You are wrong.
We'll have to wait and see. I'm sure that some would like to do it to insure Trump can't run again. But if it goes to the Supreme Court Trump put in strict Constitutionalists. Roberts or not that's 5-4 in favor of Trump if they actually take it to SCOTUS.
Are you serious? $1400 + $600 = $2000.
Trump didn't resign his office and will be a private citizen before the Senate can try him. Trump believing he was cheated and encouraging citizens to protest does not a crime make.You are wrong.
“ The Senate convened its trial in early April, with Belknap present, after agreeing that it retained impeachment jurisdiction over former government officials. During May, the Senate heard more than 40 witnesses, as House managers argued that Belknap should not be allowed to escape from justice simply by resigning his office.“
Impeachment is not a criminal trial.
But it's supposed to happen if the president committed high crimes and misdemeanors. The Senate conducts a trial to determine whether to remove or not.
and in the Senate the accused is allowed to present a defense. Something he couldn't do in the House.
You really believe the framers just missed this little loophole? You believe they thought the President could commit all the crime they wanted at the end of their term and be free of consequence because it would take too long to hold a trial. That is incredibly stupid.
The president can be arrested after leaving office if he commits Federal crimes while in office. The Senate trial as prescribed by the Constitution is strictly about removing him from office, nothing more. If he's gone already then he can't be removed.
My memory fails me, what did Mr. President do about these burned cities and businesses? I don’t remember....
The left’s bare-faced hypocrisy: Devine
What a difference a week makes. On Wednesday, we discovered that House Democrats actually support police. They are against mob violence. They believe in law and order. They believe in harsh punishm…nypost.com
Great opinion piece.
Again, who is the sitting president?
That is not how the Senate has viewed its oversight in the past. They have the authority to judge former officials. I’m not sure why you are ignoring the precedent.
Lol, we will always be friends. This is where we show people how to act like adults and have a conversation without taking it personal.
You are wrong.You are wrong.
“ The Senate convened its trial in early April, with Belknap present, after agreeing that it retained impeachment jurisdiction over former government officials. During May, the Senate heard more than 40 witnesses, as House managers argued that Belknap should not be allowed to escape from justice simply by resigning his office.“
Damn you're clueless.
You clearly don't understand how free speech works
Um, you speak freely and no one stops you, what's there to understand?
Obviously you don't understand free speech either
