Explains that term “civil officers” impeachable under the constitution was commonly thought to include senators until the Senate decided otherwise in 1798 case of Senator William Blount. Inferior executive branch appointees of the President have always been impeachable, but only one such official, Secretary of War William Belknap, whose case is detailed here, has been. Also addresses impeachment of former officers.

This chapter argues that wealth was probably not the primary barrier for Pompeiians to enter the Roman senate. One oddity about the historical record of Pompeii is that it reveals not a single certain senator in the imperial period. A previous reconstruction of the local distribution of income offers a possible explanation: it predicts that there were no Pompeian households with a senatorial income, suggesting that a lack of wealth kept the Pompeiians outside the senate. However, a new reconstruction of the top part of the Pompeian wealth distribution suggests the opposite. This reconstruction is based on combining the archaeological remains of the intramural housing stock with an econometric model which assumes that the distribution of elite wealth follows a distinct mathematical function – a power law. Even though this type of cliometric modelling is pervaded by uncertainties, with the help of probabilistic calculations it is possible to conclude that at least several Pompeian households held enough wealth to satisfy the senatorial census qualification, implying that wealth may not have been the primary barrier preventing Pompeiians from embarking on a senatorial career.

The chapter singles out two senators, two governors, and four Fox News heavyweights as having played especially important parts among the president’s enablers. The two senators – Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and inveterate Trump loyalist Lindsey Graham – were remarkable for the prominence, persistence, and importance of their fealty. The two governors – Florida’s Mike DeSantis and Georgia’s Brian Kemp – were standouts for standing strong in Trump’s corner, no matter the rising numbers of Covid-19 cases in their respective states. And the four Fox News heavyweights – Rupert Murdoch, Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, and Sean Hannity – were striking for their staunch and some would say slavish clinging to the president’s coattails. As with every enabler, most notably those singled out by name in this book, Trump’s presidency, and even his subsequent electoral viability, would not have been possible without them.

We present in this chapter a panoramic view of the policy moods that characterize three important sets of political actors – deputies, senators, and presidents – in Latin America over the past two decades. We construct these policy moods to share the same scale on which the policy moods of citizens and the policies implemented by Latin American governments are located.

Focusing on the “crisis year” 1879, in which uprisings by Volga Tatars were violently crushed by the Kazan authorities, the final chapter investigates one of the situations in which the existing legal order broke down and gave way to arbitrary rule. The example shows that while the formalized rule of law was influential by the late 1870s, it continued to be challenged by the autocratic order.