Senate cannot try a private citizen !!!

[Sunsettommy]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

The Senate disagrees. And the authority over impeachment trials, the Constitution definitely picks a team between the U.S. Senate or Johathon Mosely.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

As demonstrated by both Trump's impending impeachment trial and the impeachment trial of William Belknap after he left office.

The Constitution doesn't agree with you:

Article I, Section 3, that: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office......

bolding mine

=======

The impeachment process is for a singular purpose, to remove someone from office. Trump is already out of office on January 20, ergo the impeachment process (started on January 12) was already unnecessary, since the Congress ruled on January 6, that Biden is the President Elect and took oath of office on January 20.

 

[Faun]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

The Senate disagrees. And the authority over impeachment trials, the Constitution definitely picks a team between the U.S. Senate or Johathon Mosely.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

As demonstrated by both Trump's impending impeachment trial and the impeachment trial of William Belknap after he left office.

It doesn't matter whether the Senate disagrees, moron. The Senate doesn't determine the meaning of the Constitution. You're like the drunk searching for his keys under the lamp post because the light is better there.

LOLOL

Fucking moron ...

The Senate shall have the sole Power...​

 

[Nostra]

So what? Neither did Johnson's nor Clinton's. It's still a stain on a presidency that can't be washed away.

There have been four presidential impeachments. And half of them were Trump.

YOu are right. He has 2. However, it just shows you how wrong the process was?

Oh? Why is that?

Do you think impeachment is for jaywalking?

No, now why didn't you answer the question I asked? Why was the impeachment process wrong?

Nothing wrong with the process. Impeachment is a tool to remove an official without assassin the official because he/she is incompetent or moralless. Now, someone just devalues it.

Removal from office is not the only purpose of impeachment. Disqualification from holding a federal office in the future is also a purpose of impeachment. How is that wrong?

You don’t have the votes.

Just a Dimwinger temper tantrum like the one you are throwing in this thread.

This thread isn't about whether or not he will be convicted. I highly doubt he will be. This thread is about whether or not his impeachment can be constitutionally tried in the Senate. As always, you prove to be utterly confused.

Unconstitutional Dimwinger temper tantrum, Chester.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

Where is the part that claims a trial is illegal?

He isn't in office, dummy!

Article I, Section 3

“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.”

bolding mine

 

[Faun]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

The Senate disagrees. And the authority over impeachment trials, the Constitution definitely picks a team between the U.S. Senate or Johathon Mosely.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

As demonstrated by both Trump's impending impeachment trial and the impeachment trial of William Belknap after he left office.

The Constitution doesn't agree with you:

Article I, Section 3, that: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office......

bolding mine

=======

The impeachment process is for a singular purpose, to remove someone from office. Trump is already out of office on January 20, ergo the impeachment process (started on January 12) was already unnecessary, since the Congress ruled on January 6, that Biden is the President Elect and took oath of office on January 20.

It is not for a singular purpose which is why you intentionally edited out the rest of that sentence; which actually reads...

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 ​

 

[Faun]

So what? Neither did Johnson's nor Clinton's. It's still a stain on a presidency that can't be washed away.

There have been four presidential impeachments. And half of them were Trump.

YOu are right. He has 2. However, it just shows you how wrong the process was?

Oh? Why is that?

Do you think impeachment is for jaywalking?

No, now why didn't you answer the question I asked? Why was the impeachment process wrong?

Nothing wrong with the process. Impeachment is a tool to remove an official without assassin the official because he/she is incompetent or moralless. Now, someone just devalues it.

Removal from office is not the only purpose of impeachment. Disqualification from holding a federal office in the future is also a purpose of impeachment. How is that wrong?

You don’t have the votes.

Just a Dimwinger temper tantrum like the one you are throwing in this thread.

This thread isn't about whether or not he will be convicted. I highly doubt he will be. This thread is about whether or not his impeachment can be constitutionally tried in the Senate. As always, you prove to be utterly confused.

Unconstitutional Dimwinger temper tantrum, Chester.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

The Senate disagrees. And the authority over impeachment trials, the Constitution definitely picks a team between the U.S. Senate or Johathon Mosely.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

As demonstrated by both Trump's impending impeachment trial and the impeachment trial of William Belknap after he left office.

It doesn't matter whether the Senate disagrees, moron. The Senate doesn't determine the meaning of the Constitution. You're like the drunk searching for his keys under the lamp post because the light is better there.

LOLOL

Fucking moron ...

The Senate shall have the sole Power...​

Which only applies to people still IN OFFICE!

 

[Faun]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

Where is the part that claims a trial is illegal?

He isn't in office, dummy!

Article I, Section 3

“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.”

bolding mine

Doesn't matter that he's not in office. Read this for clarity...

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

... then see if you can explain why Trump's impeachment is exempt from "ALL."

 

[Faun]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

The Senate disagrees. And the authority over impeachment trials, the Constitution definitely picks a team between the U.S. Senate or Johathon Mosely.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

As demonstrated by both Trump's impending impeachment trial and the impeachment trial of William Belknap after he left office.

It doesn't matter whether the Senate disagrees, moron. The Senate doesn't determine the meaning of the Constitution. You're like the drunk searching for his keys under the lamp post because the light is better there.

LOLOL

Fucking moron ...

The Senate shall have the sole Power...​

Which only applies to people still IN OFFICE!

Nope, it applies to "ALL" impeachments. There's absolutely no such text in the Constitution which exempts Trump's trial.

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.​

 

[Sunsettommy]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

The Senate disagrees. And the authority over impeachment trials, the Constitution definitely picks a team between the U.S. Senate or Johathon Mosely.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

As demonstrated by both Trump's impending impeachment trial and the impeachment trial of William Belknap after he left office.

The Constitution doesn't agree with you:

Article I, Section 3, that: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office......

bolding mine

=======

The impeachment process is for a singular purpose, to remove someone from office. Trump is already out of office on January 20, ergo the impeachment process (started on January 12) was already unnecessary, since the Congress ruled on January 6, that Biden is the President Elect and took oath of office on January 20.

It is not for a singular purpose which is why you intentionally edited out the rest of that sentence; which actually reads...

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 ​

Your stupidity is off the charts:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office

He is no longer in office you dumb twit, it no longer applies anymore thus the Trial is dead on arrival since he is NO LONGER IN OFFICE. He isn't there to be removed.

The DOJ can charge him with any crimes while he is citizen, but there is so far no indication they are going to do that.

 

[mascale]

The defendant is a part of a presumptively qualified class of private citizen who needs to be disqualified from the office for cause!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Matt 25: 14-30 itself: Offers clarity in the Matter of the Christian Message! Red States have recently created, "Safe Haven" Baby Abandonment boxes. At least one Holy Father historically had created them as alternative to drowning the newborn in the Tiber River! Red State Christianity has become far more clear of message: During the Trumped-Up Administration, starting 2016!)

 

[Skylar]

"It's Constitutional because I WAAAAAANT IIIIIIT!!"

Impeachment
A process that is used to charge, try, and remove public officials for misconduct while in office.

impeachment

Definition of impeachment in the Legal Dictionary by The Free Dictionary

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

It's a bitch when all those messy words you tried to use to get what you want turn out to actually mean things.

Try again, troll. And the next time you want to quote the Constitution, try to understand what it says.

Yeah, I'll stick with the constitution rather than 'the free dictionary.com'.

And these are the punishments associated with the impeachment per the Constitution:

"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"

Its that second part that's relevant to our discussion.

In other words the people must be prevented from voting.

We cannot impeach a political office holder after his term is over no matter what the crime is. Even if he's in prison. Removal from office and a prohibition against running again is a single political act.

Democrat communists just don't trust people to vote the way they want the vote to go.

You're wrong again. Those require separate votes in the Senate. They are not a "single political act."

Judgment - Removal and Disqualification

, of the US Constitution: Analysis and Interpretation

law.justia.com

Nope, The Senate votes "guilty" or "not guilty." It doesn't have a separate to disqualify him from holding office in the future.

Says you, citing yourself as the sole legal authority. Again, you have no idea what you're talking about. Back in reality, the Constitution only states that removal requires the 2/3 majority. There is no such requirement for disqualification.

The Senate has found -twice- that a simple majority is all that is necessary for disqualification.

Senate imposed disqualification twice, on Judges Humphreys and Archbald. In the Humphreys trial the Senate determined that the issues of removal and disqualification are divisible

So your claim that they both have to be decided in a single vote is provable nonsense. Worse, the Senate determined that a simple majority is all that's necessary to disqualify.

