General Question

crazyguy's avatar

Do you think impeachment of Trump now will serve any purpose?

Asked by crazyguy (1929points) 1 week ago

The one purpose that makes some sense is to ban him from office for the rest of his life. I tried to find out whether a censure motion can include such language but have not been able to find out.

Other than that, I can see several negatives to impeachment:

1. It will further divide the country, where Biden’s stated objective is to try and unite the country.
2. Perhaps it leaves the country more secure when the President is removed; but how about the days it takes for the process to play out?
3. The Senate is obliged to hold a trial. When it does, it will take important time away from confirmation of Biden’s cabinet choices.

What do you think?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

49 Answers

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Yup, but you can continue to ignore me ! (Maybe have him shot at sunrise on the Ground Hog day) ! !

That will may end the sedition.

hello321's avatar

No. It won’t serve any purpose.

However….

@crazyguy: “It will further divide the country”

Nonsense phrase. This isn’t a thing.

JLeslie's avatar

If they could do it fast maybe it would prevent him from pardoning these terrorist running through the Capitol. I hope they don’t give the president the names of any of them. Can their names be kept off the public record?

I personally doubt he will be impeached.

I do think impeachment will rile up his cultists more. As far as the average Republican, probably 50/50. Half of them will feel it’s just another vicious stunt by Democrats and half probably do think the president is unhinged at this point.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Anything that prevents him for running for any kind of public office for the rest of his life is fine with me.

stanleybmanly's avatar

I believe Trump’s 4 year term the greatest sustained criminal spree in the history of this country. Those in the Congress who sustained the lunatic for 4 solid years are more culpable than the psychopath himself. Crazy or not, to permit the fool to walk away with no accounting for crimes of such magnitude would be as unconscionable as the shameful 4 year tolerance of his open and vulgar mockery of the laws of our land. The very idea is on its face a miscarriage of justice so extreme, the country would never live it down.

Lightlyseared's avatar

Of course it dosn’t the serve any purpose. Just like charging criminals after they’ve committed a crime is pointless. It’s not like it’s going to change the fact they’ve killed someone or whatever is it?

rockfan's avatar

“Charging criminals after they’ve committed a crime is pointless.”

Do you seriously believe that?

SQUEEKY2's avatar

@Lightlyseared You are supposed to charge criminals before they do their crime??
That makes no sense , sorta like I got a speeding ticket today because the cop said I was thinking of speeding.
You do a crime them you face the charges.
At least in the real world.

misfit's avatar

“It will further divide the country”

As if January 6th wasn’t bad enough, impeachment will be the nail in the coffin?

Are you kidding me?

ragingloli's avatar

Best case scenario:
At the end of it, besides the message it sends, they can declare him unfit for office, and prevent him from running for president again.

janbb's avatar

If he is impeached and convicted:

It will stop him from ever running again, he won’t get a $200,000 pension for life, he won’t get Secret Service protection for life and he won’t get a travel allowance for life.

So yes, it will do a lot of good.

Pandora's avatar

It will serve two purposes. Make sure he cannot run in the future for one. And the second is that it sends the message that NO ONE is above the law.
As for your ridiculous idea that it will further divide the Nation, that is total bull. We are already severely divided by the dictator in the White House. The sedition performed on Jan. 6 has already allowed those people to gather more people to their ugly cause of overthrowing the government and I’m not even sure it’s for Trump anymore. It’s just a bunch of white supremacist that want another 3rd world war now that Trump said they should be punished. But Trump and other Republicans courted them for power and for the next few years until they are all rounded up we will have home grown terrorist causing mayhem whether we impeach Trump or not.

But it’s necessary we send a message to Trump and any future Führer wanna be that our laws will stop them.

