You’ll have to start a tradition of impeaching an outgoing President “For every act undertaken during their tenure as President” just as a precaution.
As feckless and ineffectual as impeachment has been, you might as well.
If the US survives with something resembling the current Presidency, I could see in the future every outgoing President being conducted out in a ceremonial impeachment. It would no longer be an attempt to indict for high crimes and misdemeanors; it simply becomes the equivalent of a retirement ceremony.
But there would be no effect if the president wasn’t also convicted by the Senate.
That’s an effective enough first step. I mean, think of all the times the Senate has convicted an impeached president. Surely that will give Trump pause.
If Biden loses the election, he could have Trump’s Secret Service detail reassigned and replaced with agents loyal to him. Then he orders them to bring Trump to the rose garden at White House, where he shoots Trump in the face on live TV. Then he pardons the Secret Service detail, and resigns before he can be impeached and convicted.
Trump’s theory of presidential immunity would give Biden the means to commit the perfect crime and escape justice.
IMO, it should be the middle of Fifth Ave.
Well, yes, when we say “impeach”, it’s short hand for “Impeach and convict”. The senate would go along with this ritual, because if they failed to do it, the new President would then feel they were free to murder all the Senators for being weaklings.
Keeping the President on a short leash will be important in the coming years. Those guys are crazy.
Or simply resigned.
(My emphasis)
Bingo!
Ha, Good one. I laughed at that, lol.
About as well as the English Civil War, I suppose.
If Republicans have taught us anything, it’s that the crimes of a son make the father inelligible to be president.
The supreme court rejected the jack Smith appeal to decide on the issues. It went back down to the 3 judge court. What are the chances of Trump appeal now?
There is a growing feel that Trump wants to stop the case or delay with these, but also that the thigs he is bringing up will actually be part of the case. It is fairly easy to decide if Trump had any presidential duty towards the election procedures. He does not. His DOJ had to deal with the court cases of fraud in elections. It was done.
The Supreme Court is going to come on the side of state rights as far as election procedures go. But…then there is also Colorado.
Just thought this Lawfare article (about 5 pages long), Trump and Smith: Reunited at the D.C. Circuit, was helpful in knowing what happened at the hearing yesterday. It’s pretty much just a rundown of what happened without any analysis. Since the nuance and details are the point, I won’t try to summarize.
Both the prosecution and defense have agreed in this trial that a president does not have immunity for non-official acts. If Biden shoots Trump himself, he’s still liable to criminal prosecution because that is not part of his duties as president.
Under Trump’s theory of the law, to be protected Biden has to order Seal Team Six or some other government agency to assassinate Trump, because ordering those people to do things is within his role as president. Note that I am not coming up with this argument myself. It was literally a question asked by one of the judges in the case (“If a president orders Seal Team Six to kill a political rival, then resigns before conviction in the Senate, can he be prosecuted?”) and Trump’s lawyer said, “No”.
Well then, if Trump’s political theories win out, I have strong hopes that Biden will do the right thing for America prior to the end of his term. And the teams should have some other targets as well. Because Trump’s team has all but outed what they consider a viable and justifiable scenario for their future efforts.
Note - I am not advising taking any illegal action of course. As I said “if Trump’s political theories win out” then this would be a fully legal, if morally questionable political action. And now to double down on the vomitting.
No, Trump’s theory is that the president’s official duties include anything that in the best interests of the country. If Biden decided that killing Trump was protecting America from a threat, that is his duty, and he is immune from prosecution for an official act of protecting America.
But but but… Killing Biden would be in the best interest of the country, but killing Our Lord and Savior Trump wouldn’t be. So Trump would be in the clear, but Biden would still be criminally liable.
And how long before he uses Nixon’s excuse that, just by virtue of being the president, everything he does is in the best interest of the country, therefore it’s not possible for the president to commit a crime.
Frost asked Nixon whether the president could do something illegal in certain situations such as against antiwar groups and others if he decides “it’s in the best interests of the nation or something”. Nixon replied: “Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal”, by definition.
Soon.
I actually included that in my original draft, but took it out because it seemed too much.
Clearly not.
Doesn’t the oath of office say he’s supposed to defend the Constitution against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic?
I know, it’s a stretch.