@AshaRangappa_ A few other points @brithume misses.
The “ultimate punishment” isn't losing office.
In a criminal trial, a defendant stands to lose life (capital cases), liberty or property.
To call loss of office the "ultimate" punishment is silly.
Moreover, Art 1, sec 3 👇 says that. . .
The “ultimate punishment” isn't losing office.
In a criminal trial, a defendant stands to lose life (capital cases), liberty or property.
To call loss of office the "ultimate" punishment is silly.
Moreover, Art 1, sec 3 👇 says that. . .
@AshaRangappa_ @brithume 2/ “punishment” is limited to removal from office.
After removal, the person can be subjected to a criminal trial.
The idea that removal from office first requires proof of a crime under the standards of a criminal court make mo sense/ criminal trial occurs AFTER removal . . .
After removal, the person can be subjected to a criminal trial.
The idea that removal from office first requires proof of a crime under the standards of a criminal court make mo sense/ criminal trial occurs AFTER removal . . .
@AshaRangappa_ @brithume 3/ Even if you want to construe "crimes" in "high crimes and misdemeanor" strictly, the founders couldn't have meant today's criminal code, because the federal criminal code didn't exist at the time.
Removal is for corruption and abuse of power.
Criminal court comes later.
Removal is for corruption and abuse of power.
Criminal court comes later.
@AshaRangappa_ @brithume Also the “crime” failed because Trump got caught so, by this reasoning, Trump should be thanking the whistleblower for saving his job.
