Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What does the US Constitution say about removing a president who is out of office?
FR ^ | 1/23/21 | Sidebar Monitor

Posted on 01/23/2021 12:38:04 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator

What does the US Constitution say about removing a president who is out of office?

And who presides over this farce? The Constitution says the Chief Justice will preside over a trial of the "president". BUT TRUMP is now a private citizen. Joe Biden is president.


TOPICS: Free Republic Policy/Q&A
KEYWORDS: constitution; impeachment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 201-205 next last
To: Sidebar Moderator
Clarity in Trump’s Wake The United States of America is now a classic oligarchy. The clarity that it has brought to our situation by recognizing this fact is its only virtue. By Angelo Codevilla
141 posted on 01/23/2021 5:00:10 AM PST by mewzilla (Break out the mustard seeds. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

Well we all know where that will take us.

I think they.we had better go back into history and see what happens when a country that is basically bankrupt, cant pay its bills, the government being totally corrupt, being manipulated by outside sources, etc, we had better do a comparison and see where it will end up.

Weimar Republic.

Took Hitler ten years to gain control.


142 posted on 01/23/2021 5:01:28 AM PST by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator
The Constitution, what the hell is that, and why should it have ANYTHING to do with the kamala and Obiden commie dictatorship.?
143 posted on 01/23/2021 5:08:03 AM PST by unread (A REPUBLIC..! If you can keep it....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

A lot of folks in the Southern States would disagree with that statement. Secession is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution of the United States.


144 posted on 01/23/2021 5:08:39 AM PST by Bull Snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

It says whatever the Supreme Court says it says.


145 posted on 01/23/2021 5:14:05 AM PST by OKSooner (IT'S HOWDY DOODY TIME!! HI SENATOR LANKFORD!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimfree
The CJ is only required for the trial of a president - apparently to eliminate the conflict of interest of the VP. A former president on trial does not create that conflict.

On further reflection, I believe this conflict still exists and warrants the Chief Justice to preside.

The conflict is that the sitting Vice-President would likely be the candidate in 2024 running against the defendant in this impeachment trial. Harris would be in the position to preside over the barring of her most feared 2024 opponent.

-PJ

146 posted on 01/23/2021 5:22:21 AM PST by Political Junkie Too (Freedom of the press is the People's right to publish, not CNN's right to the 1st question.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

Completely agree.


147 posted on 01/23/2021 5:22:59 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

Trump should hire you as his legal representative. Seriously.


148 posted on 01/23/2021 5:25:45 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

If Chief Roberts goes along with this he should face impeachment himself.


149 posted on 01/23/2021 5:26:41 AM PST by Buttons12 ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bricklayer

In effect, yes. LOL


150 posted on 01/23/2021 5:26:46 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt

Yep. Very true.


151 posted on 01/23/2021 5:28:45 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK

Interesting take.


152 posted on 01/23/2021 5:29:49 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK

Couldn’t agree with you more that their core motive is as you outlined. Fear. Of Trump’s return. Heck, the people miss him already. The buyers’ remorse will only deepen with time.


153 posted on 01/23/2021 5:32:59 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
What will Roberts' presence say about the constitutionality of it if he agrees to participate?

It'll say we have non-political SCOTUS justices deciding that the Constitution has no standing!

Regardless...the only uncertainty here is whether the Dems can blackmail as many as 17 senators. Personally I think if they don't have the goods on 17 R senators, there is no Deep State, and it don't rain in Indianapolis in the summertime.

154 posted on 01/23/2021 5:33:30 AM PST by Buttons12 ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: unread

My sentiments exactly.


155 posted on 01/23/2021 5:34:59 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: crz

I shudder to think.


156 posted on 01/23/2021 5:35:29 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

bump


157 posted on 01/23/2021 5:37:21 AM PST by foreverfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

Amazing. Here are FREEPERS discussing fine points of Law with respect to people who could not win following the law and so have dispensed with it.

The Demons will do as they please. The Law is their bitch and so are we.

Now let’s talk about something else.


158 posted on 01/23/2021 5:39:05 AM PST by TalBlack (We have a Christian duty and a patriotic duty. God help us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator
The House and Senate cannot try or convict a private citizen of anything. To attempt to do so is to attempt to pass a bill of attainder, a legal penalty that applies only to one or more persons, which is expressly forbidden by the Constitution.

It's illegal, but we know already that illegality is no impediment to the criminals in the Democratic Party.

159 posted on 01/23/2021 5:41:41 AM PST by pierrem15 ("Massacrez-les, car le seigneur connait les siens" )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
The conflict is that the sitting Vice-President would likely be the candidate in 2024 running against the defendant in this impeachment trial.

An interesting argument for disqualification or perhaps (LOL) change of venue? Remand to the Florida state Senate? Remove to the College of Cardinals?

160 posted on 01/23/2021 5:45:15 AM PST by jimfree (My 20 y/o granddaughter continues to have more quiality exec experience than an 8 year Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 201-205 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson