• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread A second impeachment

Minoosh said:
But don't undercharge. I'm seeing negligent homicide as the most obvious criminal charge. And if you look at it this way, it gets harder to argue against impeachment. If he can't be held criminally liable for shooting someone on Pennsylvania Avenue then what is the remedy? He might as well have personally killed those people. If he gets off scot-free because "healing" or whatever, who is to be held responsible for the deaths of 3 of his supporters and a police officer? Who BTW was reportedly also a supporter.
Click to expand...

Correction. 1 police officer and 4 members of the violent mob.

Incidentally, I wonder if a number of Republican Senators could be convinced to convict as part of cutting a deal with them to protect them from prosecution for their actions in stirring up and supporting sedition, at least provided that they stop with that nonsense.
 
Aridas said:
Correction. 1 police officer and 4 members of the violent mob.

Incidentally, I wonder if a number of Republican Senators could be convinced to convict as part of cutting a deal with them to protect them from prosecution for their actions in stirring up and supporting sedition, at least provided that they stop with that nonsense.
Click to expand...

I’m sure. Also think they maybe don’t want to have Trump or any of his admin talking about that GA call or Pak’s resignation.
 
acbytesla said:
It is a political process and not a criminal process. You're right

But you cannot force him to testify in a proceeding that might expose him to criminal prosecution.

You might be able to force him to testify if you guaranteed him immunity. I don't think anyone wants to do that. In which case Trump would want to admit to all of his illegalities. That way he would he could expand that shield of immunity.
Click to expand...

Technically, courts can't force someone to testify either....just detain them indefinitely until they do. I can't imagine much stomach for having the master at arm's lock someone up.
 
Meadmaker said:
There's no way it's enough to get a conviction in a criminal trial, but an impeachment trial uses different standards than a criminal trial. The only standard in an impeachment trial is, "I think anyone who does that should be thrown out of office, now."
Click to expand...

you are forgetting that the trial would be with a DC Jury.
I think a conviction is entirely possible, and there in nothing in the President's Duties that would shield him from this prosecution once he is out.
 
The Atheist said:
Yeah, giving him more publicity and allowing him to play the martyr is a much better idea.



They already have. McConnell & Pence are now seen as his enemies as much, or maybe even more, than Democrats.
Click to expand...

Why? Not really seeing it.

Elagabalus said:
I'm updating my prediction. Trump will stay til the 20th. They will have to taser him to get him out of there. Trump needs his followers to feel sorry for him so making a Yuge scene as he is torn away from the resolute desk is in the offing.
Click to expand...

He's not going to the inaugural but he can still make an (to the rest of the world) unseemly display of being Tasered/taken away in handcuffs and all his sycophantic followers will be outraged. They will vow to "never forget." He wins again. Sort of.
 
uke2se said:
A successful impeachment requires 2/3ds of the Senate though. However, I think it might be possible to get enough Republicans on board.

They have two options for any shot on power in the future: Remove Trump or join him. The latter requires them to betray their country and to openly work to end democracy. I don't think enough of them are ready to do that just yet.
Click to expand...

Ah, that's true.

Well, then. As I was saying before, at the very least, this should give everyone a very clear idea of where everyone in Congress stands.

Everyone playing the "maybe we should just let him slink off" card, and the whole "turn the other cheek" routine are basically saying they are cool with being slapped in the face by a fascist mob and don't want to press charges thank you (because we fear retaliation).

If you are advocating doing nothing out of fear then you are essentially calling for appeasement of the fascist mob.

Don't try to appease the scum!
 
Before I say anything new, I'm going to repeat again that if the Democrats are confident they can get a conviction, they should. Even though it's only a few days, getting Trump out is good. I think he's crazy, and that makes him dangerous. Get him out.

However, what to do if they cannot get him out?

Suppose that Monday morning, Nancy Pelosi were to hold a press conference and announce that after consultation with Republican and Democratic lawmakers, it is clear that the Republicans will not convict President Trump, and so we have decided not to press for impeachment at this time. Make sure to throw in reminders that these are the same people who tried to overturn election results. (It's not strictly true, but it's close enough for a two minute speech.)

it seems to me that's even better than actually impeaching the President, but failing to get a conviction. In terms of labelling them, it's perfect. It doesn't make them take a stand in favor of Trump, but it has exactly the same effect. It stains everyone, even the Republicans who might have voted to convict. What are they going to do? Stand up and insist that they would have convicted him? Demand that they cease this cowardly stand and pass articles of impeachment right now?
 
if the Dems can’t convince America that Trump was wrong then it is what it is. I’d hope they’d have more courage than ******* Twitter and do something
 
My apologies but all these threads are too long to keep up, so if this has been discussed just direct me to the post(s).

