have voted against every appropriation to continue the war on Iraq.
impeach
Question Of The Privileges Of The House
6 November 2007 2007 Ron Paul 102:2
I have always been strongly in favor of vigorous congressional oversight of the executive branch, and I have lamented our abrogation of these Constitutional obligations in recent times. I do believe, however, that this legislation should proceed through the House of Representatives following regular order, which would require investigation and hearings in the House Judiciary Committee before the resolution proceeds to the floor for a vote. This time- tested manner of moving impeachment legislation may slow the process, but in the long run it preserves liberty by ensuring that the House thoroughly deliberates on such weighty matters. In past impeachments of high officials, including those of Presidents Nixon and Clinton, the legislation had always gone through the proper committee with full investigation and accompanying committee report.
impeach
INTRODUCING WE THE PEOPLE
January 14, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 9:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the We the People Act. The We the People Act forbids federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning State laws and polices relating to religious liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving sexual practices, sexual orientation or reproduction. The We the People Act also protects the traditional definition of marriage from judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme Court cannot abuse the equal protection clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold Federal judges accountable for abusing their powers, the act also provides that a judge who violates the act’s limitations on judicial power shall either be impeached by Congress or removed by the President, according to rules established by the Congress.
impeach
Impeachment Of Judge Samuel Kent
June 19, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 73:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, as the House of Representatives Member for Galveston, Texas, I have followed the case of Judge Samuel Kent with great interest. My study of the facts of this case has convinced me that the House Committee on the Judiciary made the correct decision in recommending that Judge Kent be impeached. Unfortunately, because of a commitment in my congressional district, I was only able to be on the House floor for the vote on the first count. Had I been on the House floor for the vote, I would have voted for all four counts of impeachment. I hope the Senate expeditiously acts on this matter.
impeach
'High crimes and misdemeanors'
07 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 07 September 1998 verse 7 ... Cached
Almost a year ago, long before our national obsession with the Bill-said/Monica-said affair began, Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia and I cosponsored legislation called an "Inquiry into Impeachment," House Resolution 304.
impeach
'High crimes and misdemeanors'
07 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 07 September 1998 verse 10 ... Cached
If this president used his powerful position to illegally secure information regarding political detractors, then this president must be impeached.
impeach
'High crimes and misdemeanors'
07 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 07 September 1998 verse 13 ... Cached
If this president not only broke the law by accepting donations from a potentially hostile foreign government, but proceeded to trade our nation's military secrets as a "quid pro quo," then this president must be impeached.
impeach
'High crimes and misdemeanors'
07 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 07 September 1998 verse 15 ... Cached
Congress must move forward now to secure the integrity of our system of justice, protect the liberties of our people, and to ensure our national security. But Congress must move forward with hearings for the sake of this president and the office he holds. If this president has done nothing meriting impeachment, public hearings will vindicate him and the sordid allegations - and purveyors of the falsehoods - will be revealed.
impeach
'High crimes and misdemeanors'
07 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 07 September 1998 verse 16 ... Cached
If, however, the allegations bear the weight of the evidence, then the man entrusted with the highest office in our land must be impeached. Should this be the case, it will be a difficult time for our nation, but it is far worse to allow transgressions against our sovereignty and liberty to go unpunished.
impeach
'High crimes and misdemeanors'
07 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 07 September 1998 verse 17 ... Cached
Impeach the president? For the sake of our nation, let us hold hearings and weigh the evidence; the allegations are simply too compelling.
impeach
For sake of Rule of Law, Congress must proceed
28 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 28 September 1998 verse 3 ... Cached
Only Clinton's resignation should stop impeachment hearings
impeach
For sake of Rule of Law, Congress must proceed
28 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 28 September 1998 verse 7 ... Cached
Under our Constitution, the House of Representatives is charged with investigating allegations against a sitting president or judge. While some may talk about whether or not an offense is "impeachable," that is only so much political rhetoric. The Constitution only specifies that Congress can impeach a president for "high crimes" and "misdemeanors," but the definitions of those words are left to Congress to determine - anything a sufficient number of Members of Congress find offensive can be cause for impeachment.
