As I have told you he has to have the right to defend himself against the charges. He never faced a trial so he never has had an opportunity to defend himself.
I hate Mayor Adams. I wanted him sacked when he hired his brother to a job said brother was unqualified for in his first few days but there is a process to remove him and none of those steps have been met other than presenting the charge.
The thing is if you want to maintain rule of law then you need to follow those rules. You can’t just decide to ignore it when you want to but then pretend you have any legitimacy. That would make you no different than any other dictator.
and that process requires the mayor to be presented charges that he gets to defend himself against. That’s a trial
“to be heard in his defense” that’s from the actual law. Im using defense because that was the verb used, whereas you are using respond which means the same thing in this context.
Ok buddy, sure it isn’t. What is it called when you face a negative outcome due to your potential wrongdoing? Oh yeah that’s called a punishment.
Do you think the trial that never happened counts?
Do you need me to explain what a trial is?
And that action requires he be presented with the charges against him and he be provided the opportunity to defend himself.
The governor cannot legally just pull him from office. These procedures need to be followed.
Im not licking anyone’s boots as I have clearly stated I want him to have a legal process which you and several others have suggested is not necessary.
You have made a very pro-authoritarian claim as to how this should be handled
I am making one that we should follow the rule of law.
YES because the law states he must have the opportunity to defend himself against charges. Failing to provide him that opportunity is never acceptable in a society that follows the rules of law.
edit: mistook you for a different poster
No one has moved goal posts. Everyone else is saying he should be removed and I have said he should not be removed without a trial. Stop trying to misuse logical flaws as away of not addressing the actual argument.
I have to imagine Nazism isnt popular in France even in fascist circles.
And that disagreement is whether we should follow the rule of law. You are advocating ignoring the law because it would grant you your preferred result and that is never ok.
“The chief executive officer of every city and the chief or commissioner of police, commissioner or director of public safety or other chief executive officer of the police force by whatever title he may be designated, of every city may be removed by the governor after giving to such officer a copy of the charges against him and an opportunity to be heard in his defense. The power of removal provided for in this subdivision shall be deemed to be in addition to the power of removal provided for in any other law. The provisions of this subdivision shall apply notwithstanding any inconsistent provisions of any general, special or local law, ordinance or city charte”
I added emphasis to a critical bit you missed. He needs to be able to defend himself against the charges presented. Everyone here is pushing for her to remove him without this. It’s a bad precedent.
If you believe the rule of law is important than you need to actually follow the laws you have on record. We don’t want to make it acceptable for a governor to remove a mayor because they feel like it.
You advocate for an unjust action so do you really believe in a just government and rule of law? You are willing to flout them in this case.
Yes, after his first impeachment he should have been removed the difference is Trump had due process and faced an inquiry whereas Adams has not.
we shouldnt be punishing people over allegations no matter how compelling the evidence is.
Yes, because in absence of a trial it isn’t legal or appropriate.
So you don’t believe rule of law is important? If you believe what you claim you cannot support any form of a just government.
Yes, it is. He would be losing his elected position. He has not been proven guilty. We all suspect he is but that hasn’t been proven.
No elected politician should be removed without due process.
It is shocking how many pro-auth people there are here.
They go criminal we also act criminally isn’t a good path to go down.
Why are so many people in this thread advocating extra judicial action when many/most of us are complaining about the GOP doing the same?