Let me make sure I understand your post. Are you saying the Chief Justice is required to preside over the impeachment trial of a former president NOT in office?
Exactly. @Winston1 How is this any different from their rhetoric during the summer of burning and looting? And besides, Trump has greater than 75m supporters, but only a handful relative to that number are responsible for the capitol breach (not counting the disguised antifa members). How can he be held responsible when an overwhelming majority of that 75+ million knew he wasn't espousing violence? This would have happened whether he spoke that day or not. And you're comparison of him to Hitler is both expected and laughable.
No, because that impeachment trial should not exist....you impeach Presidents, not former Presidents.
If he's not the president, then he's not supposed to be able to be impeached. But the left just make up the rules as they go.
Let me preface my remarks by saying I am not a lawyer. These remarks are strictly my opinion & interpretation of what I've read on the subject. I think the Supreme Court is going to have to rule on whether or not a former president can be impeached. I think both sides make arguments defending their positions based on vague language in the Constitution on the subject.
all means all and that's all all means.... it seems that you're trying to split hairs. What does the constitution say?? https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Senate_Impeachment_Role.htm The Senate's Impeachment Role The United States Constitution provides that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" ( Article I, section 2 ) and that "the Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments…[but] no person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present" ( Article I, section 3 ). The president, vice president, and all civil officers of the United States are subject to impeachment..... In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called “managers,” acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal. Since 1789, about half of Senate impeachment trials have resulted in conviction and removal from office.
No he did not. All Trump did was quote other people regarding election fraud. Trump didn't do the statistical analyses that suggests overwhelming fraud! Trump didn't sign an affidavit and give testimony of what he perceived as fraud. Trump is not the one who did the audits on the machines and came to the conclusion that they were set to a 70% error rate! All Trump did was point out what OTHERS were saying in the news. NO different from anyone else holding a position based on the information they read or hear. One would think .. that you think ... all those people there on Jan 6th live in a bubble and get all of their news from Trump!! As if, if it were not for TRUMP ... none of those people would have heard about the Ballot Drops at the TCF center at 3:30 a.m. (confirmed by CCTV at the center). None of those people would have heard about Fox News calling AZ before polls had even closed. None of those people would have heard a damn thing from the media outlets they frequent ... nope .. they all sat around and waited for TRUMP to tell them about it. [NEWS FLASH ... I"ve never heard a damn thing Trump has said, but I've heard all about all the instances of fraud]. IF .. and its a big IF .. but IF, Trump had anything to do with Jan 6th, it was that for the FIRST TIME, ... conservatives thought they had a leader in Trump that was worth breaking from the norm of conservatives of sitting on their hands, and staying quiet. No, instead, they got loud and rambunctious. It wasn't anything Trump said .. it was WHO Trump was to them. They didn't hate Trump like you. They thought Russia was B.S and a witch hunt. They thought the first impeachment was a political scam. They though Trump did just fine dealing with COVID. Basically, they IGNORED every spin article and half truth from the MSM, and made up their own minds.
i did. i think it's hard to argue 'vague' when it's specified that the chief justice is to preside as such, and when the remedy for impeachment is removal from office.... it just doesn't seem to be vague to me, and seems to me we're using political expediency and calling it constitutional....