It has been mentioned on another forum that if Trump is impeached and 'convicted' or whatever the Senate does after McConnell is no longer about to control the outcome, while it will happen after Trump is out of office, will it still mean he gets denied that ridiculous golden parachute ex-POTUSes get?

I had no idea how much they got: it's millions. Millions in annual travel for both Trump and Melania, millions for other stuff, free secret service for life and so on.

Convict this guy of sedition and there's no way he should get all that retirement benefits.

I say, impeach him even if the Senate vote isn't until after the 20th. Let him try to pardon himself then charge him in a federal court and put him in jail until the trial because he's an obvious flight risk. He can appeal that self-pardon. I think he'll lose in court because if a POTUS can pardon themselves that means they can murder people and try to overthrow a legit election with impunity.


So, what have people found out about the consequences of convicting him in an impeachment hearing after his term is up? I think a lot of those GOP legislators recognize how dangerous it was to keep up this election fraud charade. Maybe not all of them, but some of them have to finally be opening their eyes.
 
Last edited:
Stacyhs said:
The GOP is so stained now that they could soak themselves in bleach for a year and still be colored a ****** brown.
Click to expand...

true, but whenever there is a moment when they actual have to put their name next to an action/inaction, it cannot be credibly denied later.
We already see Cruz pretending that he was a never-Trump all along. Let him cast that vote or ask him in every interview from this moment forward why he didn't.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
My apologies but all these threads are too long to keep up, so if this has been discussed just direct me to the post(s).

It has been mentioned on another forum that if Trump is impeached and 'convicted' or whatever the Senate does after McConnell is no longer about to control the outcome, while it will happen after Trump is out of office, will it still mean he gets denied that ridiculous golden parachute ex-POTUSes get?
I had no idea how much they got: it's millions. Millions in annual travel for both Trump and Melania, millions for other stuff, free secret service for life and so on.

Convict this guy of sedition and there's no way he should get all that retirement benefits.

I say, impeach him even if the Senate vote isn't until after the 20th. Let him try to pardon himself then charge him in a federal court and put him in jail until the trial because he's an obvious flight risk. He can appeal that self-pardon. I think he'll lose in court because if a POTUS can pardon themselves that means they can murder people and try to overthrow a legit election with impunity.


So, what have people found out about the consequences of convicting him in an impeachment hearing after his term is up? I think a lot of those GOP legislators recognize how dangerous it was to keep up this election fraud charade. Maybe not all of them, but some of them have to finally be opening their eyes.
Click to expand...

I believe it does.

Yes, he should be impeached.

Absolutely.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
true, but whenever there is a moment when they actual have to put their name next to an action/inaction, it cannot be credibly denied later.
We already see Cruz pretending that he was a never-Trump all along. Let him cast that vote or ask him in every interview from this moment forward why he didn't.
Click to expand...

Because that really mattered with Lindsey "Use my words against me!" Graham.
 
It might be worth pointing out that nobody I have seen- here, in the media, or among GOP politicians- have suggested that the same "heal the divide" rationale for not impeaching Trump for inciting a mob to riot should also extend to not prosecuting the members of that mob for doing so. The guy who put his feet up on the desk in Pelosi's office, the idiot who carried off the lectern, the W. Va legislator, etc.- all these people face real consequences in the form of jail time, fines, loss of jobs, and so on. If you won't, in search of some mythical healing,* impeach the man who used the tool for how he used it, then surely you cannot, for the sake of the same "healing, consistently prosecute the tool for being used. And then where are you? If nobody suffers any consequences for what happened, it might as well not have. I know the right would like to pretend it didn't, that the whole thing was just some meaningless, high-spirited hijinks that never really endangered anyone, much less democracy, but that's ********- it did happen, people did die, and the example it sets for democracy is about as dangerous a one as I can imagine.

*And I do think the "healing" the GOP pretend they want is largely a myth. The party that wielded its own tool, a guy who stoked division as a matter of policy, is not after actually healing any divide in the country, they just want the slogan as cover for time to heal their party of its self-inflicted wound of trying to use a weapon they couldn't properly control. Birthers, "you lie!" "death panels!" blocking a SC nomination on a pious ground that they themselves showed to be the most blatant hypocrisy four years later, "Benghazi!" "her e-mails!" "lock her up!" "send them back!"- none of these things really needed Donald Trump. And Democrats do not, after all that, owe the GOP any "come home, all is forgiven" respect. If the Republicans want to heal the wound, the first thing they need to do is acknowledge their part in inflicting it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom