Could The US Senate Move To Pre-Emptively Impeach Candidate Trump?

[Silhouette]

You have to follow the logic lawyers use to understand my argument here. If a person is running for President, that person has to be eligible to be President. That's a given. Hold that thought.

If a person running for president is found to be unfit in some way that might compromise national security, national cohesion and the Union itself, it must be assumed he will win the election; because he could.

The Senate right now has a republican majority. No doubt democrats are shocked at the dangerous nature of Donald Trump as president. I could see an impeachment happening.

This would do two positive things for the GOP. 1. It would show they don't live a double standard. After all, they impeached Clinton for the same things Trump is guilty of. So they'd gain integrity there. 2. It would distance them from Hillary's sure-to-come more damning revelations on the not-suited-for-POTUS Trump. People could still love and admire their hero Trump; even as his diabolical true nature is revealed. And they could vote Trump on the ticket. But they'd have to understand that if found guilty of crimes against women, or other high crimes, Trump might not be sworn into office.

I would vote the Trump ticket under those circumstances. And if Trump is removed, it would be his own damn fault with the assistance of Hillary exposing him for what he's done.

 

[martybegan]

You have to follow the logic lawyers use to understand my argument here. If a person is running for President, that person has to be eligible to be President. That's a given. Hold that thought.

If a person running for president is found to be unfit in some way that might compromise national security, national cohesion and the Union itself, it must be assumed he will win the election; because he could.

The Senate right now has a republican majority. No doubt democrats are shocked at the dangerous nature of Donald Trump as president. I could see an impeachment happening.

This would do two positive things for the GOP. 1. It would show they don't live a double standard. After all, they impeached Clinton for the same things Trump is guilty of. So they'd gain integrity there. 2. It would distance them from Hillary's sure-to-come more damning revelations on the not-suited-for-POTUS Trump. People could still love and admire their hero Trump; even as his diabolical true nature is revealed. And they could vote Trump on the ticket. But they'd have to understand that if found guilty of crimes against women, or other high crimes, Trump might not be sworn into office.

I would vote the Trump ticket under those circumstances. And if Trump is removed, it would be his own damn fault with the assistance of Hillary exposing him for what he's done.

The House Impeaches a Federal Officeholder, the Senate is the Jury in a trial AFTER a president has been Impeached. Removal from office is a result of conviction by the Senate, not the Impeachment process itself.

 

[LaDexter]

Why not?


The US Senate only cares about Israel. That is why we are in such a mess and O wasn't impeached for multiple counts....

Impeach only patriotic Americans - the motto of the "leadership" of the current GOP and Dems....


If you are a traitor who sells out America, you are very popular in the US Senate.

 

[Silhouette]

The House Impeaches a Federal Officeholder, the Senate is the Jury in a trial AFTER a president has been Impeached. Removal from office is a result of conviction by the Senate, not the Impeachment process itself.

OK, thanks for the poli-sci lesson. Still though? Yes? (I doubt the House would protest removing Trump by the time Hillary peels off her next tape of him saying he just raped a 13 year old girl or whatever..) There has to be more dirt on Trump recorded forever than backstage at a Motely Crue concert..

 

[martybegan]

The House Impeaches a Federal Officeholder, the Senate is the Jury in a trial AFTER a president has been Impeached. Removal from office is a result of conviction by the Senate, not the Impeachment process itself.

OK, thanks for the poli-sci lesson. Still though? Yes?

Probably not. First the House would have to vote for Impeachment, then set up a Trial in the Senate and vote for removal, all within 3-4 months. Plus you need 2/3 of the Senate to vote for removal, even if you only need 1/2 the House to Impeach.

 

[yiostheoy]

You have to follow the logic lawyers use to understand my argument here. If a person is running for President, that person has to be eligible to be President. That's a given. Hold that thought.

If a person running for president is found to be unfit in some way that might compromise national security, national cohesion and the Union itself, it must be assumed he will win the election; because he could.

The Senate right now has a republican majority. No doubt democrats are shocked at the dangerous nature of Donald Trump as president. I could see an impeachment happening.

This would do two positive things for the GOP. 1. It would show they don't live a double standard. After all, they impeached Clinton for the same things Trump is guilty of. So they'd gain integrity there. 2. It would distance them from Hillary's sure-to-come more damning revelations on the not-suited-for-POTUS Trump. People could still love and admire their hero Trump; even as his diabolical true nature is revealed. And they could vote Trump on the ticket. But they'd have to understand that if found guilty of crimes against women, or other high crimes, Trump might not be sworn into office.

I would vote the Trump ticket under those circumstances. And if Trump is removed, it would be his own damn fault with the assistance of Hillary exposing him for what he's done.

There is no provision in the US Constitution to prevent anyone from running for office except the age requirement and the natural born citizenship requirement both for POTUS.

If such an ineligible person (due to age or foreign birth) were elected, then it would be up to the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS to refuse to give him the oath of office and the candidate therefore could not take office.

But for a scoundrel like Trump there is no way to prevent him from being elected POTUS. He is 70 years old and born in the USA.

AFTER he takes office, if he were to be elected, which I doubt, THEN the US House could impeach him for any reason, as they did Clinton, and the US Senate would be forced to try him and vote on his conviction or acquittal, same as Clinton.

Read the US Constitution. You don't need to be a lawyer to read plain English.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You have to follow the logic lawyers use to understand my argument here. If a person is running for President, that person has to be eligible to be President. That's a given. Hold that thought.

If a person running for president is found to be unfit in some way that might compromise national security, national cohesion and the Union itself, it must be assumed he will win the election; because he could.

The Senate right now has a republican majority. No doubt democrats are shocked at the dangerous nature of Donald Trump as president. I could see an impeachment happening.

This would do two positive things for the GOP. 1. It would show they don't live a double standard. After all, they impeached Clinton for the same things Trump is guilty of. So they'd gain integrity there. 2. It would distance them from Hillary's sure-to-come more damning revelations on the not-suited-for-POTUS Trump. People could still love and admire their hero Trump; even as his diabolical true nature is revealed. And they could vote Trump on the ticket. But they'd have to understand that if found guilty of crimes against women, or other high crimes, Trump might not be sworn into office.

I would vote the Trump ticket under those circumstances. And if Trump is removed, it would be his own damn fault with the assistance of Hillary exposing him for what he's done.

You guys don't know shit about how government works, do you.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Why not impeach both of these bottom of the outhouse sewer rats.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You have to follow the logic lawyers use to understand my argument here. If a person is running for President, that person has to be eligible to be President. That's a given. Hold that thought.

If a person running for president is found to be unfit in some way that might compromise national security, national cohesion and the Union itself, it must be assumed he will win the election; because he could.

The Senate right now has a republican majority. No doubt democrats are shocked at the dangerous nature of Donald Trump as president. I could see an impeachment happening.

This would do two positive things for the GOP. 1. It would show they don't live a double standard. After all, they impeached Clinton for the same things Trump is guilty of. So they'd gain integrity there. 2. It would distance them from Hillary's sure-to-come more damning revelations on the not-suited-for-POTUS Trump. People could still love and admire their hero Trump; even as his diabolical true nature is revealed. And they could vote Trump on the ticket. But they'd have to understand that if found guilty of crimes against women, or other high crimes, Trump might not be sworn into office.

I would vote the Trump ticket under those circumstances. And if Trump is removed, it would be his own damn fault with the assistance of Hillary exposing him for what he's done.

There is no provision in the US Constitution to prevent anyone from running for office except the age requirement and the natural born citizenship requirement both for POTUS.

If such an ineligible person (due to age or foreign birth) were elected, then it would be up to the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS to refuse to give him the oath of office and the candidate therefore could not take office.

But for a scoundrel like Trump there is no way to prevent him from being elected POTUS. He is 70 years old and born in the USA.

AFTER he takes office, if he were to be elected, which I doubt, THEN the US House could impeach him for any reason, as they did Clinton, and the US Senate would be forced to try him and vote on his conviction or acquittal, same as Clinton.

Read the US Constitution. You don't need to be a lawyer to read plain English.

If such an ineligible person (due to age or foreign birth) were elected, then it would be up to the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS to refuse to give him the oath of office and the candidate therefore could not take office.

The Chief Justice refusing doesn't prevent him from taking office.

 

[easyt65]

For WHAT? Punking the All-In Media & the Clinton's asses, forcing them to come face to face with Bill's rape victims, and putting them in the front row of the debate?

 

[Silhouette]

Probably not. First the House would have to vote for Impeachment, then set up a Trial in the Senate and vote for removal, all within 3-4 months. Plus you need 2/3 of the Senate to vote for removal, even if you only need 1/2 the House to Impeach.

Well I doubt many of the dem senators would put up a fight to remove Trump. If they did, their constituents would be like "WTF?" And they'd not get re-elected (they'd lose their careers).

 

[Wyatt earp]

You have to follow the logic lawyers use to understand my argument here. If a person is running for President, that person has to be eligible to be President. That's a given. Hold that thought.

If a person running for president is found to be unfit in some way that might compromise national security, national cohesion and the Union itself, it must be assumed he will win the election; because he could.

