There is an inherent statute of limitiations in impeachment of a president. His term of office.
Now, I do agree that the general principle of credible government requires expediency, as well as accuracy and fairness. It's up to the two branches of Congress to navigate that, and right now they are proving they are idiots.
Well I wasn’t saying it is a 6A imperative, only that the principle exists in the law and the Constitution. A principle of equity would dictate similar consideration for an impeachment. More importantly is the gravity of the process. Many of the Demagogues said over and over on the House floor that POTUS is a “grave threat” to the Republic and that is why he must be impeached and removed.
And I know that has been hashed around already this week - if it is such a grave threat why would they be so hypocritical to delay his removal? But my point is slightly different - that even if the House wants to play games the Senate doesn’t have to play along.
Ultimately this is all political gamesmanship. Pelosi is using the Senate rules against the Senate. Because the rules say they won’t hold a trial until the managers are appointed and the articles filed, they allow Pelosi and the Democrats to hog the spotlight and control the narrative. Once they hand this off to the Senate they lose control of both. In fact, they have been running the narrative for years now first with Russia Hoax Mueller and now with this ridiculousness. So I say strip that power from her and change the rules, and make her pay a political price. Put a strict timetable on it, and eliminate “managers” and require that only the Speaker can present the case on the floor of the Senate. Then see how long she stays on as Speaker.
in theory, the benefits of a speedy trial not only accrue to the accused but also to the accusers and the public at large.
could trump request that the senate as trier of law as well as fact in the matter, take judicial notice of the house articles, and then dismiss them purely on 6a grounds (via a writ of mandamus, perhaps)?
trump is being accused in his office as president, so at least in some sense, the office of the president deserves a speedy trial, otherwise the lack of a speedy trial risks hamstringing the business of 1/3 of the federal government. this in turn can have adverse effects on all citizens.
making the argument directly to the senate would in theory short circuit any issue related to roberts.
Clinton was disbarred and fined for the crimes he was found to have committed by the special prosecutor.
Although the crimes committed by Clinton were adjudged in the Senate to fall short of the constitutional standard for his removal, they were crimes nevertheless.
It’s clear that impeachment is a proceeding covering alleged crimes. And the Senate role in impeachment is to conduct a trial.
We thus have crimes and trial associated with impeachment but we know the Senate is limited in sentencing to removal only. But we expect the crimes to continue in criminal courts after removal.
It seems reasonable that SCOTUS would rule to apply principles and rights to an accused in a presidential impeachment proceeding.