Is The Pending Impeachment Trial of Donald Trump UnConstitutional? (Poll)

[mascale]

The Impeachment of the current office-holder happened days ago, while it was timely. The trial can validate that the attempted removal from office was warranted. If the trial draws in a number of Republican votes to convict: Then that too, is public record. Republicans can commence an internal procedure to bar further election attempts within that Party. They can point to a record.

If a conviction happens, then disbarment from further federal office-holding is mostly certain.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(The Conspiracy Republican Faction is left with its platform, with basis in the Lincoln Administration(?). They can likely claim a partisan attempt number two: To kill off White People in the USA(?), just like Lincoln The Christian mantra even celebrates the concept, "Lives Don't Matter," but get thrown out of the household, instead: Matt 25: 14-30! More than one way can that play out(?)!)

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

He is an office holder, for just a few more days. But he will cease to be, long before this process could be completed.

I would have to say that the most recent impeachment process in the House was rather blatantly unconstitutional, in that it did not involve even a superficial pretense of due process as required by the Fifth Amendment. No evidence was presented, and no opportunity for the accused to offer any defense.

 

[kyzr]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

impeachment

www.law.cornell.edu

"...the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office."

So the impeachment trial, or not, is a win-win for Trump and the GOP, because the democrats will lose votes during the "illegal" trial.
It shows how stupid democrats are, the party that thinks the island of Guam will capsize, and are happy wasting the senate's time.

So what cards are left to play by both parties and Chief Justice Roberts?

There will be no Senate Hearing. There is no law to support convicting a president of a high crime when he's not even president anymore! The whole point of the conviction is to convict to remove him from office. If the Dems try to go forward with this and Roberts goes along, our SCOTUS is now as worthless and political as our other branches and I'll know Robert's tirade in refusing to hear Trump's case was purely political-- -- first Roberts created the dilemma of a riot at the Capitol over the unresolved election he refused to address then preside over an illegal impeachment with no charges, no witnesses, and no hearings that only happened because of his cowardess?

The whole point is not just to remove him from office. Impeachment also strips him of certain presidential privileges and prevents him from running for office again.

Agreed. But the Constitution doesn't say "remove and/or disqualify from future office". It says:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments....Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States;..."

So you and Pogo are in the camp of removal doesn't matter, you want him banned. OK, now if only Justice Roberts sees it that way you and the democrats are all set for trial.

It looks to me like the snippet you pasted says exactly what you’re saying it doesn’t say. Removal from office AND disqualification from holding any public office. What am I missing here?

If you are NOT IN OFFICE how can you be REMOVED? Trump will not be in office for the trial.
Can any ex-president be impeached for any perceived "abuse of power" just to prohibit him from public office?

 

[mascale]

Kyzr poster, illiterate as usual, fails as always. This time the matter is the timeline. The Office-Holder was impeached during the lawful term. The impeachment charges do not disappear once the term is completed. That requires the "Trial" part. The trial validates or dismisses the charges, not the term in office: Which will already be over. The procedure can also include a disbarment from further office-holding--also shown in writing.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(The Conspiracy Republican Faction is left with its platform, with basis in the Lincoln Administration(?). They can likely claim a partisan attempt number two: To kill off White People in the USA(?), just like Lincoln The Christian mantra even celebrates the concept, "Lives Don't Matter," but get thrown out of the household, instead: Matt 25: 14-30! More than one way can that play out(?)!)

 

[Pogo]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

impeachment

www.law.cornell.edu

"...the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office."

So the impeachment trial, or not, is a win-win for Trump and the GOP, because the democrats will lose votes during the "illegal" trial.
It shows how stupid democrats are, the party that thinks the island of Guam will capsize, and are happy wasting the senate's time.

So what cards are left to play by both parties and Chief Justice Roberts?

There will be no Senate Hearing. There is no law to support convicting a president of a high crime when he's not even president anymore! The whole point of the conviction is to convict to remove him from office. If the Dems try to go forward with this and Roberts goes along, our SCOTUS is now as worthless and political as our other branches and I'll know Robert's tirade in refusing to hear Trump's case was purely political-- -- first Roberts created the dilemma of a riot at the Capitol over the unresolved election he refused to address then preside over an illegal impeachment with no charges, no witnesses, and no hearings that only happened because of his cowardess?

