Byron Dorgan: “The notion of trumping the articles of impeachment with even a ``broad'' findings of fact flies in the face of what the…”

“The notion of trumping the articles of impeachment with even a ``broad'' findings of fact flies in the face of what the Framers of the Constitution intended. They deliberately set the bar high when it came to the vote on articles of impeachment, first by requiring a supermajority of two-thirds of the Senate to convict, and second, by fusing the penalty-- [that is] removal from office [being the penalty]--into the question of guilt. In voting on articles of impeachment [he goes on to say] senators must answer not one but two questions: Is the president guilty or not guilty of committing high crimes and misdemeanors, and, if he is guilty, do his actions warrant removal from office? Continuing to quote from Senator Byrd's article: This was not a casual coupling on the part of the Framers. Their intent was to force senators to set aside their own passions and prejudices and focus instead on the best interests of the nation. To lift this burden from the shoulders of senators by offering them a way to convict the president without having to accept responsibility for removing him from office would, in effect, bastardize the impeachment process. Moreover [he says] the aftershocks would be felt long after this impeachment has faded into history. No longer would senators be confined to the articles of impeachment formulated by the House of Representatives.”