We got a look at the strategy with which the lawyers hired on by the former president* will be engaging his second trial before the Senate. All things being relative, the constitutional question of whether or not a former president* can be convicted of an impeachable offense after he leaves office is the most serious of the issues at trial. Because, bless their slave-holding souls, the Founders were so deeply fond of ambiguity, and because not enough of us were paying attention in history class when William Belknap was discussed, this is a question that at least is worthy of debate. I come down on the side of the Constitution’s being silent on the matter, so full speed ahead. And I would argue that it is of compelling national importance that El Caudillo del Mar-a-Lago be disqualified from ever holding an office of political trust again, and this is the only absolute legal guarantee against that particular calamity. And that is as important a reason for impeaching someone as punishing the person is.
Read the rest of Charlie Pierce’s piece at Esquire Politics.
