Famous Constitutional scholar and indicted Felon Donald J. Trump took to his "Truth Social" app to call on Republicans to invoke the 25th Amendment provision for removing a President from office over Biden's deal that releases some $6 billion of Iranian funds to accounts in Qatar that can only use it to buy food, medicine and other commodities approved under U.S. sanctions in a prisoner exchange deal.

An almost flawless stratagem from the former President. Can anybody detect the one minor flaw in it?

As Bugs would say, “What a maroon!”

I don’t agree with what Biden did.

However, Trump obviously doesn’t get what the 25th amendment says.

Biden has a right to direct policy as he feels appropriate.

As did Trump, when he was in office.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I don’t agree with what Biden did.

However, Trump obviously doesn’t get what the 25th amendment says.

Biden has a right to direct policy as he feels appropriate.

As did Trump, when he was in office.

Do you find it troubling that someone who sat in the Oval Office for four years has no better understanding of the Constitution than that?

Yes and no.

Yes, the president should know better or get competent advice.

Am is surprised? No. It’s Trump.

ya'll do remember the dem calls for invoking the 25th over the covffe tweat, right?

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Yes and no.

Yes, the president should know better or get competent advice.

Am is surprised? No. It’s Trump.

You get the advice you seek. We have seen the kind of Constitutional Advice President Trump sought, and where it brought him.

I was thought the 25th Amendment in High School. I thought President Trump had the best education and surrounded himself with the smartest people.

I agree 100 percent w your first post.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
ya'll do remember the dem calls for invoking the 25th over the covffe tweat, right?

The Dems were calling for the appropriate cabinet members to declare Trump incompetent and replace him.

Trump is telling folks who are not part of the executive (republicans) to replace Biden under this amendment.

If Trump wants to tell Harris to declare Biden incompetent and take over, that’s different.

The GOP isn’t in charge of the Senate or the executive at this point.

They certainly can impeach Biden for the act, but that’s not very likely to get him removed, given that the Dems control the senate.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
ya'll do remember the dem calls for invoking the 25th over the covffe tweat, right?

I remember them calling on Pence to invoke it after January 6th, but not otherwise.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
ya'll do remember the dem calls for invoking the 25th over the covffe tweat, right?

The Dems were calling for the appropriate cabinet members to declare Trump incompetent and replace him.

Trump is telling folks who are not part of the executive (republicans) to replace Biden under this amendment.

If Trump wants to tell Harris to declare Biden incompetent and take over, that’s different.

The GOP isn’t in charge of the Senate or the executive at this point.

They certainly can impeach Biden for the act, but that’s not very likely to get him removed, given that the Dems control the senate.

Nor should it. However, I do understand that exercise of due discretion on policy is grounds to at least impeach and try in the Senate per President Johnson.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
ya'll do remember the dem calls for invoking the 25th over the covffe tweat, right?

The Dems were calling for the appropriate cabinet members to declare Trump incompetent and replace him.

Trump is telling folks who are not part of the executive (republicans) to replace Biden under this amendment.

If Trump wants to tell Harris to declare Biden incompetent and take over, that’s different.

The GOP isn’t in charge of the Senate or the executive at this point.

They certainly can impeach Biden for the act, but that’s not very likely to get him removed, given that the Dems control the senate.

Nor should it. However, I do understand that exercise of due discretion on policy is grounds to at least impeach and try in the Senate per President Johnson.

No, it's not, and Andrew Johnson is a prime example. His enemies wanted to impeach him for policy differences but failed to get the votes for failure to identify a specific "high crime or misdemeanor". Johnson took that failure as a license to do as he pleased and fired Secretary of War Stanton in violation of the Tenure of Office Act, and the House voted to impeach.

Well, they were only 1 vote short.

Point is President Johnson was Impeached the House and tried in the Senate. He was 1 vote from being removed. The same can happen to any President unless the S. Ct., intervenes. That vote could have went the other way.

I agree with your position on principle. I just know the S.Ct., has said when asked to intervene on impeachment proceedings or overturn an impeachment the response was not our circus and not our monkey. We cannot help you.

Specifically, they held it was a political question. They did leave a bare sliver of light coming in under the window seal they closed.

There is what should be, No President should face Impeachment over due exercise of policy.

There is what is, A President currently can, and has in the past, face impeachment for sue exercise of policy.

The Courts did not save President Johnson. One Senator’s vote did.

I think I agree with President Biden in this. We got 5 US citizens home. The bank issue, I trust you on. Personally, I do not think any we gave back was worth US Citizens in harms way.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Well, they were only 1 vote short.

Point is President Johnson was Impeached the House and tried in the Senate. He was 1 vote from being removed. The same can happen to any President unless the S. Ct., intervenes. That vote could have went the other way.

I agree with your position on principle. I just know the S.Ct., has said when asked to intervene on impeachment proceedings or overturn an impeachment the response was not our circus and not our monkey. We cannot help you.

