Serious question? Is there a mechanism/procedure in the US Constitution for

Only removal from office by the Senate can do that.

Constitutionally,
Bright

You can't start the conviction process without impeachment first. "Impeachment" is used as a colloquial term for the entire process.

IF TRUMP IS GUILTY, HIS PRESIDENCY MUST BE ANNULLED.

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-if-trump-guilty-his-presidency-must-be-annulled-opinion-1092345

While I can see circumstances where the Republicans could be persuaded to impeach and convict Trump, they would NEVER yield power that they now have.

Annulled is not the same as reversed.

So who would be the President? It's a question that doesn't need to be answered because there is no process by which a US presidential election can be "nullified" (or reversed for that matter).

This has come up a ridiculous number of times.

and B) Annulment simply does not exist.

The answer is still no.

We may have a pathetic Presidency but since it was done as outlined under the terms of Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution it is not "illegal"

That's it.

Oops, forgot one: Defeat in General Election.

pretty much impeachment and ammendment 25.

the vote of the electoral college was enough for the founders to consider the presudency to be obtauned legally. of course the founders did not bother to consider modern propaganda, primary voting, or even political parties in their "document written by geniuses to govern idiots."

does not envision a popular election of the president.

The President is elected by the electoral college -- which is selected by the state legislatures (who have all decided to do popular election).

Want to permanently remove a president? Impeach and convict.

There is not. Impeachment by the US House of Representatives and Conviction/Removal by the US Senate are the only means.

But the US Constitution is available to read online for any of those so interested.

read the Constitution is a bit confounding.

While there is no Stupid Question so to speak. I am often confused by the seeming lack of effort to google the document and read through it. Don't recall it being all that long or tough a read.

Have you read the document?

...18th century language. I had already waded through the orginal in jr. college decades ago, but this little gem came to me in my late 40s and was most welcome.

Anyhow, I read it for the first time in 6th grade. It was required. The teacher went through the whole thing, explaining each part of the Constitution in language we could understand. Then, I read it again in my sophomore year of High School, in our civics class, and the teacher went through the whole thing again. We even had to rewrite portions of it in our own words and were graded on how well we captured the intent.

After that, of course, reading it was optional, but I did read it from time to time again. It's not a very long document, and takes not too long to read it through. I have a copy on my computer, in pdf format, ready to call up if there is a question about the Constitution.

For me, knowledge of the Constitution and the basics of what is in it and what that means seems to be a fundamental thing that everyone who is interested in politics or history should have. It's hard for me to imagine not being familiar with that document if I'm going to take part in political discussions. I continue to be surprised that such knowledge isn't more common than it is.

There are many websites that have copies and explanations of the Constitution. One has to be careful, though, about which ones to choose, since some explain the Constitution from some pretty strange political positions.

A good understanding of our founding document should be an essential bit of knowledge for anyone interested at all in politics. It explains why we do as we do, and why we do not do things in other ways. It is the foundation of our system of government. Why wouldn't people who frequent DU want to know it and understand it? I can't understand that at all.

...and I didn't struggle too badly with the language as I had read most of the King James Bible when I was about 9 years old, and that of course is much older. (On my own initiative, as my ex-Catholic agnostic mother rolled her eyes.)

I picked up the explanatory version more as a refresher than anything else, and also to refer others to it.

and is the basis of our entire political system. You should try reading it one of these days; it’s of rather considerable importance.

The President is elected by the Electoral College. They cast their votes and he obtained the majority of those votes. He is, by the only legal measure, legally the holder of said office. We don’t have to like it, but that’s the way it is.

If the term annulled is taken literally, then virtually every function of government the executive branch touches would be basically null and void after Obama left office.

All payments, all debts incurred, all appointments, all bills signed, all actions taken by the DoJ, all actions taken by the EPA/FCC/FAA/IRS/etc/etc would be void.

It would be shear chaos. It would basically end government as we know it. The US Government would likely never recover.

It's just a bad thought, as much as we would like parts of it, we could never take all of it.