Will Trump get convicted during impeachment trial?

[DMN]

Zero chance of a conviction even if the will is there, which is highly doubtful, but the time simply is not. Once he is no longer in office, he can no longer be impeached.

[Caroll]

Originally Posted by DMN [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Zero chance of a conviction even if the will is there, which is highly doubtful, but the time simply is not. Once he is no longer in office, he can no longer be impeached.

Can you please point out the part in the United States Constitution that says, "once a president is no longer in office, he can longer be impeached," to me? Which article and section?

[DMN]

Originally Posted by Caroll [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Can you please point out the part in the United States Constitution that says, "once a president is no longer in office, he can longer be impeached," to me? Which article and section?

"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."

The senate has no jurisdiction for anything other than those explicitly mentioned in constitution.

[cd288]

Originally Posted by DMN [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

"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."

The senate has no jurisdiction for anything other than those explicitly mentioned in constitution.

Speaking as a lawyer, you're kind of misconstruing that quote. If a court were to look at that, they would say that the quote relates to what the President can be REMOVED from office for. It speaks to what actions by the President are needed for removal. It doesn't speak to whether they can convict a former President in a trial conducted after he's left office for an impeachment that occurred while he was in office.

Legally/constitutionally speaking, they are essentially fully within their right to hold a trial in the Senate (and in fact need to do so now that they have impeached him). What they probably couldn't do would be to impeach him AFTER he's left office...but there's nothing preventing a trial from occurring after he's left office, because removal from office isn't the only penalty that is applied and the impeachment occurred while he was still in office.

[Cassawary]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Speaking as a lawyer, you're kind of misconstruing that quote. If a court were to look at that, they would say that the quote relates to what the President can be REMOVED from office for. It speaks to what actions by the President are needed for removal. It doesn't speak to whether they can convict a former President in a trial conducted after he's left office for an impeachment that occurred while he was in office.

Legally/constitutionally speaking, they are essentially fully within their right to hold a trial in the Senate (and in fact need to do so now that they have impeached him). What they probably couldn't do would be to impeach him AFTER he's left office...but there's nothing preventing a trial from occurring after he's left office, because removal from office isn't the only penalty that is applied and the impeachment occurred while he was still in office.

There's no precedent for a President even being removed, so all your big city lawyer talk is just that - talk. 🦜

[cd288]

Originally Posted by Cassawary [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There's no precedent for a President even being removed, so all your big city lawyer talk is just that - talk. ��

I don’t think you understand lol. There’s no precedent for a president being removed because no president has been bad enough to be convicted. However, it is a constititionally permitted remedy as a result of an impeachment conviction sooooo it is completely irrelevant whether there’s precedent or not. And there is precedent for it btw if you look at impeachment’s of other political/judicial figures.

Lol are you really this clueless?

[Cassawary]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don’t think you understand lol. There’s no precedent for a president being removed because no president has been bad enough to be convicted. However, it is a constititionally permitted remedy as a result of an impeachment conviction sooooo it is completely irrelevant whether there’s precedent or not. And there is precedent for it btw if you look at impeachment’s of other political/judicial figures.

Lol are you really this clueless?

The high court would definitely grant cert to the immediate challenge. Constitutional Precedent is what they live for. It's not something an insurance lawyer would understand.

[DMN]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

but there's nothing preventing a trial from occurring after he's left office, because removal from office isn't the only penalty that is applied and the impeachment occurred while he was still in office.

Where was it in the constitution where the senate could try private citizens?

Originally Posted by Caroll [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I was right. It doesn't mention anything about being out of office. The trial will continue. Prove I'm wrong.

No, like most things in life, you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Caroll]

Originally Posted by DMN [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Where was it in the constitution where the senate could try private citizens?



No, like most things in life, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Insulting the person when unable to provide facts. That's cool. I hope your problems get better.

[Caroll]

Originally Posted by DMN [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

"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."

The senate has no jurisdiction for anything other than those explicitly mentioned in constitution.

I was right. It doesn't mention anything about being out of office. The trial will continue. Prove I'm wrong.