Kelly expected to resign soon, no longer on speaking terms with Trump

[UsualName]

Thanks for your reply. I only addressed the question as to whether a U.S. President can be impeached for acts/omissions committed prior to holding office.

But to address your comment: I think it's futile now to debate properness/likelihoods of convictions, without knowing the results of the Mueller investigation.

Yes. Impeachment is a political remedy so congress gets to determine what is impeachable.

For example, the southern district of New York just tied Trump to illegal campaign financing. This being prior prior to his holding office. The House could raise articles of impeachment just on that, pass it to the senate and the senate would then hold a trial.

 

[UsualName]

The House will make the case that a president can be impeached for anything. However, he would never be convicted as a president cannot be convicted and removed from office for something that occurred prior to taking office. In addition, these were not crimes. If they were, then Obama would have been impeached for the campaign finance violation(s) that they paid a 300k fine for.

This absolutely wrong.

 

[Buy1Sell2]

Thanks for your reply. I only addressed the question as to whether a U.S. President can be impeached for acts/omissions committed prior to holding office.

But to address your comment: I think it's futile now to debate properness/likelihoods of convictions, without knowing the results of the Mueller investigation.

One thing as well to remember ----even if these were campaign finance violations, which they are not, they would only be civil fines----not impeachable offenses. The standard for campaign finance violations is whether or not the expense would occur if the person wasn't a candidate. ---and they clearly would have. If it's not clear to anyone, just do some research and know this----It would be a slam dunk acquittal.

 

[userque]

Correct. However, it now is clearly a non-collusion investigation aimed at crippling Trump and his re-election bid and his next 2 yrs in office. This is revenge for the firing of Comey.

I can't reliably, or vaguely, know with certainty (enough to debate with) what they are, or aren't currently investigating. It just seems to make more sense--to me--to wait for the results.

We can know what they have investigated via court submissions/testimony/etc. But we, (or at least, "I"), can't know what additional investigations are ongoing, or what past investigations have taken place, or whether the matters revealed in court are also part of ongoing investigations.

Again, it makes more sense to me to simply wait for the results.

 

[El OchoCinco]

Remember impeachment is not the same as a criminal charge against the President.

If the Congress votes to Impeach there is an investigation which can only lead to conviction by legislative vote which entails removal from office. it does not matter if they are not criminally charged afterwards or only pay civil fines.

You should read up on impeachment, it is NOT necessarily a criminal court of law, just a charge to remove the person from office...

The House votes on IMPEACHMENT and the Senate TRIES the impeachment.

Why do you think Trump cared so much about winning the Senate and blew off losing seats in the House.... to make him impeachment proof.

 

[Buy1Sell2]

Remember impeachment is not the same as a criminal charge against the President.

If the Congress votes to Impeach there is an investigation which can only lead to conviction by legislative vote which entails removal from office. it does not matter if they are not criminally charged afterwards or only pay civil fines.

You should read up on impeachment, it is NOT necessarily a criminal court of law, just a charge to remove the person from office...

The House votes on IMPEACHMENT and the Senate TRIES the impeachment.

Why do you think Trump cared so much about winning the Senate and blew off losing seats in the House.... to make him impeachment proof.

I certainly understand impeachment. It is the only avenue available to Congreff outside of the 25th amendment to remove a president. --it is easier than the 25th amendment actually so when Dems were talking about 25th, it was actually laughable.

 

[userque]

One thing as well to remember ----even if these were campaign finance violations, which they are not, they would only be civil fines----not impeachable offenses. The standard for campaign finance violations is whether or not the expense would occur if the person wasn't a candidate. ---and they clearly would have. If it's not clear to anyone, just do some research and know this----It would be a slam dunk acquittal.

For the sake of discussions:

As someone here just stated, impeachment proceedings do not require criminal allegations. IOW, a violation that is only punishable via civil fines, can also be an impeachable offense.

You are conflating impeachment with criminal charges/prosecution. They are not the same.

 

[Buy1Sell2]

Remember impeachment is not the same as a criminal charge against the President.

If the Congress votes to Impeach there is an investigation which can only lead to conviction by legislative vote which entails removal from office. it does not matter if they are not criminally charged afterwards or only pay civil fines.

You should read up on impeachment, it is NOT necessarily a criminal court of law, just a charge to remove the person from office...

The House votes on IMPEACHMENT and the Senate TRIES the impeachment.

Why do you think Trump cared so much about winning the Senate and blew off losing seats in the House.... to make him impeachment proof.

He paid attention to the Senate because he physically could not campaign for all House races. As well, he understood the history of midterms and was more concerned with being able to get judges confirmed. Even with the House loss, the Trump midterm results outperformed 85% of midterms in the history of the country.

 

[Buy1Sell2]

For the sake of discussions:

As someone here just stated, impeachment proceedings do not require criminal allegations. IOW, a violation that is only worthy of civil fines, can also be an impeachable offense.

You are conflating impeachment with criminal charges/prosecution. They are not the same.

Like I said the House will make a case for impeachment and possibly impeach if Trump crossed the road and bumped into someone. It has to have occurred during the time in office and must be a High Crime or Misdemeanor. This is based upon English law and you should read the history of the term "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" and you"ll see that paying off Stormy Daniels with his own money does not rise to this. Democrats will inevitably overplay their hand and it will backfire because they don't understand how things work.

 

[userque]

Like I said the House will make a case for impeachment and possibly impeach if Trump crossed the road and bumped into someone. It has to have occurred during the time in office and must be a High Crime or Misdemeanor. This is based upon English law and you should read the history of the term "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" and you"ll see that paying off Stormy Daniels with his own money does not rise to this. Democrats will inevitably overplay their hand and it will backfire because they don't understand how things work.

I am without knowledge as to what the House will do.

Again, it does not have to occur while in office. Please see my prior posts.

Yes, High Crimes and Misdemeanors are impeachable.

I did not address the question as to whether Trump or his agent paid off Stormy Daniels. Again, I will wait for the results of the investigation--as I believe it to be futile to debate with such specificity at this time.

I am without knowledge as to what the Democrats will do.