The whole point is not just to remove him from office. Impeachment also strips him of certain presidential privileges and prevents him from running for office again.

Agreed. But the Constitution doesn't say "remove and/or disqualify from future office". It says:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments....Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States;..."

So you and Pogo are in the camp of removal doesn't matter, you want him banned. OK, now if only Justice Roberts sees it that way you and the democrats are all set for trial.

See the part that says "shall not extend further than" in your own quote?

"shall not extend further than"
I interpret that to mean he can't be hanged or sent to prison.

What do you think it means?

" shall not extend further than to [sic] (ONE) removal from Office, and (TWO) disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor

It means those are the two limitations within the prescribed penalties. It doesn't mean they BOTH have to exist simultaneously.

 

[Pogo]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

impeachment

www.law.cornell.edu

"...the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office."

So the impeachment trial, or not, is a win-win for Trump and the GOP, because the democrats will lose votes during the "illegal" trial.
It shows how stupid democrats are, the party that thinks the island of Guam will capsize, and are happy wasting the senate's time.

So what cards are left to play by both parties and Chief Justice Roberts?

There will be no Senate Hearing. There is no law to support convicting a president of a high crime when he's not even president anymore! The whole point of the conviction is to convict to remove him from office. If the Dems try to go forward with this and Roberts goes along, our SCOTUS is now as worthless and political as our other branches and I'll know Robert's tirade in refusing to hear Trump's case was purely political-- -- first Roberts created the dilemma of a riot at the Capitol over the unresolved election he refused to address then preside over an illegal impeachment with no charges, no witnesses, and no hearings that only happened because of his cowardess?

The whole point is not just to remove him from office. Impeachment also strips him of certain presidential privileges and prevents him from running for office again.

Agreed. But the Constitution doesn't say "remove and/or disqualify from future office". It says:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments....Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States;..."

So you and Pogo are in the camp of removal doesn't matter, you want him banned. OK, now if only Justice Roberts sees it that way you and the democrats are all set for trial.

It looks to me like the snippet you pasted says exactly what you’re saying it doesn’t say. Removal from office AND disqualification from holding any public office. What am I missing here?

If you are NOT IN OFFICE how can you be REMOVED? Trump will not be in office for the trial.
Can any ex-president be impeached for any perceived "abuse of power" just to prohibit him from public office?

Why not?
Removal from office will not be necessary. That leaves the second penalty.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Pelosi has not forwarded it to the Senate yet

Last I read, it will arrive next week.

Too late!

 

[kyzr]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

impeachment

www.law.cornell.edu

"...the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office."

So the impeachment trial, or not, is a win-win for Trump and the GOP, because the democrats will lose votes during the "illegal" trial.
It shows how stupid democrats are, the party that thinks the island of Guam will capsize, and are happy wasting the senate's time.

So what cards are left to play by both parties and Chief Justice Roberts?

There will be no Senate Hearing. There is no law to support convicting a president of a high crime when he's not even president anymore! The whole point of the conviction is to convict to remove him from office. If the Dems try to go forward with this and Roberts goes along, our SCOTUS is now as worthless and political as our other branches and I'll know Robert's tirade in refusing to hear Trump's case was purely political-- -- first Roberts created the dilemma of a riot at the Capitol over the unresolved election he refused to address then preside over an illegal impeachment with no charges, no witnesses, and no hearings that only happened because of his cowardess?

The whole point is not just to remove him from office. Impeachment also strips him of certain presidential privileges and prevents him from running for office again.

Agreed. But the Constitution doesn't say "remove and/or disqualify from future office". It says:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments....Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States;..."

So you and Pogo are in the camp of removal doesn't matter, you want him banned. OK, now if only Justice Roberts sees it that way you and the democrats are all set for trial.

See the part that says "shall not extend further than" in your own quote?

"shall not extend further than"
I interpret that to mean he can't be hanged or sent to prison.

What do you think it means?

" shall not extend further than to [sic] (ONE) removal from Office, and (TWO) disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor

It means those are the two limitations within the prescribed penalties. It doesn't mean they BOTH have to exist simultaneously.

I see your interpretation. Its a beautiful theory killed by that ugly little AND

A famous quote from a Chief Justice went something like: "The Constitution says exactly what we say it says."
You may be right, that's why I wrote the OP. To debate the Senate trial, will it happen, is it constitutional, etc.

