Is the senate trial of a former president constitutional?

[BS Filter]

Of course it is, and the biggest names in conservative law have confirmed it.

He was impeached while in office. The trial could have been held while he was in office but Moscow Mitch wouldn’t allow it. Now he’s out and they’re whining that he should have been tried while still in office.

I liked the argument that if they convicted Trump while he was president and removed him from office, he would be a private citizen when they continued the trial to determine if he should be barred from future office.

The argument you can't try a private citizen therefore fails.

Also, all through Impeachment #1 they cried that “who are we to decide - let the voters decide in November “. Then the voters decided and they still claim they can’t impeach him.

He's impeached twice. Moron.

 

[BS Filter]

You think that 67 Senators will vote to impeach?

The House impeached. The Senate either convicts or acquits.

 

[peach174]

You think that 67 Senators will vote to impeach?

The House impeached. The Senate either convicts or acquits.

Yes convict or aquit on impeachment of the house.

 

[Circe]

No, of course it's not constitutional. We've lost our Constitution: hasn't anyone but me noticed that?

This is a Soviet-style Show Trial, duh.

 

[Nostra]

Yep. Was Peter Fonda guilty for saying Barron Trump should be ripped from his mother's arms and put in a cage with pedophiles?

The proof of incitement is clear. If somebody put Barron Trump in a cage, like Peter Fonda told them to do, he would be guilty of inciting them to do it.

Trump never said anything about violence.

A minor detail the fascist Dimwingers must ignore completely.

 

[schmidlap]

Deadly "insurrection"?

In your hallucinatory state perhaps. Pray you never see an actual insurrection.

Both sides are well aware of what caused it. It wasn't Trump.

Desperate denial by Tump bum kissers fails.

Loser incited his goons to violently attack our government because he lost a democratic election. People died.

Cry Baby Loser's pathetic attempts to throw his goons under the bus exposes him as a lying coward. His inevitable partisan acquittal does not negate the irrefutable evidence for most decent, law-abiding Americans.

... Trump didn’t just foment the insurrection with weeks of false rhetoric about a stolen election, they argued; he then sat on his hands during the riots and ignored pleas for aid until hours after the threat had metastasized and the Capitol was overrun. Even when he did respond, Trump appeared to excuse the violence, they allege.​

​

“In an astonishing act of further incitement and betrayal, President Trump denounced his own Vice President on Twitter at the very time the mob hunted him through the halls of the Capitol.”...​

​

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) shook his head when Trump told the rioters, “we love you.”​

​

Senate votes to approve constitutionality of Trump’s trial

Several senators were seen shaking their heads as scenes of the insurrection were played.

www.politico.com

​

 

[schmidlap]

No, of course it's not constitutional. We've lost our Constitution: hasn't anyone but me noticed that?

This is a Soviet-style Show Trial, duh.

The absurdity that the Founding Fathers intended to license disgruntled lame-donald-duck presidents to incite insurrections against the United States government with impunity is an impotent attempt to avoid confronting the truth.

Over 170 legal scholars, setting forth the reasons why impeachment and trial of officials who have left office is in fact constitutional.​

​

The list of signers is notable for its ideological diversity—unusual in an era when legal scholars' views on controversial issues are often polarized along ideological lines. Notable conservative and libertarian signers include Steve Calabresi (co-founder of the Federalist Society, and leading academic expert on executive power), Michael Stokes Paulsen, and my co-bloggers Jonathan Adler and Sasha Volokh:​

​

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000177-2646-de27-a5f7-3fe714ac0000

 

[j-mac]

“None of this would have happened without the President.
The President could have immediately and forcefully
intervened to stop the violence. He did not.
There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States
of his office and his oath to the Constitution.”
​

Is that what Rachel, and Don told you?

I don't know who your "Rachel" and "Don" are, but the cogent words are those of senior Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney.

I support most Americans in the matter.

Poll: Majority favor conviction as Trump impeachment trial begins

Poll: Majority favor conviction as Trump impeachment trial begins

Oh, so because it's Liz Cheney that's supposed to sway me? Pro tip there buddy, we aren't all lock step like you people on the radical left...

 

[Unkotare]

Toro is an uneducated and illiterate parrot of the dummies who make up the Goebbels media

Politics aside, he is clearly more intelligent than you, and more of an American than you could ever hope to be.

You have little education in anything and you’re a “ weak , broken down horse “

That's a lot of talk from an unstable misfit who compares so unfavorably to just about everyone on this site other than sealybobo and LAfan. But if you want to compare, by all means...

 

[Fueri]

Doesn't matter if it is or isn't, not to the dems either. Not this time and not last time.

They've got the votes to move it, so they did.

They don't have the votes to get a conviction, so they won't

These pricks don't care about the constitution at this point, any of them, it's all about the power plays and angles. The Constitution is a backdrop and a handy device of manipulation and nothing more.

