Active Now

Malizz
Discussion » Questions » Current Events and News » More proof that this new impeachment is a shame and a sham. Chief Justice Roberts will not be presiding over the "trial"?

More proof that this new impeachment is a shame and a sham. Chief Justice Roberts will not be presiding over the "trial"?

Why does the Senate think they do not have to follow the Constitution?

Posted - January 25, 2021

Responses


  • 34246
    Will depend on if they go for immediate dismissal.  Again I do not know if they will or not. 
      January 26, 2021 7:03 AM MST
    0

  • 19937
    Although the Constitution calls on the U.S. chief justice to preside over presidential impeachments, a senator presides when the impeached is not the current president, a Senate source said. First elected to the chamber in 1974, Leahy, 80, holds the title of Senate president pro tempore.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-impeachment/u-s-house-to-bring-trump-incitement-charge-to-senate-launching-second-impeachment-trial-idUSKBN29U13G
      January 25, 2021 7:36 PM MST
    1

  • 44602
    Thank you for reiterating.
      January 25, 2021 7:59 PM MST
    1

  • 58
    The Constitution also states that the purpose of impeachment in the House and trial in the Senate is to remove the official from office.  Trump is already out of office.  So, that is a moot point and, therefore, there is no reason for the trial.  This is just all political theater.  The Democrats hate Trump and will do anything to ruin his name.  That was proven when they pushed the Russia collusion hoax and it has continued with every single one of their attempts to remove him from office.  They don't care about the truth.  All they care about is destroying anyone who dares to challenge their power.
      January 25, 2021 8:28 PM MST
    1

  • 19937
    "The constitutional text is silent on whether an officer can be tried after the officer resigns or his/her term ends. However, as the 1876 case of William W. Belknap illustrates, when the issue has arisen, the House has been willing to impeach after resignation, and the Senate has been willing to try the official after resignation."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States
      January 25, 2021 9:38 PM MST
    0

  • 34246
    That is NOT in the Constitution.

    Article II, Section 4:

    The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.


    They do not have the authority to impeach a citizen Trump. Only a President Trump...therefore Justice Roberts is who is Constitutionally required for that trial.  

    This post was edited by my2cents at January 26, 2021 8:54 AM MST
      January 26, 2021 6:49 AM MST
    1

  • 19937
    Apparently, a former president can be brought up on impeachment charges for something he did while he was president.  
      January 26, 2021 8:36 AM MST
    0

  • 58
    The prescribed punishment for conviction after impeachment is removal from office.  Trump is already out of office.  Therefore there is no point to impeachment.  It will accomplish nothing.  To continue with this process on a citizen who does not hold any public office is a corruption of the US Constitution.  Leftist have shown nothing but contempt for the Constitution over the last sever months. This post was edited by my2cents at January 27, 2021 6:23 AM MST
      January 26, 2021 8:57 AM MST
    0

  • 19937
    It may keep him from holding office again which can only be a good thing.  Leftists have shown contempt for the Constitution?  Like all the Conservatives have such clean hands.  Give me a break.
      January 26, 2021 9:07 AM MST
    0

  • 34246
    Maybe....but it is still of a PRESIDENT so for it to be done Constitutionally, Cheif Justice Roberts must preside. 
    Congress cannot impeach a private citezen. 
      January 26, 2021 10:19 AM MST
    0

  • 19937
    I know you don't want to believe it, but Trump is no longer the president.  There seems to be precedent to being able to impeach a former president, however for acts committed while he was in office.
      January 26, 2021 12:26 PM MST
    1

  • 34246
    No there is not precedent to impeach a former President. It has NEVER happened. 
      January 26, 2021 12:36 PM MST
    0

  • 19937
    My mistake.  I should have said a former office holder, but that doesn't mean that the former office holder can't be the president.  
      January 26, 2021 12:56 PM MST
    1

  • 34246
    And because the former office is President....this requires Chief Justice Roberts to preside or it is not Constitutional. 
      January 26, 2021 2:35 PM MST
    0

  • 19937
    If he was still president, Roberts would have to preside, but since he's only Joe Schmo, he doesn't have to, but he may still be culpable for misdeeds he committed when he was president.  
      January 26, 2021 9:35 PM MST
    0

  • 34246
    And as just Joe Schmo Congress has no right to impeach...cannot have it both ways. He is either being treated as President or citizen.    As President...CJ Roberts is required or as citizen Congress has no power to impeach.   
      January 27, 2021 6:28 AM MST
    0

  • 7792
    I'm going to enjoy you for the next 4 years. LMAO!!!
      January 26, 2021 12:28 PM MST
    1

  • 34246
    Lol. Glad I could make you laugh. :)
      January 26, 2021 12:34 PM MST
    1