 

[mascale]

Illiterate poster, Admiral Rockwell Tory, fails as usual. The charges do not disappear on the basis that the term is ended. Anyone murdered is still dead. No timeline has passed. Since Admiral Rockwell Tory poster is better said more a Conspiracy Faction Republican, then Ignorance of the Procedure in writing has basis only in the concept of a Constitutional Conspiracy(?)! The Constitution is not meant to be honored, when there is alternative Conspiracy Contention on which to rely. There is the factional belief!.

The Charges are upheld or dismissed in a trial verdict. In the event of a majority conviction, The Constitutional procedure is specific and in writing. Disbarment from further federal office-holding likely would happen.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(The Conspiracy Republican Faction is left with its platform, with basis in the Lincoln Administration(?). They can likely claim a partisan attempt number two: To kill off White People in the USA(?), just like Lincoln The Christian mantra even celebrates the concept, "Lives Don't Matter," but get thrown out of the household, instead: Matt 25: 14-30! More than one way can that play out(?)!

 

[kyzr]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

impeachment

www.law.cornell.edu

"...the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office."

So the impeachment trial, or not, is a win-win for Trump and the GOP, because the democrats will lose votes during the "illegal" trial.
It shows how stupid democrats are, the party that thinks the island of Guam will capsize, and are happy wasting the senate's time.

So what cards are left to play by both parties and Chief Justice Roberts?

There will be no Senate Hearing. There is no law to support convicting a president of a high crime when he's not even president anymore! The whole point of the conviction is to convict to remove him from office. If the Dems try to go forward with this and Roberts goes along, our SCOTUS is now as worthless and political as our other branches and I'll know Robert's tirade in refusing to hear Trump's case was purely political-- -- first Roberts created the dilemma of a riot at the Capitol over the unresolved election he refused to address then preside over an illegal impeachment with no charges, no witnesses, and no hearings that only happened because of his cowardess?

The whole point is not just to remove him from office. Impeachment also strips him of certain presidential privileges and prevents him from running for office again.

Agreed. But the Constitution doesn't say "remove and/or disqualify from future office". It says:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments....Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States;..."

So you and Pogo are in the camp of removal doesn't matter, you want him banned. OK, now if only Justice Roberts sees it that way you and the democrats are all set for trial.

It looks to me like the snippet you pasted says exactly what you’re saying it doesn’t say. Removal from office AND disqualification from holding any public office. What am I missing here?

If you are NOT IN OFFICE how can you be REMOVED? Trump will not be in office for the trial.
Can any ex-president be impeached for any perceived "abuse of power" just to prohibit him from public office?

Why not?
Removal from office will not be necessary. That leaves the second penalty.

McConnell said that he's open to the trial and examining the evidence.
I see his point, the trial is the best use of the senate's time from the GOP perspective.
Mitch will gladly throw Trump under the bus.
So it looks to me that the GOP will not try to dispute the Constitutionality of the trial.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

impeachment

www.law.cornell.edu

"...the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office."

So the impeachment trial, or not, is a win-win for Trump and the GOP, because the democrats will lose votes during the "illegal" trial.
It shows how stupid democrats are, the party that thinks the island of Guam will capsize, and are happy wasting the senate's time.

So what cards are left to play by both parties and Chief Justice Roberts?

Don't be so sure.. Trump is toxic .. He and his sons have said they will destroy the GOP. The Rep party has no real option but to purge the party of Trumps by making sure Donald can never hold office again. Remember, Trump has always been famous for revenge. He hates the Republicans because they didn't save him.

Link? (I don't want something pulled out or your ass or theorized by a CNN talking head.)

 

[Pogo]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

impeachment

www.law.cornell.edu

"...the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office."

So the impeachment trial, or not, is a win-win for Trump and the GOP, because the democrats will lose votes during the "illegal" trial.
It shows how stupid democrats are, the party that thinks the island of Guam will capsize, and are happy wasting the senate's time.

So what cards are left to play by both parties and Chief Justice Roberts?

