I’m unclear on the actual details of an impeachment.
As I understand it, impeachment is simply a tool, justified using the “High crimes and misdemeanor” language, to remove a President from power. I thought it confers no actual judicial power to Congress, as they are not judges or court officers. They can’t actually impeach a person and sentence them to a jail term, right?
The pardon, therefore, would be a pointless defense against impeachment, since the impeachment isn’t a jailable offense and the pardon only deals with criminal prosecution. Someone could be pardoned for murder, but Congress can still impeach them because impeachment requires no legal judicial justification, they can do it because they don’t like the guy.
[nitpick]It’s a penalty that may be included, but is not automatic. For instance, Alcee Hastings was removed from the bench, but was not barred from holding office, and is now a member of the House.
Pretty much right. The Constitution does spell out that removal from office and bar from holding future office is the only penalty that can be imposed for conviction in an impeachment. And **Frank **is quite right, bar from future holding office is not mandatory. Congress can impeach, but cannot jail someone upon conviction in an impeachment.
And the Constitution explicitly spells out that a pardon cannot be used for an impeachment.
IANAL, but I think this is so clear that SCOTUS weighing in is unnecessary: no, the person previously pardoned cannot still be tried for the crime for which they were previously pardoned. Provided the pardon was applicable (ie, a state could still try someone who had received a Presidential pardon, since said pardon is not applicable to state crimes.) An intervening impeachment does not affect this.
Not for any crime. There are questions regarding State Department regulations. It’s an administrative matter. No crime has been alleged by any Justice Department official investigating this.
Taking highly sensitive documents home and putting them in your wall safe there might – or might not – violate State Department regulations. A home email server is a lot like a home wall-safe.
Even the worst possible outcome for Clinton would only be a scolding for not following proper procedures. She’ll say Mea Culpa and I’m Sorry and that’s all there is to it.
People aren’t that stupid, plus despite her extremely ethically checkered career, I don’t think she has ever been convicted of anything so what could she have pardoned?