Contendahh posted:direstraits posted:
So far, the Americans indicted or convicted during the Mueller investigation have nothing to do with Russian conspiracy, nor obstruction. True, Russians and Russian companies have been indicted. That Russia hacked and bought false ads is known. Russia, alone. So far, no conspiracy.
Again, doubtful that martial law would or could be implemented. That's a Democrat dream. Remember, whatever Democrats accuse one of, the Democrats are already committing the thing, or planning to do so.
Very poor understanding of the 25th Amendment, I see. First, the VP and a majority of the cabinet must agree on the removal. The president may disagree, upon which a second vote must be held. If the president still disagrees, it would take two-thirds of both houses of Congress to remove the president.
The 25th Amendment reasons burdening the Blithering Buffoon are not by any means limited to those that might involve coziness with Russians. You seem to avoid such matters as the payoffs to floozies in likely violation of election laws and the brazen violations of the emoluments clause. Besides all that, my reference to the 25th Amendment simply noted that there are potential reasons for its invocation. I said nothing at all about the Constitutional mechanism involved. Your diversion to the latter is nothing but a straw man argument and is thus worthless. Also, you might consider telling us the details of the Democrats' phony foundations and cite the particular Democrats who have engineered such fraudulent deceptions or who are planning to do so since you have concluded that "... whatever Democrats accuse one of, the Democrats are already committing the thing, or planning to do so."
Your "So far" reminds me of one of the "Little Moron" jokes of the 1950s: "What did the Little Moron yell at each story after jumping off the Empire State Building?" Answer: "O.K so far."
The 25th Amendment is for removal of a president because he can't perform him job. The reasons you cite are matters for impeachment.
As to FEC violations, Obama failed to correctly report $1.8 million in contributions. For that he was fined $375,000 -- the largest fine for FEC violations in history. Trump paid two women for $175,000 and $150,000, separately, for signing non-disclosure agreements. Reportedly, Cohen made the payments and was reimbursed by Trump. No campaign funds were involved.
I suggest you look up the federal statutes involving the Emoluments Clause. First, commerce with the public is not covered. Second, the only penalty is to refund the government the value of any emolument received. Got that, its a civil law affair, not criminal.
In the case of the 25th Amendment, it takes 2/3ds of both houses to remove from office. In the case of impeachment, it takes a majority in the House and a 2/3rds vote in the Senate to convict. Democrats don't have a 2/3rds majority in the Senate, or in the House, where they only have a majority.
I suspect, if such even made it to the Senate, as a matter of impeachment, the presiding judge, the Chief Justice of the United States, would dismiss such charges out of hand as not meeting the standards required by the Constitution.