Connect with us

Politics

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.”

Published

on

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
5 Comments

5 Comments

  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

    All-POLITICIANS WORK FREE VETTED HONEST no criminals DEPENDABLE WILLINGNESS To Work OVERTIME VOTE To IMPROVE THINGS FOR We THE PEOPLE FIRST ALWAYS FREE No DEALS WITH OTHER COUNTRIES. We EXPECT LEADERS With HIGH MORALS. Not WASTING OUR TAX DOLLARS. GOD PROTECTS & LOVES Us. proofs

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Reporters Want Answers on Biden’s Persistent Cough Which Consistently Interrupts Briefings

Published

on

Joe Biden

On Thursday, President Joe Biden’s persistent cough, which forced him to pause and clear his throat several times, has the public concerned. The noticeable coughing fit occurred during a speech about tax hikes. Soon after, reporters questioned White House press secretary Jen Psaki about Biden’s health.

NBC News reporter Kelly O’Donnell addressed the matter head-on. “Many of us were in the East Room watching the president, we’ve seen him on many occasions where he had a repeated cough. What is the situation with that cough and is it a concern?”

Psaki snapped back, “It’s not a concern.” She added, “We have a doctor who travels with him, obviously who checks in if it is ever warranted, and certainly that continues to be the case, as it has been since the beginning of his presidency.”

O’Donnell followed up, “Is there an explanation for why he coughs so frequently in situations like that?” Psaki again downplayed the concern, responding, “I don’t think it’s an issue of concern. I think there is a range of reasons why we may need to clear our throat or we may have a little light cold, and that’s certainly something that presidents, elected officials, reporters, spokespeople can confront.”

There is only so much longer the White House can ignore the pressing concern. Even #Bidencough became a popular social media hashtag. In Thursday’s same briefing, Psaki was asked about when Biden would receive a full physical examination, as his mental acuity has been called into question for years.

“I know this is an understandable question. I don’t have an update. He will get one soon. And when he does, we will make sure you all are aware of it and get the information,” Psaki condescendingly responded.

The New York Post reports the recent times Biden’s cough has been problematic:

After he coughed and was hoarse while speaking in December after the Electoral College confirmed his victory in the 2020 election, aides said he was suffering from a slight cold.

More recently, the president hacked at several points during a speech Monday in California in support of Gov. Gavin Newsom in the recall election, causing him to apologize and even pause to take a sip of water.

During the presidential campaign, his doctor, Kevin O’Connor, told the Wall Street Journal that Biden is fit to serve as president, but also noted that he is being treated for high cholesterol, acid reflux disease and seasonal allergies.

Acid reflux often forces him to clear his throat, O’Connor said.

“This may also contribute to occasional cough and sinus congestion,” O’Connor wrote in a medical statement. “He has received an endoscopy to rule out any more significant disease.”

Continue Reading

Legal

Clinton Campaign Attorney Indicted For Lying To FBI In Trump-Russia Investigation

Published

on

Hillary Clinton

An attorney who represented Hillary Clinton’s most recent failed presidential campaign in 2016 was indicted on Thursday for allegedly lying to FBI officials, as part of U.S. Special Counsel John Durham’s probe into the origins of the FBI’s investigation of supposed ties between Russia and former President Donald Trump’s campaign.

“Michael Sussmann, a partner with Perkins Coie who also represented the Democratic National Committee in connection with Russia’s hack of the organization, is accused of making false statements during a Sept. 19, 2016 meeting with former FBI General Counsel James Baker,” Reuters reported. “This marks the second criminal case Durham has filed so far since former Attorney General William Barr tapped him in 2019 to investigate U.S. officials who probed the Trump-Russia contacts.”

According to the New York Times, Biden administration Attorney General Merrick B. Garland has the authority to overrule Durham but declined to.
“Donald J. Trump and his supporters have long accused Democrats and Perkins Coie — whose political law group, a division separate from Mr. Sussmann’s, represented the party and the Hillary Clinton campaign — of seeking to stoke unfair suspicions about Mr. Trump’s purported ties to Russia,” the New York Times
reported. “The case against Mr. Sussmann centers on the question of who his client was when he conveyed certain suspicions about Mr. Trump and Russia to the F.B.I. in September 2016. Among other things, investigators have examined whether Mr. Sussmann was secretly working for the Clinton campaign — which he denies.”

“According to the indictment, Sussmann ‘lied about the capacity in which he was providing the allegations to the FBI’ when he met one-on-one with FBI General Counsel James Baker,” the Daily Mail explained. “That prompted to Baker to assume he was acting merely as a ‘good citizen’ rather than as a ‘paid advocate or political operative.’ He stated falsely that he was not doing the work ‘for my client,’ according to the indictment. Sussmann had handed over three ‘white papers’ as well as computer files containing evidence of the reported secret channel.”

Continue Reading

Leo's Hot List