The Senate right now has a republican majority. No doubt democrats are shocked at the dangerous nature of Donald Trump as president. I could see an impeachment happening.

This would do two positive things for the GOP. 1. It would show they don't live a double standard. After all, they impeached Clinton for the same things Trump is guilty of. So they'd gain integrity there. 2. It would distance them from Hillary's sure-to-come more damning revelations on the not-suited-for-POTUS Trump. People could still love and admire their hero Trump; even as his diabolical true nature is revealed. And they could vote Trump on the ticket. But they'd have to understand that if found guilty of crimes against women, or other high crimes, Trump might not be sworn into office.

I would vote the Trump ticket under those circumstances. And if Trump is removed, it would be his own damn fault with the assistance of Hillary exposing him for what he's done.

When did trump lie under oath?

 

[martybegan]

Probably not. First the House would have to vote for Impeachment, then set up a Trial in the Senate and vote for removal, all within 3-4 months. Plus you need 2/3 of the Senate to vote for removal, even if you only need 1/2 the House to Impeach.

Well I doubt many of the dem senators would put up a fight to remove Trump. If they did, their constituents would be like "WTF?" And they'd not get re-elected (they'd lose their careers).

Still leaves you short, and then you have the question of which House/Senate gets to do the voting, the lame duck one or the new incoming one? What if the house impeaches and the Senate vote can't happen until the new Senate is seated?

 

[Ozone]

if the senators want the power to preemptive impeachment, they'll torture the constitution long enough until it confesses whatever it is the senators want to hear, but it's really not necessary. a president of the united states is bound to inform the senate the state of the union, the senate has the discretion, the senate gets to decide whenever the senate has been well informed or not, and can force a president to think long and hard about who gets to form the government. so maybe trump makes a deal with all these people, promises them cabinet seats and everything in exchange for their support, well those are the first of trumps broken promises, even the first to feel the wheels under the trump bus.

 

[easyt65]

And they'd not get re-elected (they'd lose their careers).

And there it is...partisan hatred.

THE WHITE BILL COSBY SAYS:
"You wanna talk 'hatred'?! You should have seen how all those women I RAPED were looking at me last night! HOLY CRAP!'

 

[Silhouette]

Still leaves you short, and then you have the question of which House/Senate gets to do the voting, the lame duck one or the new incoming one? What if the house impeaches and the Senate vote can't happen until the new Senate is seated?

Right now. Today. Sessions held round the clock if necessary. We pay these people huge salaries to do their jobs...not to make calendar-excuses to not make vital decisions for the core integrity of our nation.

 

[hadit]

You have to follow the logic lawyers use to understand my argument here. If a person is running for President, that person has to be eligible to be President. That's a given. Hold that thought.

If a person running for president is found to be unfit in some way that might compromise national security, national cohesion and the Union itself, it must be assumed he will win the election; because he could.

The Senate right now has a republican majority. No doubt democrats are shocked at the dangerous nature of Donald Trump as president. I could see an impeachment happening.

This would do two positive things for the GOP. 1. It would show they don't live a double standard. After all, they impeached Clinton for the same things Trump is guilty of. So they'd gain integrity there. 2. It would distance them from Hillary's sure-to-come more damning revelations on the not-suited-for-POTUS Trump. People could still love and admire their hero Trump; even as his diabolical true nature is revealed. And they could vote Trump on the ticket. But they'd have to understand that if found guilty of crimes against women, or other high crimes, Trump might not be sworn into office.

I would vote the Trump ticket under those circumstances. And if Trump is removed, it would be his own damn fault with the assistance of Hillary exposing him for what he's done.

Actually, no. The Republican House impeached Bubba Clinton for lying under oath and filing false affidavits, something lawyers know is double plus ungood. AFAIK, Trump has not done that.

 

[martybegan]

Still leaves you short, and then you have the question of which House/Senate gets to do the voting, the lame duck one or the new incoming one? What if the house impeaches and the Senate vote can't happen until the new Senate is seated?

Right now. Today. Sessions held round the clock if necessary. We pay these people huge salaries to do their jobs...not to make calendar-excuses to not make vital decisions for the core integrity of our nation.

Not possible. how do you impeach an office holder that hasn't been elected to the office, even if they haven't taken the oath of office yet?

There is no constitutional mechanism from banning a person from running for President as long as they meet the prerequisites.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

No.

 

[easyt65]

THE WHITE BILL COSBY SAYS:

"'IMPEACH' a CANDIDATE?! WTF?! What a dumbass!

Besides, being IMPEACHED doesn't get rid of the person. I WAS IMPEACHED, & I DIDN'T GO ANYWHERE!"