GP So, reconcile these two things for me:

1. Roberts isn't presiding over the impeachment trial because his position is it's not required because Trump is no longer president.

2. Democrats can hold an impeachment trial even though Trump is no longer president.

GP Point 1, Art I, Section III, Clause 6: "[w]hen the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside."

So, no POTUS, no chief justice required. BUT ...

Point 2 (Art II, Section IV): "The President ... shall be removed from Office on Impeachment."

So, the "President" is removed from office on impeachment.

GP It is fundamentally inconsistent for Democrats to claim both (1) Roberts need no preside because Trump is not president and (2) Trump can be tried for impeachment by the Senate even though he is not president.

GP It seems to be an admission against interest, one which would doom a non-political question case in the federal courts.

And the stupidity of this position is easily explained to anyone with a modicum of common sense.