Sen. Rand Paul says Chief Justice Roberts won’t take Trump impeach trial

NY Post ^ | January 23, 2021 | 6:06pm | Mary Kay Linge

[Political Junkie Too]

I got the impression it would be up to Trump to object and the issue would be who would determine it. Given Nancy’s concept of fairness I was a bit worried.

I'm no expert, but I don't think an objection like this would be up to the presiding officer (Roberts or Harris).

The "trial" is not really a trial, it's still the Senate. Something like this would probably fall to a Senate vote over whether the trial of a private citizen was constitutional.

The Senate would likely vote 50-50 and Harris would vote yes to try to eliminate her potential rival from running in 2024.

If anything, Trump could try to pre-empt this by appealing now to the Supreme Court on the grounds that he's a private citizen and impeachment is moot. That would put Roberts back into the hot seat to accept or deny hearing the appeal, since he oversees the DC Circuit Court.

In my opinion, the Supreme Court should hear the appeal just to settle this for the future. While the appeal is being heard, the Supreme Court ought to try to stop the Senate from holding the trial until they rule, but the Senate might declare themselves a co-equal body and move forward anyway and create a constitutional crisis.

Trump would then go to the media and declare how he followed every court decision against him brought by the Democrats, and the Democrats ignore all court decisions against them. This would support his defense that he's not the one who is acting against the Constitution, the Democrats are.

-PJ

[DoughtyOne]

This way the anti terror law keeps all it's evil parts.

Thanks... it would have to do that for them to back it.

[DoughtyOne]

Yeah, I’ve heard talk of that.

Wonder how much truth there is in it though.

[Nateman]

Perhaps the Court of Supreme Whim will hear this impeachment case and decide that you can't hold a trial to remove a President that is already gone . This will be the RATs excuse to pack the courts. ‘What an outrage’ they will howl ! ‘Trump incited an Insurrection and the court has denied us our Justice!’ that is when they pack the court. Gullible rubes in the Democrat base will actually support this too.

[Political Junkie Too]

as the Senate prepared for his trial and still uncertain as to whether or not a senator, or former senator, was even liable for impeachment

Since this is early in the life of our Constitutional Republic, I can understand how they were still grappling with what it all means in practice.

A plain reading of the Constitution suggests that Senators are NOT liable for impeachment.

Article II Section 4 says:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Article I Section 6 says:

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

Article I clearly defines Congress as separate and distinct from an "Office of the United States," and only Presidents, Vice Presidents, and Officers of the United States can be impeached.

Expulsion by the Senate is the only means to remove a Senator.

-PJ

[Robert357]

“....making the exercise “a fake, partisan impeachment,”......” You think it could be anything else?

[aquila48]

“According to the US Constitution, “when the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside””

Seems pretty cut and dried to me. Trump is no longer the president.

[MinorityRepublican]

Trump was still President when they impeached him.

[Political Junkie Too]

But the counter argument that he must preside can be that Trump was impeached as President and the trial is related to that impeachment.

And the counter counter argument is that Article I Section 4 says:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Since judgment "shall not extend further than to removal from office" and Trump is no longer in office, the impeachment becomes moot.

The Democrats want the second judgment (disqualification), but they must first obtain the first judgment, which is now moot. Removing someone who is already removed from office is like a double jeopardy, it's holding a trial after the judgment has already been rendered.

-PJ

[aquila48]

“Mark Levin yesterday said Kamala Harris would be the one to preside over the case.”

That would make it even more partisan, which means that likelihood of conviction will be near zero. Even Delecto may vote against conviction.

[Political Junkie Too]

The question will be whether it is a 5-4 or 6-3 ruling.

If the Supreme Court decides the constitutionality of this by 7-2 or more, I think that kills the effort by Democrats to use it as the excuse to pack the courts.

Since this case seems so clear, Roberts might summon the nerve to protect the Court by working to get a 9-0 ruling to stop the Democrats from packing the Court. It's in the self-interest of all the Justices to do this.

-PJ

[Political Junkie Too]

P.S.

Court of Supreme Whim

I love it!

-PJ

[aquila48]

“then the presiding officer would be the vice president.”

It’s the vice president of the president that’s getting tried that should be presiding. Then that should be Pence

[ifinnegan]

“‘Just the trial’? It’s the important part - and Trump no longer qualifies as he is not President.”

He actually is.

He won. Biden is illegitimate and not president.

[kaehurowing]

All this because the Supreme Court wouldn’t consider the merits of the President’s voter fraud claims because they were scared of leftist violence from Antifa.

[Cobra64]

Yawn. Roberts is just waiting for another check from Soros. Then it’s all systems go to impeach Trump. Roberts has no ethical standards.

[Flick Lives]

From the landscape, I think Roberts is looking at how this will play out after Trump. You could have various charges drawn up on dead Democratic Presidents (probably even President Jackson, and President Theodore Roosevelt.

—

For sure FDR needs to be impeached for the unlawful internment of U,S.
citizens in concentration camps based on their race.

[Nateman]

...It's in the self-interest of all the Justices to do this.

I predict 6-3. The Leftists on the Court WANT their evil decisions to carry the day. More leftist Judges means they WIN every time! Judas Roberts will be told to join the winning side so that extra judges can be packed in.

[Political Junkie Too]

Can we impeach Obama for "caging children at the border?"

No, wait... the MSM told us that it was Trump who did this. The 2014 photos prove it!

-PJ

[Flick Lives]

Whatever they do will just make Trump more of a martyr. They are idiots.

—

Exactly.

Biden’s approval rating 48 to Trump’s 51 according to Rasmussen.

Hold a trial to impeach Trump, who is now a private citizen, and it shows how weak Biden is. So weak that the leftists still feel threatened by a private citizen.