Trump Impeachment Part Duex

[Pwns]

*yawn* This is nothing but a purely political show trial. Time to move on and get back to talking about fixing problems while not doing anything.

[SDHornet]

*yawn* This is nothing but a purely political show trial. Time to move on and get back to talking about fixing problems while not doing anything.

Spot on.

[kalm]

*yawn* This is nothing but a purely political show trial. Time to move on and get back to talking about fixing problems while not doing anything.

Spot on.

So it’s a constitution of convenience and to paraphrase my newest favorite Republican, OL’ Drone Strike Nicole Wallace, most of the Republican senate just asked for a divorce today.

[SDHornet]

Spot on.

So it’s a constitution of convenience and to paraphrase my newest favorite Republican, OL’ Drone Strike Nicole Wallace, most of the Republican senate just asked for a divorce today.

Yawn. If the votes were there, Cocaine Mitch would have rammed the Senate trial through faster than he did the ACB nomination.

[89Hen]

most of the Republican senate just asked for a divorce today.

Not sure I understand that point.

[Ibanez]

One of Donald Trump's three impeachment lawyers described the former president as a 'f****** crook' and sued him last year for attempting to disenfranchise Pennsylvania votes through baseless claims of mail-in voter fraud.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... d-him.html

[Ibanez]

I get the Democrat's POV - you don't get a free pass just because you're on your way out of office. Words have consequences and even if Trump didn't say directly, " Come to DC and storm the Capitol," his tweets, words and actions leading up to and after the election were powerful enough to get people to believe there was a conspiracy to steal the election - you are responsible for the impact your words have. Don't be surprised that a bunch of amped up people, including paramilitary incel Proud Boys who were told to " stand Ready" do something in your name.

I also get the Republicans POV - what's the point of a conviction after he's left office? If the goal is to bar him from office, then censure him and go the 14th amendment route. He's already been muzzled by social media. Censure him and let the Republican Party deal with him.

All this noise about, " we need Unity" is just that...it's noise and nonsense. It's political posturing at is worst.

Also, I fully expect the reverse if a Democratic President had done the same thing. The GOP would be in a tizzy and the Dems would be calling for a "mulligan" and unity.

[Ibanez]

most of the Republican senate just asked for a divorce today.

Not sure I understand that point.

Yeah..I listened to most of the trial and i'm not sure I heard that.

The Republicans want to give Trump a pass on his words and their effect. But a divorce?

[kalm]

Not sure I understand that point.

Yeah..I listened to most of the trial and i'm not sure I heard that.

The Republicans want to give Trump a pass on his words and their effect. But a divorce?

It was Nicole Wallace’s quote. 45 Senators voted that impeachment after office is unconstitutional.

[kalm]

I get the Democrat's POV - you don't get a free pass just because you're on your way out of office. Words have consequences and even if Trump didn't say directly, " Come to DC and storm the Capitol," his tweets, words and actions leading up to and after the election were powerful enough to get people to believe there was a conspiracy to steal the election - you are responsible for the impact your words have. Don't be surprised that a bunch of amped up people, including paramilitary incel Proud Boys who were told to " stand Ready" do something in your name.

I also get the Republicans POV - what's the point of a conviction after he's left office? If the goal is to bar him from office, then censure him and go the 14th amendment route. He's already been muzzled by social media. Censure him and let the Republican Party deal with him.

All this noise about, " we need Unity" is just that...it's noise and nonsense. It's political posturing at is worst.

Also, I fully expect the reverse if a Democratic President had done the same thing. The GOP would be in a tizzy and the Dems would be calling for a "mulligan" and unity.

It IS political theater and for the most part they are just paid actors, full of self importance.

Trump, MTG, and Jan 6th continue to be gifts for the Dems. The longer they’re in the spotlight the wider the rift within the Republican party.

I think impeachment is a worthy process for writing a conclusion on the Trump presidency rather than sweeping what has happened under the rug.

[GannonFan]

Spot on.

So it’s a constitution of convenience and to paraphrase my newest favorite Republican, OL’ Drone Strike Nicole Wallace, most of the Republican senate just asked for a divorce today.

It's easy to make a decent argument that the Senate trying him after he's no longer in office doesn't pass Constitutional muster. It's also easy to make the opposite argument - it's a real vague area. Heck, if they would just change the sentence where it talks about the punishment of an impeachment conviction from removal from office "and" disqualification from future office to be "and/or" it would clear up a lot.

[Skjellyfetti]

This sentence is pretty clear. No?

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

Not some impeachments. Not impeachments with enough time for trial before they leave office. All impeachments. The House impeached him while he was in office. I'm not sure how *all* impeachments would not apply to this one.

[UNI88]

This sentence is pretty clear. No?

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

Not some impeachments. Not impeachments with enough time for trial before they leave office. All impeachments. The House impeached him while he was in office. I'm not sure how *all* impeachments would not apply to this one.

“When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside.”

"The House impeached him while he was in office." Why isn't the Chief Justice presiding?

[GannonFan]

This sentence is pretty clear. No?

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

Not some impeachments. Not impeachments with enough time for trial before they leave office. All impeachments. The House impeached him while he was in office. I'm not sure how *all* impeachments would not apply to this one.

And that's why they voted the way they did and that's why the outcome will be acquittal, since the penalty is restricted to removal from office AND disqualification. It's how the Belknap one went down and it will be how this one goes down. All but 2 of the 25 Senators who voted to acquit Belknap did so because they didn't believe they had jurisdiction to convict. They're fine hearing the case, but with no remedy as he's already out of office.

[Ibanez]

This sentence is pretty clear. No?

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

Not some impeachments. Not impeachments with enough time for trial before they leave office. All impeachments. The House impeached him while he was in office. I'm not sure how *all* impeachments would not apply to this one.

“When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside.”

"The House impeached him while he was in office." Why isn't the Chief Justice presiding?

He isn't the President anymore.

[UNI88]

“When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside.”

"The House impeached him while he was in office." Why isn't the Chief Justice presiding?

He isn't the President anymore.

I know that but he was when he was impeached. Shouldn't the Senate explain why the Chief Justice isn't presiding?

[Skjellyfetti]

It doesn't say "When the President of the United States is impeached the Chief Justice shall preside."

It says "When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside."

[BDKJMU]

So this is the equivalent of a criminal trial having a member of the jury, who has already publicly stated that the accused is guilty, also acting as judge. What a clown show..

[Skjellyfetti]

[UNI88]

It doesn't say "When the President of the United States is impeached the Chief Justice shall preside."

It says "When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside."

If it's important that the "House impeached him while he was in office" then shouldn't he be tried under the same procedures as if he were President?

Did the Schumer give a reason for why the Chief Justice wasn't presiding?

Shouldn't the person presiding be unbiased (Leahy already voted to impeach)? Will Trump get a fair trial with Leahy presiding? Do you care if the trial is fair?

[Skjellyfetti]

It doesn't bother me one way or the other. I think it would have been fine to have Roberts preside. He barely made any rulings the first time. Only one that comes to mind was refusing to read Rand Paul's question outing the whistleblower.

I think by a strict reading of the Constitution, the President is not being tried, so it should be handled like other non Presidential impeachments... and that's the way it's being handled. But, I really don't care that much. Roberts would just be mostly sitting there in his robe, trying his best not to alter the course of the trial.

[SDHornet]

“When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside.”

"The House impeached him while he was in office." Why isn't the Chief Justice presiding?

He isn't the President anymore.

Which is why this whole thing is a joke and a total waste of time.

[UNI88]

It doesn't bother me one way or the other. I think it would have been fine to have Roberts preside. He barely made any rulings the first time. Only one that comes to mind was refusing to read Rand Paul's question outing the whistleblower.

I think by a strict reading of the Constitution, the President is not being tried, so it should be handled like other non Presidential impeachments... and that's the way it's being handled. But, I really don't care that much. Roberts would just be mostly sitting there in his robe, trying his best not to alter the course of the trial.

But I thought the Constitution was a living, breathing document. Why are we reading it strictly in this instance?

[Skjellyfetti]

Have I said that? Yawn

[∞∞∞]

Any other era in American history, Trump would've been hung and buried by now. Many of the insurrectionists too.

Glad all the evidence is being aired out for the history books, but our descendants are going to be puzzled at allowing Trump and his merry band of traitors get away with this (as they will). Oh well, every American era has its mistakes; this will be one of ours.