There will be no Senate Hearing. There is no law to support convicting a president of a high crime when he's not even president anymore! The whole point of the conviction is to convict to remove him from office. If the Dems try to go forward with this and Roberts goes along, our SCOTUS is now as worthless and political as our other branches and I'll know Robert's tirade in refusing to hear Trump's case was purely political-- -- first Roberts created the dilemma of a riot at the Capitol over the unresolved election he refused to address then preside over an illegal impeachment with no charges, no witnesses, and no hearings that only happened because of his cowardess?

The whole point is not just to remove him from office. Impeachment also strips him of certain presidential privileges and prevents him from running for office again.

Agreed. But the Constitution doesn't say "remove and/or disqualify from future office". It says:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments....Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States;..."

So you and Pogo are in the camp of removal doesn't matter, you want him banned. OK, now if only Justice Roberts sees it that way you and the democrats are all set for trial.

See the part that says "shall not extend further than" in your own quote?

"shall not extend further than"
I interpret that to mean he can't be hanged or sent to prison.

What do you think it means?

" shall not extend further than to [sic] (ONE) removal from Office, and (TWO) disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor

It means those are the two limitations within the prescribed penalties. It doesn't mean they BOTH have to exist simultaneously.

I see your interpretation. Its a beautiful theory killed by that ugly little AND

A famous quote from a Chief Justice went something like: "The Constitution says exactly what we say it says."
You may be right, that's why I wrote the OP. To debate the Senate trial, will it happen, is it constitutional, etc.

"AND", exactly. It means there are two penalties you can charge ---- you can remove the subject from office AND you can bar him from future office, but you can't do any more than that. You can do the one, AND you can do the other. You can do both if you want. You're not REQUIRED to do EITHER.

 

[kyzr]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

impeachment

www.law.cornell.edu

"...the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office."

So the impeachment trial, or not, is a win-win for Trump and the GOP, because the democrats will lose votes during the "illegal" trial.
It shows how stupid democrats are, the party that thinks the island of Guam will capsize, and are happy wasting the senate's time.

So what cards are left to play by both parties and Chief Justice Roberts?

There will be no Senate Hearing. There is no law to support convicting a president of a high crime when he's not even president anymore! The whole point of the conviction is to convict to remove him from office. If the Dems try to go forward with this and Roberts goes along, our SCOTUS is now as worthless and political as our other branches and I'll know Robert's tirade in refusing to hear Trump's case was purely political-- -- first Roberts created the dilemma of a riot at the Capitol over the unresolved election he refused to address then preside over an illegal impeachment with no charges, no witnesses, and no hearings that only happened because of his cowardess?

The whole point is not just to remove him from office. Impeachment also strips him of certain presidential privileges and prevents him from running for office again.

Agreed. But the Constitution doesn't say "remove and/or disqualify from future office". It says:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments....Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States;..."

So you and Pogo are in the camp of removal doesn't matter, you want him banned. OK, now if only Justice Roberts sees it that way you and the democrats are all set for trial.

See the part that says "shall not extend further than" in your own quote?

"shall not extend further than"
I interpret that to mean he can't be hanged or sent to prison.

What do you think it means?

" shall not extend further than to [sic] (ONE) removal from Office, and (TWO) disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor

It means those are the two limitations within the prescribed penalties. It doesn't mean they BOTH have to exist simultaneously.

I see your interpretation. Its a beautiful theory killed by that ugly little AND

A famous quote from a Chief Justice went something like: "The Constitution says exactly what we say it says."
You may be right, that's why I wrote the OP. To debate the Senate trial, will it happen, is it constitutional, etc.

"AND", exactly. It means there are two penalties you can charge ---- you can remove the subject from office AND you can bar him from future office, but you can't do any more than that. You can do the one, AND you can do the other. You can do both if you want. You're not REQUIRED to do EITHER.

Thanks for the debate. Keep that partisan chip off your shoulder.

 

[d0gbreath]

Other, Mitch will convene the Senate on the 19th, allow for a secret ballot, and drop kick donald into next week, and out of our lives permanently. That's what I'm hoping for anyway.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

They cannot impeach him. They are trying to set up another false flag that this attempt to impeach him is to give a motive to those they are going to set up. That those conservatives that are going to Biden's event are the pasties. That they are going to put the blame on them whatever the Dems orchestrated on that day.
But Pres. Trump knows that they cannot impeach him again. That is why he went back to work while they are spreading fake news.

Bad news. Trump WAS impeached. The Dems mare it irrelevant.

