Stop the Socislist/Fascist 'Revenge' Assault On The Constitution - Private Citizens Are NOT Subject to Politivcal Impeachment

[easyt65]

"The principal argument against allowing post-presidential impeachment is that the Constitution does not make private citizens subject to impeachment. The founders rejected the British model that allowed Parliament to impeach anyone, except for the King, and so they limited impeachment to certain public officials, including presidents."

"Our Founders did not permit ‘former presidents’ to be subject to impeachment trials. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Seems like an open and shut case that a private citizen, who is a former president, can’t be the subject of a trial in the U.S. Senate.

When you read the constitutional provisions relating to impeachment it is clear as day that there is no constitutional basis for the Senate to try Trump after Joe Biden is sworn in as president. Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states that the Senate conducts all impeachment trials as follows: “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” The AP reported on January 14, 2021, that there is confusion who will preside at a trial because “the Constitution says the chief justice is to preside at the impeachment trial of a president. But what about an ex-president?” The answer is nobody because a post-presidency trial would be unconstitutional."


The House did not vote for the Articles of impeachment until 13 January, 2021, AFTER President Trump was out of office and was CIVILIAN Trump.

The Federal Govt can NOT Impeach an American citizen.

If the Democrats / snowflakes continue to argue that the Federal Govt CAN Impeach a FORMER President, then - as the US Constitution stipulates - the Chief Justice of the USSC MUST preside over the Impeachment.
- Roberts has already stated he isn't doing it. THAT IS BECAUSE THE US CONSTITUTION DOES NOT ALLOW THE IMPEACHMENT OF A US CITIZEN, WHICH TRUMP IS NOW.

DEMOCRATS/SNOWFLAKES:
"An alternate to the USSC Justice can be chosen to preside over the Impeachment of a US citizen, as has now been done."

SHOW ME WHERE IN THE HELL IT SAYS THAT IN THE US CONSTITUTION. Cite Article, page, etc...and provide LINK!


This sham COULD be and SHOULD be ended quickly, now that the Articles have been delivered to the Senate:

"Senators have an option to end the unconstitutional trial quickly. If the Chief Justice refuses to preside because of the possibility of a controversy over the constitutionality of a trial coming before the high court, a Senator could raise a constitutional objection to the trial forcing a vote of the Senate. The Senator would say, “I object to this proceeding as not authorized by the Constitution as evidenced by the Chief Justice refusing to preside today and ask the Presiding Officer to rule this proceeding unconstitutional.”

"This would expose the farce of the exercise, because the vote would likely break on party lines after a partisan in the chair, either Vice President Kamala Harris or President Pro Tempore Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), would rule the objection out of order."


Going along with this farce Impeachment also violates Senators' Oaths Of office, ans could / should open them up for agction to hold them accountable for breaking their oaths of office:

"Some in the Senate have recognized that conducting this trial violates the oath of office to abide by the limits on the Senate’s impeachment power contained in the Constitution."


President Biden called the faux Impeachment 2.0 'Moot', since Trump is now a citizen.

Speaker Pelosi even admitted during an interview prior to the Articles being authored the intent of the Impeachment is to eliminate Trump as a threat in 2024 and beyond, not to hold him accountable for some false allegation.


Stop the Socislist/Fascist 'Revenge' Assault On The Constitution!

The Unconstitutionality of a Senate Impeachment Trial of Donald J. Trump Post-Presidency

townhall.com

 

[Dana7360]

"The principal argument against allowing post-presidential impeachment is that the Constitution does not make private citizens subject to impeachment. The founders rejected the British model that allowed Parliament to impeach anyone, except for the King, and so they limited impeachment to certain public officials, including presidents."

"Our Founders did not permit ‘former presidents’ to be subject to impeachment trials. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Seems like an open and shut case that a private citizen, who is a former president, can’t be the subject of a trial in the U.S. Senate.

When you read the constitutional provisions relating to impeachment it is clear as day that there is no constitutional basis for the Senate to try Trump after Joe Biden is sworn in as president. Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states that the Senate conducts all impeachment trials as follows: “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” The AP reported on January 14, 2021, that there is confusion who will preside at a trial because “the Constitution says the chief justice is to preside at the impeachment trial of a president. But what about an ex-president?” The answer is nobody because a post-presidency trial would be unconstitutional."


The House did not vote for the Articles of impeachment until 13 January, 2021, AFTER President Trump was out of office and was CIVILIAN Trump.

The Federal Govt can NOT Impeach an American citizen.

If the Democrats / snowflakes continue to argue that the Federal Govt CAN Impeach a FORMER President, then - as the US Constitution stipulates - the Chief Justice of the USSC MUST preside over the Impeachment.
- Roberts has already stated he isn't doing it. THAT IS BECAUSE THE US CONSTITUTION DOES NOT ALLOW THE IMPEACHMENT OF A US CITIZEN, WHICH TRUMP IS NOW.

DEMOCRATS/SNOWFLAKES:
"An alternate to the USSC Justice can be chosen to preside over the Impeachment of a US citizen, as has now been done."

SHOW ME WHERE IN THE HELL IT SAYS THAT IN THE US CONSTITUTION. Cite Article, page, etc...and provide LINK!


This sham COULD be and SHOULD be ended quickly, now that the Articles have been delivered to the Senate:

"Senators have an option to end the unconstitutional trial quickly. If the Chief Justice refuses to preside because of the possibility of a controversy over the constitutionality of a trial coming before the high court, a Senator could raise a constitutional objection to the trial forcing a vote of the Senate. The Senator would say, “I object to this proceeding as not authorized by the Constitution as evidenced by the Chief Justice refusing to preside today and ask the Presiding Officer to rule this proceeding unconstitutional.”

"This would expose the farce of the exercise, because the vote would likely break on party lines after a partisan in the chair, either Vice President Kamala Harris or President Pro Tempore Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), would rule the objection out of order."


Going along with this farce Impeachment also violates Senators' Oaths Of office, ans could / should open them up for agction to hold them accountable for breaking their oaths of office:

"Some in the Senate have recognized that conducting this trial violates the oath of office to abide by the limits on the Senate’s impeachment power contained in the Constitution."


President Biden called the faux Impeachment 2.0 'Moot', since Trump is now a citizen.

Speaker Pelosi even admitted during an interview prior to the Articles being authored the intent of the Impeachment is to eliminate Trump as a threat in 2024 and beyond, not to hold him accountable for some false allegation.


Stop the Socislist/Fascist 'Revenge' Assault On The Constitution!

The Unconstitutionality of a Senate Impeachment Trial of Donald J. Trump Post-Presidency

townhall.com

It is very constitutional to impeach trump and put him on trial.

William Belknap was a private citizen when the House voted to impeach him and the Senate voted 37 to 29 guilty.

He was the secretary of defense. He knew he would be impeached so he resigned.

That didn't stop the impeachment.

You seriously should have paid attention when you were in school when your teachers tried to teach it to you.

He is the one and only presidential cabinet member to be impeached.

 

[Moonglow]

Nothing illegal since he was impeached while in office.

His trial is over his impeachment and he can be tried just like other members of the govt. that have when they left office or was kicked out after impeachment...

 

[justinacolmena]

Seems like an open and shut case that a private citizen, who is a former president, can’t be the subject of a trial in the U.S. Senate.

No shit. There's a Democrat Party junta in Congress. You can't believe a single word out of their dirty chicken lips anymore, because not even the letter of the law of all the legislation they enact counts for anything to how it will be enforced by Democrat judges in court.

There's a Second Amendment, and yet Democrats refuse to allow guns in the hands of private citizens.

Why do you think anything else they say or do in a court of law is anything but more of the same dirty lies?

 

[easyt65]

It is very constitutional to impeach trump and put him on trial.

Don't give me your standard BS opinion.

Cite the Constitution where it states Congress can Impeach a US citizen.

Cite the Constitution where it states where Leahy can preside over it.

Cite the Constitution where it states a political party can use the tool of Impeachment to target and eliminate a future political threat.

And provide the links......

Tic Toc.

 

[Moonglow]

Evidently Town Hall has no idea what precedent is over senate impeachment trials...

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

"The principal argument against allowing post-presidential impeachment is that the Constitution does not make private citizens subject to impeachment. The founders rejected the British model that allowed Parliament to impeach anyone, except for the King, and so they limited impeachment to certain public officials, including presidents."

"Our Founders did not permit ‘former presidents’ to be subject to impeachment trials. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Seems like an open and shut case that a private citizen, who is a former president, can’t be the subject of a trial in the U.S. Senate.

When you read the constitutional provisions relating to impeachment it is clear as day that there is no constitutional basis for the Senate to try Trump after Joe Biden is sworn in as president. Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states that the Senate conducts all impeachment trials as follows: “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” The AP reported on January 14, 2021, that there is confusion who will preside at a trial because “the Constitution says the chief justice is to preside at the impeachment trial of a president. But what about an ex-president?” The answer is nobody because a post-presidency trial would be unconstitutional."


The House did not vote for the Articles of impeachment until 13 January, 2021, AFTER President Trump was out of office and was CIVILIAN Trump.

The Federal Govt can NOT Impeach an American citizen.

If the Democrats / snowflakes continue to argue that the Federal Govt CAN Impeach a FORMER President, then - as the US Constitution stipulates - the Chief Justice of the USSC MUST preside over the Impeachment.
- Roberts has already stated he isn't doing it. THAT IS BECAUSE THE US CONSTITUTION DOES NOT ALLOW THE IMPEACHMENT OF A US CITIZEN, WHICH TRUMP IS NOW.

DEMOCRATS/SNOWFLAKES:
"An alternate to the USSC Justice can be chosen to preside over the Impeachment of a US citizen, as has now been done."

SHOW ME WHERE IN THE HELL IT SAYS THAT IN THE US CONSTITUTION. Cite Article, page, etc...and provide LINK!


This sham COULD be and SHOULD be ended quickly, now that the Articles have been delivered to the Senate:

"Senators have an option to end the unconstitutional trial quickly. If the Chief Justice refuses to preside because of the possibility of a controversy over the constitutionality of a trial coming before the high court, a Senator could raise a constitutional objection to the trial forcing a vote of the Senate. The Senator would say, “I object to this proceeding as not authorized by the Constitution as evidenced by the Chief Justice refusing to preside today and ask the Presiding Officer to rule this proceeding unconstitutional.”

"This would expose the farce of the exercise, because the vote would likely break on party lines after a partisan in the chair, either Vice President Kamala Harris or President Pro Tempore Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), would rule the objection out of order."


Going along with this farce Impeachment also violates Senators' Oaths Of office, ans could / should open them up for agction to hold them accountable for breaking their oaths of office:

"Some in the Senate have recognized that conducting this trial violates the oath of office to abide by the limits on the Senate’s impeachment power contained in the Constitution."


President Biden called the faux Impeachment 2.0 'Moot', since Trump is now a citizen.

Speaker Pelosi even admitted during an interview prior to the Articles being authored the intent of the Impeachment is to eliminate Trump as a threat in 2024 and beyond, not to hold him accountable for some false allegation.


Stop the Socislist/Fascist 'Revenge' Assault On The Constitution!

The Unconstitutionality of a Senate Impeachment Trial of Donald J. Trump Post-Presidency

townhall.com

This is so fucking stupid. Lol.To remove a SITTING prez is for impeachment.....LOLOL

What a precedent we are setting. Impeached for farting will be next. My God how dumb can you be? Lol

Let the trial go on and lets get ALL the facts on RECORDS. You dims will look like bigger assclowns than you are. Is that possible??? Yes

 

[Doc7505]

"The principal argument against allowing post-presidential impeachment is that the Constitution does not make private citizens subject to impeachment. The founders rejected the British model that allowed Parliament to impeach anyone, except for the King, and so they limited impeachment to certain public officials, including presidents."

"Our Founders did not permit ‘former presidents’ to be subject to impeachment trials. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Seems like an open and shut case that a private citizen, who is a former president, can’t be the subject of a trial in the U.S. Senate.

When you read the constitutional provisions relating to impeachment it is clear as day that there is no constitutional basis for the Senate to try Trump after Joe Biden is sworn in as president. Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states that the Senate conducts all impeachment trials as follows: “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” The AP reported on January 14, 2021, that there is confusion who will preside at a trial because “the Constitution says the chief justice is to preside at the impeachment trial of a president. But what about an ex-president?” The answer is nobody because a post-presidency trial would be unconstitutional."


The House did not vote for the Articles of impeachment until 13 January, 2021, AFTER President Trump was out of office and was CIVILIAN Trump.

The Federal Govt can NOT Impeach an American citizen.

If the Democrats / snowflakes continue to argue that the Federal Govt CAN Impeach a FORMER President, then - as the US Constitution stipulates - the Chief Justice of the USSC MUST preside over the Impeachment.
- Roberts has already stated he isn't doing it. THAT IS BECAUSE THE US CONSTITUTION DOES NOT ALLOW THE IMPEACHMENT OF A US CITIZEN, WHICH TRUMP IS NOW.

DEMOCRATS/SNOWFLAKES:
"An alternate to the USSC Justice can be chosen to preside over the Impeachment of a US citizen, as has now been done."

SHOW ME WHERE IN THE HELL IT SAYS THAT IN THE US CONSTITUTION. Cite Article, page, etc...and provide LINK!


This sham COULD be and SHOULD be ended quickly, now that the Articles have been delivered to the Senate:

"Senators have an option to end the unconstitutional trial quickly. If the Chief Justice refuses to preside because of the possibility of a controversy over the constitutionality of a trial coming before the high court, a Senator could raise a constitutional objection to the trial forcing a vote of the Senate. The Senator would say, “I object to this proceeding as not authorized by the Constitution as evidenced by the Chief Justice refusing to preside today and ask the Presiding Officer to rule this proceeding unconstitutional.”

"This would expose the farce of the exercise, because the vote would likely break on party lines after a partisan in the chair, either Vice President Kamala Harris or President Pro Tempore Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), would rule the objection out of order."


Going along with this farce Impeachment also violates Senators' Oaths Of office, ans could / should open them up for agction to hold them accountable for breaking their oaths of office:

"Some in the Senate have recognized that conducting this trial violates the oath of office to abide by the limits on the Senate’s impeachment power contained in the Constitution."


President Biden called the faux Impeachment 2.0 'Moot', since Trump is now a citizen.

Speaker Pelosi even admitted during an interview prior to the Articles being authored the intent of the Impeachment is to eliminate Trump as a threat in 2024 and beyond, not to hold him accountable for some false allegation.


Stop the Socislist/Fascist 'Revenge' Assault On The Constitution!

The Unconstitutionality of a Senate Impeachment Trial of Donald J. Trump Post-Presidency

townhall.com

~~~~~~

The Constitution No Longer Means What It Says It Means, But Rather What - www.HNewsWire.com

Any Five Supreme Court Justices Say It Means… Earlier this month, Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden said on Twitter that he would “transform” America if he were elected. “We’re going to beat Donald Trump. And when we do, we won’t just rebuild this nation — we’ll transform it.” This is...

hnewswire.com

The present Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat Fascists are pressing to change the meaning of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to enslave Americans.

 

[easyt65]

Nothing illegal since he was impeached while in office.

As with the 1st admitted politically partisan Impeachment, President Trump has not been fully Impeached because the Articles of Impeachment were not handed to the Senate until 25 January. Trump is now a citizen.

If a House Impeachment of a President is all you wanted, you got it. The US Senate has no President to Impeach.

 

[easyt65]

There is no section of the US Constitution Socialist criminal Democrats will not violate to get what they want.

 

[Moonglow]

Nothing illegal since he was impeached while in office.

As with the 1st admitted politically partisan Impeachment, President Trump has not been fully Impeached because the Articles of Impeachment were not handed to the Senate until 25 January. Trump is now a citizen.

If a House Impeachment of a President is all you wanted, you got it. The US Senate has no President to Impeach.

The House has convicted the president of impeachment what part do you not understand? Now is the time for the trial portion of the impeachment. If the House doesn't impeach there is no need for a trial.

 

[Moonglow]

There is no section of the US Constitution Socialist criminal Democrats will not violate to get what they want.

Show us with proof what part the Dems are violating...It should be easy...

 

[daveman]

Nothing illegal since he was impeached while in office.

As with the 1st admitted politically partisan Impeachment, President Trump has not been fully Impeached because the Articles of Impeachment were not handed to the Senate until 25 January. Trump is now a citizen.

If a House Impeachment of a President is all you wanted, you got it. The US Senate has no President to Impeach.

The House has convicted the president of impeachment what part do you not understand? Now is the time for the trial portion of the impeachment. If the House doesn't impeach there is no need for a trial.

"Convicted of impeachment."

 

[easyt65]

The House has convicted the president of impeachment what part do you not understand? Now is the time for the trial portion of the impeachment. If the House doesn't impeach there is no need for a trial.

So you want the US government to have a TRIAL for a US citizen?

Please site where it states n the US Constitution the Federal Govt can conduct a trial of a US citizen...and provide the link and exact verbiage.





"The House has convicted the president of impeachment"

WTF? Flustered or just being a snowflake?

 

[Toro]

It is very constitutional to impeach trump and put him on trial.

Don't give me your standard BS opinion.

Cite the Constitution where it states Congress can Impeach a US citizen.

Cite the Constitution where it states where Leahy can preside over it.

Cite the Constitution where it states a political party can use the tool of Impeachment to target and eliminate a future political threat.

And provide the links......

Tic Toc.

Sure they can

Legal scholars, including at Federalist Society, say Trump can be convicted

Some Republicans have argued a former president can't be the target of an impeachment trial.

www.politico.com

 

[Dana7360]

It is very constitutional to impeach trump and put him on trial.

Don't give me your standard BS opinion.

Cite the Constitution where it states Congress can Impeach a US citizen.

Cite the Constitution where it states where Leahy can preside over it.

Cite the Constitution where it states a political party can use the tool of Impeachment to target and eliminate a future political threat.

And provide the links......

Tic Toc.

If you want to learn about William Belknap look him up yourself.

It takes just seconds in a search.

I refuse to spoon-feed you something you should have learned in school and something you won't read.

I can fill a message box with links to it and you will ignore it so if you honestly want to learn about him, do your own research.

I won't waste my time on you.

He was a private citizen when he was impeached.

trump was president when he was impeached.

 

[easyt65]

As I wrote and as the article mentiond ...

Rand Paul to trigger Senate vote on whether Trump impeachment trial is constitutional

Sen. Rand Paul on Tuesday afternoon is expected to force a vote on whether or not the Senate impeachment trial of former President Trump is unconstitutional now that he is out of office.

www.foxnews.com

 

[BertramN]

"The principal argument against allowing post-presidential impeachment is that the Constitution does not make private citizens subject to impeachment. The founders rejected the British model that allowed Parliament to impeach anyone, except for the King, and so they limited impeachment to certain public officials, including presidents."

"Our Founders did not permit ‘former presidents’ to be subject to impeachment trials. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Seems like an open and shut case that a private citizen, who is a former president, can’t be the subject of a trial in the U.S. Senate.

When you read the constitutional provisions relating to impeachment it is clear as day that there is no constitutional basis for the Senate to try Trump after Joe Biden is sworn in as president. Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states that the Senate conducts all impeachment trials as follows: “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” The AP reported on January 14, 2021, that there is confusion who will preside at a trial because “the Constitution says the chief justice is to preside at the impeachment trial of a president. But what about an ex-president?” The answer is nobody because a post-presidency trial would be unconstitutional."


The House did not vote for the Articles of impeachment until 13 January, 2021, AFTER President Trump was out of office and was CIVILIAN Trump.

The Federal Govt can NOT Impeach an American citizen.

If the Democrats / snowflakes continue to argue that the Federal Govt CAN Impeach a FORMER President, then - as the US Constitution stipulates - the Chief Justice of the USSC MUST preside over the Impeachment.
- Roberts has already stated he isn't doing it. THAT IS BECAUSE THE US CONSTITUTION DOES NOT ALLOW THE IMPEACHMENT OF A US CITIZEN, WHICH TRUMP IS NOW.

DEMOCRATS/SNOWFLAKES:
"An alternate to the USSC Justice can be chosen to preside over the Impeachment of a US citizen, as has now been done."

SHOW ME WHERE IN THE HELL IT SAYS THAT IN THE US CONSTITUTION. Cite Article, page, etc...and provide LINK!


This sham COULD be and SHOULD be ended quickly, now that the Articles have been delivered to the Senate:

"Senators have an option to end the unconstitutional trial quickly. If the Chief Justice refuses to preside because of the possibility of a controversy over the constitutionality of a trial coming before the high court, a Senator could raise a constitutional objection to the trial forcing a vote of the Senate. The Senator would say, “I object to this proceeding as not authorized by the Constitution as evidenced by the Chief Justice refusing to preside today and ask the Presiding Officer to rule this proceeding unconstitutional.”

"This would expose the farce of the exercise, because the vote would likely break on party lines after a partisan in the chair, either Vice President Kamala Harris or President Pro Tempore Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), would rule the objection out of order."


Going along with this farce Impeachment also violates Senators' Oaths Of office, ans could / should open them up for agction to hold them accountable for breaking their oaths of office:

"Some in the Senate have recognized that conducting this trial violates the oath of office to abide by the limits on the Senate’s impeachment power contained in the Constitution."


President Biden called the faux Impeachment 2.0 'Moot', since Trump is now a citizen.

Speaker Pelosi even admitted during an interview prior to the Articles being authored the intent of the Impeachment is to eliminate Trump as a threat in 2024 and beyond, not to hold him accountable for some false allegation.


Stop the Socislist/Fascist 'Revenge' Assault On The Constitution!

The Unconstitutionality of a Senate Impeachment Trial of Donald J. Trump Post-Presidency

townhall.com

It is very constitutional to impeach trump and put him on trial.

William Belknap was a private citizen when the House voted to impeach him and the Senate voted 37 to 29 guilty.

He was the secretary of defense. He knew he would be impeached so he resigned.

That didn't stop the impeachment.

You seriously should have paid attention when you were in school when your teachers tried to teach it to you.

He is the one and only presidential cabinet member to be impeached.

Can ex-presidents be impeached? No. Convicted? Yes.

Can a former U.S. president be impeached? Can he be convicted?

Those are two different constitutional questions. And U.S. President Donald Trump, impeached last week while still in office and potentially subject to conviction after departing, has obvious reason to offer a firm “no” to the second question.

Under the Constitution, the House of Representatives is authorized to impeach a president, and then the Senate is authorized to convict him. But that doesn’t answer the questions about a former president.

Let’s start with the text. Article I says this: “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.”

Article II says this: “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Under these provisions, it should be clear that the House cannot impeach someone who has never held public office, and who merely aspires to do so.

Suppose, for example, that a presidential candidate has done horrible things while, say, serving as governor of a state. The text makes it clear that impeachment is unavailable.

What about an ex-president? Could the House, now or next year, impeach Jimmy Carter? Bill Clinton? George W. Bush?

The Constitution doesn’t explicitly answer this question, but there’s a strong argument that the best answer is, No.

The overriding goal of impeachment is to start a process that can culminate in removal from office. If a president is no longer in office, he can’t be removed. The main point of the impeachment clauses is to allow “We the People” to take action, in real time, against officials who are egregiously abusing their authority. If a president is a private citizen, that purpose of the clause no longer appears relevant.

There is a counterargument, which is that Article I refers not only to removal, but also to “disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.”

