swordfish Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 https://www.wsj.com/articles/patrick-leahy-takes-gavel-in-second-trump-impeachment-trial-11612018170?mod=e2twp WASHINGTON—Sen. Patrick Leahy will become the first person to preside over the impeachment trial of a former president next month, putting the Vermont Democrat in the thorny position of having to run the proceedings and serve as a juror. The Senate trial of former President Donald Trump is set to kick off the week of Feb. 8, after both House Democratic managers and Mr. Trump’s defense team prepare their cases. Mr. Trump was impeached in the House over allegations he incited supporters to riot at the Capitol. The 80-year-old Mr. Leahy, the longest serving lawmaker in the Senate and the top Democrat on the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee, is taking on the role amid concerns about his health. Just hours after he was sworn in as presiding officer, he was briefly hospitalized after experiencing muscle spasms. The schedule of the trial hasn’t been set, but attendance for senators is mandatory, and he is expected to face trial sessions that have in the past run for more than 12 hours. The trial is expected to be relatively short, running for perhaps a week. Chief Justice John Roberts oversaw the first Trump impeachment trial, as required by the Constitution. But the law is silent on who presides over the trial of a former president, and the chief justice declined to participate in this one, according to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.), who said that Mr. Leahy was next in line for the role as president pro tempore of the Senate. “Sen. Leahy’s job is a little tougher in that he doesn’t come into it with the basic presumption of impartiality that normally attaches to a judge,” said Frank Bowman, a University of Missouri law professor who is an authority on impeachment. “He’s going to have to strain to appear evenhanded in any circumstance where there is sort of a partisan valence to any decision that he makes.” So, the Judge is also a juror? Since when? Yeah, that's fair......We can all trust Senator Schumer's "interpretation" of something that doesn't even exist.....Impeaching a former President...... The reality of this is that if the Democrats are unable to get 17 Republicans to agree with them (which is very unlikely) and vote to impeach (whether or not it is even constitutional) then they will come away from this having twice attempted to impeach a President for unimpeachable offenses. How will that treat their party going forward? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 I really do not get this. Upon impeachment and conviction, the only constitutional sanction is removal from office. An impeachment conviction would be inadmissible in any subsequent criminal proceedings. Are they going to argue that, upon conviction, removal is retroactive to the date of the impeachable offense? Just think about the ramifications of that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muda69 Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 49 minutes ago, Bobref said: I really do not get this. Upon impeachment and conviction, the only constitutional sanction is removal from office. An impeachment conviction would be inadmissible in any subsequent criminal proceedings. Are they going to argue that, upon conviction, removal is retroactive to the date of the impeachable offense? Just think about the ramifications of that! I thought there was something about if Mr. Trump is convicted they could then bar him from ever running for a public office again? Because you know the Democrat side of the uni-party is scared to death right now of a 2024 Trump presidential run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 4 minutes ago, Muda69 said: I thought there was something about if Mr. Trump is convicted they could then bar him from ever running for a public office again? Because you know the Democrat side of the uni-party is scared to death right now of a 2024 Trump presidential run. Will this never end? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muda69 Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 46 minutes ago, Bobref said: Will this never end? Not until the day that Mr. Trump leaves this world, I'm afraid. There is too much money to be made by the MSM, and too much time and money for the U.S Congress to waste on such a boondoggle. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 OK, 2nd verse, same as the first.... Can Congress now get back to screwing up the country in more traditional ways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteEstonia Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 On 2/9/2021 at 9:17 AM, Bobref said: the only constitutional sanction is removal from office Lol- https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPREC-HINDS-V3/html/GPO-HPREC-HINDS-V3-26.htm https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/War_Secretarys_Impeachment_Trial.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 1 hour ago, DanteEstonia said: Lol- https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPREC-HINDS-V3/html/GPO-HPREC-HINDS-V3-26.htm https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/War_Secretarys_Impeachment_Trial.htm Big surprise, Congress decided it had jurisdiction. The Congress is not the final arbiter, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteEstonia Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 2 hours ago, Bobref said: The Congress is not the final arbiter, however. Yes it is. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1992/91-740 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 6 hours ago, DanteEstonia said: Yes it is. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1992/91-740 I don’t believe that case applies to this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteEstonia Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 2 hours ago, Bobref said: I don’t believe that case applies to this situation. As the only group that can decide who it applies to is Congress, and Congress disagrees, then you are in the wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Liver Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 On 2/9/2021 at 12:12 PM, Bobref said: Will this never end? It will... Karma... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 2 hours ago, DanteEstonia said: As the only group that can decide who it applies to is Congress, and Congress disagrees, then you are in the wrong. That’s a little circular, wouldn’t you say? “There is hardly any political question in the United States that sooner or later does not turn into a judicial question.” — Alexis de Tocqueville We’ll never know for sure, since the vote was an acquittal. But if there were ever a conviction of a President after leaving office, my money is on SCOTUS having the last word on the constitutionality of such a “conviction.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swordfish Posted February 15, 2021 Author Share Posted February 15, 2021 Since it's all a game to the left - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muda69 Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 Well that was another multi-million dollar waste of time, at the taxpayer's expense of course. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts