As Hillary Clinton’s action was momentarily injected into the impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump, Democratic feathers were ruffled Friday night.
One of the primary problems in the trial was whether Trump, now a private citizen, could also be impeached and tried legally.
After Democrats failed to win ample Republican support for their article of impeachment against the former president, Trump was acquitted Saturday.
On Friday evening, Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida discussed the issue in a unique manner.
“Voting to convict the former president would establish a new precedent that the Senate can convict and disqualify a former official,” these are the words of Rubio as per what Newsweek has written.
If the Senate sets a precedent that a former official can be convicted & disqualified it will be just a matter of time before a future House,under partisan pressure to “Lock Her Up”,will impeach & the Senate forced to try other former officials
A destructive slipper slope
— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) February 13, 2021
Isn’t it possible that a future House under partisan pressure to ‘lock her up’ under this new precedent could impeach a former Secretary of State and compel a future Senate to bring her on trial and possibly disqualify her from any future office? – says Rubio.
The reference was obviously to Clinton, who, at Trump rallies, was often the focus of the expression.
During the Obama administration, Clinton’s conduct as secretary of state culminated in a long-running controversy about her usage of a private email server for classified correspondence, as well as lengthy hearings on her activities in relation to the deaths of Americans in Libya.
One of Trump’s lawyers, Michael van der Veen, said that under the precedent House Democrats wanted to create, Clinton could be prosecuted, among others.
Here’s the claim: “This could happen to… the former secretary of state.”
“It can happen to a lot of people,” said van der Veen.
One of the House impeachment administrators, Democratic Rep. Jamie B. Raskin of Maryland, disagreed with van der Veen.
He said the hypothetical question raised by Rubio had no bearing on the case.