Posted on 01/12/2021 8:19:54 AM PST by rustyweiss74
House Majority Whip James Clyburn admitted Sunday that House Democrats may wait until Joe Biden’s first 100 days in office to send articles of impeachment for President Trump to the Senate.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said lawmakers are indeed moving forward with impeachment, referring to the President as an “imminent threat” to “our Democracy.”
The imminent part seems to be in question after Clyburn’s comments.
...
“It just so happens that if it didn’t go over there for 100 days, it could – let’s give President-elect Biden the 100 days he needs to get his agenda off and running, and maybe we’ll send the articles sometime after that,” he added.
...
Correspondent Leslie Stahl, during her interview with the House Speaker, makes note that Trump could leave the office and run again for President.
Pelosi replied that the idea of Trump running for president again is one of the motivations “that people have for advocating for impeachment” and conveyed that she’d prefer using the 25th Amendment “because it gets rid of him.”
(Excerpt) Read more at menrec.com ...
Agree, and there is no "reach back" provision to prevent a private citizen from running. Nancy is blinded by her hatred. I think calling her nervous Nancy or crazy Nancy hit home.
I mean, most private citizens cannot commit a "high crime or misdemeanor", but some of them can have done so.
This is damned close to a Bill of Attainder seeking the political death of President Trump. Think of it, the Legislature attempting to declare one person and only one person ineligible to run for President in the future. ISN’T THAT UP TO THE VOTERS TO DECIDE???
The democrat party is our greatest imminent threat to our Democracy they have a long history of doing so.
You first. Show your evidence from the Constitution where the impeachment power extends to anyone other than the President or an officer of the US Government.
Same as holding a trial and then trying to convict a deceased person.
I’ll stick with Alan Dershowitz’s understanding in this matter.
The “can’t run again” stuff makes _no_ sense at all.
Donald Trump, Jr. could run if he wanted.
The public version of these events is just hiding _something_.
What is it about Trump that has the democrats still running scared? He will be gone in 8 days so what is their hurry?
As for 2024, they will still have either Biden or Harris so what is the worry, unless they have screwed up the nation real well.
IOW, they’re that scared of him and his supporters.
Impeaching Trump now is like standing outside your home and throwing sticks at someone who left town.
Step back and think about it—it makes _no_ sense.
It’s an attempt to taint him sufficiently to keep him from running for office in 2024. Some people claim a “conviction” (Not likely!) would permanently deny him office.
Primarily it’s political theater. There will be a lot of that over the next 4 years. In fact that’s how the Biden\Harris-loopapoolza will govern for the next 4 years. A massive game of let’s pretend which we will be required to accept as true.
Thanks.
Does Nancy really think they can get 67 votes for Trump being guilty? I could see Romney and several other RINOs voting "guilty" but not 17 Republican senators.
Impeachment in the House is the indictment. The Senate conducts the trial.
In the entire history of the United States, can anyone point to one single solitary instance where a person that was indicted, then DIED before their case went to trial, a trial was held and they were convicted? Beuller? Bueller?
LBJ? Wasn’t he tried and convicted of murder after he was dead?
Of course the Warren Commission went on to pronounce Lee Harvey Oswald guilty after his death and to declare him the lone gunman. 50 years later much of the public still wonders what the truth was.
And I’m asking only about criminal cases and an actual trial, not some fact finding panel like the The Warren Commission.
I highly doubt that but if you can come up with a link...
Impeachment of the President, in the US Constitution, is for removing a President from the Office of the Presidency. If Trump is not President any longer (after January 20th) ... how can one remove him from office?
All of them if the deal is sweet enough. I think a majority of them would without any sweetener. The payoff is the exclusion from office.
History books will say "really really bad, impeached twice." It is historic precedent, that's for sure.
On paper, a conviction can carry a ban from (federal) office. I think this will encourage more than a few senators to vote to convict. Not to remove, but to prevent Trump from taking office ever again. This is a fantastic way to take out a political competitor and one who is not keen to run the scheme under the accepted protocols.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.