Would this be constitutional?

[RandomPoster]

Let's say the Democrats or Republican wanted an extreme member of their party as President, except fear they can't win. They nominate a moderate they don't want as President and hope he wins the election. They make the radical Speaker of the House. They pay the moderate and his VP to step down and swear the radical in.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It would likely be illegal rather than un-Constitutional.

 

[candycorn]

It would likely be illegal rather than un-Constitutional.

Really? How?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

It would likely be illegal rather than un-Constitutional.

Really? How?

Criminal conspiracy perhaps?

Put simply, a criminal conspiracy is an agreement to commit an unlawful act. The agreement itself is the crime, but at least one co-conspirator must take an “overt act” in furtherance of the conspiracy. Under the federal conspiracy statute:

• The agreement by two or more persons is the essence of the crime. If there is no agreement, there can be no conspiracy.
• The co-conspirators must agree to commit a federal crime or to defraud the United States or any federal agency in any manner and for any purpose.
• At least one co-conspirator must take an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

The overt act itself need not be unlawful, and not all members of the conspiracy are required to take an overt act; one co-conspirator’s overt act is enough. For example, one co-conspirator’s rental of a van – a perfectly legal act – to be used in a bank robbery is sufficient for his co-conspirators to be held criminally accountable for their agreement to rob the bank, even if no other steps are taken.

A co-conspirator must have knowledge of the agreement and its unlawful objectives, but it isn’t necessary for a conspiracy to succeed in its unlawful objective. A defendant can be convicted of conspiracy, yet be acquitted of the substantive crime he conspired to commit.
What’s a Criminal Conspiracy?: MoloLamken LLP​

 

[candycorn]

It would likely be illegal rather than un-Constitutional.

Really? How?

Criminal conspiracy perhaps?

Put simply, a criminal conspiracy is an agreement to commit an unlawful act. The agreement itself is the crime, but at least one co-conspirator must take an “overt act” in furtherance of the conspiracy. Under the federal conspiracy statute:

• The agreement by two or more persons is the essence of the crime. If there is no agreement, there can be no conspiracy.
• The co-conspirators must agree to commit a federal crime or to defraud the United States or any federal agency in any manner and for any purpose.
• At least one co-conspirator must take an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

The overt act itself need not be unlawful, and not all members of the conspiracy are required to take an overt act; one co-conspirator’s overt act is enough. For example, one co-conspirator’s rental of a van – a perfectly legal act – to be used in a bank robbery is sufficient for his co-conspirators to be held criminally accountable for their agreement to rob the bank, even if no other steps are taken.

A co-conspirator must have knowledge of the agreement and its unlawful objectives, but it isn’t necessary for a conspiracy to succeed in its unlawful objective. A defendant can be convicted of conspiracy, yet be acquitted of the substantive crime he conspired to commit.
What’s a Criminal Conspiracy?: MoloLamken LLP​

Not sure what the crime is....

I guess nakedly paying someone to resign may be criminal but that likely wouldn't happen. Rather the PTOUS/VPOTUS who decide to retire could be offered jobs.

I wouldn't want it to happen, of course, and it's a shitty way to do business. But if someone could engineer the feat, I don't see criminality.

Conspiracy to induce retirement probably isn't on the books anywhere.