Page 1 of 19 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 189

Thread: Impeachment or the 25th before the 20th?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    brighton, brisbane
    Posts
    33,853
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Impeachment or the 25th before the 20th?

    Just breaking, Pelosi has asked the VP to invoke the 25th amendment against the President.
    Last edited by windsock; 9th January 2021 at 01:41 PM. Reason: Thread tidy up
    I’m pretty sure the dinosaurs died out when they stopped gathering food and started having meetings to discuss gathering food

    A bookshop is one of the only pieces of evidence we have that people are still thinking

  2. #2
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is offline RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    28,805
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bob10 View Post
    Just breaking, Pelosi has asked the VP to invoke the 25th amendment against the President.
    Not the first to ask him - there were, from memory, two state governors did yesterday, one of them Republican. The decision is up to Pence, but he needs the support of a majority of the senior members of the administration (i.e. the cabinet), or at least a majority of the ones that have not resigned already. The decision needs to be ratified by a two thirds majority in both houses, but they do not have to vote on it until 21 days later, by which time he is out of office anyway. So it would never come to a vote. I assume that since Pelosi is asking for it she has already got agreement from the Senate Majority leader not to vote before the 20th. She may, in fact, already have got Pence's OK before going public, although this could be to pressure him.

    Pence has shown that he will not do anything blatantly unconstitutional, and by refusing to attempt the unconstitutional rejection of the electoral votes, he is already on Trump's black list, so there is little likelihood that he will act in any way other than what he thinks is both constitutional and in his best interest. Acting in a statesmanlike way is the sort of thing that could stand him in good stead in 2024, but the deciding factor is likely to be getting support of the remaining cabinet members, who were chosen for their personal loyalty to Trump, and are generally not very bright or competent. So this could be a problem.

    Unless Pence can get almost unanimous support from these, it is unlikely, in my view, that he will act.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    brighton, brisbane
    Posts
    33,853
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JDNSW View Post
    Not the first to ask him - there were, from memory, two state governors did yesterday, one of them Republican. The decision is up to Pence, but he needs the support of a majority of the senior members of the administration (i.e. the cabinet), or at least a majority of the ones that have not resigned already. The decision needs to be ratified by a two thirds majority in both houses, but they do not have to vote on it until 21 days later, by which time he is out of office anyway. So it would never come to a vote. I assume that since Pelosi is asking for it she has already got agreement from the Senate Majority leader not to vote before the 20th. She may, in fact, already have got Pence's OK before going public, although this could be to pressure him.

    Pence has shown that he will not do anything blatantly unconstitutional, and by refusing to attempt the unconstitutional rejection of the electoral votes, he is already on Trump's black list, so there is little likelihood that he will act in any way other than what he thinks is both constitutional and in his best interest. Acting in a statesmanlike way is the sort of thing that could stand him in good stead in 2024, but the deciding factor is likely to be getting support of the remaining cabinet members, who were chosen for their personal loyalty to Trump, and are generally not very bright or competent. So this could be a problem.

    Unless Pence can get almost unanimous support from these, it is unlikely, in my view, that he will act.
    It's the 25th or impeachment , a 2nd time. Sorry to hijack the thread, but this is important .EDIT [ Pelosi was speaking in her role as the House Speaker.]

    Pelosi Calls for Trump to Be Removed by 25th Amendment or Be Impeached (msn.com)
    I’m pretty sure the dinosaurs died out when they stopped gathering food and started having meetings to discuss gathering food

    A bookshop is one of the only pieces of evidence we have that people are still thinking

