Split Thread A second impeachment

Firestone said:
Trump statement:

"In light of reports of more demonstrations, I urge that there must be NO violence, NO lawbreaking and NO vandalism of any kind. That is not what I stand for, and it is not what America stands for. I call on ALL Americans to help ease tensions and calm tempers. Thank You."

Fits in a tweet, by the way.

https://twitter.com/Acosta/status/1349429943869038594?s=19
Click to expand...

Stacyhs said:
Anyone else think that wasn't Trump?
Click to expand...

Honestly, it's plausible that it actually is Trump, in his usual shiny object fashion. He's facing a rather massive financial backlash and... maybe even the end of the Trump brand. He's apparently been strongly advised that the damage will be much less in the long term if he actually does call for peace compared to if he doubles down on sedition. How long any such peace push lasts, of course, is anyone's guess.

Captain_Swoop said:
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia) just promised Newsmax to introduce articles of impeachment against Joe Biden on Jan. 21.
Click to expand...

Entirely predictable that there would be Republicans seeking to impeach Biden on any pretext. I suppose we'll see how many Republicans sign on to this doomed attempt and see how many of them are willing to present even more evidence of how inimical they are to the US.


Darat said:
Oh I don’t know, she seems to have a sound grasp of republican politics!
Click to expand...

Yup.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
To be impeached once may be regarded as a misfortune.
To be impeached twice is a clear sign you’re a lying, corrupt, sociopathic fascist
Click to expand...
They say this impeachment, can you believe it? Never before seen. Never before. Historic, nobody’s ever been impeached twice. Give me a break. Oh, oh, oh, Trump is so bad. He’s so bad. He’s the worst. You look at these radical left Democrats, the biggest witch hunt in history. Nobody’s ever seen anything like it. So horrible what they’ve done, so horrible. Trump is so bad, let’s impeach him again.

Crazy Nancy, she’s crazy you know. Says she prays for Trump. Give me a break. Such lies. Lies like you’ve never seen.

Folks, there’s only one reason to impeach. Because I’m in there every day fighting for you. Fighting like nobody’s ever fought. And they can’t stand it. So terrible what they do. Terrible. So they impeach. Phony, phony lies they all make up. Trump did this, Trump did that. It’s a disgrace.

Ooo, he’ll go down in history. He’s so bad. He’s so terrible. Impeach, impeach, impeach. But y’know what? I’m glad to go down in history. It makes me happy. Oh, oh sir, how can you say that? Aren’t you angry? Can you believe it? Me, a 92% approval? I said I’d drain the swamp, right? Am I right? I mean nobody’s ever fought so hard for you. And I wouldn’t let them take away your freedom or your second amendment or your stolen votes.

Look, it is what it is. A perfect phone call, let’s impeach. A totally appropriate speech, let’s impeach. Fighting for you good people like nobody’s ever fought before, let’s impeach. They can’t stand it. But I won. Total landslide. Always remember.

God bless America.
 
Last edited:
There were no telegraph or railroads when the Constitution was written, and a senator might be absent for good reason: his horse foundered, or his keelboat grounded on a shoal, or he fell ill with the flux while mud-stuck on the Choctaw Trace.

Nowadays, we have internet, and a senator could cast his vote while on a fact-finding mission in Ouled Nail or Tijuana or Bangkok (love that name, haw haw!), and it would be plumb legit. Dunno if the rules allow that, but why not?

"Present" doesn't have to mean physically there anymore. THIS NOT THE 18TH. *******. CENTURY.

Edited by Agatha: 
Edited for rule 10. Do not disguise or misspell swear words in the public sections of the forum.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Aridas said:
Honestly, it's plausible that it actually is Trump, in his usual shiny object fashion. He's facing a rather massive financial backlash and... maybe even the end of the Trump brand. He's apparently been strongly advised that the damage will be much less in the long term if he actually does call for peace compared to if he doubles down on sedition. How long any such peace push lasts, of course, is anyone's guess.
Click to expand...

it's crazy that someone needs to tell him that sedition is a pretty unpopular political position
 
Horhang said:
This makes me unsure there will be a trial. There is no precedent for this after he has left office. Impeachment trials are to remove someone from public office. As of Jan 20 he no longer holds public office. I think this will wind up in the courts before it goes before the Senate.
Click to expand...

There are two precedents:

There is some historical precedent: The impeachments of Sen. William Blount in 1797 and Secretary of War William Belknap in 1876 both occurred after the men were no longer in office.
Click to expand...
 
sackett said:
There were no telegraph or railroads when the Constitution was written, and a senator might be absent for good reason: his horse foundered, or his keelboat grounded on a shoal, or he fell ill with the flux while mud-stuck on the Choctaw Trace.

Nowadays, we have internet, and a senator could cast his vote while on a fact-finding mission in Ouled Nail or Tijuana or Bangkok (love that name, haw haw!), and it would be plumb legit. Dunno if the rules allow that, but why not?

"Present" doesn't have to mean physically there anymore. THIS NOT THE 18TH. *******. CENTURY.
Click to expand...
The Senate rules require a senator to be physically present in order to vote.

A quorum is is required for voting - described as a simple majority of elected senators.
A majority of senators not required as a quorum is presumed unless an absence of a quorum is officially tabled.
A fifth of the senate is required to support the tabling for a suggestion of absence of a quorum.

A PDF of the rules as at March 26, 2020
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/96-452
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Aridas said:
Honestly, it's plausible that it actually is Trump, in his usual shiny object fashion. He's facing a rather massive financial backlash and... maybe even the end of the Trump brand. He's apparently been strongly advised that the damage will be much less in the long term if he actually does call for peace compared to if he doubles down on sedition. How long any such peace push lasts, of course, is anyone's guess.
Click to expand...
Sure, but he'd still need someone else to write it for him.



Aridas said:
Entirely predictable that there would be Republicans seeking to impeach Biden on any pretext. I suppose we'll see how many Republicans sign on to this doomed attempt and see how many of them are willing to present even more evidence of how inimical they are to the US. ...
Click to expand...
Not just doomed, but incredibly ignorant.

It will be especially interesting after an extensive investigation of what happened Wed is carried out.
 
From the Queens Daily Eagle: Queens man impeached — again

A Queens-born real estate developer made history Wednesday when he became the first U.S. president ever impeached twice by the House of Representatives.

Donald Trump, a 74-year-old lame duck Republican, is accused of inciting a lethal mob of far-right supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol in order to prevent Congress from certifying the results of his resounding loss in the November 2020 election. President-elect Joe Biden, a Democrat, recorded 306 electoral votes to Trump’s 232.

...

Ten Republican members of Congress joined the Democratic majority in voting to impeach the Jamaica Estates native for the second time.

In December 2019, Trump became the third president impeached by Congress — and the first from Queens.
Click to expand...

Local press is the best.
 
acbytesla said:
Well, the Republican party just tied itself to sedition and insurrection. They have defended the indefensible. This is all about messaging now. Something generally they are usually better at then the Democrats.

Still, this is going to be a hard sell.

I spent almost 30 years selling IT equipment and the one thing I can say is that it is one hell of a lot easier to sell quality then crap. Fortunately a large portion of their target consumers have been eating crap for a few years.
Click to expand...

A number of companies have done that, trading on a past reputation, but surely people eventually realise you're now selling crap?
 
Of course, if he gets impeached for a third time he gets to keep the White House.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Sure, but he'd still need someone else to write it for him.



Not just doomed, but incredibly ignorant.

It will be especially interesting after an extensive investigation of what happened Wed is carried out.
Click to expand...

This is the thing. When they're not being blocked, the investigations will make it very hard for people to pretend that, tonuse a phrase from what passes for a respectable Republican, he's "not a crook". And it's going to get through sufficient news bubbles that anyone standing by him will lose support.
 
Meadmaker said:
That's something I find somewhat depressing.

You can't convince me that there are no Democrats who think that impeaching him so close to the end of the term is a bad idea.

You can't convince me that there are no more than 10 Republicans who consider him unfit to be the President, and who thinks it's important to at least make a statement to that effect.

In other words, there's nothing inherently partisan about the question of removing him, and yet we get an almost perfect straight party line vote.
Click to expand...

You see there, right there, that's post-facts trying to sneak its way back into the conversation.

If half a group says one thing and half a group says another, that doesn't always mean there's a valid disagreement.

If I ask 50 biologist and 50 Southern Baptist is evolution is true, the fact that I already know that within a rounding error with almost all of the biologist are going say "Yes of course it is, you're an idiot for an asking, it's been hundreds of years why are we still arguing about this" and all the Southern Baptist are going to say "GET BEHIND ME SATAN!" that doesn't mean I have to furrow my brow and go "Well it has to be a partisan issue."

Yes it is a partisan issue, in the sense that one party is factually correct and the other side is not. It's not a sign of "Partisan" as some sort of bias we have to worry about.
 
dudalb said:
I think there have been a couple of Federal Jusges alos who have been impeached after leaving ofiice.
Click to expand...

Also the impeachment process has started. It's like saying you should go free because the statue of limitations for your crime expired while you were awaiting trial but after you were arrested/arraigned/charged whatever.

If the Democrats had just sat on their hands doing nothing and tried to impeach Trump 2 years from now then maybe, maybe there could be a valid discussion we could put on the table to at least talk about in regards to impeaching former Presidents. But not now.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom