1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
OverLord2011 [107]
3 years ago
11

To impeach means to formally accuse an official of a crime. Who has the “sole power of impeachment” in the Constitution?

History
2 answers:
Assoli18 [71]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" and that "the Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments"

Explanation:

ella [17]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

No one

Explanation:

No one person can impeach a sitting president. The Speaker of the House, however, can call for an impeachment investigation. After that a committee is formed to investigate the crimes of the President. But the "impeachment" doesn't begin until the House of Representatives votes to impeach a president. A simple majority is all it takes to have a President impeached.

You might be interested in
Where did General Lee surrender at the end of the Civil War? Richmond, Virginia Washington, D.C. Appomattox Courthouse
Ivahew [28]
At the Appomattox Courthouse
7 0
3 years ago
QUICK! LOTS OF POINTS
andre [41]

Answer:

Explanation:

The international community condemned the Armenian Genocide. In May 1915, Great Britain, France, and Russia advised the Young Turk leaders that they would be held personally responsible for this crime against humanity. There was a strong public outcry in the United States against the mistreatment of the Armenians. At the end of the war, the Allied victors demanded that the Ottoman government prosecute the Young Turks accused of wartime crimes. Relief efforts were also mounted to save "the starving Armenians." The American, British, and German governments sponsored the preparation of reports on the atrocities and numerous accounts were published. On the other hand, despite the moral outrage of the international community, no strong actions were taken against the Ottoman Empire either to sanction its brutal policies or to salvage the Armenian people from the grip of extermination. Moreover, no steps were taken to require the postwar Turkish governments to make restitution to the Armenian people for their immense material and human losses.

4 0
3 years ago
During the 1902 coal strike, how did Roosevelt end the dispute between the union and coal mine owners? Question 14 options: He f
Naddik [55]

Answer:

He invited both groups and worked in arbitration.

Explanation:

The Strike carried out by the United Mine workers of America in the coalfields of Pennsylvania. Miners demanded for shorter workdays, higher wages and the recognition of their union. They also threatened to stop the coal  supply to American cites. It was winter during the time of strike and most of the houses in US were heated with anthracite coal. To end the strike US Federal Government acted as a neutral arbitrator and the miners got 10 percent hike in their wages and the working hours were reduced from ten to nine hours. The owners also received a better price for their coal. It was the first dispute in which Federal government involved itself.

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What does "state of nature" mean?​
Sergeeva-Olga [200]

state of nature, in political theory, the real or hypothetical condition of human beings before or without political association.

5 0
3 years ago
Why did the colonists feel they had the right to rebel against the British government?
Vinvika [58]

In the early days of British colonization, the British gave the colonists a lot of self governing powers and autonomy, and it remained this way for several years. However, when King George III took power he tightened the grip on their colonies a lot more, which created some tensions. One big thing was after the French and Indian War, the British heavily taxed the colonists with things like the Stamp Act because it has cost the British government a lot of money to defend the colonies in the. This angered a lot of colonists because they were getting taxed without consent in that they have no representation in Parliament. Although other British colonies also did not have representation, the colonists felt that they were just as valid as British citizens as those in GB, so they were angry that they had to pay all these taxes without agreeing to them. Hence the phrase "no taxation without representation"

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • City where luther was condemned
    12·1 answer
  • The Han Dynasty (202 B.C. – A.D. 8; A.D. 25-220) consisted of two parts called the
    10·1 answer
  • The U.S. Constitution was created in _____ and ratified in
    10·2 answers
  • DUE TODAY PLEASE HELP SOOOOON!!!
    15·1 answer
  • Hehe! Fun fact the Mona Lisa has no eyebrows!
    5·1 answer
  • What were the factors that led to United States to follow the policy of<br> Imperialism?
    10·1 answer
  • The Three-Fifths Compromise at the Constitutional Convention concerned which of the following issues?
    5·1 answer
  • Which of the following reasons best explains the trends in the graph?
    6·2 answers
  • What does a state work with to share the costs of important social services?
    14·1 answer
  • Which argument did anti-abolitionists use?
    5·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!