  4. #4
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is offline RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    28,805
    Total Downloaded
    0
    The problem with impeachment is that while the house could impeach him in 24 hours or less, getting a two thirds majority of the Senate to convict him is unlikely and could take the rest of the time he has. But it has the advantage over the 25th that if it worked, he could never again stand for public office.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    brighton, brisbane
    Posts
    33,853
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JDNSW View Post
    The problem with impeachment is that while the house could impeach him in 24 hours or less, getting a two thirds majority of the Senate to convict him is unlikely and could take the rest of the time he has. But it has the advantage over the 25th that if it worked, he could never again stand for public office.
    Something I'm not sure of. If the 25th or impeached, can he still be charged with civil offences ? Can he pardon himself ? B4 impeachment?
    I’m pretty sure the dinosaurs died out when they stopped gathering food and started having meetings to discuss gathering food

    A bookshop is one of the only pieces of evidence we have that people are still thinking

  6. #6
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is offline RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    28,805
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bob10 View Post
    Something I'm not sure of. If the 25th or impeached, can he still be charged with civil offences ? Can he pardon himself ? B4 impeachment?
    25th - no effect on future charges, unable to pardon himself or anyone. If he is considered unfit to hold office for mental reasons this may be a legal argument for not being liable for his actions in courts as well.

    Impeachment - if convicted by the senate, cannot pardon himself or anyone, until then he still has all powers of the president.

    The power of a President to pardon himself has never been tested in court, and is disputed.

    A president can only pardon Federal crimes. He is likely to face charges from the New York prosecutors as soon as he is no longer President, and other charges are also likely. If he does not pardon himself, after the antics of this week he is likely to face Federal charges, including over "that phone call", and the Georgian prosecutors have also shown interest.

    Not: I am not a lawyer, but I have been following this with interest as I have a twin who lives in the USA.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Adelaide Hills. South Australia
    Posts
    13,144
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JDNSW View Post
    The problem with impeachment is that while the house could impeach him in 24 hours or less, getting a two thirds majority of the Senate to convict him is unlikely and could take the rest of the time he has. But it has the advantage over the 25th that if it worked, he could never again stand for public office.
    John, you say that like it is a bad thing.

  8. #8
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is offline RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    28,805
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 4bee View Post
    John, you say that like it is a bad thing.
    I don't know where you get that from - his not being able to stand for office again is a distinct advantage as far as the country (and the world) goes. But if it can be arranged the 25th would be better because it can happen quicker and either happens or doesn't - not something there would be a lot of discussion about before taking effect.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    brighton, brisbane
    Posts
    33,853
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JDNSW View Post
    25th - no effect on future charges, unable to pardon himself or anyone. If he is considered unfit to hold office for mental reasons this may be a legal argument for not being liable for his actions in courts as well.

    Impeachment - if convicted by the senate, cannot pardon himself or anyone, until then he still has all powers of the president.

    The power of a President to pardon himself has never been tested in court, and is disputed.

    A president can only pardon Federal crimes. He is likely to face charges from the New York prosecutors as soon as he is no longer President, and other charges are also likely. If he does not pardon himself, after the antics of this week he is likely to face Federal charges, including over "that phone call", and the Georgian prosecutors have also shown interest.

    Not: I am not a lawyer, but I have been following this with interest as I have a twin who lives in the USA.
    Could it be he is trying to get declared unfit for mental reasons, to not be liable in a civil court.? After all, he got himself unfit for military service 5 times, back in the Vietnam days.
    I’m pretty sure the dinosaurs died out when they stopped gathering food and started having meetings to discuss gathering food

    A bookshop is one of the only pieces of evidence we have that people are still thinking

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Adelaide Hills. South Australia
    Posts
    13,144
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bob10 View Post
    Could it be he is trying to get declared unfit for mental reasons, to not be liable in a civil court.? After all, he got himself unfit for military service 5 times, back in the Vietnam days.
    Thank Christ for that.


    a. He would have been on the VC's side. (May have been a good thing that, on reflection)

    b. They wouldn't have found a Steel helmet big enough to fit his egotistical head.

    c. The war would still be going on.

    d. The upside is he might have got himself bumped off & saved us all this problem..

Page 1 of 19 12311 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!