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
Editorials & Other Articles
In reply to the discussion: "Impeach the president again" opinion piece, Boston Globe [View all]Marcuse
(7,463 posts)28. Private citizens are indicted, not impeached.
18 U.S.C. § 1752
a) ?Whoever--
(1) ?knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
(2) ?knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
(3) ?knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; ?or
(4) ?knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
[link:https://codes.findlaw.com/us/title-18-crimes-and-criminal-procedure/18-usc-sect-1752.html|
a) ?Whoever--
(1) ?knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
(2) ?knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
(3) ?knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; ?or
(4) ?knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
[link:https://codes.findlaw.com/us/title-18-crimes-and-criminal-procedure/18-usc-sect-1752.html|
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
46 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I agree with Hekate here, it has to stop. And that means WE need to stop it. Not age or health. US.
better
Nov 2020
#35
Disqualification is only voted upon following a successful removal vote by a supermajority.
FreepFryer
Nov 2020
#4
It drives me nuts when I hear or read about "the future political life of trump"
Escurumbele
Nov 2020
#5
That' my line of thinking too. Hit him with emoluments this time for the impeachment.
Pobeka
Nov 2020
#23
It just occurred to me, one possible grift would be a public speaking tour.
The Animator
Nov 2020
#26
I would've seen it here at DU, but I posed it as a question because I'm unsure of the details.
Pobeka
Nov 2020
#44
I believe it limits what the Senate can do while he's being impeached. I could
BComplex
Nov 2020
#46
Right. Try to keep the toddler preoccupied with impeachment so he doesn't get into trouble
Illumination
Nov 2020
#8
Yes! There HAVE to be consequences for impeachable actions, or nothing will ever change!
FailureToCommunicate
Nov 2020
#11
Yes, they could impeach again and take up the matter after the new Senate is seated,
dware
Nov 2020
#31
And then democrats take over the senate and BOOM! No more problem with him running in
BComplex
Nov 2020
#45