• 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

Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I've not had a chance to follow this, but I have read that McConnell voted that the trial wasn't constitutional. Since he's the weathervane, I think there goes the last slim hope that enough Republicans would abstain or vote to convict to allow a conviction.
Click to expand...

I gave up hope of that a long time ago.
The Dems are attempting to win the court of public opinion, and I think they have a very good chance there.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I've not had a chance to follow this, but I have read that McConnell voted that the trial wasn't constitutional. Since he's the weathervane, I think there goes the last slim hope that enough Republicans would abstain or vote to convict to allow a conviction.
Click to expand...

If there was any hope of that McConnell wouldn't have delayed the trial until Trump was no longer in office.
 
Vixen said:
The attorney guy Representative Joe Neguse argued so much better than Castor or Schoen. He did use Belknap as a prime example of precedent, in that, of course, the constitution covers day one to the last day of the presidency. It matters not that you have now left if your impeachable act happened during your term of office.

Was it Belknap - or was it Bount - tried to get out of it by handing in his resignation but was impeached anyway.

Case for constitutional correctness well argued.
Click to expand...

Belknap.

"On March 2, 1876, just minutes before the House of Representatives was scheduled to vote on articles of impeachment, Belknap raced to the White House, handed Grant his resignation, and burst into tears.

This failed to stop the House. Later that day, members voted unanimously to send the Senate five articles of impeachment, charging Belknap with “criminally disregarding his duty as Secretary of War and basely prostituting his high office to his lust for private gain.”

https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/impeachment/impeachment-belknap.htm/.

As for Blount. That was the first impeachment. He was expelled before he was impeached

Here's his story.

https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/The-First-Impeachment.htm
 
dudalb said:
I gave up hope of that a long time ago.
The Dems are attempting to win the court of public opinion, and I think they have a very good chance there.
Click to expand...

The GOP won't do the right thing. Must make them pay for that failure.
 
Upchurch said:
Twitter is saying that he normally wears a yarmulke (sp?), but isn't for this. I don't understand the reason why.

Anyway, he's touching his head out of habit to keep his yarmulke from falling off when he leans back to take a drink.
Click to expand...

Under Jewish tradition a person must say a bracha before eating or drinking. A bracha is a short blessing. There are different blessing for different types of food and drink.

A bracha should only be said when the head is covered, preferably with a kippah/yarmulke. If that is not possible, something else can be used. Preferably a piece of cloth, but it really be anything if necessary. Usually not just your own hand. It looks like he is using the bottle cap as a literal cap.
 
Donald Trump is NOT happy!!!

Per
@MajorCBS
, "Two sources familiar with the former president's reaction to today's Senate proceedings described Trump as angry about his lawyers' lackluster performances. One source said the President "didn't sound pleased" on phone calls with close associates.
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/SovernNation/status/1359281298364276738?s=20

Did they fail to mention the Steal or the Election Fraud?

Instead, they blubbed on and on saying whatever popped into their heads, and waved a couple of booklets around for theatrics. Castor claimed he cried. Haha, who is he kidding? Schoen was so incredibly boring you wonder if he ever won a case.
 
acbytesla said:
Keep in mind that the Senate has also held an impeachment trial after Secretary of War Belknap resigned and was out of office. Think about that. The Senate tried Belknap despite that they couldn't offer any penalty. Convicting Trump today would at least have a tangible effect. It would eliminate the pension, the 1 million per annum of travel benefits and Secret Service protection as well as being able to ban him from holding public office.
The argument is beyond weak that it is Constitutionally prohibited.
Click to expand...

I don't even care about all the other stuff he might be denied as long as this is done.
 
This is pure soap.

Multiple people tell me Trump was basically screaming as Castor made a meandering opening argument that struggled to get at the heart of the defense team's argument.
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1359272249153499142?s=20


Who knows? He might change his mind and come raging into the Senate to represent himself.


I'd love to have been a fly on the wall when Castor suggested Trump be arrested and charged with a felony, instead of impeached.

President Donald Trump was set off by the defense mustered by his legal team at the start of his Senate impeachment trial, raging at key admissions and a presentation that appeared to drive away a key Republican vote.

Trump, viewing the proceedings from his new home at Mar-a-Lago, was aghast that one of his lawyers, Bruce Castor, acknowledged the potency of the opening argument put forward by House Democratic impeachment managers, ABC News reported.

Castor even acknowledged that his team changed course after viewing the Democrats' presentation, which featured dramatic video of Trump supporters storming the Capitol and taunting police officers with obscenities as they bashed in doors and windows.

‘I’ll be quite frank with you, we changed what we were going to do on account that we thought that the House managers’ presentation was well done,’ Castor admitted. ‘And I wanted you to know that we have responses to those things.’

One Trump advisor even told CNN getting good legal representation was a concern if he is ever charged in criminal court, which is now possible since he is out of office.
Click to expand...
DM
 
Vixen said:
This is pure soap.

https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1359272249153499142?s=20

Who knows? He might change his mind and come raging into the Senate to represent himself.

