Forum Thread

Trump Impeached Again

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 15 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    TRUMP IMPEACHED AGAIN!

    That was the headline in both the Washington Post and New York Times in all Capitals.

    10 Republicans voted to impeach.

    The WP byline reads: In bipartisan rebuke, House votes, 232-197, to impeach president a second time, on charge of ‘incitement of insurrection’

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Liz Cheney was one of the House Republicans voting to impeach. Here is her statement from the day before announcing her intention:

    "On January 6, 2021 a violent mob attacked the United States Capitol to obstruct the process of our democracy and stop the counting of presidential electoral votes. This insurrection caused injury, death and destruction in the most sacred space in our Republic.

    "Much more will become clear in coming days and weeks, but what we know now is enough. The President of the United States summoned this mob, assembled the mob, and lit the flame of this attack. Everything that followed was his doing. None of this would have happened without the President. The President could have immediately and forcefully intervened to stop the violence. He did not. There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution.

    "I will vote to impeach the President."

    Rep Liz Cheney, Wyoming

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Does this really help? It is only "words" but no action as long as the Senate does nothing. Yes our government works only on an snails pace. I've not heard anything at all about cutting his pension and all benefits after leaving the job. Sorry a bunch of weaklings for sure. In the meantime he collected an hoard of money (kickbacks from the wall) with his one day trip to Texas; I guess his bud crawler Graham got his "reward" as well. Where are the brains in this country??

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Dutch -- I don't know where you get your information, but MSNBC discussion is full of expert analysts discussing the implications of the Senate trial, how it fits in with Biden's need for cabinet reviews/approvals, and the 14th Amendment, Section 3, on stripping Trump of his powers. They have talked so much about it with Representatives and Senators I have almost got it memorized:

    "No Person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

    However, until Biden takes office and the two Georgia Senators are sworn in, everything moves at the pace McConnell dictates.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    For those wondering what the next steps are in the impeachment process, this New York Times article:

    Why Remove Trump Now? A Guide to Trump's Impeachment, discusses the various possible courses of action. To briefly summarize:

    The Senate trial does not start until Nancy Pelosi submits the House impeachments charge to the Senate. There is no specified timetable that she needs to follow.

    However, once she submits the impeachment charge to the Senate, it must immediately take up the issue. "Under rules in place for decades, impeachment is the only issue the Senate can consider while a trial is underway; it cannot simultaneously consider other legislative business."

    Biden has asked McConnell whether it would be possible to alter that rule, allowing the Senate to "conduct the impeachment trial on a parallel track to consideration of his cabinet nominees, splitting its days between the two. McConnell will consult with the Senate parliamentarian on whether that would be possible.

    "If such a bifurcated process were not possible, House Democrats might choose to hold back the article to allow Mr. Biden time to win confirmation of his team before a trial got underway."

    "Conviction in an impeachment trial would not automatically disqualify Mr. Trump from future public office. But if the Senate were to convict him, the Constitution allows a subsequent vote to bar an official from holding “any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.”"

    "That vote would require only a simple majority of senators. Such a step could be an appealing prospect not just to Democrats, but also to many Republicans who either have set their sights on the presidency themselves or are convinced that it is the only thing that will purge Mr. Trump from their party."