impeach
For sake of Rule of Law, Congress must proceed
28 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 28 September 1998 verse 8 ... Cached
In recent weeks I have been asked many times what the timetable might be for impeachment. We now have a tentative outline.
impeach
For sake of Rule of Law, Congress must proceed
28 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 28 September 1998 verse 10 ... Cached
According to Chairman Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), his committee will receive a full briefing on the evidence on October 1st or 2nd. Over the next three days, the full committee will debate the evidence. On either October 5 or 6, the committee will consider a resolution to begin an impeachment hearing.
impeach
For sake of Rule of Law, Congress must proceed
28 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 28 September 1998 verse 12 ... Cached
A simple majority of the House of Representatives is all that will be required to initiate impeachment hearings. Those hearings could begin immediately, or be held until early November, after the elections.
impeach
For sake of Rule of Law, Congress must proceed
28 September 1998 Texas Straight Talk 28 September 1998 verse 13 ... Cached
A big question will be whether or not the impeachment hearings will be limited solely to allegations that the president lied under oath, or if it will also include other charges. Those involve potentially treasonous activities in transferring advanced missile technology to the communist Chinese in exchange for campaign donations, as well as violations of peoples rights in the abuse of more than 1,000 confidential FBI files for partisan purposes. (By comparison, a man went to prison in the early 1970s for misuse of one FBI file.)
impeach
Unconstitutional wars gravest of crimes
21 December 1998 Texas Straight Talk 21 December 1998 verse 15 ... Cached
Most recently, the Congress interrupted the important impeachment debate to pass a two-part resolution. The first half simply offered support for our troops, and was unobjectionable. The second half, though, encouraged the president, praised his unconstitutional actions, and recommended that he engage in further unconstitutional actions by trying to topple the leadership of Iraq and replace it with what would amount to a US taxpayer supported puppet regime. Of course, voting against the second part is depicted as the fans of unconstitutional war as opposing our troops. Nevertheless, I voted against the resolution because I cannot sanction abuses of our Constitution.
impeach
Unconstitutional wars gravest of crimes
21 December 1998 Texas Straight Talk 21 December 1998 verse 16 ... Cached
Congress should support the troops by taking them out of senseless danger, not encouraging a soon-to-be impeached president to risk further the lives of enlisted men.
impeach
China is only winner in scandals
31 May 1999 Texas Straight Talk 31 May 1999 verse 13 ... Cached
Almost two years ago, long before Monica Lewinsky and the national soap opera begun, several Members and I introduced an Inquiry into Impeachment because of the then-materializing allegations involving these serious breaches of national security, among other similar charges. Of course, this Congress -- and indeed much of the nation -- was disinterested in pursuing such an investigation, apparently because it is far less ribald than the obsession with sex, though arguably more dangerous.
impeach
Sound Money Needed More Than Ever
28 February 2000 Texas Straight Talk 28 February 2000 verse 8 ... Cached
Well, perhaps the best way to answer the question is to consider when the Fed did indeed take the first step on the path of its current policy direction toward raising the Fed funds rate. If you'll recall, it was at the very first Fed meeting after President Clinton's impeachment trial had been wrapped up in the US Senate.
impeach
Sound Money Needed More Than Ever
28 February 2000 Texas Straight Talk 28 February 2000 verse 10 ... Cached
The bottom line is that Greenspan's admission suggests that, even without the negative affects of political considerations, a fiat monetary policy is doomed to fail. When we add to the mix the all-too-human tendency of central planners responding to political pressure, as Greenspan and the fed money making machine clearly did throughout the impeachment process, what we have is a recipe for disaster. Unfortunately, Greenspan's admission points anew to the fact that a big mess is coming. But fortunately for those who are listening, it also presents proof-positive that the best way to avoid such calamities in the future is to reset our monetary policy on a firm and sound basis.
Texas Straight Talk from 20 December 1996 to 23 June 2008 (573 editions) are included in this Concordance. Texas Straight Talk after 23 June 2008 is in blog form on Rep. Paul’s Congressional website and is not included in this Concordance.
Remember, not everything in the concordance is Ron Paul’s words. Some things he quoted, and he added some newspaper and magazine articles to the Congressional Record. Check the original speech to see.