 

[Pogo]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

impeachment

www.law.cornell.edu

"...the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office."

So the impeachment trial, or not, is a win-win for Trump and the GOP, because the democrats will lose votes during the "illegal" trial.
It shows how stupid democrats are, the party that thinks the island of Guam will capsize, and are happy wasting the senate's time.

So what cards are left to play by both parties and Chief Justice Roberts?

There will be no Senate Hearing. There is no law to support convicting a president of a high crime when he's not even president anymore! The whole point of the conviction is to convict to remove him from office. If the Dems try to go forward with this and Roberts goes along, our SCOTUS is now as worthless and political as our other branches and I'll know Robert's tirade in refusing to hear Trump's case was purely political-- -- first Roberts created the dilemma of a riot at the Capitol over the unresolved election he refused to address then preside over an illegal impeachment with no charges, no witnesses, and no hearings that only happened because of his cowardess?

The whole point is not just to remove him from office. Impeachment also strips him of certain presidential privileges and prevents him from running for office again.

Agreed. But the Constitution doesn't say "remove and/or disqualify from future office". It says:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments....Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States;..."

So you and Pogo are in the camp of removal doesn't matter, you want him banned. OK, now if only Justice Roberts sees it that way you and the democrats are all set for trial.

See the part that says "shall not extend further than" in your own quote?

"shall not extend further than"
I interpret that to mean he can't be hanged or sent to prison.

What do you think it means?

" shall not extend further than to [sic] (ONE) removal from Office, and (TWO) disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor

It means those are the two limitations within the prescribed penalties. It doesn't mean they BOTH have to exist simultaneously.

I see your interpretation. Its a beautiful theory killed by that ugly little AND

A famous quote from a Chief Justice went something like: "The Constitution says exactly what we say it says."
You may be right, that's why I wrote the OP. To debate the Senate trial, will it happen, is it constitutional, etc.

"AND", exactly. It means there are two penalties you can charge ---- you can remove the subject from office AND you can bar him from future office, but you can't do any more than that. You can do the one, AND you can do the other. You can do both if you want. You're not REQUIRED to do EITHER.

Thanks for the debate. Keep that partisan chip off your shoulder.

"Partisan" doesn't even enter into it. This is an impeachment trial. You don't impeach somebody because he's on a particular political "side". You impeach because of what he DID.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Other, Mitch will convene the Senate on the 19th, allow for a secret ballot, and drop kick donald into next week, and out of our lives permanently. That's what I'm hoping for anyway.

In your dreams!

 

[Pogo]

They cannot impeach him. They are trying to set up another false flag that this attempt to impeach him is to give a motive to those they are going to set up. That those conservatives that are going to Biden's event are the pasties. That they are going to put the blame on them whatever the Dems orchestrated on that day.
But Pres. Trump knows that they cannot impeach him again. That is why he went back to work while they are spreading fake news.

Bad news. Trump WAS impeached. The Dems mare it irrelevant.

And the horse he rode in on.

Oh by the way that impeachment the other day? It was voted in by Democrats AND Republicans.

 

[Lesh]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

impeachment

www.law.cornell.edu

"...the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office."

So the impeachment trial, or not, is a win-win for Trump and the GOP, because the democrats will lose votes during the "illegal" trial.
It shows how stupid democrats are, the party that thinks the island of Guam will capsize, and are happy wasting the senate's time.

So what cards are left to play by both parties and Chief Justice Roberts?

There is precedent for Impeachment and trial held after having left office. Secretary of War Belknap. Look it up

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Although I would love for the democrats to waste a month or two on an impeachment trial that will never get 67 votes, I need to point out the simple fact that the US Constitution limits impeachment to "office holders", which Trump is not.

impeachment

www.law.cornell.edu

"...the American impeachment process is remedial, not penal: it is limited to office holders, and judgments are limited to no more than removal from office and disqualification to hold future office."

So the impeachment trial, or not, is a win-win for Trump and the GOP, because the democrats will lose votes during the "illegal" trial.
It shows how stupid democrats are, the party that thinks the island of Guam will capsize, and are happy wasting the senate's time.

So what cards are left to play by both parties and Chief Justice Roberts?

There is precedent for Impeachment and trial held after having left office. Secretary of War Belknap. Look it up

He was acquitted primarily because his trial was unconstitutional.