So A President Needs to be Impeached to be removed from Office, but

[brettdale]

What say if he starts pulling out a gun and shooting people.

He can be arrested then? right?

Of course that is a way over the top suitation.

What Im saying if they discovered something really horrific, wouldnt he be forced out,
and they wouldnt have to go through months and months of hearings before an impeachment vote?

Also if something is that Horrific, can congress call a meeting and have a impeachment vote, without
having to go through hearings?

[lapfog_1]

1. yes, the House can draft articles of Impeachment

and vote on them without any discussion if they so choose.

However, there is still the matter of the Senate Trial managed by the Chief Justice of SCOTUS.

[Foamfollower]

2. I'm afraid if Trump pulled out a gun and shot somebody, no, he could not be arrested.

A sitting president cannot be arrested for anything at any time.

[canetoad]

4. Could he be shot

In self-defence?

[jberryhill]

7. Can you cite a legal authority for that proposition?

[brooklynite]

8. See Watergate: "Unindicted Co-Conspirator".

The theory is sound; consider Roy Cooper and what the Republican Legislature has done to interfere with his work. Suppose, instead, a conservative prosecutor just drafted spurious charges against him?

[marylandblue]

3. There is nothing in the constitution that says he can't be arrested

Theoretically, if he convicted but not.impeached, he could.serve as president from a jail cell. Wouldn't that be a blast !

[jberryhill]

6. If you think about it, he's already virtually under house arrest

He gets weekend passes, but I can't think for a moment he likes living there with his every movement under constant scrutiny.

He'd get zero bail, since it's not as if he is a flight risk or transient. So it's not as if he'd be sitting in jail.

[jberryhill]

5. No

The President shooting someone is one of the favorite hypotheticals in this question.

However, the last time this whole set of issues was kicked around was during the Paula Jones case, in which there was a preliminary issue about suing a sitting president.

There is, in fact, nothing which prevents the president from being treated as an ordinary criminal suspect (with bail probably set at zero) in relation to criminal acts which do not per se involve acts undertaken AS president.

For example, I don't know what has become of the drone war against terrorism, but certainly President Obama ordered the killing of civilians day-in-day out, from the White House.

The reason people believe "it's not possible" is more a function of the ordinary traditions and, of course, the generally decent character of people who have historically been president.

But, no, there is no particular legal immunity which the president enjoys in relation to ordinary criminal activity. This would especially be true for criminal acts committed before becoming president, as such acts would not possibly fall under any sort of executive immunity attaching to acts committed within the capacity of the office.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB889218754227546000

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. The idea that the Secret Service would let a president assault somebody strains credulity.

[jberryhill]

10. Or let him carry a loaded gun

We're talking about someone who is not allowed to drive a car.