Impeachment

My words are not to be misread as a veiled attack on their integrity or their honour. They are intended as a frank and open impeachment of their judgment. [...] In certain quarters, I doubt not, this impeachment and this protest will provoke a sneer.

And here is as great an adventure as ever I heard of, and here, if we turn back, no little impeachment of all our honours.

It is sometimes intimated that testimony which is direct and positive cannot legally be rebutted and overturned by presumptions less high than those which are juris et de jure in the absence of impeachment of the credibility of the witnesses. We are not prepared to accept that proposition unqualifiedly.

He [William Howard, 1st Viscount Stafford] is charged in the Articles of Impeachment with Contriving the Death of the King, and being at ſeveral Meetings and Conſults about the King's Death, and Hiring Perſons to kill the King; And are theſe no Overt Acts? [...] My Lords, another Exception that is taken, is, That there is no Indictment. I conceive that an Impeachment of the Houſe of Commons is more than an Indictment. And there cannot be any doubt of that, the Impeachment of the Houſe of Commons having always been received and proceeded on by your Lordships.

Backed by the Treasurer's bitterest enemies he brought charges against Danby. Impeachment followed. There was fresh uproar in the House.

The Boſton Gazette of March 7 contains articles of impeachment of high crimes and miſdemeanors againſt Peter Oliver, Eſq; Chief Juſtice of the Superior Court of Judicature, &c., over the Province of Maſſachuſets Bay, by the Houſe of Repreſentatives in General Court aſſembled, [...] [T]he Aſſembly perſiſted in their impeachment, which was carried, upon a diviſion, yeas 92, nays 8: [...]

The awful diſcretion, which a court of impeachments muſt neceſſarily have, to doom to honour or to infamy the moſt confidential and the moſt diſtinguiſhed characters of the community, forbids the commitment of the truſt to a ſmall number of perſons.

The acts for which an officer may be impeached, are preciſely thoſe for which he may be indicted as an officer; miſdemeanors in office, offences or unlawful acts done with an evil intention in his official capacity. For ſuch only can he be convicted on an Impeachment. And no officer can be convicted on an Impeachment, unleſs, on the ſame charge, and on the ſame evidence, he ought to be convicted on an Indictment. The ground of both is an unlawful act with an evil intention. Impeachment is Indictment, in other form, adopted in England for great offenders, whoſe influence might defeat the justice of the ordinary tribunals, and retained in Pennſylvania, either from ſimilar motives, or from imitation.

Another letter [...] is worthy of being remembered, not merely as expressing more clearly Edmund Verney's antipathy of a Scotish war, but also as indicating what were his expectations, and no doubt the general expectations, of the results of calling a parliament. The quashing of ship-money, the abolition of monopolies, and even the impeachments of [William] Laud and [Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of] Strafford, are here clearly foreseen.

The impeachment process provides a mechanism for removal of the President, Vice President, and other federal civil officers found to have engaged in "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." The Constitution places the responsibility and authority to determine whether to impeach and to draft articles of impeachment in the hands of the House of Representatives. A number of means have been used to trigger the House's investigation, but the ultimate decision in all instances as to whether impeachment is appropriate rests with the House. Should the House vote to impeach and vote articles of impeachment specifying the grounds upon which impeachment is based, the matter is then presented to the Senate for trial.

In popular impeachments, the street protesters use disruption in order to apply the ultimate accountability sanction for a president: removal from power. [...] Popular impeachments have only happened under extraordinary circumstances. In the case of legal accountability: blatant corruption, abuses of power, or both, that seem to go unpunished. In the case of political accountability: economic meltdowns, major political crises, or both, with no signs of light at the end of the tunnel.

In Juazeiro do Norte, demonstrators cornered the mayor inside a bank for hours and called for his impeachment, while thousands of others protested teachers’ salaries.

Of those 12, four women came before the committee to share their crucial knowledge of the events that led to an impeachment inquiry threatening Trump’s presidency. […] There is even a gender gap in support for impeachment, with more American women than men in favor of the House inquiry – and Trump’s removal from office.

And Don Diego Ordoñez answered, [...] ye of Zamora have received Vellido and harbored him within your walls. [...] And for this I impeach the people of Zamora, the great as well as the little, and living and the dead. [...] Don Arias Gonzalo replied, [...] But know that you have been ill advised in making this impeachment, for the manner is, whosoever impeacheth a council must do battle with five, one after another, and if he conquer the five he shall be held a true man, but if either of the five conquer him, the council is held acquitted and he a liar.

Turne thee back, / And tell thy King, I doe not ſeeke him now, / But could be willing to march on to Callice, / Without impeachment: [...]

Now Hazael, king of Syria, fought against the Israelites, and their king Jehu, and spoiled the eastern parts of the country beyond Jordan, [...] and this without impeachment from Jehu, who made no haste to defend the country when it was under this distress: [...]

Robert Hovell, Licence to Hunt Foxes, &c. 1231 [...] The King has granted to Robert Hovel that he and his heirs may have freely and without impeachment of the King's foresters and their ministers, through the whole forest bailywick of Essex, their dogs running for fox or hare and to chase and take the same, as is more fully contained in the King's charter to him thereupon made. And it is commanded Richerd de Munfichet that he permit the said Robert and his heirs to have without impeachment their dogs running though all the aforesaid forest for hare and fox and to chase and take the same as is aforesaid.