Connect with us


Former fed judge says Senate has no constitutional authority to impeach Trump once he leaves office

“Congress has no power to impeach or try a private citizen, whether it be a private citizen named Donald Trump or named Barack Obama, or anyone else.”



Despite all efforts by the left to tarnish President Trump’s legacy and cut his term short, a former federal judge insists that the Senate has no constitutional authority to impeach him once he leaves office and becomes a private citizen. 

In the wake of the Capitol riot, the House is expected to approve at least one article of impeachment, however an impeachment trial in the upper chamber of Congress would not begin until after Inauguration Day, if ever. 

Given that President Trump’s presidency is coming to an end in just one week, ex-U.S. Court of Appeals Judge J. Michael Luttig – who also worked in the Reagan and G.W. Bush administrations – says that this just might be a game of politics. 

“Once Trump’s term ends on January 20, Congress loses its constitutional authority to continue impeachment proceedings against him – even if the House has already approved articles of impeachment,” Luttig wrote. 

“Therefore, if the House of Representatives were to impeach the president before he leaves office, the Senate could not thereafter convict the former president and disqualify him under the Constitution from future public office,” he added. 

“The reason for this is found in the Constitution itself. Trump would no longer be an incumbent in the office of the President at the time of the delayed Senate proceeding, and would no longer be subject to ‘impeachment conviction’ by the Senate, under the Constitution’s Impeachment Clauses. Which is to say that the Senate’s only power under the Constitution is to convict – or not – an incumbent president,” he said, citing Article 1, Section 3, and Article II, Section 4.

If Trump were to be convicted in the Senate, he would be disqualified from running in 2024, according to BizPacReview. 

Perhaps this was their goal all along: impeach Trump so he can’t run again. 

If the dispute over the Senate’s impeachment abilities wound up in court, “it is highly unlikely the Supreme Court would yield to Congress’s view that it has the power to impeach a president who is no longer in office when the Constitution itself is so clear that it does not,” Luttig concluded. 

Luttig is not the only one using common sense to interpret the Constitution. 

Harvard Law professor and Democrat Alan Dershowitz reiterated that the Senate lacks any legal authority to move forward, BizPacReview reports. 

“But the case cannot come for trial in the Senate because the Senate has rules, and the rules would not allow the case to come to trial until – according to the majority leader – until 1 p.m. on Jan. 20, an hour after President Trump leaves office,” he said during an interview on Sunday Morning Futures. 

“And the Constitution specifically says, ‘The President shall be removed from office upon impeachment.’ It doesn’t say the former president,” he urged. 

“Congress has no power to impeach or try a private citizen, whether it be a private citizen named Donald Trump or named Barack Obama, or anyone else. The jurisdiction is limited to a sitting president, and so there won’t be a trial.” 

Continue Reading


  1. Kathy Anderson

    January 23, 2021 at 2:20 pm

    Do you think someone could tell Nancy now instead of waiting until they have spent millions of hours and dollars on the trial only to have it tossed out after? Congress has other fish to fry.

  2. Patrick Herlihy

    January 23, 2021 at 4:22 pm

    So happy to see Leo walk away from the crazy left and joint us America loving, trump supporting patriots.. Leo 2.0 ????

  3. Chiem

    January 24, 2021 at 4:17 am

    “Your honor, I freely admit I robbed that bank, but I already spent everything I stole the day after I was arrested. Since I can’t pay, you can’t fine me; since you can’t fine me, you can’t hold a trial; and since you can’t hold a trial you must free me immediately. Also, I expect to be paid for the time I spent in jail last night.”

    • Muhammad Jamaal

      January 30, 2021 at 10:37 am

      You are a “private citizen” so you will go to jail whether you pay the money back or not. Look on the bright side at least the US Congress can not try you.