Specifically, they held it was a political question. They did leave a bare sliver of light coming in under the window seal they closed.

There is what should be, No President should face Impeachment over due exercise of policy.

There is what is, A President currently can, and has in the past, face impeachment for sue exercise of policy.

The Courts did not save President Johnson. One Senator’s vote did.

I think I agree with President Biden in this. We got 5 US citizens home. The bank issue, I trust you on. Personally, I do not think any we gave back was worth US Citizens in harms way.

Impeachment is purely article I, the SCOTUS (as part of art III) is, rather intentionally, not part of the process --

arguably there's some gray area about voted vs appoint senators, but

quote:

The House of Representatives shall chuse [sic] their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment .

seems pretty clear

As for the 14a, I am of a mind that it requires a conviction, rather than popular opinion, to be enforced.

I'll say this, only dictators and 3rd world corruption prevent candidates from being on the ballot...

Trump would Lose to Biden - I think many, if not most, of us agree to that - So, let the voters speak - if the Rs are dumb enough to put trump there in the general, it's not hard to see.

Funnily enough, I am not seeing Trump as a target of any insurrection charges -- if it's that bloody obvious, it should be a slam dunk case

Oh, btw, it's a particular pet peeve to hear the House referred to as "the Congress"
Article I Section I

quote:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Well, they were only 1 vote short.

Point is President Johnson was Impeached the House and tried in the Senate. He was 1 vote from being removed. The same can happen to any President unless the S. Ct., intervenes. That vote could have went the other way.

I agree with your position on principle. I just know the S.Ct., has said when asked to intervene on impeachment proceedings or overturn an impeachment the response was not our circus and not our monkey. We cannot help you.

Specifically, they held it was a political question. They did leave a bare sliver of light coming in under the window seal they closed.

There is what should be, No President should face Impeachment over due exercise of policy.

There is what is, A President currently can, and has in the past, face impeachment for sue exercise of policy.

The Courts did not save President Johnson. One Senator’s vote did.

I think I agree with President Biden in this. We got 5 US citizens home. The bank issue, I trust you on. Personally, I do not think any we gave back was worth US Citizens in harms way.

Impeachment is purely article I, the SCOTUS (as part of art III) is, rather intentionally, not part of the process --

arguably there's some gray area about voted vs appoint senators, but

quote:

The House of Representatives shall chuse [sic] their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment .

seems pretty clear

As for the 14a, I am of a mind that it requires a conviction, rather than popular opinion, to be enforced.

I'll say this, only dictators and 3rd world corruption prevent candidates from being on the ballot...

Trump would Lose to Biden - I think many, if not most, of us agree to that - So, let the voters speak - if the Rs are dumb enough to put trump there in the general, it's not hard to see.

Funnily enough, I am not seeing Trump as a target of any insurrection charges -- if it's that bloody obvious, it should be a slam dunk case

Oh, btw, it's a particular pet peeve to hear the House referred to as "the Congress"
Article I Section I

quote:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

The best (funniest) part?

McCarthy didn't have the votes to formally open an impeachment inquiry without evidence so he caved in to Matt Gaetz and just ordered it...

Which means none of the three Committees he designated to look at it has subpoena power because the House's own Rules authorize subpoenas for "legislative oversight" purposes ONLY without a delegation of authority by the full House.

McCarthy is a trapped rat

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
McCarthy is a trapped rat

He thought he wanted that job SO badly...

If they Vacate the Chair who would take it who could possibly win?

Give Kevin a couple more weeks to alienate the remaining sane Republicans and Hakeem Jeffries starts to look good.

He may have wanted the job, badly -- but it seemed to turn out to be volunteering for his day in the barrel

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Well, they were only 1 vote short.

Point is President Johnson was Impeached the House and tried in the Senate. He was 1 vote from being removed. The same can happen to any President unless the S. Ct., intervenes. That vote could have went the other way.

I agree with your position on principle. I just know the S.Ct., has said when asked to intervene on impeachment proceedings or overturn an impeachment the response was not our circus and not our monkey. We cannot help you.

Specifically, they held it was a political question. They did leave a bare sliver of light coming in under the window seal they closed.

There is what should be, No President should face Impeachment over due exercise of policy.

There is what is, A President currently can, and has in the past, face impeachment for sue exercise of policy.

The Courts did not save President Johnson. One Senator’s vote did.

I think I agree with President Biden in this. We got 5 US citizens home. The bank issue, I trust you on. Personally, I do not think any we gave back was worth US Citizens in harms way.

Impeachment is purely article I, the SCOTUS (as part of art III) is, rather intentionally, not part of the process --

arguably there's some gray area about voted vs appoint senators, but

quote:

The House of Representatives shall chuse [sic] their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment .

seems pretty clear

As for the 14a, I am of a mind that it requires a conviction, rather than popular opinion, to be enforced.

I'll say this, only dictators and 3rd world corruption prevent candidates from being on the ballot...

