Article of Impeachment Against Vice President Nix

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The sweet Justice from transsexual Thailand should remember that impeachment is Constitutional by definition. There is no judicial review of the process; it is totally up to the Senate and the people to interpret what constitutes an "impeachable offense."

And, for the record, until I hear Ben explain why he has introduced these articles, I'm suspending judgement on whether anyone should be impeached.

This was the Vice President himself, then a Senator from the Northeast Region stating his view in the Judiciary Committee of the Senate, on the potential application of impeachment when challenged by then Senior Associate Justice Opebo on the constitutionality of impeaching someone on the grounds of inactivity.

[Lumine]

Speaking from a purely personal point of view I remain unconvinced of the explanations given by the Vice-President on his public statements, mainly because the supposed meaning he has given is pretty hard to believe. I think most of us can agree that if the Vice-President had really meant to give such a confusing statement he would have chosen another way of expressing himself.

That said, Speaker Truman has been cited as a citizen that had recieved this explanation via PM, so if we could contact him to see his version and hear his opinion that might go a long way into explaining that particular point.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     You can say that you support a reboot. I more or less do so too. But describing it as not affirming Atlasia's laws and authority is asking for trouble. When you make statements that would diegetically be interpreted as treason, and especially when there is conduct like that of TNF and Al's afoot, it makes sense for us to view your words poorly.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yet, oddly, no evidence has been introduced to that effect.

Well Mr Vice President could you explain this statement?

Only one thing has changed: I do not reject the reality Atlasia's federal laws, legal structure, and authority, but I do not affirm it either. More to follow elsewhere.

maybe you could explain why you believe it to constitute treason?

Treason is not a necessary standard for impeachment.

We have also endorsed in law and the constitution the notion of using it for inactivity (On Second Thought, We Do Have Expectations Amendment), composed by the esteemed man from Bakersfield with amendments from myself and I think Kalwejt. It has also been amended since then, but it is still present in the Constitution.

The creation of an activity standard utilizing impeachment, expands the acceptable range of usage for impeachment beyond treason, quite far actually.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I in no way condoned the lack of process in this manner Nix. I had to work that day and so I wasn't here to be the first one to respond to Cris and the others saying "that is not how it works". Bgwah runs the show, etc etc.

Taking your word for it regarding the statement that you made. The question remains why you would claim to not be safe, call for my surrender when I am not resisting justice, whilst the real treason is occuring in the Midwest in open rebellion?

 If you were unsafe, wouldn't it have been from the people in open rebellion? If you were demanding surrender terms to be communicated to the President, wouldn't it be the one seeking to overthrow the Government, not the one being brought up on false charges, for stating a dire futuristic prediction in a Senate debate thread, by your administrations Attorney General? At a time I will note that said AG was also reforming a group that was once banned for the express purposes of destroying Atlasia.

For real Nix, what the hell did you think I was doing or trying to do? Did you blindly trust in Al or presume that I would suddently act in a manner that I have not in the six years, or both? What would make you think that I, having committed no crime and being persecuted by your administration's AG because of a personal vendetta, would pose a threat to you? WHo did you feel threatened enough by to leave the capital?

At the very least your statement, in the absence of anything from bore was completely irresponsible, and had a destabilizing effect. The "misinterpretations" as you call them of your words led some to question whether or not the administration was supporting TNF. 

The problem is nothing you have said make sense throughout this process. And so for all I see you doing is ascribing false motives to us in this process and claiming that refutes a given point.

[Blair]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As Yankee observed, your position has changed since you served in the Senate.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, which is why the Senate has had to act in this manner during the last couple of days, due to the actions of the Attorney General and others. If it hadn't been for the Senate, I'd be horrified to think what would be happening right now.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No it's not. Travelling to a foreign country during a time like this alone is an impeachable offense in my view. It's the equivalent in historical examples of Wallace going to Mexico in 1941 after Pearl Harbor, Hamlim fleeing to Canada during the civil war or Cheney going to Barbados. The defense that you provided, that Cuba is A) Close B) Has a military base near it, both fail to cover up the fact that you decided to flee at the worst possible time. In simple terms, you fled to a foreign country during our time of need.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why would Attorney General Al openly put up trumped up charges against Senator Yankee? Why would TNF and SWE declare a Marxist rebellion? We've hardly had a rational week in Atlasia have we?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You stated that you don't 'affirm it'. I've used the dictionary definition of this, and you haven't directly responded to that definition. To not affirm it, means that you don't see it as true. It's a rather weird situation to put yourself in, because at best you're saying that you don't want to enforce the rules and laws of Atlasia-combined with this weekends crisis it's me concerned. Mr Vice President, will all respect your position was at best poorly thought out. As I've said before, we need a Vice President who is fully committed to the Constitution

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In all fairness, as Speaker I did object to that.

