Hope you don’t mind, but I started a new GQ thread on this subject(giving you full credit, of course).
Couldn’t POTUS challenge the VP to a dual, kill the VP and then pardon himself? There appears to be precedent here is all I’m saying. And damn that would make great TV! I’d watch that one, the ratings would be stellar. 
Actually, Jefferson and Burr were allies in the same party (Democratic-Republican). The plan was to have one of their electors vote for Jefferson and abstain on his second vote, so that Jefferson would have one more vote than Burr and thus become president, with Burr as vice president. The plan got screwed up (not sure if it was by machinations by Burr) and they ended up tied. The house took 35 ballots but ended up with Jefferson as president and Burr as vice president, just as originally intended.
a. DuEl
b. It would have to be in the middle of Fifth Avenue, not in Jersey like Burr did it.
Burr was actually a Federalist but he was really more interested in Aaron Burr than he was in party politics. He threw in with Jefferson in order to get New York to vote for Jefferson with hopes that he, Burr, would succeed Jefferson as President. But Jefferson had no use for Burr any more than anybody else did. The Federalists in New York who supported Burr did so mainly to thwart Alexander Hamilton and *his *ambitions.
The problem with this idea is that the President only has the power to pardon crimes against the United States. Murder is a state crime and so you’d need a state governor to pardon you.
Or find some territory with no local laws against murder. Washington DC is out, even though it’s not a state the local cops can still arrest you for murder. Some uninhabited island under Federal control might do it.
But even if the screw-up was not originally engineered by Burr, he surely could have insisted that the electors adhere to the original plan.
The Prez could only completely pardon himself if the duel were in DC or another area of exclusive federal jurisdiction. If it were any place else, the Prez would potentially be liable under state law, which could only be pardoned according to the law of that state.
He didn’t want to, he was hoping there would be enough of a cockup either for him to be elected directly, or it would get thrown into the House (like happened only four administrations later), and he would wind up as President.
It’s been noted this is wrong, but for completeness, the poster is talking about either John Nance Garner (FDR’s first VP) or Henry Wallace (his second.)
Garner was the one who called the vice presidency “not worth a bucket of warm piss.” Garner broke with Roosevelt during their second term. Wallace was the one who was distrusted by the party bosses. FDR dumped him as VP, but kept Wallace on as Secretary of Commerce until Wallace later broke with Harry Truman.
And to the point of this thread, neither of them was “fired” by the President. Rather, they were denied renomination by their party, and thus didn’t get on the ballot.
What about a military base?
First of all, none of this contradicts what I said. Nothing you quoted establishes that a President cannot fire the V-P. For example, the cabinet secretaries are impeachable, and can also be fired by the President. So the fact that the V-P is impeachable does not mean he’s not fireable.
The rest of your screed is just “The Constitution According To Exapno Mapcase”. It has no more or less validity than anything else you say. :dubious: As I was at pains to point out, we are guided by unwritten law in our actual constitution of how our federal government works. Most people probably understood that to mean that I considered it very unlikely that the President could do it, even though I made the point that we don’t know for certain. <smh>
No matter how hard you try to spin it, I did not even try to contradict you. Instead I added some context to the answer that you left out. Try it some time. You may feel good about yourself afterward.
Doesn’t have to be a military base. The federal government finally has a good use for one of those tiny random islands we have held onto all these years!
So it’s settled. Jarvis Island. Ten paces and turn. High noon. Just need to pick the date.
And since people cannot easily travel to see the event live just set it up as a Pay Per View Event. The ratings would be YUUUUGEE! The biglyest and best ever!
Murder of the Vice President, in a duel or otherwise, is already a Federal crime: 18 U.S. Code § 1751 - Presidential and Presidential staff assassination, kidnapping, and assault; penalties | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
Sure, it’s a federal crime. But the point is, it’s also a state crime. So if you murder the vice president within a state, both the Feds and the state authorities can get a crack at you, and a pardon only takes care of one of those.
My point was that Jefferson had plenty of reason to want to get rid of Burr, even if the original situation wasn’t solely due to Burr’s machinations.
Article II, section 1 also explicitly says the term of the vice president is four years:
I’m not seeing your point. Yes, the term is four years, but the officeholder can be changed by resignation, death, or impeachment. If a firing were legal it would cut short the incumbent’s length of time in office but wouldn’t change the term at all. There are already procedures for replacing a vacancy in the office for the remainder of the term.
I think this is one of the things that can reasonably be said about the Constitution. The fact that no Vice President has ever been impeached doesn’t mean everything that would happen if so is undetermined.