Trump and the right don't care about the law when it applies to them.It appears that impeachment can result in permanently
banning Trump from any public office.
How Congress can permanently disqualify Trump from office after impeachment
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Trump and the right don't care about the law when it applies to them.It appears that impeachment can result in permanently
banning Trump from any public office.
How Congress can permanently disqualify Trump from office after impeachment
You mean like hats, etc? Doesn't he/his family already run that?
Trump and the right don't care about the law when it applies to them.
I don't know how anyone voted for him the first time since his personal history and record revealed nothing corruption, bad business practices, a mountain of lawsuits, amd rampant fraud.It begs the question whom in their right mind would even consider voting for Trump again?
Another question is for what party? I don't think the Republicans would dare adopt him again. He'd run as an independent, split the Right and guarantee President Kamala Harris!A lot of people, sadly.
But why would Trump run for the House, when he's been President? His ego is much too large for that. He also lives in blue Palm Beach where he'd likely lose. He's also old and likely tired of the pressure of elected office. He'll make much more money, much more easily, running Trump TV/buying Newsmax.
I have heard that an office of honor would be any elected position. Or even appointed position. Most of the people that have been impeached and convicted in the U.S. have been federal judges. As you know none of them have been Presidents. That too is clearly a "position of honor". Perhaps some more research may be needed, but it is clearly much larger than just the Presidency.Actually no. AFAIK the term “office of honor” refers to positions in the Executive and Judicial, but not elected positions in Congress. I wouldn’t bet the house on it and could be be wrong. But I think that is correct. Your link, VOX, assumes that any office of honor includes the elected offices of Congress. I believe you would find that case law specifies that it doesn’t apply to those.
I can't wait to get my Donald Trump commemorative plates:A lot of people, sadly.
But why would Trump run for the House, when he's been President? His ego is much too large for that. He also lives in blue Palm Beach where he'd likely lose. He's also old and likely tired of the pressure of elected office. He'll make much more money, much more easily, running Trump TV/buying Newsmax.
Another scenario:Here is the scenario: It’s November 2022 (just next year). The Republicans regain control of both the House and Senate. (Entirely possible) President Biden has been implicated as a result investigations of Hunter Biden. (Could happen) Now for the twist. Donald Trump decided to run for, and won, a seat as a member of the House of Representatives from a solidly Republican District. There is nothing legally preventing this, even if he were impeached.
The end result of this scenario: Nancy Pelosi loses the Speakership and has to see Donald Trump yielding power in the House everyday and Joe Biden faces the prospect of Donald Trump voting on Articles of Impeachment against him.
Yes, yes, of course this won’t happen. But it is not impossible.
Trump is therefore barred from running in 2024 since he is a traitor, but he runs anyway, taking 5% of the Republican vote, thus guaranteeing a Democratic victory in 2024.
I don't know how anyone voted for him the first time since his personal history and record revealed nothing corruption, bad business practices, a mountain of lawsuits, amd rampant fraud.
I get that. They are those I lived with for 30 years.For instance, we will overlook the genuine feelings of desperation and near desperation that so many people in rural areas of the country were experiencing back then and are even more strongly experiencing today.
I get that. They are those I lived with for 30 years.
I also saw them betray their morals and values for a man who normally they would condemn and want nothing to do with. I dealt with them giving me grief for not being conservative, patriotic, and pro military to meet their approval, but they gave Trump a free pass when he disrespected the troops and their families. I know how they love their Bible and their Jesus, yet I also saw them toss Matthew 16:26 out the window. They forsook everything they stand for a man who clearly a con.
I wish there I could remember the guys name, he was a guest on Real Time a few years ago, and he too pointed out Trump is everything they are against. They like humility and despise the boastful. They hate liars and adulterers. Disrespecting the troops is a great sin. Bit they surrendered it all for a man who is the very thing they dislike and don't trust.
One can be genuinely and legitimately aggrieved and a racist fool.Easy to look at them all as fools, nationalists, racists, etc. Always easier and more emotionally gratifying to do that
One can be genuinely and legitimately aggrieved and a racist fool.
Their whole premise that they're the forgotten workers is flawed.That's quite true. I should clarify. It is easy to dismiss the lot of them as a group because some significant portion of them are racist.
And what of the remainder? Some don't recognize the white nationalist, neofascist core of Trumpism. Some don't care. In my opinion, both are understandable but neither are justifiable.That's quite true. I should clarify. It is easy to dismiss the lot of them as a group because some significant portion of them are racist.
And what of the remainder? Some don't recognize the white nationalist, neofascist core of Trumpism. Some don't care. In my opinion, both are understandable but neither are justifiable.
OK, but let's do so without ever compromising an abiding commitment to the primacy of human rights.Honestly, Jay, if they have not committed crimes, I still favor working with them to demonstrate through actions that they have a vital interest in supporting democracy.
OK, but let's do so without ever compromising an abiding commitment to the primacy of human rights.