Second Impeachment Penalties. True?

[HockeyMom]

Never before has a President received a 2nd Impeachment but this will hold special consequences. Watching MSNBC or CNN (?) discussing it.

After a 2nd Impeachment in the House a President would be:

1. Banned for life from ever running for or holding any public office.
2. Banned from receiving a $200,000 President Pension.
3. Banned from receiving free Travel Expenses.
4. Banned from receiving Secret Service Protection.

Has anyone heard this? Of course, 25th Amendment would be the best option to remove him immediately, but if Pence and Cabinet refuse to seek this, sounds like this 2nd Impeachment would at least punish Trump. The Senate can convict and remove, but with only 10 days left is that going to happen?

Thoughts?

[servermsh]

1. For the first item, only if they take a second vote on it after conviction. Requires majority vote

[Botany]

2. Is this true or just "internet stuff?"

n/t

[RockRaven]

3. No penalties without a conviction...

[fishwax]

4. those would be the penalties from a conviction, not just the second impeachment

[dhol82]

5. As long as he is impeached before the change in administration, the trial can proceed after

We can try him at our leisure.

[superpatriotman]

7. Link please

Not being snarky just checking my work before I open my yap.

[dhol82]

8. I have no link. It's what I keep reading.

I can try to do a search.

[dhol82]

13. I found this but it just talks about all the problems the Biden administration would have

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/impeachment-trump-congress/2021/01/08/2a0d83ca-51c3-11eb-b96e-0e54447b23a1_story.html

I’ll keep trying.

[dhol82]

14. Look at post #11

[dhol82]

16. Finally found something you can work with:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clybrn-impeachment-trump/2021/01/10/fd10fa88-5356-11eb-a08b-f1381ef3d207_story.html

House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.) said Sunday that the House plans to vote this week to impeach President Trump — but that the chamber may wait a few months to submit the articles of impeachment to the Senate.
Clyburn’s comments come amid tensions in the Democratic Party on whether to press ahead with action to hold Trump accountable for last week’s deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol or whether to prioritize the agenda of President-elect Joe Biden, who will be inaugurated Jan. 20.

[onenote]

6. I don't think any of that is true unless there is conviction by the Senate.

I'm unaware of any provision of law or other authority under the Constitution that would allow the House alone to impose such penalties.

[brush]

9. IMO there is no option other than to impeach.

How can we as a nation not levy punishment upon a president who fomented an insurrection against government?

We can't let that go unpunished.

[LisaL]

10. Not true.

NT

[PoliticAverse]

11. There are no "special consequences" for a 2nd impeachment. Potential consequences are the same...

as for a first (or any impeachment).

Also as to specific penalties those have to be voted for after any impeachment conviction in the Senate.

Although it is not a completely settled legal issue it is widely believed that someone no longer in office can be impeached and the penalties that can be imposed in that case could be prevention from holding future office and/or losing benefits
(pension, expenses, etc.) the person is normally entitled too.

[Happy Hoosier]

12. He must be convicted and then it is a second vote by the Senate to be barred from office.

Withdrawal of post Presidential privileges are not tied to impeachment. That could be withdrawn by simple majorities, AFAIK.

[soothsayer]

15. There's an extremely viral tweet that claims impeaching Trump means he can't run in 2024. That is no

Daniel Dale
@ddale8
·
Jan 9, 2021
There’s an extremely viral tweet that claims impeaching Trump means he can’t run in 2024. That is not true. Even a two-thirds Senate vote to remove him from office wouldn’t mean a 2024 ban. The Senate would have to hold a second vote to prohibit him from holding future office.

Daniel Dale
@ddale8
According to Senate precedent, a post-conviction vote to prohibit the person from future office would require a simple majority, not the two-thirds that conviction itself requires. But anyway the viral tweet is wrong.
11:57 AM · Jan 9, 2021