First, let’s set the scene. I quote (italics are my emphasis):
The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
The Constitution, Article I, Section 3:
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachments 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, but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishment, according to Law.
Second, the mood of the country. Increasingly, ordinary folks are debating the question about Hillary Clinton and the FBI investigation of her emails.
Famously, Bernie Sanders said he didn’t “give a damn about” her emails. But, the FBI does. And so do more and more people. Bernie may be a minority of one!
People are concerned and their concern is framed as a series of questions:
- Will she be charged?
- Should she be charged?
- How serious will the charges be, presumably serious?
- Could/should/would she go to prison?
- Will the Justice Department protect her from the FBI? Would they do so under the full glare and focus of history’s microscope?
All very interesting. Consider another aspect of it all, however. This was brought to my attention in all its urgency in discussion with my younger son who pinpointed the absurd possibility, noted below.
Third, consider the timing.
Especially consider her being charged in the very particular time context of her candidacy, possible nomination, possible election, and inauguration.
Let’s look at the possibilities, not in chronological order, but in the order of legal complexity and chaos potential. [Bear in mind for all of these, the possibility of President Obama pardoning her. A pardon, as I understand it, is usually given for someone already convicted, but … you never know.]
During candidacy.
If charged as a pre-convention candidate it is very difficult to see how she could continue as a viable candidate. Yet, she has many more delegates than Bernie. The Democratic Party’s disarray at their convention would make the GOP potential disarray a Sunday School picnic.
As nominee.
If charged as the nominee prior to the election it is equally difficult to see her continuing as a viable candidate. In this case would the VP on the ticket automatically be the presidential candidate?
As president, after inauguration.
Now Hillary would be President Clinton. Impeachment would be the legally appropriate response. Would it be instituted? What if there is a GOP House [which impeaches] and a Democrat Senate [which tries the case]? Just like her husband’s case! Or, would she go for the Nixon option. Once again, very important who the VP is.
The absurd possibility, after the election [which she wins] and before the inauguration.
President-Elect Clinton is not yet subject to impeachment. A process through the court system would be lengthy and all-consuming. Her VP colleague has no real legal standing in the succession as yet. Would she resign as President-Elect? Would that entail the resignation of her VP-Elect? If so who then is to be inaugurated? The current Speaker [who happens to be Paul Ryan]? My reading of the Constitution does not detect clarity for this eventuality.
Know why?
The Founders did not contemplate this possibility: of a potentially impeachable candidate, one who is chargeable for or has been charged with, let alone convicted for, “high crimes and misdemeanors,” ever being remotely considered as a candidate for the highest office in the land.
Makes you stop and think.
Or cry.
Or laugh.
clamjamfrey 