Should Trump get the security briefing normally given to former presidents

[roguenuke]

No, the question I have to answer (and you can as well) is where in the Constitution does it say a former president can be removed from office after he's already left. The answer to that question is. It doesn't.

It doesn't have to specifically state he can be, it only has to not prevent such action.

 

[Overitall]

It doesn't have to specifically state he can be, it only has to not prevent such action.

By that standard anything can go. The Constitution is the foundation upon which our laws are based. The impeachment proceedings are clearly spelled out. The very use of the word “removal” is so clear that even a child can understand it. Imagine asking a child to remove his plate from the dinner table if it has already been removed. He would probably give you a bewildering look.

 

[roguenuke]

By that standard anything can go. The Constitution is the foundation upon which our laws are based. The impeachment proceedings are clearly spelled out. The very use of the word “removal” is so clear that even a child can understand it. Imagine asking a child to remove his plate from the dinner table if it has already been removed. He would probably give you a bewildering look.

The Constitution is meant to limit government.

There is more to impeachment though than "removal". Failing to recognize that fact doesn't change it. There are other things that are only able to be gained from Impeachment, even with the person out of office.

 

[Overitall]

The Constitution is meant to limit government.

There is more to impeachment though than "removal". Failing to recognize that fact doesn't change it. There are other things that are only able to be gained from Impeachment, even with the person out of office.

Who do you think is conducting the impeachment proceedings?

 

[Jonsa]

wellllllll, he's going to need new sources of revenue and he won't be getting his pension. Its a way he can pick up a little cash on the side. So sure why not let Donnie Peachs, MAGA Mob Boss sell out the country.

 

[roguenuke]

Who do you think is conducting the impeachment proceedings?

But the Constitution does not specifically limit when Impeachment happens or has to happen. So that is not a constitutional limitation. It allows Congress to decide that when it comes to Impeachment of the President.

 

[Connery]

No way....Trump will try to pin the report on Belichick’s chest as door prize for passing up the Medal of Freedom.

 

[Overitall]

But the Constitution does not specifically limit when Impeachment happens or has to happen. So that is not a constitutional limitation. It allows Congress to decide that when it comes to Impeachment of the President.

Fine. Why not wait until after 2024. If he wins they can then impeach a sitting President where the CJ can preside. Then everything will be Constitutionally legit.

 

[roguenuke]

Fine. Why not wait until after 2024. If he wins they can then impeach a sitting President where the CJ can preside. Then everything will be Constitutionally legit.

Because it is to hold him responsible for something he did recently, while in office. He was still in office when he was Impeached.

It is constitutionally "legit" now.

 

[Overitall]

Because it is to hold him responsible for something he did recently, while in office. He was still in office when he was Impeached.

It is constitutionally "legit" now.

They would still be holding him responsible. You said there was no time limits. What’s the problem now? Is it that you’re afraid he might steal the election in 2024. The Russians might aid him. Or simply that the American citizens want him as President despite the animosity of the Democrats.

 

[roguenuke]

They would still be holding him responsible. You said there was no time limits. What’s the problem now? Is it that you’re afraid he might steal the election in 2024. The Russians might aid him. Or simply that the American citizens want him as President despite the animosity of the Democrats.

You do understand about due process right? Part of that is a speedy trial. A speedy trial within a reasonable time after being "arrested" (in this case "indicted", aka Impeached). That applies here.

Those in Alabama chose Roy Moore to be on the AL Supreme Court after he was removed the first time. Doesn't mean they shouldn't have prevented that, if they had had the means to do so. The only reason he was prevented from running after was he would have been passed the age limit.

Some people should be barred from holding office regardless of what the population may feel is "the best choice", especially considering how our President is elected, which means it could easily be a minority of the population. But they should also be reprimanded and go into history showing that we, as a country, should not tolerate public officials, Presidents acting in this manner and actually hold them in some way accountable.

 

[Overitall]

You do understand about due process right? Part of that is a speedy trial. A speedy trial within a reasonable time after being "arrested" (in this case "indicted", aka Impeached). That applies here.

Those in Alabama chose Roy Moore to be on the AL Supreme Court after he was removed the first time. Doesn't mean they shouldn't have prevented that, if they had had the means to do so. The only reason he was prevented from running after was he would have been passed the age limit.

Some people should be barred from holding office regardless of what the population may feel is "the best choice", especially considering how our President is elected, which means it could easily be a minority of the population. But they should also be reprimanded and go into history showing that we, as a country, should not tolerate public officials, Presidents acting in this manner and actually hold them in some way accountable.

Due process? Really? Now I know for a certainty that you don’t know what you’re talking about. Where was the due process when Trump was impeached the first and now this time?

Now you’re fine with the government, instead of the governed, deciding who is best to serve us in the capacity of a government official. That’s not a democracy; it’s a dictatorship.

 

[uptower]

No, he won't read it and he'll only share it with some idiot like Ivanka.

 

[jamesrage]

I do not believe there is a law about this matter. If only custom is involved, why should anyone grant Trump the courtesies granted by custom to Presidents? He didn't fulfill the jobs done by custom by presidents such as riding to the Inauguration with President Biden or welcoming him to the White House.

Die hard foam at the mouth anti-Trump conspiracies or Orange man bad nonsense is not a valid reason to deny a former president security briefings. What is a valid reason to deny a former president security briefings is the fact that since he is no longer president then he has no reason for those security briefings.

 

[Jonsa]

Die hard foam at the mouth anti-Trump conspiracies or Orange man bad nonsense is not a valid reason to deny a former president security briefings. What is a valid reason to deny a former president security briefings is the fact that since he is no longer president then he has no reason for those security briefings.

How about all former presidents have to reapply for security clearance like all other citizens? Is that a fair approach?

 

[trouble13]

As a courtesy, most former presidents receive intelligence briefings. Should Biden extend this privilege to Trump?

I love how some of you think its a privilege that benefits Trump to have him be given intelligence briefings.

 

[Lucky 1]

He will pass them along to the highest bidder. So no.

You're right...that is exactly what we have to worry about with Senile Joe Biden!

Its clear that Biden was already selling influence to foreign governments through his crack smoking kid for millions of dollars!

And considering that pretty much all of Biden's executive orders hurt America and help our adversaries, particularly China...it would appear that the Chinese investment in Joe is already paying dividends!

 

[jamesrage]

How about all former presidents have to reapply for security clearance like all other citizens? Is that a fair approach?

Since they aren't president anymore then how about we deny all former presidents that security briefing? Seems to actually be the logical choice.

 

[roguenuke]

Since they aren't president anymore then how about we deny all former presidents that security briefing? Seems to actually be the logical choice.

Other former Presidents get it when/if they are going to provide advice about an issue. It isn't a regular or normal briefing type thing. It is a as needed type briefing.

 

[justabubba]

Since they aren't president anymore then how about we deny all former presidents that security briefing? Seems to actually be the logical choice.

not a whole lot of people have sat in the seat of the president
it's a good thing to be able to hear their perspectives about matters of importance to the sitting president
should joe need Obama's insight about the middle east or domestic racial violence, for instance, providing that former president with the current intelligence assessments would allow that person to be better positioned to craft a recommendation/opinion
if the sitting POTUS does not need a former POTUS' suggestions, then there is no further need to share secured information with the former POTUSi

 

[Jonsa]

Since they aren't president anymore then how about we deny all former presidents that security briefing? Seems to actually be the logical choice.

Because former presidents usually can be a valuable source of "institutional knowledge" and issue/leader specific experiences. This makes particular sense in the case of national security - a truly bipartisan issue.

As for trump, he's got nothing to offer Joe other than keeping his big mouth shut.

 

[uptower]

Nope.

Tradition be damned. I dunno what any former president needs it for anyway. Now there is a strongly justified reason to end the practice: the former president is a traitor and a crook.

 

[Linc]

Since they aren't president anymore then how about we deny all former presidents that security briefing? Seems to actually be the logical choice.

Trump is Putin’s bitch. We still don’t know how bad the SolarWinds hack of our govt. is.

 

[The Hairy Fiddler]

Fine. Why not wait until after 2024. If he wins they can then impeach a sitting President where the CJ can preside. Then everything will be Constitutionally legit.

How in the hell is Trump going to win the election in 2024? The man's approval rating is 33% LMAO. There is nothing wrong with impeaching him right now. He's a criminal, and criminals should face the consequences.

 

[Overitall]

How in the hell is Trump going to win the election in 2024? The man's approval rating is 33% LMAO. There is nothing wrong with impeaching him right now. He's a criminal, and criminals should face the consequences.

Criminals typically face the judicial branch. Not much confidence in the congress that he would ever face a jury or a conviction if he did.