- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Andrew Weissmann's intentional ignorance on checks and balances.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 9:58 am to Indefatigable
Posted on 4/29/24 at 9:58 am to Indefatigable
quote:
It’s right there for you, in very plain English.
Then “convicted” is superfluous because according to your interpretation I can remove it and it means the same thing.
I’m going to assume it’s there to ensure that only parties convicted by impeachment are liable for indictment since that is, you know, what it actually says.
2
Posted on 4/29/24 at 10:05 am to Robin Masters
quote:
Then “convicted” is superfluous because according to your interpretation I can remove it and it means the same thing.
No, it doesn’t. A person convicted by the senate in an impeachment proceeding can still be prosecuted criminally.
That’s it. That’s what it means. It’s there to prevent double jeopardy application and head off the exact argument you’re trial to make. Impeachment has nothing to do with criminal prosecutions. The last clause in Art. 1 Sec 3 clause 7 makes that as plain as any statute or legal authority I have ever read.
quote:
I’m going to assume it’s there to ensure that only parties convicted by impeachment are liable for indictment since that is, you know, what it actually says.
But that is literally not what it says. So long as you’re clear on that.
This post was edited on 4/29/24 at 10:08 am
Posted on 4/29/24 at 10:07 am to Robin Masters
quote:
Then “convicted” is superfluous because according to your interpretation I can remove it and it means the same thing.
How?
quote:
Judgment 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, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
quote:
Judgment 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 shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
These do not say the same thing in the context of criminal law, especially re: Double Jeopardy.
quote:
I’m going to assume it’s there to ensure that only parties convicted by impeachment are liable for indictment since that is, you know, what it actually says.
Where does "only" appear in the clause?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News