 

[BS Filter]

Deadly "insurrection"?

In your hallucinatory state perhaps. Pray you never see an actual insurrection.

Both sides are well aware of what caused it. It wasn't Trump.

Desperate denial by Tump bum kissers fails.

Loser incited his goons to violently attack our government because he lost a democratic election. People died.

Cry Baby Loser's pathetic attempts to throw his goons under the bus exposes him as a lying coward. His inevitable partisan acquittal does not negate the irrefutable evidence for most decent, law-abiding Americans.

... Trump didn’t just foment the insurrection with weeks of false rhetoric about a stolen election, they argued; he then sat on his hands during the riots and ignored pleas for aid until hours after the threat had metastasized and the Capitol was overrun. Even when he did respond, Trump appeared to excuse the violence, they allege.​

​

“In an astonishing act of further incitement and betrayal, President Trump denounced his own Vice President on Twitter at the very time the mob hunted him through the halls of the Capitol.”...​

​

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) shook his head when Trump told the rioters, “we love you.”​

​

Senate votes to approve constitutionality of Trump’s trial

Several senators were seen shaking their heads as scenes of the insurrection were played.

www.politico.com

​

What a shit show by a bunch of drama queens. Trump never told anyone to be violent.

 

[peach174]

Doesn't matter if it is or isn't, not to the dems either. Not this time and not last time.

They've got the votes to move it, so they did.

They don't have the votes to get a conviction, so they won't

These pricks don't care about the constitution at this point, any of them, it's all about the power plays and angles. The Constitution is a backdrop and a handy device of manipulation and nothing more.

Yep, the 1%rich rulers of the world have won.

 

[Faun]

I caught part of Chuck Schumers argument, and it proves the senate trial isn't barred by the impeached person no longer being in office.

From the Constitution:


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.

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: but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law.

Under Trumps lawyers interpretation, that when the impeached becomes a private citizen the trial becomes unconstitutional. So let's test if this is a legitimate position.

There are two judgments the senate can make. Removal from office, and disqualification from future office. If the first judgement is removal from office, Trumps lawyers position would bar them from imposing a second judgment. Since once the first judgement was rendered, the impeached, having been removed, would at that point be a private citizen, and by Trumps lawyers position, the senate could not continue the trial, or impose an additional judgment.

As the constitution declares the senate can make both judgments, if Trumps lawyers position would prevent that, that means their position must be invalid.

It's clear the constitution requires if the senate renders judgment to remove a sitting president, their second judgment would be on a private citizen. Hence passing judgment on a private citizen must be constitutional.

"Is the senate trial of a former president constitutional?"

The Senate says, "yes!"

 

[Lakhota]

Is the senate trial of a former president constitutional?

YES! The Senate confirmed that with a 56-44 vote. Therefore, the question is now moot.

Senate Votes To Affirm Constitutionality Of Trying A Former President

 

[Faun]

Deadly "insurrection"?

In your hallucinatory state perhaps. Pray you never see an actual insurrection.

Both sides are well aware of what caused it. It wasn't Trump.

Desperate denial by Tump bum kissers fails.

Loser incited his goons to violently attack our government because he lost a democratic election. People died.

Cry Baby Loser's pathetic attempts to throw his goons under the bus exposes him as a lying coward. His inevitable partisan acquittal does not negate the irrefutable evidence for most decent, law-abiding Americans.

... Trump didn’t just foment the insurrection with weeks of false rhetoric about a stolen election, they argued; he then sat on his hands during the riots and ignored pleas for aid until hours after the threat had metastasized and the Capitol was overrun. Even when he did respond, Trump appeared to excuse the violence, they allege.​

​

“In an astonishing act of further incitement and betrayal, President Trump denounced his own Vice President on Twitter at the very time the mob hunted him through the halls of the Capitol.”...​

​

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) shook his head when Trump told the rioters, “we love you.”​

​

Senate votes to approve constitutionality of Trump’s trial

Several senators were seen shaking their heads as scenes of the insurrection were played.

www.politico.com

​

What a shit show by a bunch of drama queens. Trump never told anyone to be violent.

"we are listening to Trump, and he's your boss!"

Seems they got the message.

 

[schmidlap]

“None of this would have happened without the President.
The President could have immediately and forcefully
intervened to stop the violence. He did not.
There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States
of his office and his oath to the Constitution.”​

Oh, so because it's Liz Cheney that's supposed to sway me?

Reason does not "sway" the cult.

Their failed casino operator and faded reality-tv performer could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and the bum kissers would gush over what a great shot the Loser is.

 

[schmidlap]

What a shit show by a bunch of drama queens. Trump never told anyone to be violent.

He lied to them and his lies were their acknowledged pretext for their violent insurrection.

Several Trump goons who were indicted openly admitted that they were following his lead.