I'd love to have been a fly on the wall when Castor suggested Trump be arrested and charged with a felony, instead of impeached.

DM
Click to expand...
I knew this was going to really piss Trump off when I heard it:
Castor made other admissions that may have grated on Trump, calling him a 'former president' while also saying: 'President Trump no longer is in office. The object of the Constitution has been achieved. He was removed by the voters.' He was arguing against the need for a post-presidency impeachment.
Click to expand...
I wondered if Trump gave him permission then I thought of the saying: better to ask for forgiveness than for permission.
 
Vixen said:
I'd love to have been a fly on the wall when Castor suggested Trump be arrested and charged with a felony, instead of impeached.
Click to expand...

It's been pointed out that if he's tried in a criminal court Trump will be in deep trouble as he doesn't seem to be able to secure good lawyers. Only crazy people and idiots. For some reason.

He'd be lucky if he got that hyperchicken from Futurama for a lawyer.
 
dudalb said:
That video was chilling and scary, very well done.
I think , since this not about convicting Trump but battle for public opinion, that the Dems are off to a very good start in that regard.
Click to expand...
For the video they can call on the best talent in Hollywood and New York, which does rather light up the lack of talent that the GOP can call on across the board. Trump has made them into something just as shoddy as everything else he's been involved with.

The Republicans look like they're not even trying to compete for public opinion, because they aren't. They know (?) the numbers are with them, they'll win the game, so that's that. If they think of anyone outside the political world it's Trump's base (which is largely a mystery to them), and Trump's base couldn't keep them the House, the Presidency, or the Senate, while they were all as happy as pigs in the proverbial, and enormously motivated. Somehow it will get the House back in '22, and the rest in '24? That's simply psychotic.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
That is most important. But I want him busted up like a former pinata.
Click to expand...
As do all decent people, but there's pleasure to be gained from what he's suffering through. This is not a happy man, cleared by clever lawyers, kicking back with a cheeseburger and a familiar action movie playing on a massive screen. I don't thing he enjoys rage and frustration one little bit, and he must be consumed by them right now. That's what I like to think, anyway, so until it's proven false I will. That's the modern way. :cool:
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I knew this was going to really piss Trump off when I heard it:
Castor made other admissions that may have grated on Trump, calling him a 'former president' while also saying: 'President Trump no longer is in office. The object of the Constitution has been achieved. He was removed by the voters.' He was arguing against the need for a post-presidency impeachment.
Click to expand...
I wondered if Trump gave him permission then I thought of the saying: better to ask for forgiveness than for permission.
Click to expand...

Yes, the object of the Constitution in having a vote to decide whether or not to remove him was achieved despite his effort to subvert the objective by denying its result- hence the object of the Constitution in having a provision for holding accountable a President who would try such a thing, and including a restriction against his ever being in a position to try it again. The fact that he didn't stay in office, that he failed in his effort to subvert the Constitution, is no reason to excuse him for trying to.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
I'd love to have been a fly on the wall when Castor suggested Trump be arrested and charged with a felony, instead of impeached.
Click to expand...
Understandable. I'd love to have heard what epithets Trump applied to Schoen if and when his twitchy behaviour was explained to him. To have it on video would be very Heaven.
 
turingtest said:
Yes, the object of the Constitution in having a vote to decide whether or not to remove him was achieved despite his effort to subvert the objective by denying its result- hence the object of the Constitution in having a provision for holding accountable a President who would try such a thing, and including a restriction against his ever being in a position to try it again. The fact that he didn't stay in office, that he failed in his effort to subvert the Constitution, is no reason to excuse him for trying to.
Click to expand...
Of course not. I think we all agree these lawyers were crap.
 
turingtest said:
Yes, the object of the Constitution in having a vote to decide whether or not to remove him was achieved despite his effort to subvert the objective by denying its result- hence the object of the Constitution in having a provision for holding accountable a President who would try such a thing, and including a restriction against his ever being in a position to try it again. The fact that he didn't stay in office, that he failed in his effort to subvert the Constitution, is no reason to excuse him for trying to.
Click to expand...
When you put it like that it seems very persuasive, but where's the poetry? And while mere mention of the Constitution might jerk a tear in some quarters, they are very small and peculiar quarters.
 
CapelDodger said:
Understandable. I'd love to have heard what epithets Trump applied to Schoen if and when his twitchy behaviour was explained to him. To have it on video would be very Heaven.
Click to expand...

It will be interesting if Trump fires these guys before the trial is over.

:popcorn1
 
dudalb said:
I am not a lawyer..though my kid sister is....but you have to wonder if the guy forgot everything he learned in his Legal Procedures course in Law School.
Click to expand...

Or, possibly, he recognizes that impeachment is a political process, not a legal one.

I didn't watch it. i don't know what they said, but from what I'm hearing about it, it's pretty clear that whatever he is talking about is performance art, done for the benefit of the public, not a legal case being presented to a jury.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom