Mitt Romney: Trump Impeachment Trial Important For 'Unity,' 'Accountability'

I'm on the side of about half of legal experts who say it isn't Constitutional to hold a Senate impeachment trial for a President who is out of office and is now a citizen.

However, since the majority is going forward with an unconstitutional act, then I would be present to vote "No" on convicting Citizen Trump.

 

I can't find that verbiage in the Constitution on Impeachment rules. Can you cite the source for it?

 

AND I JUST HATE HIM BECAUSE HE BEAT ME AND CALLED ME NAMES!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is amazing after all the bogus hits by the Dems on him before he is now their darling.

 

I wish Roberts would speak out about his reasons. He is a key functionary in a Presidential impeachment this is not about some private matter of law before him or how he might rule in the future. He is the presiding officer and it appears he said the President is not being impeached here so he cannot appear. That means Trump is being sanctioned as a private citizen and that is HIGHLY unconstitutional and an abuse of power and of his rights.

 

Impeachment is a political exercise and as such it is controlled by the political consequences of those who vote. If some agreement is taken where a number of Republican Senators conveniently missed the session it would cause the same blowback for them as a vote to convict. They will understand that. Let's see if the Dems can find enough leverage to cause this to happen. Should be interesting to watch these petty POSs prostitute themselves for a bit more power.

 

Ahh the Senate is now in session over the impeachment and will remain in session for the impeachment trial until it concludes. The Senators will be sworn in tomorrow at 1 o'clock and then they shall remain silent with punishment if they don't.

 

Yeah, a sitting President needs to hire a legal team to defend himself against losing his elected office. A private citizen shouldn't have to be paying a legal team...to defend from what? The punitive outcome of an impeachment conviction is that the sitting President loses the Executive Office for the rest of his elected term, and by separate vote, may be barred from holding office again.

The acquittal or conviction isn't really about whatever charges are alleged, it's about being able to finish the term.

 

I believe all 100 Senators agreed to delay hearing the impeachment article for two weeks so they could continue to work on Biden's Cabinet confirmations and Covid relief.

 

Quite frankly I think ALL the Republicans should refuse to attend just as the Chief Justice apparently did. This is a totally unconstitutional and illegitimate trial in the Senate. This is bordering on becoming a bill of attainder in order to punish a certain individual and deprive that person of their rights with this extraconstitutional charade. And the Dems know they don't have the votes.

 

Wow.

The Trump people really seem to be taking his loss hard.

Puzzling, in light of the FACT that everybody KNEW that Trump was toast (for months).

"Lookie Here, Romney Bad"...

And, on-topic back to the OP, Mitt is (obviously) spot-on.

 

They are required to be sworn in tomorrow at 1:00 and take their oath as jurors and they are solely jurors until it is over. It's another way the Dems screwed the pooch again. All this should have happened in the House, the allowing the person being impeached to put together their defense and witness and affidavits and their presentation and then both sides present ALL the evidence and it is FULLY debated and then the decision is made did they commit these acts and the vote to declare whether they did or not ie impeach or not. Then the Senate is a brief matter, the House Managers present the evidence used in the impeachment the legal team for the impeached person presents theirs and they vote.

 

ROFL you missed the point once again, Romney did when he lost and stills holds his vengeance

 

I'm no lawyer, but if no Republicans attended then Trump will be convicted by the Democrats. A conviction would likely be fairly serious fodder for a criminal lawsuit against Citizen Trump. You know that high-profile lawyers are going to be hitting him with all sorts of civil and criminal charges as a civilian.

They must burn the witch to discourage any other person who is not part of the Corporate Establishment Party from attempting to get elected and reform government to benefit the people. Outsiders are a significant threat to the grift the Inner Circle imposes on taxpayers.

 

Which would be a legal sanction denying him a right to run for office. That's like felons can't vote except this is not in the judicial system. The Senate Dems have declared themselves a court which can try and legally sanction private citizens. There is SO MUCH unconstitionality in that if it weren't so outrageous it would be a Monty Python movie. The Chief Justice just washed his hands of the entire matter and he has an obligation to tell the citizens why. The Constitution demands he sit in a trial of the President which the Dems interpret to mean Trump.

 

Yeah? And, So What?

Elections have consequences, etc.

Trump should have thought about that BEFORE he Single-handedly cost the GOP BOTH GA Senate seats.

 

Search impeachment and it will tell you can be impeached and removed and which role the several actors play.

Then here
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/SMAN-113/html/SMAN-113-pg223.htm

 

Could that separate vote be brought up even if he is not convicted? Could that be what Pelosi wants?

 

No doubt that Pelosi has used her power to turn this Congress, and our reputation in the world, into a Banana Republic for two years.

They do get sworn in at 1pm tomorrow; however, they agreed not to start the trial until each side gets their paperwork together.

They are planning to continue to work on other items until the witch trial starts.






https://www.freep.com/story/news/po...es-what-happens-next-senate-trial/6672582002/

 

OH WOW now THAT refuted what I posted............

 

Where in the Constitution does it state the Congress has the authority to directly sanction a private citizen? Why do you think the Chief Justice bailed?

 

Article I, Section 3, last sentence in the next to last paragraph: "And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present."

 

I Just wanted to check-in, to make sure I haven't been missing anything.

***As to the OP, Romney is spot-on.
Trump Needs to be held responsible. Period.

***Trump "supporters" take:

"We Lost...Impeachment BAD".

I think that I have got it.

 

yes - but my opinion remains in the long term that this is a mistake, regardless if it is seen as necessary. Less than 10 Republicans will vote to convict and Biden first 100 days will be undermined

 

I don't think so. DoJ announced today that they were launching an investigation into the attempts to overthrow the election. And, a "crime" is really not necessary for conviction on impeachment. There may be a crime involved, but there doesn't have to be. I believe it was President Ford who was famous for saying "it's whatever the House votes the offense to be and confirmed by the Senate. The MAXIMUM penalty is removal from office and a separate vote on eligibility for holding any future federal office...elective or appointed.

 

Exactly. I'm saying that an impeachment conviction for inciting an insurrection against the government could (and would) certainly be used by lawyers in "real" criminal charges against Trump later.