Trump would Lose to Biden - I think many, if not most, of us agree to that - So, let the voters speak - if the Rs are dumb enough to put trump there in the general, it's not hard to see.

Funnily enough, I am not seeing Trump as a target of any insurrection charges -- if it's that bloody obvious, it should be a slam dunk case

Oh, btw, it's a particular pet peeve to hear the House referred to as "the Congress"
Article I Section I

quote:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

The best (funniest) part?

McCarthy didn't have the votes to formally open an impeachment inquiry without evidence so he caved in to Matt Gaetz and just ordered it...

Which means none of the three Committees he designated to look at it has subpoena power because the House's own Rules authorize subpoenas for "legislative oversight" purposes ONLY without a delegation of authority by the full House.

The House Impeaches and that Impeachment is tried n the Senate. In the Senate, President Johnson survived removal by 1 vote. What are we talking about here.

Congress, both Chambers, post a delegate role in Impeachment.

As for the 14th Amendment. That provision which is not at play, in this discussion, was designed to be used against Confederate officials/officers. It did not require convictions. Although, the “ Radical Republicans” wanted to try ex-Confederate Officials. President Johnson bring 1) from Tennessee, and 2( Following a more Lincoln like agenda granted pardons and clemency. That is what got him impeached in the House and near removed by the Senate.

That was due exercise of Executive Branch Authority. If it can be done to President Johnson, then it can be done to President Biden.

I also agree with controlling precedent

Nixon v. United States, 506 U.S. 224 (1993).

That case for folks is from 1993 and deals w a Fed Judge who was removed after “trial” by the Senate.

Again, the Court held the Court had no role to play. However, they did say we are not saying we would never get involved. Holding Impeachment to be a political question.

Also, “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside:
And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present."

The language and structure of this Clause are revealing. The first sentence is a grant of authority to the Senate, and the word "sole" indicates that this authority is reposed in the Senate and nowhere else. The next two sentences specify requirements to which the Senate proceedings shall conform:

Unless the Supreme Court narrows or overturns Nixon v. United States, Congress can Impeach a setting president for that president’s due excretes of policy. As stated above Both Houses have due and independent grants is sole authority concerning the impeachment process.

It is correct to refer to Congress as impeaching a Federal official. The House impeaches and the Senate tries the impeachment.

I do neither want nor believe President Biden should be Impeached in the House, and the Impeachment tried in the Senate over this Iran policy position. That does not mean he cannot be so done. President Biden most certainly can.

Now, the Senate, like President Johnson, is not going to vote to convict. Convict is the language of the Constitution and Nixon v United States.

Bottom line, unless a Supreme Court majority were to narrow Nixon v United States, or overturn it entirely, a President serves at the whelm of Congress (the House impeaching and the Senate trying).

Now, such an abashed misuse of power would give a Supreme Court motivation to say, “ We never said in Nixon we would never intervene.” Alternatively, the Party so doing would suffer severe losses in the next Election. Frankly, I would expect a discussion for Revolution or a Constitutional Convention if a majority party in Congress, so took advantage of the powers delegated to it currently to impeach and remove a president.

My point is that if the House votes for a formal Impeachment Inquiry and designates a Committee to conduct it that Committee then has the right to issue binding investigative subpoenas likely to have their validity upheld by courts.

An impeachment inquiry spread across three Committees directed by the Speaker, BY HOUSE RULES, may still only issue subpoenas with a legislative purpose.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
McCarthy is a trapped rat

Just plain rat will suffice. What a shithead he is.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
My point is that if the House votes for a formal Impeachment Inquiry and designates a Committee to conduct it that Committee then has the right to issue binding investigative subpoenas likely to have their validity upheld by courts.

An impeachment inquiry spread across three Committees directed by the Speaker, BY HOUSE RULES, may still only issue
subpoenas with a legislative purpose.

I agree with that. That cannot be disputed.

My point is both Chambers have sole and delegated roles concerning Impeachment, and if there are enough votes any President can be Impeached in the House and Tried and Convicted in the Senate for any reason Congress deems fit. Unless, the S. Ct., narrows Nicole v United States, or we change the Constitution.

That includes President Biden. Let us assume the Senate had 60 R or Maga Senators who believed we need to get rid of this Guy over Iran and being President Biden. If the House sent them Articles of Impeachment on Iran Policy. President Biden’s goose is plucked and cooked. I do not like it, but that is the current state of Constitutional Law. An unspoken safeguard is we did not use to elect such little people by and large. President Johnson was an exception. However, he is an exception that can be invoked if the votes are present. Many here have voiced a desire to see enough votes to Johnson President Biden. If they get enough political power in Congress, the Supreme Court if they follow precedent will not stop them.

Now, bad facts make bad law. The S. Ct., being forced to pigeonhole themselves into Impeachment by such a scenario would be bad law. Not so acting, maybe bad law.

It is amazing how fragile the stack of dominos really is.