Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Member Login

Site Notices
Page / 3
Next Page Arrow Left
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 3:58:09 PM EST
He will be impeached 100%. But it's unlikely he'll be covicted.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 3:59:35 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NagOrzo15-1:



They want to strip him of secret service protection.

So that they can, er, delete him.

The swamp has no idea what part of their shit he's had eyes on.   They want him gone.   Its as simple as that.  
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NagOrzo15-1:
Originally Posted By Kihn:
I don't see how it could. The idea is to strip him of his office. How is it possible to do that if he is no longer in office? It's all political kabuki theatre. If he is no longer in the theatre how is that possible?



They want to strip him of secret service protection.

So that they can, er, delete him.

The swamp has no idea what part of their shit he's had eyes on.   They want him gone.   Its as simple as that.  



A bunch of hateful assholes.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 3:59:58 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ArchEtech:



You can’t impeach someone who isn’t holding an office.  
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ArchEtech:
Originally Posted By FVMC:
Originally Posted By ACDer:
They can impeach him after leaving office and bar him from running again. Thats the game.


Exactly



You can’t impeach someone who isn’t holding an office.  


rite?
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:00:20 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Troutman84:


You may have a point. But for the sake of argument, let's say a President commits a high crime or misdemeanor on his last day in office. Or that the offense isn't even discovered until after the President has already left office. Surely, the founders would have intended for the congress to possess the authority to deny the offender the opportunity to hold public office again, were such a situation to manifest.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Troutman84:
Originally Posted By nyrifle:
Not to nitpick . But it does not say or it says and. In my somewhat feeble mind that would mean the second punishment can only follow the first. If a private citizen cannot be removed from office the whole punishment part would be moot.


You may have a point. But for the sake of argument, let's say a President commits a high crime or misdemeanor on his last day in office. Or that the offense isn't even discovered until after the President has already left office. Surely, the founders would have intended for the congress to possess the authority to deny the offender the opportunity to hold public office again, were such a situation to manifest.
Retroactive impeachment. That is not in the constitution. I do understand your point , I am not remotely well versed to discuss the legal ambiguities.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:00:54 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Justintime2:
Anything’s possible when the rules no longer apply...
View Quote



they are making up their own rules. They are that pissed off.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:02:34 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By nyrifle:
Retroactive impeachment. That is not in the constitution. I do understand your point , I am not remotely well versed to discuss the legal ambiguities.
View Quote

 

If something that egregious happened he or she would be prosecuted by the court and most likely wouldn’t be voted back into office.  Let the people decide if they want to vote for a criminal or not unless they are a felon and in prison obviously.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:03:01 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NagOrzo15-1:




Its not even REALLY about running again (well, maybe for the RINOs it is).   The Dems want to strip him of his security detail.   They want him to be a target.   They want to punish him by actual deletion.   They don't EVER want someone to rise outside of the machine politics framework again.   They want him gone.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NagOrzo15-1:

Originally Posted By ScottsGT:
Not enough time to go from House to Senate and once he's out, cannot impeach a private citizen.  At least that's what I read on the internet, so it must be true.

Originally Posted By rxdawg:
Wanna bet?  Especially if they declare that makes him ineligible to run for office again, which they already have.


Its not even REALLY about running again (well, maybe for the RINOs it is).   The Dems want to strip him of his security detail.   They want him to be a target.   They want to punish him by actual deletion.   They don't EVER want someone to rise outside of the machine politics framework again.   They want him gone.



Cancel culture to its fullest. If they'd do that to a President just think...
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:04:15 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Theodoric:
Yes. I don't think there is anything preventing proceedings from going forward after he leaves office.
View Quote

Well, I suspect SCOTUS will rule that the Senate must do trial with the existing Senate as it were at the time the Articles were drafted and voted for. Why? Because the House has a "sitting" ability which could skew a trial in Senate if say the House waited 30day and the Senate was changing in House favor.

How will Senate get 2/3 anyway? Not gonna happen.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:14:51 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kihn:



they are making up their own rules. They are that pissed off.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kihn:
Originally Posted By Justintime2:
Anything’s possible when the rules no longer apply...



they are making up their own rules. They are that pissed off.


They've been making up their own rules since Clinton was elected.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:16:53 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Wizardali:

Well, I suspect SCOTUS will rule that the Senate must do trial with the existing Senate as it were at the time the Articles were drafted and voted for. Why? Because the House has a "sitting" ability which could skew a trial in Senate if say the House waited 30day and the Senate was changing in House favor.

How will Senate get 2/3 anyway? Not gonna happen.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Wizardali:
Originally Posted By Theodoric:
Yes. I don't think there is anything preventing proceedings from going forward after he leaves office.

Well, I suspect SCOTUS will rule that the Senate must do trial with the existing Senate as it were at the time the Articles were drafted and voted for. Why? Because the House has a "sitting" ability which could skew a trial in Senate if say the House waited 30day and the Senate was changing in House favor.

How will Senate get 2/3 anyway? Not gonna happen.


Scotus won't take any such case.  

They have shown their reluctance to dance on issues of substance related to this president.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:19:55 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By croookedchamber:
He will be impeached 100%. But it's unlikely he'll be covicted.
View Quote


NYT is reporting that Kennedy and McConnell both support a trial. Both have said NYT is lying.

I don't think there will be a trial. What are they going to do? Remove him from office?
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:20:12 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheKill:


They've been making up their own rules since Clinton was elected.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheKill:
Originally Posted By Kihn:
Originally Posted By Justintime2:
Anything’s possible when the rules no longer apply...



they are making up their own rules. They are that pissed off.


They've been making up their own rules since Clinton was elected.


They've always made up their own rules.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:21:07 PM EST
fucking 9 Repubs voting for impeachment
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:25:54 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/13/2021 4:33:33 PM EST by bigstick61]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By hugh1:

Article 1 section 3 of the US 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: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."


Edit; And not or.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By hugh1:
Originally Posted By Theodoric:
Yes. I don't think there is anything preventing proceedings from going forward after he leaves office.

Article 1 section 3 of the US 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: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."


Edit; And not or.


It describes the maximum penalty that can be imposed by impeachment, not a mandatory penalty.  So, at most, an impeached officer can be punished with both removal from office and a bar from ever holding another as a consequence of a Senate conviction.  Removal appears to be mandatory based on another clause later in the document, but not the bar from office.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:26:25 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ScottsGT:
Not enough time to go from House to Senate and once he's out, cannot impeach a private citizen.  At least that's what I read on the internet, so it must be true.
View Quote
That's effectively what Alan Dershowitz had to say yesterday. Him, I believe.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:26:55 PM EST
Easily got what they needed with the help (so far) of 10 Repubs. Still 9 NV.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:28:25 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HeckThomas:
theater to make the country still think there's two parties

View Quote


Since the democrat party has merged with the state..there are really NO parties, at least none that matter.

Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:55:42 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sprocket99:
That's effectively what Alan Dershowitz had to say yesterday. Him, I believe.
View Quote


It appears an impeachment can go forward after a President leaves office.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 4:56:51 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By kzin:
House can impeach and it's likely.

One amusing possibility is the senate could find him guilty and set the punishment at removal from office. After he's out.
View Quote
It keeps him from running again.
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 5:45:29 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
That article doesn't say that.  In fact, it suggests that it's vague at best.

A better article from the same author:  https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/can-president-trump-be-impeached-after-he-leaves-office
Link Posted: 1/13/2021 8:19:28 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kihn:
fucking 9 Repubs voting for impeachment
View Quote
10 I believe.
Page / 3
Next Page Arrow Left
Top Top