Yankee raises a valid point, and a question I'd like to raise.

Did you support Attorney General Al's attempted arrest of Yankee?

[Ban my account ffs!]

The only interpretation I can make was that VP Nix did what he did assuming AG Al would be successful, and if not, he'd be surrendering the game to Yankee as a "well fine..if we cant tear it down our way, then you can have it...see ya!" Type gesture.

I think his insistence that he does not affirm the reality of the laws, legal structure, or authority of said laws or legal structure further proves he is unwilling to keep the game moving forward.

And his arguments so far have not really convinced me otherwise... Except I do not believe he just wants to tear it down or leave the game.  And  I am, of course, not the damning type and would like to see Nix remain in his post and be a part of whatever reboot or reform process there is to the game, if any.  I think he wants to stay.  While others have simply quit the game or resigned, he is arguing his case.

Personally, I'd like to hear a statement from the president on his VP on this matter.  If the president has continued confidence in his VP, it would go a long way in assuring me.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

One important thing needs to be said. It's true Atlasia is just a game, but in every game actions have consequences: it's how it works. Since we're supposed to simulate real life, I can't think of any RL Vice President and other high official doing and saying what Nix had done and said and avoid any consequences. I mean, seriously, let's get real.

I like Nix a great deal as a poster and as a player. But right now I'm playing the a Senator, whose part in this game was to introduce these articles. And it's our part to act on it. Nobody's "damning" anybody here.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

That said, Speaker Truman has been cited as a citizen that had recieved this explanation via PM, so if we could contact him to see his version and hear his opinion that might go a long way into explaining that particular point.

Granted, my involvement in this affair is minimal, but I'd be happy to lend what insight I can to the Senate.

I received the aforementioned PM from Mr. Nix on the evening of July 18. Several minutes before, I had printed an article in the Mideast Record-Courier that described the Vice President as "demanding" Atlasia's surrender, a statement he said was inaccurate. He explained that "I meant that we - meaning Atlasia - might need to *offer* surrender to Yankee if legal action against him was unsuccessful." I thanked him for his explanation and edited the article accordingly. A few minutes afterwards, Mr. Nix sent me a second PM saying that while he was "having more fun with [the ongoing crisis] than I should", he did not condone the ongoing violence. (I would be happy to post this message at the Senate's request). That was the last correspondence I had with the Vice President.

[Blair]

Thanks Harry, good to get your insight and evidence.

As Kal said, we have to act responsibly here. A Vice President who 'has fun' with a crisis, whilst hiding in another country raises question marks for me

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

That said, Speaker Truman has been cited as a citizen that had recieved this explanation via PM, so if we could contact him to see his version and hear his opinion that might go a long way into explaining that particular point.

Granted, my involvement in this affair is minimal, but I'd be happy to lend what insight I can to the Senate.

I received the aforementioned PM from Mr. Nix on the evening of July 18. Several minutes before, I had printed an article in the Mideast Record-Courier that described the Vice President as "demanding" Atlasia's surrender, a statement he said was inaccurate. He explained that "I meant that we - meaning Atlasia - might need to *offer* surrender to Yankee if legal action against him was unsuccessful."

This is a direct quote:

Should Attorney General Al Sibboleth's attempt to take legal action fail, I am prepared to meet with North Carolina Yankee on neutral ground to discuss the terms of Atlasia's final surrender, to be relayed to the President. I am also monitoring events in the Midwest on behalf of the administration. More to follow.

He's been clearly talking about "the terms of Atlasia's final surrender". It's in black and white for all to see. Him, claiming now he didn't say that is offending our collective intelligence.

This, combined with his conduct (fleeing the country in time of national crisis), as well as plain statement he "doesn't affirm the laws of Atlasia anymore", which constitutes a blantant breach of the oath he took to "preserve, protect and defend the constitution" are ground for removing him from office.

