Posted on 01/10/2021 11:09:30 AM PST by bitt
US Attorney and legal scholar Alan Dershowitz joined Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures this morning to discuss Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat Party’s latest plans to impeach President Trump before the inauguration ceremonies next week.
According to Alan Dershowitz Democrats have zero chance of impeaching President Trump this week or after he leaves office.
Alan Dershowitz: “The case cannot come to trial in the Senate. Because the Senate has rules and the rules would not allow the case to come to trial until, according to the majority leader, until 1 PM on January 20th an hour after President Trump leaves office. And the Constitution specifically says, “The President shall be removed from office upon impeachment.” It doesn’t say the former president. Congress has no power to impeach or try a private citizen, whether it be a private citizen named Donald Trump or named Barack Obama or anyone else.”
Via Sunday Morning Futures:
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
True, NOT FORMER OFFICERS.
Please, that wasn’t my comment.
“Parsing the constitution will not resolve the outcome...”
On the other hand, do they really think this will help their cause with the former “deplorable” and now “domestic terrorists/insurrectionists”?
The part that you are not seeing is that the Constitution grants the power of impeachment as a “sole” power to the House. For all practical legal purposes, this means that the House gets to define what is and is not an impeachable offence.
I have no doubt that the House might/probably will adopt an interpretation that they can impeach (at any time) for an “offense” that occurred DURING when the person held the office. However, that is playing with fire.
If that interpretation were to be adopted, ANY former officer (Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Obama, etc) could be impeached for any offence that occurred while they were in office. Use that against one party, and the other will use it back when they cycle into power.
Very slippery slope if they go down that path.
Great example. And to the point that a person not currently an officer cannot be impeached, becuase that's not what the constitution says, all they need to do is say "the constitution does not forbid it," and then they do it. There is no recourse if they are wrong. IOW, they cannot be wrong, no matter what. They can do whatever they want in this regard. The constitution literally has no force agains the government.
They could get away with defining it the way they like but they would not be upholding the Constitution.
Kind of like when you get away with stealing the election.
I’m not seeing? I’ve never disputed they have “sole” power, only that impeachment applies only to “officers” of the US. “Sole” power does mean they can impeach any person on planet earth. The Constitution is a legal document. Terms such President or officer have very precise legal definitions. A former officer is NOT is legally an officer of the US. The law does not apply. 250 years of precedent backs this up. It is silly to even dispute it.
Well..... the Dems haven’t been following the Constitution regarding election law so....
“the constitution does not forbid it,” and then they do it.
This is somewhat different however since the language of the Constitution clearly states who can be impeached and the list is limited. Alas members of Congress are not on that list and cannot be impeached no matter what they do. Senator Harris can bail out ‘mostly peaceful’ rioters, thus encouraging more rioting, but she cannot be impeached.
https://www.riddick.gpo.gov/UserData/SenateProcedures/Impeachment.pdf
11th page of that PDF, page 975 of Riddick’s Senate Procedure.
It's on page 875, not 975:
Congress, Impeachment Carries Into New Congress:The Senate has carried an impeachment over into a subsequent Congress. Articles of impeachment against Harold Louderback, a United States district judge for the northern district of California were exhibited on March 3, 1933, at the end of the second session of the 72d Con- gross,m and the trial occurred during the first session of the 73d Congress, concluding with acquittal on all articles on May 24,1933. l At the end of the 100th Congress, the Senate adopted a resolution to continue into the 101st Congress the pro- ceedings in the impeachment of Alcee L. Hastings, a United States judge for the southern district of Florida.I2
Conviction for removal is 2/3 and must be done while he is in office.
Barrier to future office is majority vote and can only be done after conviction for removal.
Barring a private citizen from holding office is unconstitutional.
Some tidbits from the news that is getting out.
A smooth transition = Trump’s second term.
Not going to biden’s inauguration = there will be no biden inauguration.
There were marks put on the paper used in the dominion counters (the fake paper used for fake ballots) and they can see them torn or not .. anywhere.
They are threatening Trump if he ever tries to run again... threatening him in dirty ways. IN my opinion, he has to let the evidence he has on 190 there, let it be seen and known.. and it’s pretty bad.
This is what it looks like and feels like to clean up the deep deep deep state who aimed to kill us all.
As usual kabuki theatre but good enough to help biden keep making a fool of himself
I know he doesnt need any help
Impeachment is an exception to the rule that “the matter dies.”https://www.riddick.gpo.gov/UserData/SenateProcedures/Impeachment.pdf
11th page of that PDF, page 975 of Riddick’s Senate Procedure.
https://www.riddick.gpo.gov/UserData/SenateProcedures/Impeachment.pdf
At your cited source, Riddick's Senate Procedure, PDF page 11, document page 875.
Congress, Impeachment Carries Into New Congress: The Senate has carried an impeachment over into a subsequent Congress. Articles of impeachment against Harold Louderback, a United States district judge for the northern district of California were exhibited on March 3, 1933, at the end of the second session of the 72d Congress,10 and the trial occurred during the first session of the 73d Congress, concluding with acquittal on all articles on May 24, 1933.11 At the end of the 100th Congress, the Senate adopted a resolution to continue into the 101st Congress the proceedings in the impeachment of Alcee L. Hastings, a United States judge for the southern district of Florida.1210 Mar. 28, 1933, 72-2, Journal, p. 283-84. 11 May 24, 1911, 73-1, Journal, p. 344. 12 S. Res. 480, 100-2, Sept. 30, 1988
Consideration of Articles of Impeachment: On one occasion, just before 1:00 p.m. on the day following the day articles of impeachment were exhibited by the managers on the part of the House, unanimous consent was obtained that the Senate not proceed to the articles of impeachment until an unspecified future time.13
13 Aug. 7, 1986, 99-2, Record, p. 19779.
The Senate carried an impeachment trial over to a new Congress.
Hastings was impeached by the House during the second session of the 72nd Congress, and the trial occurred during the first session of the 73rd Congress.
The House cannot pass articles of impeachment and hold on to them for four years before delivering them to the Senate. Recall Nancy had to notify the Senate and deliver the Trump charges.
Once the House approves articles of impeachment, it must notify the Senate. Once the Senate is notified, it must take specified actions. It goes into session, remains in session, and does not consider business other than the impeachment.
It is only because the Senate is a continuing body that it may carry forward impeachment proceedings from one Congress to the next, as it did in the Alcee Hastings case.
See IMPEACHMENT, Selected Materials, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representives, One Hundred Fifth Congress, November 1998,
105th Congress, 2d Session, Committee Print, Ser. No. 10, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1998
At book page 754, page 50 of Report of the National Commission on Judicial Discipline & Removal, August 1993.
Initiation of the Senate TrialThe Senate’s trial role commences only after receipt of articles of impeachment from the House at the bar of the Senate. The chairman of the House Managers demands that the Senate order the appearance of the accused to answer the charges, demands a conviction and appropriate judgment, and exhibits the articles. Unless a Rule XI committee is appointed, the Senate by resolution sets a date and time for proceeding to the consideration of the articles. The Senate’s jurisdiction is narrowly circumscribed by the case brought before it by the House. Absent articles, individual senators are, of course, free to refer complaints or evidence of judicial misconduct to the House of Representatives and to encourage an investigation by the appropriate committee.
The Senate has an obligation to render a final decision on articles of impeachment. It cannot take the matter under advisement indefinitely. Although the House of Representatives renews itself every two years, the Senate — as a continuing body — can carry forward an impeachment proceeding from one Congress to the next. In the proceeding involving Judge Hastings, the Senate did precisely that. This resulted in four Senators who had been Members of the House being excused from participation.
I would note that it is not apparent that an impeachment can not follow departure from office, although I have read online comments that it can't be done, it has been done.
[Senate Document 99-33]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
99th Congress SENATE Document
2d Session 99-33
PROCEDURE AND GUIDELINES FOR
IMPEACHMENT TRIALS IN THE
UNITED STATES SENATE
(REVISED EDITION)
PREPARED PURSUANT TO SENATE RESOLUTION 439,
99TH CONGRESS, 2D SESSION
SUBMITTED BY SENATOR ROBERT C. BYRD AND SENATOR ROBERT DOLE
by
FLOYD M. RIDDICK, PARLIAMENTARIAN EMERITUS
OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE
and
ROBERT B. DOVE, PARLIAMENTARIAN OF THE
UNITED STATES SENATE
August 15, 1986.--Ordered to be printed
99th Congress Document
2d Session SENATE 99-33
At PDF page 61:
Resignation Does not Render Moot the Impeachment of the Respondent:In the trial of William Belknap in 1876, Mr. Belknap resigned his office of Secretary of War and the question was raised
. . . whether W. W. Belknap, the respondent, is amenable to trial by impeachment for acts done as Secretary of War, notwithstanding his resignation of said office; . . .\210\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\210\ May 4 1876, 44-1, Senate Journal, p. 928.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------The Senate resolved the issue by agreeing to the following resolution:
Resolved, That, in the opinion of the Senate, William W. Belknap, the respondent, is amenable to trial by impeachment for acts done as Secretary of War notwithstanding his resignation of said office before he was impeached.\211\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\211\ May 29, 1876, 44-1, Senate Journal, p. 944.
Correct. Trump will be impeached and the Senate under Schumer will conduct a trial after Jan 20.
“There are Senate and House rules regarding impeachment but rules can be changed with a majority vote.”
Ex post facto
Thanks. Very good info.
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.