IECVCT January 6, 2021

[Lefty Specialist]

Love to know the story of the dead woman

She was an Air Force veteran, an avid Trump supporter, and was one of the "protestors" who invaded the Capitol building.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Some Cabinet members are holding preliminary discussions about invoking the 25th Amendment, a well-placed GOP source told CNN.

The discussions are ongoing but it's unclear if there will be enough Cabinet members to result in Trump's removal. The conversations have reached Capitol Hill where some senators have been made aware of the discussions, the source said.

Angry Republican leaders float removing Trump from office

[Fman99]

Some Cabinet members are holding preliminary discussions about invoking the 25th Amendment, a well-placed GOP source told CNN.

The discussions are ongoing but it's unclear if there will be enough Cabinet members to result in Trump's removal. The conversations have reached Capitol Hill where some senators have been made aware of the discussions, the source said.

Angry Republican leaders float removing Trump from office

This is and always has been a lot of bluster. The 25th Amendment cannot be invoked without the Vice President and we all know he's still the lapdog in chief.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I'm skeptical too. Maybe Pence will decide that the calculus has changed and that his future would be better if he distanced from Trump, but I wouldn't bet on that happening.

And who knows? Maybe he'd like to be the President of the United States for eleven or twelve days. If nothing else, it would screw up any "46" merchandise that has been created for Joe Biden.

[Lefty Specialist]

Never happen. Cabinet members are chosen for their ability to stay loyal to Trump, not their qualifications.

[MFS62]

The names of the Seditious Six:
Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Josh Hawley (R-MO), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), John Kennedy (R-LA), Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), and Roger Marshall (R-KS).
We will never forget.

Also, follow the money. How did all of these Domestic Terrorists afford to travel to the Capitol? Was any part of this bankrolled by the Trump PAC? Follow that money. They've been grifting for money to "defend freedom" and "take back a stolen election" even through all of the coup attempt yesterday.

There were NOT good people on both sides.

Later

[Benjamin Grimm]

Elaine Chau resigns from the Cabinet in protest. Makes it that much less likely that the Cabinet would have enough votes to invoke the 25th.

I really want the House to vote to impeach in the next few days. I don't know how it would play out, with the term ending in less than two weeks, but it would be good, at least, to have Trump be the most frequently impeached president ever. One more thing for him to boast about!

[batmagadanleadoff]

I don't care. I just know that 100% of them should.

If that's the case, Trump would've already been removed about a year ago.

I called for it then, and I've called for it every day since.

I'm totally with you. You should know that. I'm just sayin' that it ain't gonna happen. You should know that, too.

So (no surprise), Mitch McConnell's gonna slow-walk any Articles of Impeachment the Senate might receive all the way till sometime after Biden's sworn in.

So the question then becomes whether a president that was impeached while in office could then be tried by the Senate after he's left office.

A coupl'a things to consider: to convict a president in an impeachment trial, 2/3 of the senators present must vote to convict -- not 2/3 out of 100. So with a 50-50 senate, Trump could be convicted with all 50 Dems voting to do so and 17 Republicans not showing up for the vote. Or, if, for example let's say, six Republicans join the Dems in voting to convict, then just 16 Republicans would need to disappear for a conviction (56/84 = 2/3). If eight Republicans join the 50 Dems, then just 13 R's would need to disappear. Still a long shot, but less so than needing 25 R's to vote to convict.

Play around with the numbers.

[Lefty Specialist]

Ironically, it might be beneficial for Hawley and Cruz to vote FOR impeachment. It clears Trump out of the way for 2024.

I expect a few Republicans might vote for this in the Senate (Murkowski/Sasse/Romney), but they won't reach 2/3. The rest will all be like, "Donald who?"

[batmagadanleadoff]

How to Impeach a President in 12 Days: Here’s What It Would Take

Excerpt:

Under one theory being discussed, the House could impeach Mr. Trump and hold onto the articles for a few days to wait until Democrats take over control of the Senate, which will occur after Mr. Biden is sworn in. The length of a trial, and the rules governing it, are determined by the members of the Senate.

[***]

History gives little guide on the question of whether a president can be impeached once he leaves office, and House lawyers were racing to understand the legal and constitutional issues.

There is precedent for doing so in the case of other high government officers. In 1876, the House impeached President Ulysses S. Grant’s war secretary for graft, even after he resigned from his post. The Senate at the time considered whether it still had jurisdiction to hear the case of a former official, and determined that it did. Ultimately, the secretary was acquitted.

Michael J. Gerhardt, a constitutional scholar at the University of North Carolina who testified in the last impeachment proceedings, wrote on Friday that he saw no reason Congress could not proceed.

