The Second Impeachment of Donald Trump Begins Today

[PeterGriffin]

The NY State Bar Assoc had opened an inquiry into Giuliani today.

[sikofit]

@DougBH

Precedent does not matter…Congress can do what it wants with or without precedent, unless the courts say otherwise…and they likely won’t.

They won’t. There is a reason past instances were never challenged

[zantax]

@sikofit

@zantax

@sikofit

@zantax

@sikofit

@zantax

Congressional precedent is irrelevant, show me legal precedent of such being upheld.

And Congressional precedent is what matters when it comes to Congressional proceedings. Legal precedent is not a requirement no matter how badly you want it to be.

It will be challenged in court and that is when legal precedent matters, I never said congress couldn’t impeach him, I said it wouldn’t pass muster in court if he is barred from running for office with a conviction that happens after he leaves office.

Precedent says it holds up. There’s a reason the multiple instances of this happening in the past have never been reversed

Which of these precedents removed a constitutional right? There is no constitutional right to be a judge, there is one to be eligible to run for President.

Dude this isn’t going to be the first time or even the second this is going to be done.

By all means, show me this having been done before. Show me the case where the courts say congress can bar a private citizen from holding office by impeaching them.

[WuWei]

@Meriweather

@WuWei

Irrelevant. You are trying to force them to “prove”. They don’t have to. All it takes is 51% (House) to vote yes.

No, I am always against force. I am asking them to think it over before they call for Impeachment. Carefully. It would be interesting to see the result of what a strictly anonymous vote (Nancy Pelosi having no way of knowing who voted how).

Requiring then.

Did Trump think it over? Carefully?

[DougBH]

@sikofit

@DougBH

Precedent does not matter…Congress can do what it wants with or without precedent, unless the courts say otherwise…and they likely won’t.

They won’t. There is a reason past instances were never challenged

So…you believe you could be impeached, even though you have never held a federal office? (I am assuming here)

[WuWei]

@zantax

@peek-a-boo

If the intention is to prevent him from running again, it is political.

So if congress impeached me tomorrow, a private citizen, the courts would say it was a political matter and they can’t get involved? Nope.

Are you a former President?

[sikofit]

@DougBH

@sikofit

@DougBH

Precedent does not matter…Congress can do what it wants with or without precedent, unless the courts say otherwise…and they likely won’t.

They won’t. There is a reason past instances were never challenged

So…you believe you could be impeached, even though you have never held a federal office? (I am assuming here)

That isn’t the case though is it? Trump has held office

[WuWei]

@zantax

@sikofit

@zantax

@WuWei

It is a political question.

Not after he is once again a private citizen it isn’t.

Yes it is

No it isn’t, it is then a matter of the constitutional right to run for office possessed by a private citizen.

A former President is not just a private citizen.

[zantax]

@DougBH

@sikofit

@zantax

Congressional precedent is irrelevant, show me legal precedent of such being upheld.

And Congressional precedent is what matters when it comes to Congressional proceedings. Legal precedent is not a requirement no matter how badly you want it to be.

Precedent does not matter…Congress can do what it wants with or without precedent, unless the courts say otherwise…and they likely won’t.
If precedent matters, then precedent says no one can be convicted of an impeachable offense if they do not hold office, because no one ever has been.
Likely the reason for that is that some Senators didn’t think you could convict someone of impeachment if they did not hold a federal office.

So, theoretically, democrats, if they had sufficient numbers in congress, could simply impeach any potential opponents from holding office? Why didn’t the GOP think of this when Ross Perot ran?

[DougBH]

My guess is that enough Senators will vote against conviction based on the grounds that Trump does not hold a Federal Office any longer and therefore cannot or should not be subject to conviction (at least I would vote that way).
If that happens, you will then have your “precedence” that only an office holder can be convicted of an impeachable offense.
Doesn’t mean he can’t be indicted if a crime occurred.

[peek-a-boo]

Trump is a former President. Big difference.

[TommyLucchese]

@Jezcoe

It depends on how the political winds are blowing and what information comes out between now and then. Trump is already losing support from the more rational people in the GOP who owe him nothing.

And he has no means of retaliation. Without Twitter, and being banned by every other social media app on Earth so he won’t migrate, he can’t rile up his troll army.

[sikofit]

@DougBH

If that happens, you will then have your “precedence” that only an office holder can be convicted of an impeachable offense.

Good thing the House is using an impeachable offense as their basis then

[zantax]

@DougBH

My guess is that enough Senators will vote against conviction based on the grounds that Trump does not hold a Federal Office any longer and therefore cannot or should not be subject to conviction (at least I would vote that way).
If that happens, you will then have your “precedence” that only an office holder can be convicted of an impeachable offense.
Doesn’t mean he can’t be indicted if a crime occurred.

Again, I haven’t said congress can’t impeach him, sure they can, whether it holds up in court or not is an entirely different matter.

[Jezcoe]

@TommyLucchese

@Jezcoe

It depends on how the political winds are blowing and what information comes out between now and then. Trump is already losing support from the more rational people in the GOP who owe him nothing.

And he has no means of retaliation. Without Twitter, and being banned by every other social media app on Earth so he won’t migrate, he can’t rile up his troll army.

If he starts a news network who other than MyPillow would advertise on it? I don’t think that even gold hustlers would touch it now.

[DougBH]

The House will impeach him. Pelosi said to do it.

[zantax]

@TommyLucchese

@Jezcoe

It depends on how the political winds are blowing and what information comes out between now and then. Trump is already losing support from the more rational people in the GOP who owe him nothing.

And he has no means of retaliation. Without Twitter, and being banned by every other social media app on Earth so he won’t migrate, he can’t rile up his troll army.

Lol. you don’t think there any media outlets left that would gladly give him air time or print space?

[WuWei]

@zantax

whether it holds up in court or not is an entirely different matter.

No, it’s not.

[sikofit]

@WuWei

@zantax

whether it holds up in court or not is an entirely different matter.

No, it’s not.

Can the courts even rule on a political process? (legitimate question)

[zantax]

@WuWei

@zantax

whether it holds up in court or not is an entirely different matter.

No, it’s not.

Yes it is. Private citizens are not subject to impeachment, nor can congress bar a private citizen from holding the office if they are constitutionally eligible.