• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Trump Struggles to Find Lawyers as Impeachment Trial Nears

Haunted

Haunted

Banned
Nov 3, 2017
2,737
This article seems optimistic. Even if it's a pro bono case because he doesn't have the money or isn't willing to pay, it's still a big high-profile case, he'll obviously find some representation.
 
i hate cheaters

i hate cheaters

Member
Feb 16, 2018
2,685
i know a few people who applied for the job, but they didn't get it because they thought the interview was at a hotel when it was actually at a landscaping store

but there's no need to panic: "If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you"
 
Feep

Feep

Lead Designer, Iridium Studios
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
4,603
I mean, it's cute, but does it really matter? I can't imagine anyone's vote will be in any way dependent on a lawyer's arguments.
 
OP
OP
SilentPanda

SilentPanda

Member
Nov 6, 2017
13,726
Earth
Tovarisc said:
Isn't there still also questions if trial even can legally occur once Trump is out of office?

It has never been done before and seems like there is uncertainty about legality.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No, It Would Not Be Unconstitutional for Trump's Impeachment Trial to Take Place After He's Out of Office

Now Luttig has opined, in the pages of the Washington Post, that the Senate's impeachment trial of President Trump cannot be held after he leaves office. This time, Luttig is wrong. The Senate can indeed try and convict Trump once he again becomes an ordinary citizen, although the only available judgment will be to disqualify him from holding a federal government office in the future.


"Once Trump's term ends on Jan. 20," according to Luttig, "Congress loses its constitutional authority to continue impeachment proceedings against him." Luttig supports his position by citing two provisions of the Constitution. Article II, Section 4 provides that "The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment," and Article I, Section 3 provides that "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." This leads Luttig to argue that only the constitutional impeachment "of a president" can result in future disqualification from office, thus making the impeachment of a non-president impossible.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


This is a logical error. Removal from office is only one of the two available constitutional outcomes of an impeachment trial, and that does not make potential removal a mandatory predicate for holding a trial in the first place. In fact, the Senate has twice before considered the impeachment of "officers of the United States" (a senator and a cabinet secretary) who had already left office. Luttig blows right past these precedents, arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court would never agree that the Senate "has the power to impeach a president who is no longer in office." That is his second mistake.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution provides that "the Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments." Although the Chief Justice must preside over impeachment trials of the president, the Supreme Court otherwise has no role to play. In a 1993 case involving the impeachment of federal judge Walter Nixon, the Court unanimously held that impeachment is essentially a "nonjusticiable" political proceeding that is not subject to judicial review. More recently, the current Court has made it clear that it firmly intends to stay out of political controversies, holding that partisan gerrymandering likewise presents a nonjusticiable political question.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


The constitutional separation of powers confers the "sole power of impeachment" upon the House of Representatives, which has now exercised it for the second time with regard to President Trump. It will be up to the House to present the Article of Impeachment to the Senate, at whatever time it deems appropriate. It will then be up to the Senate to conduct a trial, or not, in the exercise of its own sole power. If the timing is such that Donald Trump is no longer president, a conviction may not extend beyond "disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States," but that will still be a trial well worth holding.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

lawandcrime.com

No, It Would Not Be Unconstitutional for Trump’s Impeachment Trial to Take Place After He's Out of Office

If the timing is such that Donald Trump is no longer president, a conviction may not extend beyond “disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States,” but that will still be a trial well worth holding.
lawandcrime.com lawandcrime.com
 
Tovarisc

Tovarisc

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,432
FIN
SilentPanda said:
No, It Would Not Be Unconstitutional for Trump's Impeachment Trial to Take Place After He's Out of Office

lawandcrime.com

No, It Would Not Be Unconstitutional for Trump’s Impeachment Trial to Take Place After He's Out of Office

If the timing is such that Donald Trump is no longer president, a conviction may not extend beyond “disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States,” but that will still be a trial well worth holding.
lawandcrime.com lawandcrime.com
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I also have seen argument to other way so it seems to be bit open in the air.

thoI do expect Schumer to go ahead with it and see what happens :D
 
weekev

weekev

Is this a test?
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,215
His brand is toxic so noone will do it for the exposure. He has been known not to pay his lawyers so noone wants to do it for the money. He fucks everyone over unless you are related to him so noone will do it out of loyalty. Turns out being an absolute jackass for your entire life might not have been the smartest move.
 
Lightning Count

Lightning Count

Member
Jan 27, 2019
16,074
Fuck off
Between this and the upcoming NY tax trials, it's pretty clear Trump will be spending his final days going through court after court getting ripped to shreds by prosecutors.
 

Dis

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,953
Putting aside the obvious reasons of no one wants to defend the guy who caused an insurrection attack on the government, maybe telling people not to pay the guy who agreed to fight cases for you over the election and a known history of not paying lawyers wasn't the best ideas when you actively refuse to stop doing illegal shit that require lawyers to help......moron.
 
Binabik15

Binabik15

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,621
HotFuzzshame.gif

Actually, no, it's not possible to make up for the horrible shit Trump did, but seeing him this miserable and the predators moving closer is nice.
 
WhySoDevious

WhySoDevious

Member
Oct 31, 2017
8,459
Calderc said:
Nope!

www.google.com

Dershowitz says he won’t be part of Trump’s legal team - Washington Examiner

Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, a usual ally of President Trump, says he will not defend the president in his second impeachment trial impending in the Senate. Dershowitz circled back on his vow that he would help Trump if he were to face another impeachment, telling the Boston Herald on...
www.google.com www.google.com
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Guess he didn't get that pardon for any Epstein-related charges that might one day come his way.
 
RailWays

RailWays

One Winged Slayer
Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
15,676
Considering he stopped paying his remaining lawyers, I'm not surprised
 
theLusitanian

theLusitanian

Member
Nov 3, 2017
669
As much as I would like to think this matters, I have a hard time believing the Senate will get enough Republicans for conviction. there could be hours of silence for the defense and the party over country fervor of the GOP could win the day.
 
Mandos

Mandos

Member
Nov 27, 2017
30,985
vhoanox said:
Any law students willing to do pro-bono work. Because I am 100% sure Trump will not pay.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You have to be an aid for several years before they'd let you even be co counsel on a case like this
Haunted said:
This article seems optimistic. Even if it's a pro bono case because he doesn't have the money or isn't willing to pay, it's still a big high-profile case, he'll obviously find some representation.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Dude hasn't paid an attorney for a while, is toxic, has shown no respect for his attorneys(almost every firm in the top 100 that has supported him in the past has dropped him), anyone who fails or slights him gets attacked by the mob, and he's a horrible ex president.
Nobody wants the exposure of being the one who let him go down, everyone wants to be the one to take him down
 
blackhawk163

blackhawk163

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,222
Tovarisc said:
I don't have links (in work atm), but last night came across short write up by ex Federal Judge, he argued that trial wouldn't be lawful to hold after Trump has left office.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But there's already a precedent where a person was impeached and convicted after their resignation. Nixon wasnt impeached because they (Congress) achieved their objective (removal).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.