Should Trump be impeached again?

[kentuck]

I was just reading where the chief scientists in the coronavirus task force advised Trump to not attend the rally in Tulsa.

He is gambling with the lives of all Americans. Who knows where the virus might spike up next?

In addition to the bombshell information in the John Bolton book, there is plenty of evidence, there just isn't much backbone. It's almost like a death wish by Senator McConnell and his Republican comrades.

No leader is more important than the survival of this country. A leader that threatens our survival should be kicked to the curb immediately. If the Senate cannot get a resignation, then they should proceed with the impeachment, that could be easily resent from the House by Speaker Pelosi, with a few added charges from the book by John Bolton, which he refused to testify about just four or five months ago.

It's easy to play it safe and say it would never be legitimate unless he is beaten at the polls. Of course, even if he is beaten at the polls, we all know what he would say already.

[PTWB]

1. No. He should be removed via ballot box and then prosecuted...

Along with everyone in his administration who helped facilitate his criminal acts.

[uponit7771]

5. Can't happen while he's actively cheating to win

[PTWB]

7. Sure it can.

We just have to overcome his cheating.

What can’t happen is impeachment with consequences. We could impeach him so many times it would fail to have meaning because the republicans will never, ever, convict him. We could impeach him every day for the remainder of his term and it would not matter.

Voting him out is the single solution.

[uponit7771]

8. Computers don't respond to "overcoming", that's just reality. We can continue to expose Red Don's

... crimes and illegalities to American people.

What else do we have other than overwhelming polling to show Red Don couldn't win pre election?

thx in advance

[PTWB]

10. We do what we are and have been doing.

Are you under the impression that Trump, or someone working for him, was able to change actual votes in the 2016 election?

Disinformation / propaganda, voter suppression, poor polling, a bitter primary and a strong candidate burdened by terrible centrist messaging all contributed to our 2016 loss.

But I’ve seen no credible information that actual votes were changed. Unless you meant something else by your computer comment?

[uponit7771]

21. No, don't need to change votes at all. just make it harder to vote and Russians fund 3rd party ...

... candidates that siphon votes away from dem candidates in swing states like they did in 16.

That's all it took.

Red Don in 2016 under performed rMoney votes from 2012 so how did he win?

Swing states ... voter suppression and Russian funded 3rd party candidates in swing state siphoning votes from HRC.

I don't see leaving things up to an election where he's going to cheat

We have the choice of driving his numbers into the low 20s by exposing Trump Treason to the middle

Then ... WHEN ... Red Don cheats we'll have the public in our favor for the house NOT to certify his election win.

That's something, we had turnout last time according to number of votes so more cow bells isn't going to help.

NOT certifying Trumps win is about all we got

and

Yes, Nancy Pelosi is legally the most powerful women on Earth.

[grantcart]

14. A President who is impeached cannot be pardoned for those crimes.

If you want to prosecute him then you have to impeach him first to make sure there is no post election pardon

[PTWB]

15. That's not how that works.

[grantcart]

22. In fact that is exactly how it works: Article 2 Section 2 Clause 1

It is literally spelled out word for word in the constitution

The President ... shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of impeachment.

As it is questionable whether or not you can pardon yourself I expect that Trump will pardon Pence for all crimes (and everyone else in senior offices) have Pence sign a pardon for him and then resign as President.

After Pence is sworn in Trump will fill in the date.

The only way to proscribe that Trump cannot be pardoned is to impeach him, doesn't require a trial or any further action.

Currently Trump cannot be pardoned for the crimes listed in the impeachment that was already passed (conviction, again is not necessary). We should pass a comprehensive list of offenses and impeach him the day after the election without even sending it to the Senate. He would then be immunized against pardons for all of those crimes.

[PTWB]

23. That isn't how that works.

Scenario: Trump is impeached and convicted. He cannot be pardoned.

Scenario: Trump is impeached and not convicted, then prosecuted at some later date and time. He can be pardoned.

You’re blending two issues in your mind that are not related.

Further, assuming Trump is prosecuted by a Biden administration would essentially guarantee he won’t be probed. Trump is in poor health. He doesn’t have enough years left to see another Republican administration.

