That would have been an improvement regardless of which Senator you are talking about. 
The President isn’t a tenant who holds a lease on the property. He’s an invited guest of the Federal gov’t which graciously permits he & his family to sleep there. Not much different from when a military member is assigned quarters on base.
When the owner of the property says it’s time for a now-unwelcome guest to move, well, it’s time for the guest to move. Perhaps with a motivational assist from the Sheriff. Or in the Fed’s case, from the Secret Service.
Depends on which horse.
Where I live ( New York City ) - if you stay as a houseguest for 30 days or more you are treated as a tenant - even if you aren’t paying rent - and can’t be removed without due process. I’m not sure what the laws in DC are but housing laws in general are pretty tenant- friendly
I learn something every day. Thank you. I had thought stories like that were UL.
I need to make sure I understand the rules around here; the area has enough NYers that it may have picked up some of the same laws. I’m a Progressive, but laws like that boggle my mind.
Sorry Frank, I’m right; you’re wrong.
http://blogs.usyd.edu.au/theoryandpractice/2013/10/if_woodrow_wilson_had_lost_the.html
It wasn’t Speaker, Wilson would have made Hughes Secretary of State. And it was 1916, not 1940, when the presidential lame duck period was 4 months long.
A blog post from an Australian university describing Wilson’s secret plan is your cite? Seriously?
But since removing him from office is the only penalty they can impose…what conceivable point would there be?
This goes back to the origin of the Move On organization. Since Clinton’s impeachment could not conceivably lead to a conviction in the Senate, the impeachment had no more real effect than a censure, why not just censure and move on?
OK, this appears to trace back to the posthumously published autobiography of Robert Lansing, the Secretary of State at the time. It is claimed that Wilson gave the plan to Lansing in a sealed envelope, and that the only people who knew about it were Wilson, Mrs. Wilson, and Lansing.
I don’t know whether to believe it or not. This is, after all, a president who didn’t resign when he’d had a stroke and was incapable of performing his duties.
Same here in New Jersey only there isn’t a time limit. If you establish residency you may need to be formally evicted. There are some grey areas that I won’t go into but certainly if you have been living in a house for 8 years you would need to be evicted through the court.
Just because President Sanders was elected doesn’t mean that he’s *my *President.
President Underwood speaks for me.
A censure merely expresses disapproval. An impeachment imposes not only removal from office, but “…disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.”
It’s true that former Presidents do not typically seek elective or appointed federal office subsequent to their terms, but it’s not unprecedented. William Howard Taft accepted an appointment to the Supreme Court following his service as President. John Quincy Adams and Andrew Johnson both served in Congress after their presidencies.
I’m sure the Patriot Act takes precedence over housing laws when it comes to removing unwanted persons from a top-secret Federal facility. I bet the “President” might find himself in Gitmo if he pushed too hard.
There were similar rumblings towards the end of the Bush II administration.
The jurisdiction over the white house would be federal. Local state laws wouldn’t matter.
Ah! Super point. That would put some meaning back into the action.
But the disqualification is optional. The Senate can choose to convict but not disqualify, which is why Alcee Hastings is allowed to be a congressman even though he was impeached and convicted when he was a federal judge.
But without the disqualification…and given the guy isn’t actually in office…the impeachment would have no point, and we’d be back where we started. A motion (or bill) to censure would have the same real effect.
Anybody remember National Lampoon’s “Missing White House Tapes” and the Swearing-Out Ceremony (purportedly following Richard Nixon’s impeachment?) Now that’s a declaration of disregard!
Why would it need to go this far, anyway? It doesn’t take an act of Congress to throw a bum or a fired federal employee out of a federal building does it? The former president no longer lives or works there - his contract ended. Security can go ahead and escort him out. If it comes down to it, the secret service can frog-march the former president to the curb and eject him from the white house property.
Not in the OP’s idea of a greedy President just flat holding on. However I see 2 scenario’s where it would work:
-
When a major national crisis has occurred right before election day in November and the president declares martial law and the president with support of congress, orders the election postponed until the crisis is over. Who says when the “crisis” is over?
-
There is a widely held view that the election results were tampered with and the issue going to the supreme court and the judges agreeing and therefore annulling the election and their be calls for a new election (this almost happened in 2000 in Florida). This could be drug out for a long time.