Trump Truth on presidential immunity - Answer from Federal Appeals Court Hearing, in Washington, D.C. is YES!
(media.greatawakening.win)
LET'S GOOoOoooo!!!
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (64)
sorted by:
I'm not a lawyer, and I haven't followed the details, but I think, in some way, Nancy Pelosi is responsible for Trump having the winning argument.
Constitutionally, the only remedy for a sitting President is impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate followed by removal from office. After that, presumably the President is subject to further litigation over that same issue.
Prior to 2021, one would think that the impeachment clause only covers sitting Presidents. But thanks to Nancy impeaching again a week or so before the end of his term, Trump was tried in the Senate after his term had expired.
That Congress didn't abandon the proceeding would indicate that they inferred that the impeachment clause still applied to the President even after being out of office. I think you can make the legal argument that Congress continuing the impeachment process after the term expired means that trial of a former President on any issue would be subject first to impeachment in the House and then conviction in the Senate - otherwise why continue after Trump left office?
Since he wasn't convicted in the Senate, then he can't be tried for actions while in office.
Are you referring to double jeopardy? Because, I have been thinking about that in regards to Trump being removed for a crime for which he has not had a due process conviction, but since the impeachment efforts failed, doesn't that exonerate him from J6? He hasn't been tried in a court of law, but I would think the concept of double jeopardy would apply. What do you think about that?
Not double jeopardy specifically. I'm saying he can't be tried for actions while in office without first being impeached in the House and convicted in the Senate for those same actions.
This does two things, besides benefiting Trump. It establishes that former Presidents can't be tried politically by the next administration unless Congress agrees. It also establishes that Presidential immunity, while not absolute, is essentially subordinate only to Congress and not the succeeding President's administration.
I could see how there is no double jeopardy.
The impeachment process is a political process regarding the question of meeting the requirements of the office & trust. It would mean that there is a vetting process equal and surpassing the moral requirement for entering the continental US from abroad. (Ever seen the requirements for a visum?)
It may be that there are things in a file that needs the attention of the criminal courts as these answer a totally different question.
Disagree.
Yes, it’s a political (Constitutional) process, but based on high crimes and misdemeanors. (Key word being “crimes”).
That actually makes sense to me!
He was impeached a 2nd time and at a time when he was believed to be out of office, but was he/is he really out of office? Impeachment is a remedy which may only be used for a sitting President - the consequeces of Senate conviction being simply removal from office.
Second impeachment, if convicted in Senate trial, would have barred Trump from holding federal office - THAT was reason they played that hoax out.