CBO: "Most scholars" conclude that the Senate CAN try a former President

[Lastamender]

If I understand the constitution correctly (I could be wrong), the primary purpose of the senate trial is to remove the president from office if convicted. After the conviction vote, a separate vote has to be taken to bar that person from holding federal office again. Conviction on the impeachment vote does not automatically result in baring from holding federal office again.

Since Trump is no longer president, could the senate skip the vote to convict and move directly to the vote to bar from holding federal office again? I sure lawyers can make the argument for either yes or no for this question, and which side a lawyer falls on usually depends on which side pays him.

Then you understand wrong. Additional functions are setting precendent and keeping the offender from holding office again.

You mean they are already shitting their pants about 2024. Another indication that the election was stolen if they want to prevent Trump from running again. What has been done, the censorship, intimidation and ridiculous hyperbole scream guilt. Biden is illegitimate.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If I understand the constitution correctly (I could be wrong), the primary purpose of the senate trial is to remove the president from office if convicted. After the conviction vote, a separate vote has to be taken to bar that person from holding federal office again. Conviction on the impeachment vote does not automatically result in baring from holding federal office again.

Since Trump is no longer president, could the senate skip the vote to convict and move directly to the vote to bar from holding federal office again? I sure lawyers can make the argument for either yes or no for this question, and which side a lawyer falls on usually depends on which side pays him.

Then you understand wrong. Additional functions are setting precendent and keeping the offender from holding office again.

What exactly in my first paragraph is wrong?

The main or sole purpose. As i clearly explained. So no odea why you are confused.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If I understand the constitution correctly (I could be wrong), the primary purpose of the senate trial is to remove the president from office if convicted. After the conviction vote, a separate vote has to be taken to bar that person from holding federal office again. Conviction on the impeachment vote does not automatically result in baring from holding federal office again.

Since Trump is no longer president, could the senate skip the vote to convict and move directly to the vote to bar from holding federal office again? I sure lawyers can make the argument for either yes or no for this question, and which side a lawyer falls on usually depends on which side pays him.

Then you understand wrong. Additional functions are setting precendent and keeping the offender from holding office again.

You mean they are already shitting their pants about 2024. Another indication that the election was stolen if they want to prevent Trump from running again. What has been done, the censorship, intimidation and ridiculous hyperbole scream guilt. Biden is illegitimate.

The only people shitting their pants over 2024 are Republicans, who just watched the mentally ill dumbfuck poison their party for 4 years.

 

[pyetro]

CBO as in the congressional budget office?

Number crunches?


Hahaha

I meant CRS.
Now you're forced to stop participating in the thread.

 

[JoeMoma]

If I understand the constitution correctly (I could be wrong), the primary purpose of the senate trial is to remove the president from office if convicted. After the conviction vote, a separate vote has to be taken to bar that person from holding federal office again. Conviction on the impeachment vote does not automatically result in baring from holding federal office again.

Since Trump is no longer president, could the senate skip the vote to convict and move directly to the vote to bar from holding federal office again? I sure lawyers can make the argument for either yes or no for this question, and which side a lawyer falls on usually depends on which side pays him.

Then you understand wrong. Additional functions are setting precendent and keeping the offender from holding office again.

What exactly in my first paragraph is wrong?

The main or sole purpose. As i clearly explained. So no odea why you are confused.

Okay, I that case I respectfully disagree since baring from office is nor required when the senate convicts through an impeachment trial.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If I understand the constitution correctly (I could be wrong), the primary purpose of the senate trial is to remove the president from office if convicted. After the conviction vote, a separate vote has to be taken to bar that person from holding federal office again. Conviction on the impeachment vote does not automatically result in baring from holding federal office again.

Since Trump is no longer president, could the senate skip the vote to convict and move directly to the vote to bar from holding federal office again? I sure lawyers can make the argument for either yes or no for this question, and which side a lawyer falls on usually depends on which side pays him.

Then you understand wrong. Additional functions are setting precendent and keeping the offender from holding office again.

What exactly in my first paragraph is wrong?

The main or sole purpose. As i clearly explained. So no odea why you are confused.

Okay, I that case I respectfully disagree since baring from office is nor required when the senate convicts through an impeachment trial.

Neither is removal from office, so you don't have any reason to disagree

 

[ThisIsMe]

I'm not certain on how the SC would rule, if a case ever made it there, on impeaching a president Or officer holder after they have vacated the seat.... I know it has been done before....

But in this case with Trump, he was impeached WHILE sitting in office, and not enough time for a trial before leaving office. The constitution says the Senate SHALL try those impeached....

That means the Senate, constitutionally, has to have a trial in the Senate....

Ok, so trump was impeached "while sitting in office", so he is impeached AS president, and we be tried for actions AS president, which means if you are going to hold him accountable AS president, then the trial must be presided by the chief justice.

Unless you are suggesting he was impeached AS president but will be tried as a private citizen...this the reason for allowing a senator to preside.

Either he is going to be tried as president and is required to have the chief justice preside over the trial, or he is a private citizen and cannot be tried by the senate.

