4 ms·

I think Trump has become radioactive, even within the republican party. They may not want to impeach (and I am not sure what is the point of impeaching a presid

by cm2187 6y ago

I think Trump has become radioactive, even within the republican party. They may not want to impeach (and I am not sure what is the point of impeaching a president after he left office) but I doubt a come back is on anyone’s mind at this stage. But Trump’s electorate will remain however.

jfim 6y ago
> I am not sure what is the point of impeaching a president after he left office Impeachment may prevent him from running again: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-impeachment-explainer/explainer-can-lawmakers-use-impeachment-to-bar-trump-from-holding-office-again-idUSKBN29H1A8 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-impeachment-exp...
mullingitover 6y ago
> I am not sure what is the point of impeaching a president after he left office If a military officer commits a felony offense the week before they're discharged, I don't think the military would/should say "well you're so close to leaving, so we'll still give you an honorary discharge and a pension." I feel like the same concept applies here, otherwise we're opening the door to the president being able to commit impeachable offenses with impunity as long as they're close to the finish line. Also, not a lawyer, but I feel like conviction after impeachment would make conviction in subsequent civil suits a slam dunk.
- alasdair_ 6y ago
  >Also, not a lawyer, but I feel like conviction after impeachment would make conviction in subsequent civil suits a slam dunk. I doubt it. Congress can impeach for almost anything - it doesn't have to be anything illegal - they just need to have enough votes for it.
  - mullingitover 6y ago
    > Congress can impeach for almost anything - it doesn't have to be anything illegal - they just need to have enough votes for it. I know this part is true. However, and again I'm not a lawyer, but I think inciting an insurrection is actually illegal?
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      > However, and again I’m not a lawyer, but I think inciting an insurrection is actually illegal? It is, but even if they use the name of a crime or tort, Congress isn’t bound to apply the same definitions or rules of evidence as a court of law, and the decisions of the Senate in an impeachment trial can’t be entered as evidence of the facts found by the Senate in a civil case the way a criminal conviction can. So, while the trial (regardless of outcome) may generate a potential trove of free-for-others-to-use evidence, I don’t think a Senate conviction (or acquittal, for that matter) has much direct bearing on future civil litigation.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > Also, not a lawyer, but I feel like conviction after impeachment would make conviction in subsequent civil suits a slam dunk. No, unlike a criminal conviction, I don’t think it would. OTOH, any evidence gathered and publicly presented against Trump in the impeachment trial could be a valuable gift to those with substantially-related civil claims.
alasdair_ 6y ago
>I am not sure what is the point of impeaching a president after he left office Doing so bans the person from holding federal office forever. In other words he couldn't run again in 2024.
- masonic 6y ago
  Alcee Hastings was impeached, convicted, and yet became a Congressman quickly after.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > Doing so bans the person from holding federal office forever. Not inherently, but presumably (as it is the only remedy left, and apparently requires only a majority vote after conviction) the Senate would adopt the forward ban allowed by the Constitution if it convicted.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 6y ago
> They may not want to impeach (and I am not sure what is the point of impeaching a president after he left office) Trump has already been impeached the second time (it didn’t happen after he left office.) Conviction after he left office would be limited to a lifetime bar on future office (assuming it is legal at all, but I suspect that were it challenged it would be found to be), but the main purpose would arguably not be the actual disability to Trump, but drawing a line of accountability for Presidents in general. (Politically, it would also be an opportunity for some Republicans to concretely distance themselves from Trump, which they may see as beneficial for future elections.)
- amanaplanacanal 6y ago
  He could potentially also lose his pension. Given how strapped he is right now, this could be quite painful for him.

by cm2187 6y ago

jfim 6y ago

> I am not sure what is the point of impeaching a president after he left office Impeachment may prevent him from running again: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-impeachment-explainer/explainer-can-lawmakers-use-impeachment-to-bar-trump-from-holding-office-again-idUSKBN29H1A8 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-impeachment-exp...

mullingitover 6y ago

> I am not sure what is the point of impeaching a president after he left office If a military officer commits a felony offense the week before they're discharged, I don't think the military would/should say "well you're so close to leaving, so we'll still give you an honorary discharge and a pension." I feel like the same concept applies here, otherwise we're opening the door to the president being able to commit impeachable offenses with impunity as long as they're close to the finish line. Also, not a lawyer, but I feel like conviction after impeachment would make conviction in subsequent civil suits a slam dunk.

alasdair_ 6y ago
>Also, not a lawyer, but I feel like conviction after impeachment would make conviction in subsequent civil suits a slam dunk. I doubt it. Congress can impeach for almost anything - it doesn't have to be anything illegal - they just need to have enough votes for it.
- mullingitover 6y ago
  > Congress can impeach for almost anything - it doesn't have to be anything illegal - they just need to have enough votes for it. I know this part is true. However, and again I'm not a lawyer, but I think inciting an insurrection is actually illegal?
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > However, and again I’m not a lawyer, but I think inciting an insurrection is actually illegal? It is, but even if they use the name of a crime or tort, Congress isn’t bound to apply the same definitions or rules of evidence as a court of law, and the decisions of the Senate in an impeachment trial can’t be entered as evidence of the facts found by the Senate in a civil case the way a criminal conviction can. So, while the trial (regardless of outcome) may generate a potential trove of free-for-others-to-use evidence, I don’t think a Senate conviction (or acquittal, for that matter) has much direct bearing on future civil litigation.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> Also, not a lawyer, but I feel like conviction after impeachment would make conviction in subsequent civil suits a slam dunk. No, unlike a criminal conviction, I don’t think it would. OTOH, any evidence gathered and publicly presented against Trump in the impeachment trial could be a valuable gift to those with substantially-related civil claims.

alasdair_ 6y ago

>I am not sure what is the point of impeaching a president after he left office Doing so bans the person from holding federal office forever. In other words he couldn't run again in 2024.

masonic 6y ago
Alcee Hastings was impeached, convicted, and yet became a Congressman quickly after.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> Doing so bans the person from holding federal office forever. Not inherently, but presumably (as it is the only remedy left, and apparently requires only a majority vote after conviction) the Senate would adopt the forward ban allowed by the Constitution if it convicted.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

dragonwriter 6y ago

> They may not want to impeach (and I am not sure what is the point of impeaching a president after he left office) Trump has already been impeached the second time (it didn’t happen after he left office.) Conviction after he left office would be limited to a lifetime bar on future office (assuming it is legal at all, but I suspect that were it challenged it would be found to be), but the main purpose would arguably not be the actual disability to Trump, but drawing a line of accountability for Presidents in general. (Politically, it would also be an opportunity for some Republicans to concretely distance themselves from Trump, which they may see as beneficial for future elections.)

amanaplanacanal 6y ago
He could potentially also lose his pension. Given how strapped he is right now, this could be quite painful for him.