Posted on 01/24/2021 3:30:25 AM PST by RandFan
Sen. Rand Paul says that a Senate impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump that doesn’t include Chief Justice John Roberts would be an illegitimate process.
“If Justice Roberts won’t preside over this sham ‘impeachment’ then why would it ever be considered legitimate?” the Kentucky Republican tweeted Friday. “Hint: It won’t be.”
Later in the day, Paul joined Fox News’s Sean Hannity and elaborated on his impeachment stance, calling it an “illegitimate procedure” if Roberts isn’t there.
“It isn’t a real impeachment. It’s going to be a fake, partisan impeachment,” Paul said about a process without Roberts.
“The story is,” Paul continued, “that the chief justice is not going to be asked, but the reason he’s not going to be asked is he’s privately said he’s not supposed to come unless it’s an impeachment of the president.”
“So, this is an illegitimate procedure,” he said. “And even the chief justice of the Supreme Court, who's not a rabid Trump person, who's actually, if anything, sort of in the middle, he is now saying this is illegitimate because I’m not getting in the middle of this and I’m not coming over for this.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
“I would argue that impeaching a private citizen is illegitimate”
Trump was not a private citizen when he was impeached.
I meant the Senate trial not the House impeachment.
“What ISN’T illegitimate about demorcats? “
Yes, even their “president” is illegitimate.
The dems position in the trial will be that they don’t need 67 votes to convict and remove Trump since he’s “been removed” by the voters. They will go direct to the only judgement they have to deal, which is disqualification that needs only 51 votes. They’ll get close to 60 to disqualify Trump.
But the Constitution gives the Senate the power to try ALL impeachments.
Democrats and go a long Republicans are acting seditiously.
I would not call Bull Connor or the Klansmen decent, nor I should think Christian, though I’m hardly the one to say.
The civil rights movement worked because of TV, which brought the ugliness and blatant un-Americanness of enforcing Jim Crow into every living room, where it got the attention of the decent people who couldn’t countenance turning a fire hose on children or sicking a dog on a man of the cloth of whatever color. JFK also reluctantly helped. Without TV, nothing would have ever happened.
TV is now a dinosaur. The Internet is where you go to get decent people’s attention, and a good thing, too. TV is for fake news, and willful ignorance in the name of subversive narratives.
It’s already happening. They just bombed a church in California. It’s been going on for a while.
See #35.
This is the Kansas-Missouri phase, though one might see the Federal Courthouse in Portland as Fort Sumter, and possibly the assaults on ICE offices as well.
I was kind of hoping for Fort Sumter to be Fort Sumter again. It might be a long hot summer.
The white population of the 11 States of the Old Confederacy in 1960 was somewhere around 40 million people. One of them was Bull Connor. Most of them were not Klansmen or Klanswomen.
But you know that already.
The "civil rights movement" was led by Christian ministers and their pleadings had an overtly Christian and Biblical perspective.
But you know that already, too.
My argument is that IF the appeals of the "civil rights movement" had not had an overtly Christian outward appearance, resistance to it would not have evaporated so quickly. Which it did.
Except the last one.
Makes perfect sense, when introducing a sham vote to justify a political lynching without a trial.
Lawless and unconstitutional Senate action presents just the hanging.
They become guilty of a grave dismissal of constitutional rights or all, to a trial, to a defense, and a hearing of criminal evidence to the contrary, proving POTUS won.
They become complicit in defying the Constitution.
In fact, if Roberts doesn't show, he's going to create a Consitutional crisis because Trump's lawyers will immediately file for a permanent injunction/dismissal with prejudice of any attempt to hold a Senate trial without Roberts, and HE will have to rule on HIS OWN ABSENCE.
But you were referring to the nature of the opponents of the civil rights movement. I wouldn’t characterize active opponents that way. People who were neutral, acquiescent to Jim Crow as the way things had always been, but not prone to think much of it, were not opponents per se. Bull was. So were the aforementioned klansmen, of whatever percentage of the population they comprised at the time. Their biggest chapter now, I remember hearing, is in Long Island. The South has outgrown them, in part thanks to the civil disobedience movement, as amplified by TV, and in part thanks to the economic development that followed.
Let me ramble a bit off topic, because I have to get this down before I forget it. Liberals imagine that the racial paradigm remains the same as in 1960, and cannot imagine Christianity as having any positive influence anywhere. But Coleridge says “if you do not understand a man’s ignorance, presume yourself ignorant of his understanding.” If a factory moves down to Mexico, both blacks and whites are laid off with no prospects other than rotting on the dole, so they become allies, rather than competitors for crap jobs. Thus, you have the new paradigm that liberals remain ignorant of, which animates all of their erroneous assumptions about the South and southerners and Trump. I’m onto something, I think.
Enough rambling. The fit has left me. I think we do not fundamentally disagree. I misunderstood your meaning and stand corrected.
Chief Justice only presides in trial of "the President", meaning the sitting President....text doesn't say "a President". Senate trial is under Senate rules, so there is no appellate authority beyond the chair, which in this case will be VP Harris.
In the impeachment of Andrew Johnson the Senate overrode several of Chief Justice Salmon Chase’s rulings. In response Chase threatened to withdraw from the proceeding knowing it would halt the proceedings as they constitutionally could not continue without his presence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.