If an ex-president is deemed to have committed impeachable offenses, perhaps it would be perfectly legitimate to impeach and remove him — and thus to block him from running for president (or other office) ever again.

The counterargument isn’t crazy. It receives some support from the leading precedent, the impeachment of Secretary of War William Belknap in 1876. It’s a fascinating tale, ably told by my Bloomberg Opinion and Harvard Law School colleague Noah Feldman.

Belknap resigned just hours before a House committee recommended his impeachment. In the ensuing debate, the House explored, in detail, whether it was permissible to impeach someone who was no longer in office.

When it voted to impeach Belknap, the House essentially concluded that a post-resignation impeachment was permissible. In the Senate, Belknap’s lawyer insisted that he was a private citizen and so could not be tried. By a vote of 37 to 29, the Senate rejected that argument. A majority of the Senate — but not the necessary two-thirds — voted to convict Belknap.

There are two problems with reading the Belknap debates to resolve the question whether a former president can be impeached and convicted. First, the House and Senate might have gotten it wrong; their disputed judgments, way back in 1876, are hardly conclusive. Second, Belknap resigned immediately before a House committee was going to recommend his impeachment. This was hardly analogous to a decision, in 2021, to pursue Carter, Clinton or Bush.
Turn in this light to the unique question that is about to face the Senate. After the unquestionably legitimate House impeachment of a sitting president, can the Senate proceed to convict him after he leaves on Jan. 20, the day of Joe Biden’s inauguration, and becomes a private citizen?

You could easily argue that it can. In impeaching Trump, the House did its constitutional duty. If the Senate proceeds to a trial, it is merely continuing the process. And for the Senate to complete that process is not at all pointless, even if Trump is no longer president. The disqualification provision makes that clear.

The counterargument is also not hard to sketch. Once Trump has left office, he cannot be removed. Removal is the central goal of the impeachment provision.

The argument for allowing the Senate to try Trump is far stronger than the argument for allowing the House to impeach, and the Senate to convict, someone who has been out of office for a long time. It is even stronger than the argument for allowing the Senate to try Belknap, because Trump was impeached while he was in office.

Still, the Constitution does not clearly resolve the central question; it contains a genuine gap. Someone has to fill it. The impeachment process has obvious political dimensions, and the Supreme Court is highly unlikely to get involved.

Which means that the Senate is the right institution to fill the gap. Without offense to the Constitution, it could choose to stay its hand. Without offense to the Constitution, it could choose to complete the process that the House started.

According to the research done by Cass R. Sunstein, if the Senate wishes to convict Trump, it can.

.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"The principal argument against allowing post-presidential impeachment is that the Constitution does not make private citizens subject to impeachment. The founders rejected the British model that allowed Parliament to impeach anyone, except for the King, and so they limited impeachment to certain public officials, including presidents."

"Our Founders did not permit ‘former presidents’ to be subject to impeachment trials. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Seems like an open and shut case that a private citizen, who is a former president, can’t be the subject of a trial in the U.S. Senate.

When you read the constitutional provisions relating to impeachment it is clear as day that there is no constitutional basis for the Senate to try Trump after Joe Biden is sworn in as president. Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states that the Senate conducts all impeachment trials as follows: “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” The AP reported on January 14, 2021, that there is confusion who will preside at a trial because “the Constitution says the chief justice is to preside at the impeachment trial of a president. But what about an ex-president?” The answer is nobody because a post-presidency trial would be unconstitutional."


The House did not vote for the Articles of impeachment until 13 January, 2021, AFTER President Trump was out of office and was CIVILIAN Trump.

The Federal Govt can NOT Impeach an American citizen.

If the Democrats / snowflakes continue to argue that the Federal Govt CAN Impeach a FORMER President, then - as the US Constitution stipulates - the Chief Justice of the USSC MUST preside over the Impeachment.
- Roberts has already stated he isn't doing it. THAT IS BECAUSE THE US CONSTITUTION DOES NOT ALLOW THE IMPEACHMENT OF A US CITIZEN, WHICH TRUMP IS NOW.

DEMOCRATS/SNOWFLAKES:
"An alternate to the USSC Justice can be chosen to preside over the Impeachment of a US citizen, as has now been done."

SHOW ME WHERE IN THE HELL IT SAYS THAT IN THE US CONSTITUTION. Cite Article, page, etc...and provide LINK!


This sham COULD be and SHOULD be ended quickly, now that the Articles have been delivered to the Senate:

"Senators have an option to end the unconstitutional trial quickly. If the Chief Justice refuses to preside because of the possibility of a controversy over the constitutionality of a trial coming before the high court, a Senator could raise a constitutional objection to the trial forcing a vote of the Senate. The Senator would say, “I object to this proceeding as not authorized by the Constitution as evidenced by the Chief Justice refusing to preside today and ask the Presiding Officer to rule this proceeding unconstitutional.”

"This would expose the farce of the exercise, because the vote would likely break on party lines after a partisan in the chair, either Vice President Kamala Harris or President Pro Tempore Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), would rule the objection out of order."


Going along with this farce Impeachment also violates Senators' Oaths Of office, ans could / should open them up for agction to hold them accountable for breaking their oaths of office:

"Some in the Senate have recognized that conducting this trial violates the oath of office to abide by the limits on the Senate’s impeachment power contained in the Constitution."


President Biden called the faux Impeachment 2.0 'Moot', since Trump is now a citizen.

Speaker Pelosi even admitted during an interview prior to the Articles being authored the intent of the Impeachment is to eliminate Trump as a threat in 2024 and beyond, not to hold him accountable for some false allegation.


Stop the Socislist/Fascist 'Revenge' Assault On The Constitution!

The Unconstitutionality of a Senate Impeachment Trial of Donald J. Trump Post-Presidency

townhall.com

"Socislist/Fascist"

lol

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"The principal argument against allowing post-presidential impeachment is that the Constitution does not make private citizens subject to impeachment. The founders rejected the British model that allowed Parliament to impeach anyone, except for the King, and so they limited impeachment to certain public officials, including presidents."

"Our Founders did not permit ‘former presidents’ to be subject to impeachment trials. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Seems like an open and shut case that a private citizen, who is a former president, can’t be the subject of a trial in the U.S. Senate.

When you read the constitutional provisions relating to impeachment it is clear as day that there is no constitutional basis for the Senate to try Trump after Joe Biden is sworn in as president. Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states that the Senate conducts all impeachment trials as follows: “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” The AP reported on January 14, 2021, that there is confusion who will preside at a trial because “the Constitution says the chief justice is to preside at the impeachment trial of a president. But what about an ex-president?” The answer is nobody because a post-presidency trial would be unconstitutional."


The House did not vote for the Articles of impeachment until 13 January, 2021, AFTER President Trump was out of office and was CIVILIAN Trump.

The Federal Govt can NOT Impeach an American citizen.

If the Democrats / snowflakes continue to argue that the Federal Govt CAN Impeach a FORMER President, then - as the US Constitution stipulates - the Chief Justice of the USSC MUST preside over the Impeachment.
- Roberts has already stated he isn't doing it. THAT IS BECAUSE THE US CONSTITUTION DOES NOT ALLOW THE IMPEACHMENT OF A US CITIZEN, WHICH TRUMP IS NOW.

DEMOCRATS/SNOWFLAKES:
"An alternate to the USSC Justice can be chosen to preside over the Impeachment of a US citizen, as has now been done."

SHOW ME WHERE IN THE HELL IT SAYS THAT IN THE US CONSTITUTION. Cite Article, page, etc...and provide LINK!


This sham COULD be and SHOULD be ended quickly, now that the Articles have been delivered to the Senate:

"Senators have an option to end the unconstitutional trial quickly. If the Chief Justice refuses to preside because of the possibility of a controversy over the constitutionality of a trial coming before the high court, a Senator could raise a constitutional objection to the trial forcing a vote of the Senate. The Senator would say, “I object to this proceeding as not authorized by the Constitution as evidenced by the Chief Justice refusing to preside today and ask the Presiding Officer to rule this proceeding unconstitutional.”

"This would expose the farce of the exercise, because the vote would likely break on party lines after a partisan in the chair, either Vice President Kamala Harris or President Pro Tempore Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), would rule the objection out of order."


Going along with this farce Impeachment also violates Senators' Oaths Of office, ans could / should open them up for agction to hold them accountable for breaking their oaths of office:

"Some in the Senate have recognized that conducting this trial violates the oath of office to abide by the limits on the Senate’s impeachment power contained in the Constitution."


President Biden called the faux Impeachment 2.0 'Moot', since Trump is now a citizen.

Speaker Pelosi even admitted during an interview prior to the Articles being authored the intent of the Impeachment is to eliminate Trump as a threat in 2024 and beyond, not to hold him accountable for some false allegation.


Stop the Socislist/Fascist 'Revenge' Assault On The Constitution!

The Unconstitutionality of a Senate Impeachment Trial of Donald J. Trump Post-Presidency

townhall.com

The thread premise is a lie.

There is no 'assault' on the Constitution.

This is more rightwing lies and demogogery.