    ==============================

    What seems to be unclear in some of the media reports is whether Congress can still bar him from office under the 14th Amendment, Section 3 Clause if he is not convicted. Some of the media pundits seem to think that they can. Some confusion in the reporting...needs more clarity.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    NO, As long as nothing is "black & white" through the Senate, then there is only an Statement from the House, signed by Pelosi. That's all. Both Houses have to agree fully on it. Knowing Mc Connell, he'll wait until the 19th as he said before; he even either "moves" or "rejects" it. Thus the statement as you describe is not yet in effect. Also if Trump leaves office on the 20th, then the whole thing has no value, other than an afterwards Statement with which the "lawyers" have not an clue on how to deal with that, because it never happened before in this way. Neither are likely any penalties applicable after 20th of January, unless another "court" decides that, since he's then already removed from office. Thus as usual an "half baked" bunch of B.S., thanks to our convoluted outdated laws. It looks right now that "impeachment" (to the full extend) can't be done. Thus again an "failed" effort as before. Is n't time to get some solid laws which "work" as it does for "normal" citizens; so an judge can throw such an person as Trump immediately in jail. Why exceptions for Presidents?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I hope Nancy holds the impeachment file until after Joe is sworn in and the democrats control both house and senate, that would almost assure the conviction of Trump. Presently, with a republican majority in the senate, they would likely acquit, Trump still has a hold on the right wing.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    It would appear to me that she might hold back at least for a short period of time to get Biden's top cabinet choices approved. That would also allow time for more evidence to emerge of Trump's role in the insurrection. Of course, theoretically the House members presenting the case for conviction to the Senate should only use the evidence presented to the House...which in this case was testimonies from House members. It is unclear what objections might be raised by Senate Republicans, but if McConnell wants Trump removed from his backyard forever he will have to go down the conviction route and allow some relaxation of rules.

    Any new evidence will likely be made available to the media long before the Senate trial, and therefore Trump will be tried in the court of public opinion before the official trial. That would ease the pressure on Republican Senators worried about retribution if they vote to convict.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch, What you seem to be suggesting that you want Joe Biden to give a speech to supporters that they organize a lynch mob to storm the WH, take matters into their own hands, and deal with Donald Trump themselves.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    if McConnell wants Trump removed from his backyard forever he will have to go down the conviction route and allow some relaxation of rules.

    Any new evidence will likely be made available to the media long before the Senate trial, and therefore Trump will be tried in the court of public opinion before the official trial. That would ease the pressure on Republican Senators worried about retribution if they vote to convict.

    Yes, I believe a majority of Republicans want Trump out of politics. They can see he create huge problems everywhere he goes, harming people, destroying things, and most of all incites others to do the same. He brings out the worst qualities in those that support him, as well as those who don't. He exploits weakness in people, places, and things. Republicans can see that just as much as Democrats.

    I would like to point out that the democratic party is lucky he ran as a Republican. He just as easily could have ran as Democrat, won the 2016 election using the same tactics supporting Democratic issues. And very likely would have 30% of the far far left supporting him and his methods for the same exact reasons the far far right have supported him. Those of us in the middle would hate him just as much, and see him as destroying the Democratic party and the country. We would like to hope that the democratic party has a higher bar, and would reject Donald Trump at the very start. I think there might be a slightly higher bar, but not as much as people think. Think about it, if he got 3 democratic Judges on the SC, and legalized DOCA, passed more Health Care laws, reinforced Roe V Wade.... how much push back would be getting from Democrats? What I am saying is there likely are Democratic Senators that are versions of Lindsey Graham, Jim Jordon, Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz, etc, who would support Donald Trump if he were a Democrat, we just don't know who they are because they have not been flushed out, plus they support issues we endorse.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    wwjd, please read it correctly about what I wrote; no I don't want Biden to give a speech. I only point to that our laws are so f.....g awful that they seldom work. The point is Trump will be "out" at the 20th, so then it sounds kind of ridiculous to "remove" him as he's already "out". The lawyers are already scratching their heads on how to deal with such. But don't worry the Senate will likely not "impeach" him anyway. So again it shows that things don't work with an 2 party system, if one party broke all the "rules" and "laws" The only thing they should do is: penalize Trump for his behavior with things which "do" work, such as giving him "no" pension, or "none" of all the benefits which apply to departing Presidents, such as secret service protection, healthcare etc. He stole this country "blind", so why give him presents while being kicked out.

