U.S. President Andrew Johnson Should've Been Impeached in the Senate

I'd just like to say, first off, I'm sorry that I haven't been very quick, I've been really busy the past week or so.1. I acknowledge that he didn't choose to be an apprentice tailor; however, he still didn't have an education other than teaching himself how to read and write. 2. My oppponent has agreed that Andrew Johnson is a racist, but said that racism isn't a justifiable reason why a president should be impeached. Even though racism isn't a quality you want in a person president after the civil war, my point was that being counterproductive after the civil war is a reason why he should've been impeached, not that he was racist.3. The law was NOT ruled unconstitutional in MYERS v. UNITED STATES, 272 U.S. 52 (1926). Myers V. United States was about firing a postmaster- keeping in mind that a postmaster is a position that no longer existed. The case ruled that it is unconstitutional to prevent a President from firing people that he appointed, not that it is unconstitutional to prevent the President from firing officals appointed by others. The supreme court has never ruled that it was unconstitutional for congress to have checks and balances on the President's ability to fire officers appointed by other presidents. Also, the law still existed and he KNEW he was violating it. Slavery doesn't exist today, but there were presidents before Johnson that had slaves. But because slavery was allowed THEN, they could not be impeached. Today if a president kept slaves, they would definitely be impeached. According to the United States Government, the position of Secretary Of War DOES exist today, albeit under a different form; the department of the army is essentially the same as the department of war. Also, the department of war lasted until 1947, and was only replaced when the departments split apart into Air Force and Army. The Tenure of Office Act was a way for congress to keep checks and balances on a power-hungry, controlling, president. Also, in the trial where Johnson was aquitted by one vote, many of the senators were probably bribed by a $150,000 fund that Johnson's administartion had raised. Also, the only reason that Edwin Stanton was fired was that he stood in Andrew Johnson's way of returning the south to what it was pre-civil war.So, to summarize, Johnson had no formal education and his only actual education was self-taught. His actions were counterproductive to all the progress made during the civil war, and he violated the tenure of office act.Also,1) The position that Andrew Johnson fired a man from DOES exist, it just split into 2 branches because of the rise of aircraft.2) It doesn't matter that it doesn't exist today; Andrew Johnson KNEW that what he was doing was illegal, yet he did so anyways. 3) The law was not declared unconstitutional; the US Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional for the President to be stopped from firing officers that he himself appointed. The Tenure of Office Act was a major part of this trial yet the Supreme Court never said that it was unconstitutional for Congress to put checks and balances on the President by preventing him from firing officers appointed by others.http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...http://www.defense.gov...;http://law2.umkc.edu...http://www.andrewjohnson.com...;