LogFAQs > #931484564

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Politics Containment Topic 252: Voiding Our Special Relationship
xp1337 12/12/19 4:45:54 PM #328:	Ashethan posted... He could theoretically run in 2020 -- IF the Articles of impeachment don't forbid him from doing so, like the articles of impeachment against Bill Clinton did. But if he won in 2020, he could NOT run in 2024 since the constitution forbids anyone from being elected President more than twice. Actually, AFAIK, it doesn't matter what the House does or doesn't include in the articles re: disqualification. Disqualification is a possible additional penalty handed down by the Senate. Upon a conviction in the Senate trial removal occurs, but the Senate can then choose whether to additionally specify that they are disqualifying the convicted person from holding office. As the Constitution does not specify a required proportion of Senators for disqualification, only removal (2/3s) they have historically held that disqualification only requires a simple majority to impose (though of course this only comes into play after you've gotten the 2/3s needed to convict.) Nevertheless, it's rare even in the context of impeachment. I think disqualification has only been imposed like 3 times in US history. --- xp1337: Don't you wish there was a spell-checker that told you when you a word out? <cite>xp1337 posted [p:931484564] in Politics C... [t:78241503]...</cite> <quote>Ashethan posted... </cite> <quote>He could theoretically run in 2020 -- IF the Articles of impeachment don't forbid him from doing so, like the articles of impeachment against Bill Clinton did. But if he won in 2020, he could NOT run in 2024 since the constitution forbids anyone from being elected President more than twice.</quote>Actually, AFAIK, it doesn't matter what the House does or doesn't include in the articles re: disqualification. Disqualification is a possible additional penalty handed down by the Senate. Upon a conviction in the Senate trial removal occurs, but the Senate can then choose whether to additionally specify that they are disqualifying the convicted person from holding office. As the Constitution does not specify a required proportion of Senators for disqualification, only removal (2/3s) they have historically held that disqualification only requires a simple majority to impose (though of course this only comes into play after you've gotten the 2/3s needed to convict.) Nevertheless, it's rare even in the context of impeachment. I think disqualification has only been imposed like 3 times in US history. --- xp1337: Don't you wish there was a spell-checker that told you when you a word out?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1