“It would make no sense for former officials, or ones who step down just in time, to escape that remedial mechanism,” he wrote. “It should accordingly go without saying that if an impeachment begins when an individual is in office, the process may surely continue after they resign or otherwise depart.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/08/us/p ... pitol.html

[metsmarathon]

so, "as long as you do it late enough in your term, you can do whatever the fuck you want" is counterpoint to impeaching?

[MFS62]

It seems like a number of the identified insurrectionists are retired military personnel. They should have their pensions stopped pending trial.

And, speaking of the military, as Commander-In-Chief of the armed forces, isn't the president subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice?(UCMJ) And if so, can he be brought up on charges in a military court (there must be a regulation in there that fits what he did)?

Later

[Edgy MD]

I don't care. I just know that 100% of them should.

If that's the case, Trump would've already been removed about a year ago.

I called for it then, and I've called for it every day since.

I'm totally with you. You should know that. I'm just sayin' that it ain't gonna happen. You should know that, too.

So (no surprise), Mitch McConnell's gonna slow-walk any Articles of Impeachment the Senate might receive all the way till sometime after Biden's sworn in.

So the question then becomes whether a president that was impeached while in office could then be tried by the Senate after he's left office.

A coupl'a things to consider: to convict a president in an impeachment trial, 2/3 of the senators present must vote to convict -- not 2/3 out of 100. So with a 50-50 senate, Trump could be convicted with all 50 Dems voting to do so and 17 Republicans not showing up for the vote. Or, if, for example let's say, six Republicans join the Dems in voting to convict, then just 16 Republicans would need to disappear for a conviction (56/84 = 2/3). If eight Republicans join the 50 Dems, then just 13 R's would need to disappear. Still a long shot, but less so than needing 25 R's to vote to convict.

Play around with the numbers.

See, now you're talking turkey.

The numbers may also be skewed by 1-3 senators expelled, though I tend to think of that as a tougher row to hoe than impeachment.

Resigning under threat of expulsion is probably more likely.

If inciting insurrection isn't an impeachable offense, it strains the mind to conceive of what is.

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

I didn't know till just now that successfully impeached presidents lose all the post-presidency perks afforded others (travel, security detail, $$). Its worth it just for that.

One of of the personally hard-hitting moments for me in the last 4 years was visiting city hall in Denver (I'm pretty sure it was) where there was a beautiful rotunda gallery ringed with portraits of every US president and realizing how grotesquely undeserving the current one was to be in that room.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I didn't know till just now that successfully impeached presidents lose all the post-presidency perks afforded others (travel, security detail, $$). Its worth it just for that.

Really? He would lose Secret Service protection?

I don't know that he'll need it anyway. He may end up in a well-guarded prison.

One of of the personally hard-hitting moments for me in the last 4 years was visiting city hall in Denver (I'm pretty sure it was) where there was a beautiful rotunda gallery ringed with portraits of every US president and realizing how grotesquely undeserving the current one was to be in that room.

I've had the same thought, although not inspired by a visit to City Hall in Denver. Each of the 43 (or 44, however you want to count them) presidents who preceded Trump are diminished by his presence among them.

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

that's what i thought I heard on npr. I don't think i ever gave thought to what impeachment really meant for x-prezzes

[batmagadanleadoff]

I don't care. I just know that 100% of them should.

If that's the case, Trump would've already been removed about a year ago.

I called for it then, and I've called for it every day since.

I'm totally with you. You should know that. I'm just sayin' that it ain't gonna happen. You should know that, too.

So (no surprise), Mitch McConnell's gonna slow-walk any Articles of Impeachment the Senate might receive all the way till sometime after Biden's sworn in.

So the question then becomes whether a president that was impeached while in office could then be tried by the Senate after he's left office.

A coupl'a things to consider: to convict a president in an impeachment trial, 2/3 of the senators present must vote to convict -- not 2/3 out of 100. So with a 50-50 senate, Trump could be convicted with all 50 Dems voting to do so and 17 Republicans not showing up for the vote. Or, if, for example let's say, six Republicans join the Dems in voting to convict, then just 16 Republicans would need to disappear for a conviction (56/84 = 2/3). If eight Republicans join the 50 Dems, then just 13 R's would need to disappear. Still a long shot, but less so than needing 25 R's to vote to convict.

Play around with the numbers.

See, now you're talking turkey.

The numbers may also be skewed by 1-3 senators expelled, though I tend to think of that as a tougher row to hoe than impeachment.

Resigning under threat of expulsion is probably more likely.

If inciting insurrection isn't an impeachable offense, it strains the mind to conceive of what is.

That "17" should be "25" R's not present. 17 is the # of R votes to convict the Dems would need with a full 50-50 Senate and the entire Dem Senate caucus voting to convict.

[batmagadanleadoff]

One of of the personally hard-hitting moments for me in the last 4 years was visiting city hall in Denver (I'm pretty sure it was) where there was a beautiful rotunda gallery ringed with portraits of every US president and realizing how grotesquely undeserving the current one was to be in that room.

I've had the same thought, although not inspired by a visit to City Hall in Denver. Each of the 43 (or 44, however you want to count them) presidents who preceded Trump are diminished by his presence among them.

I've had this thought since the day after Election Day 2016. I wanted to vomit, knowing that his portrait would hang in every Federal building, and in the offices of every Federal judge. What an embarrassment.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Here's what Wikipedia says about consequences of impeachment:

Conviction immediately removes the defendant from office. Following conviction, the Senate may vote to further punish the individual by barring him or her from holding future federal office, elected or appointed. As the threshold for disqualification is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, the Senate has taken the position that disqualification votes only require a simple majority rather than a two-thirds supermajority. The Senate has used disqualification sparingly, as only three individuals have been disqualified from holding future office.[37]

Conviction does not extend to further punishment, for example, loss of pension. After conviction by the Senate, "the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law" in the regular federal or state courts. However, the Former Presidents Act of 1958, which provides a pension and other benefits, does not extend to presidents who were removed from office following an impeachment conviction. Because of an amendment to that law made in 2013, a former president who has been removed from office due to impeachment and conviction is still guaranteed lifetime Secret Service protection.[38]

Footnote 37 references an article from Politico:

The Senate’s practice in impeachment cases has been to hold separate votes on removal and disqualification. The removal vote is the same as the vote on whether to convict on the charges presented by the House’s referral of impeachment. The Constitution’s threshold for conviction and removal is “two-thirds of the [Senators] present.” But disqualification is different. The Senate has long taken the position (not without some controversy) that the vote to disqualify an official from again seeking office requires only a simple majority vote, not the higher two-thirds threshold.

And 38 is an article from Mother Jones:

The 1958 Former Presidents Act assures that no president leaves office without being set for life—it guarantees a pension, access to health insurance, office space and staff. There is, however, one exception: These perks are only granted to presidents who aren’t removed from office in an impeachment trial.

For Donald Trump, who boasts of being a billionaire (though one who appeared to be headed for financial troubles, even before Wednesday’s insurrection), the pension may not be a big deal. It is lavish, set to be $219,000 this year, but a fraction of what Trump earns from his business. But losing other perks, like subsidies to maintain an office and staff to burnish his legacy, might

Regardlesss of what Congress decides, one perk Trump will get to keep is his Secret Service detail—a 2013 amendment to the law guaranteed lifetime protection, even to presidents removed from office.

[Edgy MD]

President Nixon, who had his moments of patriotic grace bursting through some vile behaviors and decisions, declined to continue with Secret Service protection and hired the detail assigned to him out of pocket for his personal security.

[MFS62]

The NY Bar Association is considering disbarring Rudy Giuliani for supporting the people who attacked the Capitol.
https://news.yahoo.com/rudy-giuliani-co ... 560fI3N8LH

Mr Giuliani said that the Trump supporters who attacked the Capitol - an attack that left six people dead - were on the "right side of history."
Earlier in the day, he appeared to encourage the idea of solving political differences with violence.
"If we're wrong, we will be made fools of, but if we're right, a lot of them will go to jail," Mr Giuliani said to the crowd, speaking about the president's challenge to the 2020 election results. "Let's have trial by combat."
Mr Giuliani made the statement shortly before the crowd of Trump supporters swarmed the Capitol.

"Based on these complaints, and the statement Mr Guiliani uttered shortly before the attack on the Capitol, NYSBA President Scott M Karson has launched an inquiry pursuant to the Association's bylaws to determine whether Mr Giuliani should be removed from the membership rolls of the Association," the statement said.

If removed from the rolls, he will not be able to practice law in NY State.
Later

[Willets Point]

I don't know that he'll need it anyway. He may end up in a well-guarded prison.

And no Secret Service agent should have to dive in front of a shiv.

[Lefty Specialist]

[whippoorwill]

I think that little elf guy by the dude with the horns works at the North Pole
The dude with the horns is a reindeer

[Lefty Specialist]

The New York Times reveals that President Trump gave his vice president quite the ultimatum when attempting to pressure Mike Pence join efforts to stop Congress from reaffirming Biden’s victory: “You can either go down in history as a patriot, or you can go down in history as a pussy.”

Wonder what Mother thought about that.