[grantcart]

25. You cannot read simple English. Conviction has absolutely nothing to do with it

This is not even a controversial position, boiler plate constitutional law.


Trump was impeached but not convicted. All of those involved in crimes related to the impeachment cannot be pardoned:

So, for example, Roger Stone cannot be pardoned for the crimes he committed that were a part of the impeachment:

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/02/27/trump-pardon-roger-stone-constitution-117757

But fortunately, the Constitution’s framers imagined this nightmare scenario—a suspected criminal president pardoning a co-conspirator—and they put in the Constitution language to legally prohibit the pardon power in exactly this kind of case.

Both the plain meaning of the Constitution’s text and the historical evidence show that once a president has been impeached, he or she loses the power to pardon anyone for criminal offenses connected to the articles of impeachment — and that even after the Senate’s failure to convict the president, he or she does not regain this power.

Under Article II, Section II of the Constitution, the president is given the “power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” Pardons are supposed to be used as acts of mercy. The framers thought of the pardon power as a “benign prerogative”—prerogative because it was mostly unchecked by courts or Congress, but benign because presidents would use it for the public good.


But the framers knew not to place blind trust in the president to wield the power justly. That’s why they forbade a president from exercising the pardon power in “cases of impeachment.” This phrase is often interpreted to mean that a president cannot use his pardon power to stop an impeachment case of someone else from proceeding in Congress. But the phrase should also be interpreted as preventing the worst abuse of the pardon power: an impeached president’s pardoning of cronies who have been convicted of crimes related to the president’s own wrongdoing.

The issue was so important that some delegates to the convention refused to vote for it unless some limit on Presidential pardons was added to prevent exactly this situation:

The framers deliberately used the phrase “cases of impeachment,” not “conviction.” One reason why is simple: A president convicted by the Senate would be removed from office, and thus unable to pardon anyone. As such, there would be no reason for the Constitution to curb a convicted president’s pardon power. No exception to the pardon power needs to be granted, because no such power exists.

It is simple, direct and means exactly what it says,

The pardon powers of the President are based on Article Two of the United States Constitution (Section 2, Clause 1), which provides:

The President ... shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of impeachment.

It works exactly the way it is written.

Anyone who is related to a crime in which the President has been impeached cannot be pardoned. Conviction in the Senate is not an issue.

[PTWB]

27. No, that is simply a common misconception that some folks have.

I hope this post does not come across as belittling or demeaning. I'm not a very good educator and tend to be blunt.

You're simply wrong.

This idea that Trump can be impeached for various crimes, and then later prosecuted federally for crimes related to that impeachment process, and then be immune to pardon, is simply a glaring misreading of the constitution and misunderstanding of how the process works.

The consensus in the legal community is that the "cases of impeachment" exception to pardon powers ONLY prevents a president from pardoning someone who has been impeached, thus returning them to their elected position. It has nothing to do with limiting a president's ability to pardon someone who has been convicted of a crime, regardless of whether or not that crime was part of the impeachment case or not.

But don't just take my word for it, this has come up many times during the Trump years. Here is a recent example of someone (wrongly) interpreting the clause your way, and then people who know what they are talking about explaining why that person was wrong.


You may be familiar with the following (much-maligned) opinion piece by Robert Reich:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-impeached-house-literally-unpardonable-1475096

Regardless of whether a sitting president can be indicted and convicted on such criminal charges, Trump will become liable to them at some point. But could he be pardoned, as Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon 45 years ago?

Article II, section 2 of the Constitution gives a president the power to pardon anyone who has been convicted of offenses against the United States, with one exception: "In Cases of Impeachment."

If Trump is impeached by the House, he can never be pardoned for these crimes. He cannot pardon himself (it's dubious that a president has this self-pardoning power in any event), and he cannot be pardoned by a future president.

Even if a subsequent president wanted to pardon Trump in the interest of, say, domestic tranquility, she could not.

Gerald Ford wrote in his pardon of Nixon that if Nixon were indicted and subject to a criminal trial, "the tranquility to which this nation has been restored by the events of recent weeks could be irreparably lost."

Had the House impeached Nixon, Ford's hands would have been tied.

Trump isn't going to be as lucky. The House will probably impeach him before Christmas.

