Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

lagomorph777

(30,613 posts)

24. I'm aware of the infamous DOJ memo,

Reply to scipan (Reply #21)

Fri Jun 8, 2018, 09:14 AM

Jun 2018

which I consider to be on very weak ground; the words of the Constitution itself don't seem to back it up. So the controversy remains, because, as with the 2nd Amendment, we keep letting the pundits say crap about it, but almost nobody just reads the (very very brief) relevant text of the Constitution. We have to start putting the actual words out there in everybody's faces. It's not that complicated!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

27 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

"in Cases of Impeachment...the Party convicted shall nevertheless be ...subject to Indictment [View all] lagomorph777 Jun 2018 OP

It says the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject NewJeffCT Jun 2018 #1

That's not what the clause means. Adrahil Jun 2018 #5

Exactly, thank you! lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #10

that's the weak argument they're making. it doesn't really imply that, it leaves it open. unblock Jun 2018 #7

It can be read differently, which is why it is a matter of such controversy. tritsofme Jun 2018 #2

I could read it in Klingon or Elvish; that doesn't change what it clearly says. lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #11

Well, all it clearly says is that the only restriction is that a pardon cannot apppy to impeachment tritsofme Jun 2018 #17

My OP is not about pardons at all. lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #18

Then I misunderstood. tritsofme Jun 2018 #19

Bizarrely, it is indeed a matter of controversy. lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #20

You and Stephen Colbert, saidsimplesimon Jun 2018 #26

Article II, Section 2 billh58 Jun 2018 #3

Another interpretation is that the president cannot pardon any party involved in an impeachment case FreepFryer Jun 2018 #4

People forget that many officials are subject to impeachment, not just the President. Adrahil Jun 2018 #6

He also can't pardon anybody else being impeached. lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #12

Including Gorsuch. duforsure Jun 2018 #8

ah, yes, the usurping, installed stooge bucolic_frolic Jun 2018 #9

We'll be nice. lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #13

Good luck proving that there was anything "illegal" about the confirmation of Gorsuch onenote Jun 2018 #14

You've hit the nail on the head bucolic_frolic Jun 2018 #15

I don't think you can impeach him legally. Demsrule86 Jun 2018 #16

Right; impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #22

I don't think it is possible. Demsrule86 Jun 2018 #25

Mathematically, I agree, unfortunately. lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #27

not clear scipan Jun 2018 #21

I'm aware of the infamous DOJ memo, lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #24

please let him be gone bdamomma Jun 2018 #23