If you want to do this, you need to get Robert's on board, and not this wishy washy change the rules to fit their desires stuff.

 

[meaner gene]

Ok, so trump was impeached "while sitting in office", so he is impeached AS president, and we be tried for actions AS president, which means if you are going to hold him accountable AS president, then the trial must be presided by the chief justice.

Unless you are suggesting he was impeached AS president but will be tried as a private citizen...this the reason for allowing a senator to preside.

Either he is going to be tried as president and is required to have the chief justice preside over the trial, or he is a private citizen and cannot be tried by the senate.

I saw a post of the senate trying a private citizen back in the 1930's. Tried, convicted, and sent to jail. The senate clearly has the power to try a private citizen, so Trump clearly can be tried as a private citizen.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Ok, so trump was impeached "while sitting in office", so he is impeached AS president, and we be tried for actions AS president, which means if you are going to hold him accountable AS president, then the trial must be presided by the chief justice.

Unless you are suggesting he was impeached AS president but will be tried as a private citizen...this the reason for allowing a senator to preside.

Either he is going to be tried as president and is required to have the chief justice preside over the trial, or he is a private citizen and cannot be tried by the senate.

I saw a post of the senate trying a private citizen back in the 1930's. Tried, convicted, and sent to jail. The senate clearly has the power to try a private citizen, so Trump clearly can be tried as a private citizen.

I'm not familiar with it, but still, as was mentioned, this is all about things that happened while he was president. This whole process started when he WAS president, so it should continue in that same vein. He was impeached as president, he should be tried as president, and that requires Robert's to be the presiding judge.

Also, the presiding officer, or the judge, should be an neutral party. Leahey is assuredly not neutral.

 

[DJT for Life]

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments...When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside..."

I missed the part where it says, "If the Chief Justice is busy doing something more important, they can just give it to some old, fat political hack from Vermont."

I wonder what "most scholars" would say about that.

The Chief Justice wants no part of this Kangaroo Court. For good reasons.

Exactly. Thus an impeachment trial without the Chief Justice running the show, is not a valid trial. (It's Unconstitutional).

Without the Chief Justice there...the trial can be appealled to SCOTUS. The vote will be 6-3.

 

[Care4all]

I'm not certain on how the SC would rule, if a case ever made it there, on impeaching a president Or officer holder after they have vacated the seat.... I know it has been done before....

But in this case with Trump, he was impeached WHILE sitting in office, and not enough time for a trial before leaving office. The constitution says the Senate SHALL try those impeached....

That means the Senate, constitutionally, has to have a trial in the Senate....

Ok, so trump was impeached "while sitting in office", so he is impeached AS president, and we be tried for actions AS president, which means if you are going to hold him accountable AS president, then the trial must be presided by the chief justice.

Unless you are suggesting he was impeached AS president but will be tried as a private citizen...this the reason for allowing a senator to preside.

Either he is going to be tried as president and is required to have the chief justice preside over the trial, or he is a private citizen and cannot be tried by the senate.

If you want to do this, you need to get Robert's on board, and not this wishy washy change the rules to fit their desires stuff.

I agree with you, I'd like to see Roberts preside over it, though technically....He does not have to.... He should do it, for the sake of the country.... however hard, whatever the worry of the abuse he Or even his family, may get hit with, from who even knows what side of the aisle, Roberts should oversee the proceedings imo.

Just for the appearance purpose of legitimacy, fairness.

 

[Care4all]

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments...When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside..."

I missed the part where it says, "If the Chief Justice is busy doing something more important, they can just give it to some old, fat political hack from Vermont."

I wonder what "most scholars" would say about that.

The Chief Justice wants no part of this Kangaroo Court. For good reasons.

Exactly. Thus an impeachment trial without the Chief Justice running the show, is not a valid trial. (It's Unconstitutional).

Without the Chief Justice there...the trial can be appealled to SCOTUS. The vote will be 6-3.

Appealed on what grounds???

 

[Care4all]

This is Trump's M/O on all of his wrong doings that he is accused of doing...

He uses technicalities to get off of his rap....like most rich kids, I suppose.... it all depends on who you can afford to get you another..... get out of jail free card.

The first impeachment, his taxes, not honoring subpoenas, his inciting an insurrection....you name the crime or wrong doing.... He gets away with them, through lawyering, through technicalities, though guilty as heck.

And then claims his innocence, the accusations, were a hoax, a fraud, a conspiracy out to get him, the deep state......... bull crap!

Why can't this man of lawlessness just disappear in to the sunset, with his beautiful bride, dear Lord??

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments...When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside..."

I missed the part where it says, "If the Chief Justice is busy doing something more important, they can just give it to some old, fat political hack from Vermont."

I wonder what "most scholars" would say about that.

The Chief Justice wants no part of this Kangaroo Court. For good reasons.

The democrats are turning America into a banana republic

I’m not a fan of all the policies but at least the Dems are governing. It’s the Yahoo’s yelling sham and fake election fraud claims that are making a mockery of our country.