After that, he will be quite literally unpardonable.

Here is what constitutional law professors had to say about his (and your) interpretation of the pardoning power / impeachment cases:

https://lawandcrime.com/legal-analysis/law-profs-robert-reichs-op-ed-on-trumps-pardon-power-got-the-impeachment-exception-wrong/

Legal Experts Take Note

Michigan State Law Professor Brian Kalt, who specializes in structural constitutional law, said that Reich was “absolutely 100% wrong,” in his interpretation of Article II, Section 2.

“Oh this is so wrong, it’s painful,” Fordham constitutional law professor Jed Shugerman wrote in response Reich’s op-ed. “He’s just making stuff up,” he added.


...


Professor Kalt then provided a brief explanation on how to properly understand the clause.

“[Reich] is badly wrong,” Kalt wrote. “The pardon power’s impeachment exception means that no president can use pardons to preempt or undo an impeachment or impeachment conviction. It does nothing—nothing!—to affect pardons relating to criminal prosecution for related offenses.”

[kentuck]

28. It seems to me there would be some value to have it all prescribed for history?

Why he should be impeached is important, in my opinion.

[PTWB]

29. At this point it devalues the impeachment process and gives him political ammunition to use in Nov

He’s already been impeached. We won that battle. Now let’s win the war and vote his ass out.

[Voltaire2]

2. Yes.

[Rorey]

3. It's warranted

But it's not feasible given everything else going on.

[bearsfootball516]

4. Yes, he deserves it.

But it would do more damage to the Democratic Party then it would Trump at this time. It would look too political. With all the protests and COVID going on, it would look like Democrats are more concerned with pushing impeachment then trying to take care of the country.

[Awsi Dooger]

31. Trump is impeaching his own campaign right now

It would be masochistic to interrupt him and change the national dialog

[uponit7771]

6. Yes, at minimum highlight his illegal actions to America

[obnoxiousdrunk]

9. It would be a

blessing in disguise for Trump.

[TheCowsCameHome]

11. Absolutely not.

Let him suffer until November 3rd.

[Brother Buzz]

12. A double asterisk would be kinda cool

[Mr. Ected]

13. I think it's exactly what Republicans would do if the tables were turned

It's terrible and diabolical and lacks civility.

But that's exactly why we should do it. Because they're not expecting it. We need to Pearl Harbor his ass.

I'm sorry, but it's time to give the man a taste of his own medicine. To allow him to escape would surely be perceived as a sign of weakness. He's already unleashed all sorts of unholy hell on America, and much of what he's fomented - civil unrest, pandemic negligence, on and on - will likely only get worse after November. The Democrats will get the blame, just like we did when Obama came to save us from the scourge of Bush.

We might as well get our money's worth this time.

[Solly Mack]

16. Oh, you said impeached.

Vlad the something, something.

[Wellstone ruled]

17. Yes yes yes,,

he should be Impeached once again. Schiff mentioned the Leadership will make that decision last night.

[grantcart]

18. Immediately after the election there should be an omnibus impeachment bill

This will counter any attempts to manufacture pardons to protect him.

He cannot be pardoned for crimes he has been impeached.

[marie999]

19. Not before the election, it would look too political.

After the election, there would not be enough to complete it. If he is reelected then yes, over and over and over again.

[BluesRunTheGame]

20. The House should vote a quick impeachment on November 4th.

“Unfit to serve out the remainder of his term”

Send it over to the Republican Senate and make it clear that they’ll be blamed for any damage Trump does to the country between November and the inauguration.

[kentuck]

30. Your idea has a lot of potential.

What if he were impeached just after the election but not sent to the Senate unless....

He did something so egregious that the Republicans would want to convict him. Something ao egregious, such as losing the US Senate, the House, and the Presidency in the last election?

[Thomas Hurt]

24. He should be impeached again just as soon as there is a bigly chance of convicting the SOB.

Until then it is making him a one term loser and hoping he has to be dragged bodily from the WH kicking and screaming about conspiracy.

[2naSalit]

26. Waste of funds...

Save all evidence for the trials next year and beyond. Focus on making it through the next seven months and dumping the regime.

[rockfordfile]

32. It's those peoples fault. They know the risk.