« Alterman buys into Barron's 2006 analysis | Main | Bush campaigns for ethically challenged »

October 24, 2006


I think you need to get all the facts here. Yes Congressman HAstings was impeached but he was also impeached AFTER he was acquitted by the federal courts.

He has served honorably all this time since 1992 and is also the first american elected to the OSCE. He definitely is qualified and I dont think something as political as an impeachment should even be considered in this.

If I understand correctly, despite his 'acquittal' the courts in question had no legal right to do so which is why he was impeached. I do not argue that the man is not qualified, but I would rather not risk our countries greatest secrets with someone who has already shown he can be bought in the past.

But that makes even less sense. Hastings has been on the intelligence committee for 7 years already. There are classified sensitive secrets already swimming around in his head. If he was good enough to serve with distinction the past 7 years without a problem then there shouldn't be anything that should prevent his ascension to the chairmanship.

He definitely has proved himself. He has served in Congress since 1993 and has done so ethically. He is the first AMERICAN elected as President of the European group that overseas elections.

And also about his acquittal..he was acquitted of the charges in court by a jury. What happened was once he was impeached and removed he appealed that decision in the courts based on his previous jury acquittal and that the removal was done in a Senate committee and not the full body of the Senate. A judge then ruled in favor with Hastings and sent the case back to the Senate. The SC then said it had no legal right to overturn the impeachment and so the removal was upheld.

So again bottom line facts:

1). He was acquitted in the courts

2). He has served honorably on the intelligence committe for 7 years already.

The comments to this entry are closed.