As I've said before, this case cannot be possibly more clear.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

That said, Speaker Truman has been cited as a citizen that had recieved this explanation via PM, so if we could contact him to see his version and hear his opinion that might go a long way into explaining that particular point.

Granted, my involvement in this affair is minimal, but I'd be happy to lend what insight I can to the Senate.

I received the aforementioned PM from Mr. Nix on the evening of July 18. Several minutes before, I had printed an article in the Mideast Record-Courier that described the Vice President as "demanding" Atlasia's surrender, a statement he said was inaccurate. He explained that "I meant that we - meaning Atlasia - might need to *offer* surrender to Yankee if legal action against him was unsuccessful."

This is a direct quote:

Should Attorney General Al Sibboleth's attempt to take legal action fail, I am prepared to meet with North Carolina Yankee on neutral ground to discuss the terms of Atlasia's final surrender, to be relayed to the President. I am also monitoring events in the Midwest on behalf of the administration. More to follow.

He's been clearly talking about "the terms of Atlasia's final surrender". It's in black and white for all to see. Him, claiming now he didn't say that is offending our collective intelligence.

it's been explained numerous times already that he is talking about a "surrender" to nc yankee, not to tnf/swe. it'd be really great if the senate were to actually read nix's defense before rushing at him with torches and pitchforks.

[Blair]

Well Evergreen, we're still waiting to hear if Nix supports the actions of Attorney General Al.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Everyone's seen the quote by now, Kal. I've been open for a very long time about my belief that Yankee is emblematic of much of what has gone wrong with Atlasia. If the wording is confusing, so be it: How many mangled sentences have you, or anyone else, for that matter, posted? But don't call me a liar.  The stakes here aren't nearly high enough for me to lie.

You've mangled every possible sentence back and forth since since before this proceedings started, then accuse everybody else of lying. You can keep doing this for as long as you wish. The evidences are clear and there's really nothing more to add.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Everyone's seen the quote by now, Kal. I've been open for a very long time about my belief that Yankee is emblematic of much of what has gone wrong with Atlasia. If the wording is confusing, so be it: How many mangled sentences have you, or anyone else, for that matter, posted? But don't call me a liar.  The stakes here aren't nearly high enough for me to lie.

You've mangled every possible sentence back and forth since since before this proceedings started, then accuse everybody else of lying. You can keep doing this for as long as you wish. The evidences are clear and there's really nothing more to add.

I don't know that I've accused anyone of lying, but - I am sorry to say so - I have picked up a strong sense of opportunism, vindictiveness, and hypocrisy.

I see where this is going: now this is a personal bitchfest. Sorry, not interested.

For your peace of mind, let me rephrase it: your explanation does not convince me at all.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I think that language is uncalled for, Kalwejt.

As I said, I'm not interested in turning these proceedings into a "Nix v. Kalwejt" brawl. This would only be extremely not fair toward the other members of this body and the institution itself.

[Blair]

Well Evergreen, we're still waiting to hear if Nix supports the actions of Attorney General Al.

I fail to see the relevance of the question, but if it makes you happy I'll provide an answer: None of us are aware of the details of the Attorney General's prospective case. None of us know what evidence he planned to present. My response to this is to suspend judgment. If anyone is comfortable drawing any strong conclusions about the case at this juncture, he or she most likely knows more about it than I do.

We saw the evidence, he gave it in the Supreme Court case . The question is valid frankly, because you failed to do anything to actively denounce TNF's unlawful succession, apart from calling for peace on all sides which quite frankly would have lead to TNF annexing the Pacific. It's a cycle of events in my view, which is why I'm still in favour of impeachment. All the evidence links together in a pattern that suggests you're not fit to uphold your constitutional oath.

1.) Fleeing to Cuba, during the crisis.
2.) Announcing that you don't 'affirm' the laws of Atlasia. As I've said about 5 times, this shows that you don't 'see the laws as true', which means I have doubts about your ability to uphold your oath.
3.) Subsequent failure to denounce the actions of Attorney General Al, or TNF. As TNF launched his coup, and the Attorney General did nothing you merely called for the Federal Government to reach a peaceful settlement.

