Who is the Federalist Society and what are they saying about Trump’s impeachment

[bripat9643]

Inciting an insurrection is a crime.

The was no crime committed by Trump.
Criminal offenses are tried in a criminal court of law.
The Senate is not a criminal court of law. ...

Impeachment has already happened. Conviction by the Senate is a political process. When a commander in chief for months eggs on his followers to disrupt a certified election of his replacement, rallies them together and unleashes them on Congress, then does nothing to protect Congress for hours while he watches “his people” waving “his flags” violently seize the Capitol Building, we are dealing with exactly the kind of treason to our Republic & “high crimes and misdemeanors” that the impeachment process was meant to deal with.

In other countries parliaments can quickly pass a “no confidence” motion to bring down such an outrageous President or Prime Minister. Our system provides mainly just this awkward impeachment process. If not enough Republican Senators rise to support impeachment, what is left of Congressional authority will be fatally wounded. This is not about what is temporarily popular with any party’s supporters, but about defense of what is left of our Republic’s basic institutions.

The Senate connot try somone who is not the president. End of story.

Your justification for this idiocy is pure bullshit.

 

[bripat9643]

I've never hear of a person who voluntarily left a company he worked for when his contract was over and went home.
And then officially fired weeks later by the new management of the company. ...

Inciting an insurrection is a crime.

It is now solely in the hands of the Senate toed side whether a crime has been committed. if this goes to trial, there is no court of appeal. Trump could argue to the courts that he can’t be tried, if it goes to trial, the Senate decides.

From the Constitution:

"When the President of the United States is tried "

Is Trump President of the United States?

Donald Trump is now a private citizen!

I believe they are just bluffing. Even NAZI Democrats aren't this stupid.

 

[gmeyers1944]

I've never hear of a person who voluntarily left a company he worked for when his contract was over and went home.
And then officially fired weeks later by the new management of the company. ...

Inciting an insurrection is a crime.

It is now solely in the hands of the Senate toed side whether a crime has been committed. if this goes to trial, there is no court of appeal. Trump could argue to the courts that he can’t be tried, if it goes to trial, the Senate decides.

From the Constitution:

"When the President of the United States is tried "

Is Trump President of the United States?

Donald Trump is now a private citizen!

So what. That is irrelevant. I’ve showed you what the Constitution says
Trump has already impeached and nowhere is it said that it expires.

The constitution states that the Senate has the sole Power to try ALL impeachments.

what part of the word “all” don’t you understand. It’s a simple word. Why don’t you understand it. Do you want some links to the definition.

From The Federalist Society legal experts (conservatives and libertarians.

“Impeachment is the exclusive constitutional means for removing a president (or other officer) before his or her term expires,” they wrote. “But nothing in the provision authorizing impeachment-for-removal limits impeachment to situations where it accomplishes removal from office. Indeed, such a reading would thwart and potentially nullify a vital aspect of the impeachment power: the power of the Senate to impose disqualification from future office as a penalty for conviction.”

Where in the Constitution does it mention anything about disqualification from future office?

 

[MadDog]

Can Trump’s disqualification be accomplished through impeachment?

The U.S. Constitution says there are two ways to punish an impeached official: removal from office or “disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.”

Article I, Section 3, Clause 7:

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.

 

[MadDog]

I've never hear of a person who voluntarily left a company he worked for when his contract was over and went home.
And then officially fired weeks later by the new management of the company. ...

Inciting an insurrection is a crime.

It is now solely in the hands of the Senate toed side whether a crime has been committed. if this goes to trial, there is no court of appeal. Trump could argue to the courts that he can’t be tried, if it goes to trial, the Senate decides.

From the Constitution:

"When the President of the United States is tried "

Is Trump President of the United States?

Donald Trump is now a private citizen!

So what. That is irrelevant. I’ve showed you what the Constitution says
Trump has already impeached and nowhere is it said that it expires.

The constitution states that the Senate has the sole Power to try ALL impeachments.

what part of the word “all” don’t you understand. It’s a simple word. Why don’t you understand it. Do you want some links to the definition.

From The Federalist Society legal experts (conservatives and libertarians.

“Impeachment is the exclusive constitutional means for removing a president (or other officer) before his or her term expires,” they wrote. “But nothing in the provision authorizing impeachment-for-removal limits impeachment to situations where it accomplishes removal from office. Indeed, such a reading would thwart and potentially nullify a vital aspect of the impeachment power: the power of the Senate to impose disqualification from future office as a penalty for conviction.”

Where in the Constitution does it mention anything about disqualification from future office?

More reading, then you can argue.

Experts Dismiss GOP Claim That Trump’s Impeachment Is Unconstitutional

Republicans senators are beginning to coalesce around a new talking point: impeaching Trump is now unconstitutional because he has left office.

talkingpointsmemo.com

“If it were unconstitutional to finish impeachment proceedings for a former official, then Congress would never be able to ban officials from future office: the subject official would just resign moments before the Senate vote,” Levitt said. “In order to give meaning to the constitutional text, the official can’t control that process of disqualification for serious misconduct. Which means it has to apply to former officials as well.”

 

[CowboyTed]

If time is a factor, then a President can just wait for the "perfect" moment to do whatever the hell he or she wants and get away w/it.

That's not Constitutional.

Congress must be able to convict post-Presidency.

If you can't impeach him then he has to face criminal prosecution...

The Constitution is pretty clear, no body is above the law...

 

[Bush92]

I’ll be the first to admit that there are differences of opinion over whether Trump can still be tried and convicted, but here’s a credible opinion and its rationale. Take a deep breath, read with an open mind (that’s asking a lot), then do some critical thinking.

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

“Impeachment is the exclusive constitutional means for removing a president (or other officer) before his or her term expires,” they wrote. “But nothing in the provision authorizing impeachment-for-removal limits impeachment to situations where it accomplishes removal from office. Indeed, such a reading would thwart and potentially nullify a vital aspect of the impeachment power: the power of the Senate to impose disqualification from future office as a penalty for conviction.”

The Federalist Society was established with conservative and liberal lawyers as a counter to liberal influences In the legal system and education system.

About Us | The Federalist Society

fedsoc.org

• Founded in 1982, the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians dedicated to reforming the current legal order. We are committed to the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks to promote awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities.

They seek to ensure states rights and to promote a strict constructionist interpretation of the Constitution.

 

[danielpalos]

and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States

Yes, that must apply to any citizen of the United States for civil purposes.

 

[JoeB131]

If successfully impeached it appears he will not be able run again but...
It will only cause more division.
It will strengthen the Republican party.
Trump might sue them for wrongful impeachment, and win.

There's no such thing as "Wrongful impeachment".

 

[Dogbiscuit]

If successfully impeached it appears he will not be able run again but...
It will only cause more division.
It will strengthen the Republican party.
Trump might sue them for wrongful impeachment, and win.

There's no such thing as "Wrongful impeachment".

Yet you were able to fully comprehend my meaning, obviously implied from your childish response...sweet.
How would you like for it to be written Joe ?
Tell me and I will ask the mods to correct it, just for you.
Will this example suffice ?

The Wrongful Impeachment of Trump | IntellectualConservative

...

intellectualconservative.com

Not feeling very good about your new administration now are ya ?

 

[JoeB131]

Yet you were able to fully comprehend my meaning, obviously implied from your childish response...sweet.
How would you like for it to be written Joe ?
Tell me and I will ask the mods to correct it, just for you.
Will this example suffice ?

Sorry, man, there's no such thing as a wrongful impeachment. Impeachment is a political act. You can impeach a president as long as you have a majority in Congress willing to do so.

Let's not forget, you guys impeached Clinton over lying about a blow job.

There have been cases where Judges have been removed from office through impeachment, but eventually acquitted by the courts.

 

[Dogbiscuit]

Sorry, man, there's no such thing as a wrongful impeachment. Impeachment is a political act. You can impeach a president as long as you have a majority in Congress willing to do so.

Let's not forget, you guys impeached Clinton over lying about a blow job.

There have been cases where Judges have been removed from office through impeachment, but eventually acquitted by the courts.

No need to apologize Joe.
So with slick willy, was it a righteous impeachment or a wrongful impeachment ?
In other words youre saying I must call you an ass, and not a dumb ass.
My original statement stands as is, but thanks for your useless interjection just the same.

 

[Bush92]

If successfully impeached it appears he will not be able run again but...
It will only cause more division.
It will strengthen the Republican party.
Trump might sue them for wrongful impeachment, and win.

There's no such thing as "Wrongful impeachment".

I'm sure the average American will be tickled shitless that the Congress is wasting time impeaching a man already out of office just to keep him from running for public office again because they fear him.

 

[danielpalos]

If successfully impeached it appears he will not be able run again but...
It will only cause more division.
It will strengthen the Republican party.
Trump might sue them for wrongful impeachment, and win.

There's no such thing as "Wrongful impeachment".

I'm sure the average American will be tickled shitless that the Congress is wasting time impeaching a man already out of office just to keep him from running for public office again because they fear him.

Or, they simply don't believe he will do a better job next time than the last time.

 

[gmeyers1944]

Yet you were able to fully comprehend my meaning, obviously implied from your childish response...sweet.
How would you like for it to be written Joe ?
Tell me and I will ask the mods to correct it, just for you.
Will this example suffice ?

Sorry, man, there's no such thing as a wrongful impeachment. Impeachment is a political act. You can impeach a president as long as you have a majority in Congress willing to do so.

Let's not forget, you guys impeached Clinton over lying about a blow job.

There have been cases where Judges have been removed from office through impeachment, but eventually acquitted by the courts.

Clinton was impeached for committing perjury! (Which he did)

 

[gmeyers1944]

If successfully impeached it appears he will not be able run again but...
It will only cause more division.
It will strengthen the Republican party.
Trump might sue them for wrongful impeachment, and win.

There's no such thing as "Wrongful impeachment".

I'm sure the average American will be tickled shitless that the Congress is wasting time impeaching a man already out of office just to keep him from running for public office again because they fear him.

Or, they simply don't believe he will do a better job next time than the last time.

President Trump did very well in his 4 years. Doing better in a second term would be very difficult. I'm sure that if he wins the election in 2024, he will try to do just that.

I just heard the speech that he gave on January 6th. There was absolutely nothing that could be construed as inciting people to do what happened at the Capitol.

 

[MadDog]

If successfully impeached it appears he will not be able run again but...
It will only cause more division.
It will strengthen the Republican party.
Trump might sue them for wrongful impeachment, and win.

There's no such thing as "Wrongful impeachment".

I'm sure the average American will be tickled shitless that the Congress is wasting time impeaching a man already out of office just to keep him from running for public office again because they fear him.

Or, they simply don't believe he will do a better job next time than the last time.

President Trump did very well in his 4 years. Doing better in a second term would be very difficult. I'm sure that if he wins the election in 2024, he will try to do just that.

I just heard the speech that he gave on January 6th. There was absolutely nothing that could be construed as inciting people to do what happened at the Capitol.

Obviously, a lot of poem minded people disagree with you. if you were convinced BEFORE you saw the speech course you wouldn’t see anthying. That’s what is called bias. And obviously, a lot of his following thought they were being told to stop the certification. Nobody thinks Trump was telling people to stop the certification by having a picnic.

 

[gmeyers1944]

If successfully impeached it appears he will not be able run again but...
It will only cause more division.
It will strengthen the Republican party.
Trump might sue them for wrongful impeachment, and win.

There's no such thing as "Wrongful impeachment".

I'm sure the average American will be tickled shitless that the Congress is wasting time impeaching a man already out of office just to keep him from running for public office again because they fear him.

Or, they simply don't believe he will do a better job next time than the last time.

President Trump did very well in his 4 years. Doing better in a second term would be very difficult. I'm sure that if he wins the election in 2024, he will try to do just that.

I just heard the speech that he gave on January 6th. There was absolutely nothing that could be construed as inciting people to do what happened at the Capitol.

Obviously, a lot of poem minded people disagree with you. if you were convinced BEFORE you saw the speech course you wouldn’t see anthying. That’s what is called bias. And obviously, a lot of his following thought they were being told to stop the certification. Nobody thinks Trump was telling people to stop the certification by having a picnic.

99.99+% of the people who gathered at the Capitol were there to support the legislators who were going to challenge the fraudulently elected Biden electors but the rioters caused them to lose their nerve.

 

[Dogbiscuit]

MadDog
gmeyers1944

Asking for some editing behavior changes. (Selective Quoting)

Mod staff has been working with the IT consultants to find a FIX for the mile long quotes you get when folks JUST use the big static "reply" button at the bottom of every post next to the "post rating - like" button.. Quotes stack up pretty quickly if EVERYBODY does it that way in a thread...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[MadDog]

99.99+% of the people who gathered at the Capitol were there to support the legislators who were going to challenge the fraudulently elected Biden electors but the rioters caused them to lose their nerve

Breaking into the Capitol, beating police, and shouting for Pence’s hanging are funny ways to show support. Kinda backfired though because some Republicans backed off after the riot.

Now, lets do some factchecking. Where did you come up with 99.99%? the only way to get that degree of precision is if you knew exactly how many protestors there were so why don’t you start by telling us the number. If you give me the numerator and denominator, I’m sure I can check your math. And by the way, did you poll all of them to see why they were there? You must have since you have so much precision in your final tally!

Trump didn’t tell people to support anyone. He told them to stop the certification. And since the crowd knew people in Congress could actually see them or hear them, the did the only thing they could do to stop the certification.