Ask ol Winton why he likes your post. The letter pretty much shit on his perspective that my post was a bunch of "blather". What Winston ol buddy ol pal forgot to mention in his b.s. rebuttle was the Constitution states plainly that the CJustice is to preside over PRESIDENTIAL impeachments. Other people, like the SOS, etc do not have that requirement. So, some SOS back in the 1800s doesn't count as PRESIDENT .. and thus there is NO PRECEDENT for impeaching a PRESIDENT using leaky Leahy as the presiding officer. IF Trump is not considered President, then he is nothing and not impeachable .... as the letter clearly implies .. "unconstitutional proceeding" ..
The Democrats have no credibility to lose. Trump will not be testifying and doesn't have to. The defense is clear ... there is no standing for the Senate to hold trail on a private citizen, ie., the entire procedure is a scam ... and is unconstitutional.
Again you ignore the precedent of 1876 where there was a trial after the impeached was out of office. I’m not saying it’s absolute but it is arguable. You need to look at things as they are not as you want them to be.
agree.... thought this might help: Article II, Section 4: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
You forgot this part ... "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present" As noted here .... Impeachment Problem? Chief Justice Roberts May Not Have Constitutional Authority To Preside At Trial Of FORMER President (legalinsurrection.com) "The Constitution says “[w]hen the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside” — but Trump will not be “the President” during the upcoming trial. If Roberts refuses to preside at upcoming Senate trial as beyond his constitutional authority — as he should — that will render the “impeachment” trial not an “impeachment” trial at all."
Well this is like arguing the number of angels on the head of a pin. It’s going to happen no matter how you rule. As I noted there is also some precedent and legal justification. I think it’s wrong for more reasons than the narrow legal objection. It is an action of naked revenge not justice. Similarly the de comitteeization of Marjorie Taylor Greene the action by Democrats is a step too far. No matter that both Trump and Greene probably should have been impeached or thrown off the committees for their actions the timing and manner of the Democrats is just as egregious.
