Why build yourself up just to disappoint yourself over ■■■■ that is never, ever, ever going to happen? The Chief Justice is constitutionally required to preside over an impeachment trial.
I seriously doubt it.
…if you were a white male that is.
1 Like
I can’t wait for the chaos to end.
I seriously can’t wait for when I wake up every morning I don’t have to wonder what stupid ■■■■■■■ thing is going to happen today.
1 Like
I would like to see this discussion taken beyond this forum.
It does say he shall
Article I, Section 3
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Emphasis mine. It’s not a suggestion.
I quoted the relevant section of the constitution, no mention of former Presidents, sorry.
1 Like
Trump is done. None of your people seem willing to recognize this fact and move beyond their hate.
Shall what? Preside over the impeachment trial of who? Presidents, not former Presidents, they aren’t the same thing.
What?
The OP is implying if Chief Roberts were to preside over the trial he would be Pelosi’s tool the answer to that is no
I would assume he would want it to be challenged legally.
1 Like
You aren’t going to win this one. The Articles of Impeachment will be submitted tomorrow, while he is still President.
Property owning white male. Except Pennsylvania because Quakers were actually kind awesome.
3 Likes
I’m looking for the part where is says he SHALL preside when a FORMER President is tried. There is much room for interpretation here.
Very much a matter of debate still.
By the logic espoused by a “constructionist reading”, a President could commit as many impeachable offenses as he wanted in the last days of his term because he knows impeachment proceedings would never be able to get done in the time period he was in office.
Besides, we already know how many Trump supporters will throw away “strict constructionist” interpretations of the Constituion…for instance Louis Gohmert reading into the 12th Amendment that “opening envelopes” equated to absolute authority to choose or reject electors.
2 Likes
And it doesn’t matter that the Senate is purposely sitting on it until after the inauguration
You do realize that there are Republicans jumping on board with this.
Think about. If Trump had conceded a month and a half ago he could have left the Presidency and only have faced the mountain of legal troubles that face him but now, because of his actions, he has to do that while being abandoned by long time lenders, an increasingly toxic brand and loss of access to his megaphone.
He is truly a very stupid man.
Glib response. I believe term limits is something the nation should less glibly consider…especially when a small segment of the population results in an entire nation having to follow Nancy Pelosi off a cliff. Nationwide, she had few votes.
John Quincy Adams didn’t agree with your interpretation.
Irrelevant when it comes to what the chief justice is ordered to do by the constitution, which is not to preside over the impeachment trial of private citizens.