    Sorry this country got plenty of things to learn.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    If Trump is not convicted then he is vindicated. He was abhorred in the beginning. A conviction is a plus for GOP. No conviction almost guarantees three parties. No conviction of a narcissistic chameleon so violently anti social unleashes a plague. The constitution has no mechanism to deal with an aberration that the very existence of was denied and any attempt to expose incurred the wrath deserving the aberration. Good luck thinking Trump is over. There is a warning of how dangerous he is and that is the fact he is looking for a hero's benediction. Other than some factual embellishments this is almost the identical assessment I gave of Trump in 2015.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    All I can say; Fix our laws so they are "clear" and can't be "manipulated" by a zillion lawyers or the "mob". Sorry people your old shoes are worn out, get some"new" one's. You can't forever stick to laws of 1800 and don't revise them or update those only with an very few amendments or half baked "case laws", which are also already outdated in no time. How did we get an Trump as President? How did we get our awful "gun" laws? How did we get no "impeachment" system which "works" without all the hoopla? How did we get an "media" which can do as they like without any restrictions? Freedom of speech "restrictions", no too scary for the lawyers; Fox and others may object? Spreading "lies" without "restrictions? No "limits" on what an President can do? No "limits" on just about everything the government does? No "limits " in our laws, nor have an "manual" which describes in detail on how to "carry out" those few antique laws, like an "impeachment" etc.

    No laws at all, about properly dealing with "obstructions" in an two party system; which paralyzes "governing".

    Sorry people our outdated British "systems" and "laws" act as a noose around our necks; either "clean these up"; preferably dump those, or expect more of the same as we have seen the last 4 years. It is time that this country enters the 20th Century related to governing.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:

    . So again it shows that things don't work with an 2 party system, if one party broke all the "rules" and "laws"

    Sorry this country got plenty of things to learn.

    Well Dutch, you are probably decades ahead of the reality of your ideas becoming true. What you are suggesting is true for the long term, all things must evolve into something better, stronger, and wiser, or they die. The same is true for the US constitution and the USA, and mankind. During this process there are steps backs, but IMO far more many steps forwards. In the time frame of a human life (about 80 years), its just a blink of eye, but to us progress seems soooo slow.

    The essences of what you say is true over the course of history. If we were to write a constitution from scratch, we would keep what is good from the current one and other countries, and toss out what is no longer important (ie the right to own weapons), and keep what is considered to be universal truths (ie all human beings are created 100% equal, and always have been). Any nation, including the US, must evolve for the better, or otherwise it will fall because people like Donald Trump will rise to power and destroy the country.

    I suspect that if you lived back in the 1700s- 1800s, you would be a free white man who is rightfully outrage about slavery, pointing out how the US constitution declares all men are equal, but at the same time has legalized slavery, and never living to see equal rights become law..... Slowly, and it still continues, progressing forward despite a hell of lot push back from about 30% of society that is ignorant and selfish. Donald Trump will be a long term historical example of worst of what mankind can be. He will be right there with Hitler and other powerful leaders that failed because they pursued injustice over judice, bad over good, exclusive over inclusive. Put 10 harcore Trump supporters in the same room, given enough time, they will turn on each other because that is their nature.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The point is that you don't understand, that this country is barely 200 years in existence (of course the Indians owned it before). Compared to the European culture of thousands of years. The "wild" West started here with people who lacked "governing experience" and due to the times were insulated from the rest of the world until the Brits, Dutch, French invaded the place. This made the mess only bigger, especially with the British system. Since this place is actually an big "island" which has become super "arrogant" it did stick to its outdated laws, which got manipulated by the rich and powerful over time. On top of that this country never had foreigners invade it. So it never had a chance to "improve" or revise their governing "system" for the better.

    Due to all the wars in Europe and elsewhere then these countries had the chance to change/improve their "systems" after every war. Here it is "stuck" in the "mud" run by a zillion well paid lawyers. And it muddles on as in 1800.

    The Trump reign showed exactly what I've been saying all along; the "British island" arrogant mentality and awful laws will ruin this country.

    It sounds crazy , but this country actually needs an"revolution" so it can then start from scratch and have leaders who are not above the law or being "Kings" or Potentates. Our present laws are based on having 15th century "Kings". Look at the "pardoning" issue; Trump is enriching himself by doing it as he likes. Also he just has pardoned people who murdered women and children. Sorry our laws and rules have become the laughing stock of the world, Trump proved such in an big way.