An interesting thought...

[RED]

What if the Senate were to convict trump and oust him from office. The process would take weeks, first the trial, then the realization that whoever Pence would nominate as his VP would take weeks to be confirmed... by then it would be November and there will be another election and Trump wins in a land slide. The Dems would no longer be the majority in either the House or the Senate.

This whole impeachment thing is a pipe dream and more fake news for the fakers and the stooges MSM to crow about.

[Roadkingtrax]

I think the President's job is pretty secure. 2018 was an indication that he will not enjoy the majority he once had, and that will probably carry through the rest of his presidency...however how long.

[Gun Smoke]

What if the Senate were to convict trump and oust him from office. The process would take weeks, first the trial, then the realization that whoever Pence would nominate as his VP would take weeks to be confirmed... by then it would be November and there will be another election and Trump wins in a land slide. The Dems would no longer be the majority in either the House or the Senate.

This whole impeachment thing is a pipe dream and more fake news for the fakers and the stooges MSM to crow about.

Could he run again if officially impeached by the senate?

- - - Updated - - -

I think the President's job is pretty secure. 2018 was an indication that he will not enjoy the majority he once had, and that will probably carry through the rest of his presidency...however how long.

You may be right but he has majority to spare.

[RED]

Could he run again if officially impeached by the senate?

There is no prohibition in the Constitution to not allow a impeached and convicted President to be reelected. In my opinion it would have to be done by each State Legislature that set the rules for the Electoral College... Again a very lengthy process.

[togor]

Short of the President switching parties, nothing will lead to a conviction. Too many other political jobs on the line.

[Vern Humphrey]

Could he run again if officially impeached by the senate?

United States Constitution, Article I, Section 3:

Clause 7: Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

The part in bold is considered separate -- the sentence must include disqualification, or else the impeached official CAN hold office. A good example is Alcee Hastings, a judge who was impeached, ran for Congress and has been in Congress now since 2013. because the Senate failed to include disqualification in his sentence.

[S.A. Boggs]

My question is this: What crime[s] has the President committed? If none, then how can the President be tried for a crime? If the President can be tried for this is anyone safe then?
Sam

[Dolt]

that's easy...He isn't one of the swamp or deep state. That is a crime in DC

[togor]

My question is this: What crime[s] has the President committed? If none, then how can the President be tried for a crime? If the President can be tried for this is anyone safe then?
Sam

DOJ holds that a sitting President cannot be criminally indicted. That is a policy never tested in court but under it no Federal charges will be brought, and the DOJ would fight state charges.

This is not to say that a sitting President cannot do things contrary to the laws on the books or what Congress is willing to tolerate. "High crimes and misdemeanors" therefore covers the spectrum.

As for what the articles of impeachment say Trump has done, you are free to read them yourself. It's a quick read.

https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/de...mpeachment.pdf

[Vern Humphrey]

My question is this: What crime[s] has the President committed? If none, then how can the President be tried for a crime? If the President can be tried for this is anyone safe then?
Sam

He obstructed justice by failing to commit impeachable offenses, of course.

[Roadkingtrax]

He obstructed justice by failing to commit impeachable offenses, of course.

One advantage to repetitious colon inspections is the increased ability for someone to stick their head up further into their think tank. When the ears and mouth are covered, you've made it.

[RED]

Another interesting thought... If Trump is thrown out of office during his first term but is reelected in the next election, why couldn't he run again in 2024 and argue that his first term had been erased or annulled by the impeachment?

[Gun Smoke]

Another interesting thought... If Trump is thrown out of office during his first term but is reelected in the next election, why couldn't he run again in 2024 and argue that his first term had been erased or annulled by the impeachment?

I think technically he could but too many obama judges to block him and too many gutless GOP judges to push it through.

Then there is the age factor. I think by 2024 Trump and Melania will have had enough. He's not getting rich from his position like all the previous.

[Vern Humphrey]

I think technically he could but too many obama judges to block him and too many gutless GOP judges to push it through.

Then there is the age factor. I think by 2024 Trump and Melania will have had enough. He's not getting rich from his position like all the previous.

The problem is time. The election occurs in November, and if the liberal judges simply spin out the case, the election will occur before there is a decision and the case will be moot.

[Art]

Vern is correct. Both removal from office and disqualification from future office must be in the verdict. Otherwise the person removed but not disqualified can hold another office. Alcee Hastings who I have mentioned in the past was impeached, convicted and removed from his office as a Federal District Judge but not disqualified from future office which is why we are saddled with him as a U.S. Representative from Florida.

The idea that the President can not be charged with a crime committed while in office is long standing but was not formally articulated during the Clinton impeachment. The Constitutional theory is that the head of a branch of government can not be the subject of an investigation carried out by his subordinates (it looks too much like a coup) but he can be prosecuted for crimes committed in office after he leaves that office. The same principle applies to judges. However, Congressmen can be charged with crimes while in office because the Executive and Judicial branches are not in their "chain of command." There is a similar theory that prevents members of Congress from being impeached but, interestingly, they can be removed by the congress by other Constitutional means, a 2/3 vote pf the members of their house (Article 1 Section 5.)

It's all part of the whole separation of powers thing.

It's also part of the heritage we take from the Romans that certain officials were "sacrosanct" that is immune from prosecution while they are in office, the best know example being the Civil Tribunes or "Tribunes of the Plebeians."