As I said before, these 3 together make me have strong doubts that you're committed to your oath. This isn't to do with game reform, this isn't to do with the Senate, this isn't to do with vendetta's or feuds. This is simply to do with your failure to uphold your oath of office

[Oakvale]

It's clear what's happening here - impeach Nix over an utterly absurd interpretation of a single word, install a Vice-President more sympathetic to the cause of the self-styled reformists, and then force the President to resign by threatening impeachment for his outspoken support of a reboot. Voila.

[Ban my account ffs!]

It's clear what's happening here - impeach Nix over an utterly absurd interpretation of a single word, install a Vice-President more sympathetic to the cause of the self-styled reformists, and then force the President to resign by threatening impeachment for his outspoken support of a reboot. Voila.

This is rather disingenuous and presumptive.

1) I was powerless to act on my own, and I knew that President Bore would be online to respond to the crisis before the day's end. Remaining safe was the most logical action to take, unless the Senate would have preferred that I lead a coup.

2) I don't affirm the status quo. I support a reboot, and that reboot would necessarily entail suspending our existing constitution and laws. This is an opinion that a large share of Atlasia shares, including the President. While my phrasing of the sentiment is apparently provocative, it does not indicate anything more than what has become a mainstream opinion over the past month.

3) A majority of the Senate, the Cabinet, and the Supreme Court never denounced TNF's rebellion in public. Laugh if you want, but my calls for a nonviolent resolution make me one of the most vocal advocates for peace during the entire crisis. Of course I don't support threatening Nyman with nuclear attack or invading the Pacific, or any other region for that matter. (Once again, the rationale for this impeachment shifts in an increasingly incomprehensible and untenable direction...)

The "pattern" that you suggest is entirely the product of a narrative that you have imposed on my actions. It is not consistent with my stated beliefs, my stated motives, or the supporting evidence that I have submitted in my defense in this thread.

Regarding point two:  either you can use your position as VP to argue for and affect reform within the confines and rules of the game...or you can do so from outside the game while continuing to uphold your oath of office within the game.  You cannot, as an elected official in the game, start arguing for a reboot and act accordingly while also expecting to keep your position if that doesn't work out.  That is called going rogue and is grounds for impeachment.

[Simfan34]

It's clear what's happening here - impeach Nix over an utterly absurd interpretation of a single word, install a Vice-President more sympathetic to the cause of the self-styled reformists, and then force the President to resign by threatening impeachment for his outspoken support of a reboot. Voila.

Finally, real political intrigue! Something that's been missing for a long time.

[Blair]

It's clear what's happening here - impeach Nix over an utterly absurd interpretation of a single word, install a Vice-President more sympathetic to the cause of the self-styled reformists, and then force the President to resign by threatening impeachment for his outspoken support of a reboot. Voila.

Funnily enough, you're tactic to make this out as 'some vast conspiracy' is quite frankly not true. If this was my plan why would I be running for Governor on Friday? I'm not interested in your conspiracy theories, and frankly it devalues the entire debate

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Nobody's wanting to impeach President bore or Justice Oakvale. The difference between their political advocating of a reboot and Nix's actions has been explained numerous times here.

[Blair]

2) I don't affirm the status quo. I support a reboot, and that reboot would necessarily entail suspending our existing constitution and laws. This is an opinion that a large share of Atlasia shares, including the President. While my phrasing of the sentiment is apparently provocative, it does not indicate anything more than what has become a mainstream opinion over the past month.

But that's not what you said. You said that you don't affirm the laws of Atlasia. There's a massive difference in that. I'm not discussing impeachment because you want reform, I want reform, I don't want the status quo. But the fact that I want reform doesn't stop me from protecting my oath of office. The phrasing is extremely provocative, and clearly different to what the President called for. We need a Vice President who holds the laws of the game to be true

[Senator Cris]

Well Evergreen, we're still waiting to hear if Nix supports the actions of Attorney General Al.

I fail to see the relevance of the question, but if it makes you happy I'll provide an answer: None of us are aware of the details of the Attorney General's prospective case. None of us know what evidence he planned to present. My response to this is to suspend judgment. If anyone is comfortable drawing any strong conclusions about the case at this juncture, he or she most likely knows more about it than I do.

Suspend judgment? Really?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I consider the Vice President a friend.

Whatever the intentions of others, I believe we all have a responsibility to fully abide by the oaths we have taken. If you don't want to or can't, then you must resign.