You believe signing 40 EOs and bypassing congress is governing?. No wonder this country is so screwed up.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

I'm not certain on how the SC would rule, if a case ever made it there, on impeaching a president Or officer holder after they have vacated the seat.... I know it has been done before....

But in this case with Trump, he was impeached WHILE sitting in office, and not enough time for a trial before leaving office. The constitution says the Senate SHALL try those impeached....

That means the Senate, constitutionally, has to have a trial in the Senate....

The object of an impeachment trial is to remove a sitting president. Trump is not the president, and can't be removed. To hold a trial to remove Trump makes no sense.
That said, I hope that they hold the trial and it takes 2-months, then Trump gets acquitted, and runs again in 2024.

Thats is such a lame argument. The object is not to remove. A penalty is removal. Another penalty is also disqualification... the object of impeachment is to hold politicians accountable for their actions.

The argument is not "lame" if you can't dispute it. Its then called a "winning argument".
Calling an argument "lame" is lame. Read the Constitution.

I just did dispute it. You need to read more than the first sentence

1. The ONLY object of impeachment is to remove a sitting president or "civil Officer" from office, read the Constitution. 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.

The Constitution gives Congress the authority to impeach and remove the President,1 Vice President, and all federal civil officers for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors

I don’t know what you think you are proving with this. Would you say that a POTUS can do whatever he wants in his final weeks of office, commit any crime, without any possibility of penalty?

No. Were saying democrats can commit any crime without any possibility of penalty.

 

[Burgermeister]

If I understand the constitution correctly (I could be wrong), the primary purpose of the senate trial is to remove the president from office if convicted. After the conviction vote, a separate vote has to be taken to bar that person from holding federal office again. Conviction on the impeachment vote does not automatically result in baring from holding federal office again.

Since Trump is no longer president, could the senate skip the vote to convict and move directly to the vote to bar from holding federal office again? I sure lawyers can make the argument for either yes or no for this question, and which side a lawyer falls on usually depends on which side pays him.

Then you understand wrong. Additional functions are setting precendent and keeping the offender from holding office again.

You mean they are already shitting their pants about 2024. Another indication that the election was stolen if they want to prevent Trump from running again. What has been done, the censorship, intimidation and ridiculous hyperbole scream guilt. Biden is illegitimate.

The only people shitting their pants over 2024 are Republicans, who just watched the mentally ill dumbfuck poison their party for 4 years.

Actually, we shat our pants when Biden "won". I don't personally know any who have recovered enough to worry about, let alone shit their pants over 2024.

 

[dannyboys]

This has to be a mistake by the independent CBO, since several anonymous right-wing graduates of the prestigious law school USMB University told me that Trump cannot be convicted:

"The Constitution does not directly address whether Congress may impeach and try a former President for actions taken while in office," the six-page brief said. "Though the text is open to debate, it appears that most scholars who closely examined the question have concluded that Congress has authority to extend the impeachment process to officials who are no longer in office."

PolitiFact | Walker overreaches claiming Senate can’t convict Trump after departure

"Most of the experts I have listened to agree that eating dog shit every day will allow you to live forever."
You're a fucking idiot!

 

[dannyboys]

Ok, so trump was impeached "while sitting in office", so he is impeached AS president, and we be tried for actions AS president, which means if you are going to hold him accountable AS president, then the trial must be presided by the chief justice.

Unless you are suggesting he was impeached AS president but will be tried as a private citizen...this the reason for allowing a senator to preside.

Either he is going to be tried as president and is required to have the chief justice preside over the trial, or he is a private citizen and cannot be tried by the senate.

I saw a post of the senate trying a private citizen back in the 1930's. Tried, convicted, and sent to jail. The senate clearly has the power to try a private citizen, so Trump clearly can be tried as a private citizen.

I'm not familiar with it, but still, as was mentioned, this is all about things that happened while he was president. This whole process started when he WAS president, so it should continue in that same vein. He was impeached as president, he should be tried as president, and that requires Robert's to be the presiding judge.

Also, the presiding officer, or the judge, should be an neutral party. Leahey is assuredly not neutral.

Nancy did NOT send the impeachment article to the Senate until AFTER Trump left office!
THINK!

 

[Mac-7]

You believe signing 40 EOs and bypassing congress is governing?. No wonder this country is so screwed up.

Obama really glamorized the undemocratic EO’s

now biden is carrying government by dictatorial mandate to the next level

 

[Slade3200]

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments...When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside..."

I missed the part where it says, "If the Chief Justice is busy doing something more important, they can just give it to some old, fat political hack from Vermont."

I wonder what "most scholars" would say about that.

The Chief Justice wants no part of this Kangaroo Court. For good reasons.

The democrats are turning America into a banana republic

I’m not a fan of all the policies but at least the Dems are governing. It’s the Yahoo’s yelling sham and fake election fraud claims that are making a mockery of our country.

You believe signing 40 EOs and bypassing congress is governing?. No wonder this country is so screwed up.

How is it not governing?