  4. Richard Lukenbach

    January 24, 2021 at 9:51 am


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


National Public Radio Discontinues Reading the Declaration of Inependence



Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

A post by Todd Starnes alerts that National Public Radio (NPR) has ditched its annual ritual of reading the Declaration of Independence. NPR, derisively referred to by Starnes as “National Public Welfare Radio,” announced the cessation of reading the Declaration. Which staffers at the taxpayer-funded radio network had been reading aloud the document since 1988.

The void that would have resulted from not reading the Declaration was not unfilled. “Instead, NPR broadcast an 11-minute conversation about whether or not the Founding Fathers actually meant the words “all men are created equal.” Here’s a link if you’d like to listen to their “screed” (which also reminds us frequently that many of the Founding Fathers owned slaves).

Starnes disclosed that he owns “KWAM, the leading news talk radio station in Memphis, Tennessee. It angers me that my tax dollars are used to prop up a broadcast competitor that spits on our Founding Fathers and our Founding Documents.”

Interestingly, NPR’s newly voiced contempt and cynicism for the Declaration of Independence does not encompass refusing taxpayer-funded government support. Whether or not the Founding Fathers meant what they said and what they wrote may be grist for energetic banter on a radio program that is increasingly committed to shrill progressive virtue signaling. However, the topic of this discussion among smug well-remunerated media activists is irrelevant. The words of the Founding Fathers have been inspirational for two hundred and forty-six years and have been the moral and legal foundation used to free the slaves and develop Constitutional principles to ensure that slavery can never be implemented in this country. Slavery currently exists in several countries now, but NPR is dedicated to ignoring that scourge.

Continue Reading


‘Every Word Of This Is False’: Ted Cruz Factchecks Ilhan Omar’s Attack On Coach Kennedy Prayer Case



Rep. Ilhan Omar

On Monday night, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) factchecked Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) after she made multiple false claims about the Supreme Court ruling in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, in which the Court ruled 6-3 that a public high school football coach in Washington state had his First Amendment rights violated when he was punished by his school district for praying on the field after games where students could see.

As previously reported, “In 2008, high school football coach Joseph Kennedy began a tradition of praying at midfield after each game. Over time, his players and even members of the opposing team began to join him. In September 2015, a school administrator addressed the matter with Kennedy after an opposing team complained and the coach briefly stopped his prayers.”

“On October 14, 2015, Kennedy told the school district that he was planning on resuming his prayer tradition at the next game. The school district told the coach that his prayers violated the district’s policy, but Kennedy continued to pray at the next two games. The school district subsequently placed him on administrative leave, banned him from participating in the football program, and refused to renew his contract for the following season. Kennedy took the issue to federal district court, arguing that the school district had violated his First Amendment rights,” the report added.

In response to the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Kennedy, Omar tweeted, “The Supreme Court just ruled that public school teachers can pressure students to join in prayer at public school events but can also retaliate against those that don’t join in. Religious freedom is dead in America.”

“Every word of this is false,” Cruz responded.

Omar’s claim that the Supreme Court’s decision allowed to teachers to “pressure students to join prayer” is false. The Court’s ruling just protected Coach Kennedy’s religious freedom to pray publicly.

Omar was also incorrect in claiming that there would be retaliation against students who did not join Kennedy in prayer – the coach’s tradition of praying after games began with him praying alone at midfield after football games. Kennedy’s school district even noted that Kennedy had “not actively encouraged, or required, participation.”

Additionally, in contrast to Omar’s claim that “religious freedom is dead in America,” the Supreme Court ruling actually strengthened protections of religious freedom.

Writing for the majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch explained, “Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Republic—whether those expressions take place in a sanctuary or on a field, and whether they manifest through the spoken word or a bowed head.”

“Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a brief, quiet, personal religious observance doubly protected by the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment,” Gorsuch added. “And the only meaningful justification the government offered for its reprisal rested on a mistaken view that it had a duty to ferret out and suppress religious observances even as it allows comparable secular speech. The Constitution neither mandates nor tolerates that kind of discrimination. Mr. Kennedy is entitled to summary judgment on his First Amendment claims.”

Continue Reading

Leo's Hot List