Not impeaching sends the message that our doors are open to the next Fuhrer. If you really are an American as you claim you certainly would not want to see our Nation Taken over by future Natzi’s.
No one is pretending that impeaching Trump will unite the Nation but it won’t harm it any more than how Trump has harmed it with his sedation calls in order for him to keep power and avoid future jail. Even those who know him best say Trump is a racist who is running scared and willing to destroy the Nation to stay out of Jail.

elbanditoroso's avatar

Pretty hypocritical of @crazyguy to use “divide the country” as an excuse. He’s been a chief divider ( @crazyguy, that is) along with his patron saint.

Yes, impeachment prevents Trump from running again. That, alone, is worth it.

gondwanalon's avatar

Waste of time. Trump’s political future is over now without a second impeachment.

crazyguy's avatar

All, I found what I think is a good article about impeachment. Read it if facts mean anything to you people.

Here it is:
https://www.vox.com/22220495/impeachment-trump-2024-election-bar-from-office

There are many inaccuracies in the posts above.

1. @hello321 Your theme is repeated in many of the posts. The theme is that it is impossible to further divide the country. Even if that were true (I do not think it is), it certainly does not start the healing process.

2. @JLeslie I am certain he can be impeached. But a Senate conviction is all but impossible. The last poll I saw shows that Trump was supported by 87% of Republicans. Since that poll was taken before Jan 6, the number is probably closer to what you have used. There is no way you can prevent Trump from pardoning anybody if he so chooses.

3. @SQUEEKY2 As the article makes clear, an impeachment alone does not prevent “him for running for any kind of public office for the rest of his life”. A trial to remove him from office must be held by the Senate, even if he is already gone. I got that from Rubio’s interview over the weekend.

The Senate must garner a two-thirds majority for conviction, and then, _pass a separate measure to prevent him from running for office again.

@ragingloli As usual, you seem to know what you are talking about!

Response moderated (Flame-Bait)
crazyguy's avatar

@gondwanalon Waste of time is right. Perhaps that would be poetic justice. The Senate may be too busy to take up any of Biden’s nominations!

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
hello321's avatar

@crazyguy: “Your theme is repeated in many of the posts. The theme is that it is impossible to further divide the country. Even if that were true (I do not think it is), it certainly does not start the healing process.”

My “theme” is certainly not that it is “impossible to further divide the country”. What I’m suggesting is that the concept of “dividing the country” or “a divided country” is nonsensical. It doesn’t make any sense.

Pandora's avatar

@crazyguy Is this linked article only in your mind because you did not post one. And I’m not going down this rabbit hole with you again. Where you post something that has nothing that doesn’t support your views one way or the other and then when confronted on it, you play a childish game of keep away and say I never said that it did. I guess now that parlor is down you will just annoy us more.

LuckyGuy's avatar

Here are some reasons to go ahead with the debate:

“The impeachment debate is still highly consequential.
1) The Senate has the power both to remove Trump from office and to prevent him from holding office in the future. That second power will not expire when his term ends, many constitutional scholars say. A Senate trial can happen after Jan. 20.
And disqualifying Trump from holding office again could alter the future of American politics.

He has tried to reverse an election result and remain in power by persuading local officials to commit fraud. He incited a mob that attacked the Capitol — and killed a police officer — while Congress was meeting to certify the result. Afterward, Trump praised the rioters.

This behavior was consistent with Trump’s entire presidency. He has previously rejected the legitimacy of election results and encouraged his supporters to commit violence. He has tried to undermine Americans’ confidence in the F.B.I., the C.I.A., the military, Justice Department prosecutors, federal judges, the Congressional Budget Office, government scientists, government health officials and more.
He has openly used the presidency to enrich his family.

Source (There are links and data to back up every claim stated above.)

Zaku's avatar

* The legislature doesn’t need to add provisions to prevent running again, because being ejected via impeachment already does that. ( https://www.chandralaw.com/faqs/if-a-president-of-the-united-states-is-impeached-by-the-house-and-convicted-by-the-senate-can-that-now-former-president-run-for-and-become-president-again )

* Trump isn’t getting re-elected by any means, any how, anyway, except maybe in the dreams and fantasies of some of his more deluded remaining fans.

* If Trump is impeached and removed before Jan 20, he would lose his “former president” benefits. ( https://reason.com/volokh/2021/01/10/under-the-former-presidents-act-a-removed-president-does-not-receive-a-pension-office-staff-office-space-and-secret-service-protection/ )

* It’s important to get the dangerously unstable madman out of office as soon as possible to head off as much ongoing damage as possible.

* Impeachment would require all legislators to vote, which would help clear up which ones are still crazy enough to be supporting Trump at this point. Or at least to signal to the crazy people in the population that even the Republicans aren’t willing to pretend he shouldn’t be impeached at this point.

* NOT officially reacting to even Trump inciting and attack on the government and attempted coup, would set a terrible precedent, and perpetuate the atrocious enabling of Trump’s pattern of lying and other constant abuse of the office and much of the country letting it happen and not calling it out for what it was.

* “2. Perhaps it leaves the country more secure when the President is removed; but how about the days it takes for the process to play out?” – Well there’s a point. Yeah, probably he should be shut down immediately… and that may be happening to some degree already, just not making the news except for the social media shutdowns. Good thing Trump isn’t smart enough to know how to create his own web page LOL.

* Probably many other points, but this ought to be more than enough…

crazyguy's avatar

@janbb I may be an ass, but I do have some knowledge. What you said is inaccurate, a conviction does not automatically bear him from seeking office again.

@Pandora The article is linked, believe it or not, right below “Here it is:”

@LuckyGuy The way I tread the article I linked, it requires removal from office. If Trump were already out of the White House, he would be tried as a private citizen. I am not sure a private citizen can be barred indefinitely from seeking public office.

@Zaku I am not certain that conviction by the Senate automatically includes a bar from seeking public office. The article you linked does say that. However, the article I linked does not say that.

Chances are Trump would not get re-elected in 2024 but stranger things have happened.

Impeach and convict in under 9 days – what are you smoking?

You say: “It’s important to get the dangerously unstable madman out of office as soon as possible to head off as much ongoing damage as possible.” I guess you are worried about a President’s war-making power. Have you considered what happens while the process is playing out?

Getting all legislators (at least in the House) to vote would be a good idea.

If you were prosecutor, could you depend on proving beyond reasonable doubt that Trump’s words on Jan 6 were an incitement to attempt a coup?

Before I got to your reply on 2 I had already repeated my point. Shutting down the President would leave this country absolutely defenseless. I can see Russia, Iran and China salivating at the prospect!

@Zaku, thanks for a well-thought out and superbly presented answer.

Zaku's avatar

It’s worth impeaching even if can’t be done in 9 days. And having waited and watched while both houses ratified the 50 states’ votes, I can imagine it being possible to get done quickly in the current circumstances. That mob got too close for comfort to all of them.

I have thought about the military implications. So has the military. President Eisenhower may have been the first one to come up with how to handle the chain of command when the POTUS is taken out. That led to the 25th Amendment eventually, and although that doesn’t clearly spell out all procedures for all scenarios, the problem of the POTUS being replaced, and many other scenarios, have been under serious consideration by the military since then. Rest assured the plan is certainly not “gee, no one ever thought this would happen. I guess we can’t do anything” even if both the POTUS and VP were killed or out of communication. In the case of just legally removing the POTUS, national command authority passes straight to the VP.

As for the not seeking office part, 1) LOL at his chances even if allowed (though yes, I suppose technically stranger things have happened) and 2) the article I linked directly quotes the applicable law and says while it’s not clear it would automatically be applied, Article I, Section 3 does directly include “disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States”. I can’t imagine that would be excluded in this impeachment.

crazyguy's avatar

@Zaku Here is the relevant paragraph from Article 1, Section 3:

Judgement in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment, according to Law.

It is open to interpretation whether removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office… are simultaneously applied or not. Your link says yes, mine says no.

There is military preparedness for the events you describe. Is there any for the time the President is barred from commander-in-chief duties because somebody thinks that he is apt to strike out in a fit of peeve and/or childishness?

As far as getting a conviction in nine days, if that happens I’ll be more surprised than anybody else on this planet. And, if, as likely, it does not happen, Biden’s agenda will have been set back several weeks for no good reason.

stanleybmanly's avatar

When you stop to consider Trump surviving to run in 2024, who is left that would be caught dead working for him? The man is an ogre of such phenomenal magnitude that all and any who dare be associated with him must dependably find their reputations in tatters. It is absolutely extraordinary the number of ruined lives and wrecked careers Trump has inflicted on the ranks of Republican notables. The bootlicking sycophants comprising the Republican House and Senate now find themselves jeered and hooted by the very Trump worshipers they courted through the 4 year application of their frantic lips to Trump’s colossal ass. What a sty of shameless pigs.

crazyguy's avatar

@crazyguy Further to my response above, @Zaku here is a sentence from your link that basically confirms what I have been saying:

So if the House and Senate address the issue in the articles of impeachment—we will undoubtably be done with the offending president.

In other words, an offending president or any other Federal official is not automatically barred from ever seeking public office again, but the articles of impeachment can require it.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

@crazyguy are you saying you hope they don’t go for impeachment because you indeed hope The Don Father does make a run the White house in 2024?

crazyguy's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 My main reason for opposing impeachment at this time is that it won’t serve any purpose, and will detract from Biden’s agenda.

As far as my hopes go, I want Trump to run and win in 2024. He may not win, but stranger things have been known to happen.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

“My main reason for opposing impeachment at this time is that it won’t serve any purpose, and will detract from Biden’s agenda.” WHAT !! it will kick his fat ass to thr curb !

Zaku's avatar

“There is military preparedness for the events you describe. Is there any for the time the President is barred from commander-in-chief duties because somebody thinks that he is apt to strike out in a fit of peeve and/or childishness?”
– Yes. Unlike the political circus, the military spends its time seriously thinking about every possible future crisis it can think of, and developing expedient practical courses of action for them. And they have clear chains of command, with capable professionals in the higher positions.

crazyguy's avatar

@misfit I agree the country is as divided as it has ever been since the Civil War. However, my impression was that Biden is planning to re-unite the country.

crazyguy's avatar

@Zaku The military does indeed have plans for every possible future crisis it can think of. However, the Constitution is clear on the President being the Commander-in-Chief: “The Constitution of the United States divides the war powers of the federal government between the Executive and Legislative branches: the President is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces (Article II, section 2), while Congress has the power to make declarations of war, and to raise and support the armed forces…Oct 15, 2019.

So I think the question becomes: Can Congress take away the President’s Commander-in-Chief status? And if it does, who exactly will be given the power? It is true the Military has probably thought about this scenario, but is there a Constitutional solution? I can think of many that would probably be challenged as unconstitutional.

Response moderated
Zaku's avatar

“So I think the question becomes: Can Congress take away the President’s Commander-in-Chief status?”
– That seems like (yet another) different question, to me. Conviction in a Senate trial after impeached with the intent of “removal from office” (q.v. US Constitution, as discussed above), which certainly includes POTUS’ “Commander-in-Chief” status.

But hopefully you understand that POTUS’ “Commander-in-Chief” status doesn’t prevent the military from reacting to threats. Authority to launch new attacks as part of new missions when not at war and not part of an already-authorized operation, does rest with the POTUS. But non-nuclear defensive actions, and command within the context of existing situations for which there are operations, rests with military command.

You started this tangent with the idea: “Shutting down the President would leave this country absolutely defenseless. I can see Russia, Iran and China salivating at the prospect!” And I think that is not true, unless any of those countries are actually on the brink of wanting to attack the US, which I do not think is the case.

And on top of all of that, change of POTUS has by now been considered very carefully for decades now, and I am sure that:

1) A new CIC would be appointed at the same time a POTUS is removed.

2) US Strategic Command has already decided what it will do in case of many different types of crisis, when the POTUS and VP and Congress are not in communication. For example, if a nuclear bomb takes out Washington D.C. and then we see some nation attacking us, I have no doubt our military would respond decisively, and worry about the legalities later, if there’s anyone left to worry about those.

3) Given that the US military could see Trump was a dangerous chucklehead, at least as soon as he was the Republican candidate in 2016, they would have started thinking about “WTF do we do if this guy becomes POTUS and acts like a loose cannon?”

JLeslie's avatar

Soldiers are obligated to disobey an order that would commit a crime. Trump can’t order them to stop the change of power when the change is in line with the constitution. I don’t think congress needs to do anything. The generals have the power to do the right thing and the soldiers themselves.

stanleybmanly's avatar

At minimum these 2 impeachments testify to some hint that there may yet be some inkling in this country regarding the difference between right and wrong. The most alarming thing I have to say about Trump is in recognition of the spectacular ease with which people are prepared to suspend acknowledgement of that difference and yet expect outcomes somehow favorable to themselves. This is why I rattle on incessantly against the 2 insidious weasels here. I’m afraid, and the rest of you should be as well.

JLeslie's avatar

@stanleybmanly I think for Trump it’s legal and illegal and how far can we cross the line and still get away with it. It’s not about right and wrong. It looked to me his wording was very careful, and this rumor he won’t pay Giuliani, if true, means to me he asked Giuliani if he says this or that will he be ok legally.

Many of his followers at the Capitol don’t care about man made laws, a lot of them are religious zealots. Others are completely clueless about history and laws and are told over and over again revolution is good. America Revolution is something they are grateful for and proud of. If it has to happen again so be it.

si3tech's avatar

Serves no purpose. Spends taxpayers’ money!

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Hey ,if they can get a senate conviction this time and it prevents him forever running for any public office again well worth it.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@si3tech SAVES taxpayers’ money.

Million dollars a years travel expenses.

LuckyGuy's avatar

@crazyguy You wrote: “My main reason for opposing impeachment at this time is that it won’t serve any purpose, and will detract from Biden’s agenda.” That is a good playbook answer designed to allay fears.
But the claim rings hollow when at the same time:

“Rep. Greene, Georgia, to Submit Articles of Impeachment Against Joe Biden on Jan 21.”

crazyguy's avatar

@LuckyGuy I had not heard that. But after your heads-up, I did research it and find it sort of nonsensical. However, you are comparing apples and oranges.

The Senate is the only body authorized to conduct Trump’s trial, and to confirm Biden’s choices. The House does neither. So the only thing Rep Greene will accomplish is perhaps derail Pelosi’s agenda for a day or two.

crazyguy's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 You are assuming two things:

1. The trial will end in a conviction. That is a dubious prospect, at best.

2. The delay in confirming Biden’s choices will cause minimal disruption. Another dubious prospect.

crazyguy's avatar

@si3tech Agree 100%. Also, it does nothing to further Biden’s reunification agenda.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

@crazyguy We know you would love ole orange hair for 2024 but I don’t think the rest of the world like the idea.

You are right I am hoping for a conviction so he can’t run again EVER!!!
I just want him to fade away only on clear days on a Trump golf course you can hear the horrible cry (I WAS ROBBED!).

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Trump can’t run for President if he is Attica !

crazyguy's avatar

@Zaku You said: That seems like (yet another) different question, to me. Of course the implication of your remark is that I keep changing my original question (as I am wont to do!)

Let em clarify. My question was “Do you think impeachment of Trump now will serve any purpose?” To my question, you provided a good, comprehensive answer. I acknowledged your answer and asked a follow up about military preparedness during the time to remove the President. Unless you were thinking of an instantaneous removal?

So I did not change the original question.

Your latest long post still did not answer my follow up question. It has a lot of detail about what happens after the POTUS is removed, Not one thing about what happens during the time the POTUS is being removed.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie I am not sure who you are addressing your remarks to. They do not seem to be related to my question.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther