27
posted ago by K3719er ago by K3719er +27 / -0

When Nixon resigned after being impeached, the senate declined to follow through with a trial as it was rendered moot. Should that not have set precedent?

Comments (9)
sorted by:
3
Yianni1955 3 points ago +3 / -0

With Democrats, they go with whatever advances their agenda.

2
RedWhiteandPew 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nixon was never impeached.

2
K3719er [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

REEEEE!!! RREEE!!! Cough I mean, after re reading history, I have determined that Nixon was not in fact officially impeached - I appreciate that correction pede.

2
datahog1776 2 points ago +2 / -0

Trump is no longer a sitting President. The Impeachment process is used to remove a sitting President. What the fuck are they even doing??

1
K3719er [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Attempting a desperate hail Mary attempt to disqualify him from the 2024 election - although imo, his age at that time MIGHT be an issue, and personally I would love to see some younger blood in the WH. Would still vote for him if he was best candidate though.

2
Littleirishmaid 2 points ago +2 / -0

Good point.

2
handpeople 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not really. You can still be guilty of crimes after your Presidency. But impeachment is moot in this case, no crimes, not enough votes to convict and they all know it. Its just a show.

2
K3719er [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Of course you can, however I dont see that congress has the judicial authority to try someone no longer in office. Granted, there have been very few impeachment in the history of the US, however, it seems to me that the Nixon situation should be considered moving forward. IF a former official was to be tried, I would hope it would be done through the regular courts.

2
JohnGaltwazhere 2 points ago +2 / -0

It would for a rational, sane, human being with a brain. But we are talking about democrats.