What I don't understand about the upcoming Trump trial
Comments
-
This isn’t the first impeachment to take place after an official has left office. As for “high crimes”, there was no US Code. It referred to betrayal of the Constitution, one’s oath of office, the country, or all the above. We watched Daddy’s criminal acts in real time. But the GOP can convict him or not. I don’t think it matters much whether he is barred from running again.
-
Here is a good article on how undecided/undetermined the impeachment process really is - Look at the quote from Gerald Ford that states the house can do what they want (in much more fanciful language) but is not accepted by a majority of scholars.
That was one of the arguments in Trump's impeachment that the house made it appear possible that the President holds office at the whims of the house. The house is basically doing the same thing again imho -
What I get out of this is the House can run loosy goosy rules and the Senate is more tightly controlled by process
https://www.findlaw.com/litigation/legal-system/presidential-impeachment-the-legal-standard-and-procedure.html -
Let’s see some examples. Nobody is just going to believe you.HHusky said:This isn’t the first impeachment to take place after an official has left office. As for “high crimes”, there was no US Code. It referred to betrayal of the Constitution, one’s oath of office, the country, or all the above. We watched Daddy’s criminal acts in real time. But the GOP can convict him or not. I don’t think it matters much whether he is barred from running again.
-
What was the due process in the impeachment? What crime was discussed and then voted on? A crooked DA can make up a fake arrest warrant and make an arrest. That isn't due process. The dems charged Citizen's United for making a movie. A clear violation of the First Amendment. Yet, four dem Supreme Court judges voted that it did not.LebamDawg said:
if that was true they could not have impeached him. They can do what they want - the Senate is more logical and have never convicted a president of the stupid charges coming out of the House.WestlinnDuck said:
I'll disagree. Due process is following the Constitution. Must have a finding of a high Crime or misdemeanor based on the evidence and not the politics. Just like the dazzler couldn't cite the crime that Trump committed the first time. There is no evidence of a crime this time. Second, the impeachment process is to constitutionally remove a president (and others) from office. No office, no impeachment.LebamDawg said:Due process in the house is just a majority
The Senate needs 2/3 to convict
It means nothing until settled in court since this is the first time trying it.
The Supreme Court might just let it stand if he is convicted -
I believe the rumor that Roberts did not want to touch any of the Trump Election stuff because he was afraid of riots. That will also chinfluence this if it gets that far
There is impeached and never a conviction so far in our illustrious, albeit confusing, history -
I only know of one example.NorthwestFresh said:
Let’s see some examples. Nobody is just going to believe you.HHusky said:This isn’t the first impeachment to take place after an official has left office. As for “high crimes”, there was no US Code. It referred to betrayal of the Constitution, one’s oath of office, the country, or all the above. We watched Daddy’s criminal acts in real time. But the GOP can convict him or not. I don’t think it matters much whether he is barred from running again.
-
Its completely absurd. Like of all the times in the past 100 years for politicians to actually do shit they are playing at impeaching a dude who's not even there. Lol
-
So 5 days into DNC complete control and the president is busy writing unconstitutional legislation and the congress is busy conducting unconstitutional prosecution
Tell me again how the right is unhinged? -
-
False flagHHusky said: -
Looks like a mostly peaceful assembly. Not seeing a lot of molotov cocktails like you antifa and BLM buddies.







