Trumpanzee Fruitloop News - "God Didn't Say Trump Lost, So He Won Really!"

Amanda Grace,
"All part of God's plan to make eveyone think Joe Biden won"

'Prophetess' Amanda Grace Says Trump's Impeachment Trial Is Proof He's Still President | Right Wing Watch

Self-declared "prophetess" and Talibangelical grifter, Amanda Grace, normally bases her 'prophesies' on what the voices in her head say. This time, however, she's going with what they don't say.

In this case, despite wrongly telling her Trump would win last November, so far, 'God' hasn't told her Trump lost - so he must have won really and is still president! Or so she told a delighted right-wing author, commentator, and leading Trumpanzee cultist, Eric Metaxas, on The Eric Metaxas Radio Show.

Apparently believing that it's not the final tally of the votes cast, the certification of the count by state officials, the votes of the Electoral College and finally, certification of the result by Congress, that determines the outcome of American elections, but what her personal voices say, that determines them, she said:

There has been a delay for a reason. It’s not over, and it’s far from over with what the Lord is going to do with President Trump, what the Lord is going to do to the wicked of this nation, including the media. You know, I prophesied from the Lord in October about the media suffering the biggest crisis they ever had in 2021 for their crimes, so I’m watching for that to unfold.

She also 'revealed' that it is all part of God's plan to make everyone think Joe Biden won, so there will be no doubt it is God's miracle when Trump is reinstalled in the White House.

But the real clincher is the fact that Trump is being impeached for a second time. Grace has declared, despite legal opinion to the contrary, that it is only possible to impeach a president in office, and not after he has been deposed, therefore, impeachment 'proves' he is still president, really:

There’s been a delay because I believe God is trying to get people’s eyes on him. He wants all eyes on him right now for the demonstration he’s going to put on. Just like when the Jews were at the Red Sea, and they’re there, and Egypt’s at their back, and it’s all eyes on God because either the Lord is going to do this, or it’s not going to happen. And when they thought there was a dead end, God saw a path through that water. So, God’s ways are much higher when he sees how to make a path when people don’t think there is a way.

The Lord has never said to me [Trump is] not going to serve a second term. Sometimes what the Lord doesn’t say is as important as what he says. And he never said to me, ‘President Trump is not going to serve a second term.’ However, I do believe, because I prophesied this last night from the Lord, a surprise is coming with this impeachment because you can’t impeach a citizen. So something is very interesting here going on, because they’re trying to impeach a citizen right now, if he really is a citizen. You can only impeach a sitting president, so this is like we have dueling presidents right now. This is what it is: dueling presidents.

People’s actions speak louder than their words. These wicked peole right now in Congress—who the Lord is going to deal severely with, by the way—you can only impeach a president. If he is really a citizen right now, how are you impeaching him? You can’t impeach a regular citizen. It’s not possible, not according to the law, not according to the Constitution. So their action—sometimes the actions of the wicked will give them away—are pointing that something is not quite kosher going on with who’s the president.

You actually can impeach a former President, FWIW

— Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) December 4, 2019

One person who disagrees with Grace on that score, is President-reject, Donald J. Trump who once famously called for the impeachment of Barak Obama after he had left office. In early 2020, in a tweet which is no longer available, Trump's Twitter account having been permanently suspended, in response to Obama's comments on health care, Trump said, "We should impeach him for that. Why aren’t we impeaching him?"

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), himself a lawyer, though not a constitutional scholar, also disagrees with 'Prophetess' Grace. Answering criticism of his call to impeach Obama in December 2019, he assured Jake Sherman, "You actually can impeach a former president, FWIW".

Not that anyone need take fruitloop, Amanda Grace's opinion on the niceties of US constitutional law, seriously, but there is actually some unsettled debate on the matter of impeaching former officials, unsettled partly because it's never really been tested at this level before. The argument is over the interpretation and the intent of two Articles:

• Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution, says, “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
• Article I, Section 3, says, “Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.”

In other words, a person convicted on impeachment can't be imprisoned, executed, fined, have property seized or face any other penalty - not even the loss of his pension.

So, those convicted face two penalties - removal from office, and disbarment from holding future office, the latter being the only relevant penalty for a former official, meaning the purpose of impeachment is not solely to sack a corrupt official, but also to prevent them from ever holding office again.

The other argument is over the intent of the people who framed these articles, and it surely can't have been their intention to build in a massive loophole that would render the entire thing moot and unusable - namely, by offering the escape route of resignation to avoid the penalty of being disbarred in the future, and the ignominy of being convicted.

Be that as it may, the reality is that Congress has the right to bring articles of impeachment against a former office holder, and has decided to do so, as is their constitutional right; and the Senate now has a constitutional duty to hold a formal trial once articles of impeachment have been brought before them, to which they are bound by their oath of office. The argument over whether the Senate can then convict under the Constitution is a separate one altogether.

The moral of this story is, if you want to understand the US Constitution and the powers of the legislature, ask a constitutional lawyer, not a deluded fruitloop who hears voices and even understands what they mean when they don't say anything - especially when what they don't say is what she doesn't want them to say anyway.

What is the probability that she is just plain lying because she is too embarrassed about making false prophesies to admit she made them up too and got it wrong?

---

Tweet Link