Precedents Of The House Of Representatives § 2397 (1907), and in the Archbald trial the Senate imposed judgment of disqualification by vote of 39 to 35.

So yes, the issues of removal and disqualification are divisible. And yes, disqualification requires only a simple majority.

Which the democrats have.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Again. That question has been raised before and has been rejected.

In a most disingenuous way. The left has won a battle by stealing an election because they were frightened
by Donald Trump but they cannot win a war without massive popular support.

Joe Biden, Nan Pelosi, Kamala Harris are anchors around the necks of democrats.

 

[bripat9643]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

Where is the part that claims a trial is illegal?

"When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside"

 

[bripat9643]

"It's Constitutional because I WAAAAAANT IIIIIIT!!"

Impeachment
A process that is used to charge, try, and remove public officials for misconduct while in office.

impeachment

Definition of impeachment in the Legal Dictionary by The Free Dictionary

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

It's a bitch when all those messy words you tried to use to get what you want turn out to actually mean things.

Try again, troll. And the next time you want to quote the Constitution, try to understand what it says.

Yeah, I'll stick with the constitution rather than 'the free dictionary.com'.

And these are the punishments associated with the impeachment per the Constitution:

"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"

Its that second part that's relevant to our discussion.

In other words the people must be prevented from voting.

We cannot impeach a political office holder after his term is over no matter what the crime is. Even if he's in prison. Removal from office and a prohibition against running again is a single political act.

Democrat communists just don't trust people to vote the way they want the vote to go.

You're wrong again. Those require separate votes in the Senate. They are not a "single political act."

Judgment - Removal and Disqualification

, of the US Constitution: Analysis and Interpretation

law.justia.com

Nope, The Senate votes "guilty" or "not guilty." It doesn't have a separate to disqualify him from holding office in the future.

Says you, citing yourself as the sole legal authority. Again, you have no idea what you're talking about. Back in reality, the Constitution only states that removal requires the 2/3 majority. There is no such requirement for disqualification.

The Senate has found -twice- that a simple majority is all that is necessary for disqualification.

Senate imposed disqualification twice, on Judges Humphreys and Archbald. In the Humphreys trial the Senate determined that the issues of removal and disqualification are divisible

So your claim that they both have to be decided in a single vote is provable nonsense. Worse, the Senate determined that a simple majority is all that's necessary to disqualify.

Precedents Of The House Of Representatives § 2397 (1907), and in the Archbald trial the Senate imposed judgment of disqualification by vote of 39 to 35.

So yes, the issues of removal and disqualification are divisible. And yes, disqualification requires only a simple majority.

Which the democrats have.

The Constitution says the Senate shall try the "PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES."

You keep trying to ignore that.

 

[Skylar]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

The Senate disagrees. And the authority over impeachment trials, the Constitution definitely picks a team between the U.S. Senate or Johathon Mosely.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

As demonstrated by both Trump's impending impeachment trial and the impeachment trial of William Belknap after he left office.

The Constitution doesn't agree with you:

Article I, Section 3, that: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office......

bolding mine

=======

The impeachment process is for a singular purpose, to remove someone from office. Trump is already out of office on January 20, ergo the impeachment process (started on January 12) was already unnecessary, since the Congress ruled on January 6, that Biden is the President Elect and took oath of office on January 20.

It is not for a singular purpose which is why you intentionally edited out the rest of that sentence; which actually reads...

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 ​

Your stupidity is off the charts:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office

He is no longer in office you dumb twit, it no longer applies anymore thus the Trial is dead on arrival since he is NO LONGER IN OFFICE. He isn't there to be removed.

The DOJ can charge him with any crimes while he is citizen, but there is so far no indication they are going to do that.

And when you finish the sentence you quoted, you demonstrate the absurdity of your argument:

"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"

And the Senate has already found that removal and disqualification are divisible. They can be voted on separately.

The former requires a 2/3 majority (which the democrats don't have...and is moot now anyway as Trump has left office).

The latter requires only a simple majority (which the democrats do have...and is very relevant to any future presidential runs Trump may be considering).

 

[Faun]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

The Senate disagrees. And the authority over impeachment trials, the Constitution definitely picks a team between the U.S. Senate or Johathon Mosely.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

As demonstrated by both Trump's impending impeachment trial and the impeachment trial of William Belknap after he left office.

The Constitution doesn't agree with you:

Article I, Section 3, that: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office......

bolding mine

=======

The impeachment process is for a singular purpose, to remove someone from office. Trump is already out of office on January 20, ergo the impeachment process (started on January 12) was already unnecessary, since the Congress ruled on January 6, that Biden is the President Elect and took oath of office on January 20.

It is not for a singular purpose which is why you intentionally edited out the rest of that sentence; which actually reads...

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 ​

Your stupidity is off the charts:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office

He is no longer in office you dumb twit, it no longer applies anymore thus the Trial is dead on arrival since he is NO LONGER IN OFFICE. He isn't there to be removed.

The DOJ can charge him with any crimes while he is citizen, but there is so far no indication they are going to do that.

Dumbfuck, what part of, "disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States," do you need explained to you? The punishment for impeachment is not "singular," as you falsely claimed. There can be a secondary punishment, which disqualifies him from holding office in the future. I suspect you even know that as you keep editing that clause out.

 

[Skylar]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

Where is the part that claims a trial is illegal?

"When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside"

And that's a requirement of the Chief Justice. Not on the Senate or the impeachment trial.

As demonstrated by the fact that Justice Roberts in NOT presiding over Trump's impeachment trial. Leahy is instead.

 

[bripat9643]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

The Senate disagrees. And the authority over impeachment trials, the Constitution definitely picks a team between the U.S. Senate or Johathon Mosely.

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation."

As demonstrated by both Trump's impending impeachment trial and the impeachment trial of William Belknap after he left office.

The Constitution doesn't agree with you:

Article I, Section 3, that: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office......

bolding mine

=======

The impeachment process is for a singular purpose, to remove someone from office. Trump is already out of office on January 20, ergo the impeachment process (started on January 12) was already unnecessary, since the Congress ruled on January 6, that Biden is the President Elect and took oath of office on January 20.

It is not for a singular purpose which is why you intentionally edited out the rest of that sentence; which actually reads...

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 ​

Your stupidity is off the charts:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office

He is no longer in office you dumb twit, it no longer applies anymore thus the Trial is dead on arrival since he is NO LONGER IN OFFICE. He isn't there to be removed.

The DOJ can charge him with any crimes while he is citizen, but there is so far no indication they are going to do that.

And when you finish the sentence you quoted, you demonstrate the absurdity of your argument:

"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"

And the Senate has already found that removal and disqualification are divisible. They can be voted on separately. The former requires a 2/3 majority (which the democrats don't have). The latter requires only a simple majority (which the democrats do have).

The Senate is not authorized to make any such judgment, you fucking moron.

 

[bripat9643]

Here is something not considered in the thread, it is part way down in this article that drives home the trial is illegal.

American Thinker


January 27, 2021
The Senate Cannot Impeach Donald Trump
By Jonathon Moseley

Excerpt:


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has delivered Articles of Impeachment of Donald J. Trump and the appointment of Impeachment Managers to the U.S. Senate on January 25. The Senate cannot legally hold a trial on impeachment of a President or other official who has already left office.

As we will watch, the Senate has extensive, long-established procedures -- but only as its own rules. The Senate must convene the next day at 1:00 P.M. But the Senate typically schedules the actual trial for later. Chuck Schumer says the trial will start February 8. Senate rules require a trial, whereas the Constitution only allows the Senate to hold a trial should they choose. No trial is required. But in any trial, a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be taken up first.

Remember: Democrats in the House were conducting impeachment hearings of President Richard Nixon for some serious crimes. It appeared that the votes were there in the Senate to remove Nixon from office. But when Nixon resigned, the entire effort stopped. Democrats then believed that they did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with impeachment. In December 2019, when Rep. Matt Gaetz suggested impeaching Barack Obama no longer in office, the Washington Post “fact checked” the idea as unlikely, with more professors arguing against than for.

LINK

==========

The Constitution says in Article I, Section 3, that: “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.”


Trump is already out of office, the Senate Trial is no longer valid.

Where is the part that claims a trial is illegal?

"When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside"

And that's a requirement of the Chief Justice. Not on the Senate or the impeachment trial.

As demonstrated by the fact that Justice Roberts in NOT presiding over Trump's impeachment trial. Leahy is instead.

I marvel at how you are able to get everything ass backwards.