• 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

Skeptic Ginger said:
I hope in closing I hope they point out how courageous the Georgia governor and sec of state were, how courageous Officer Goodman was and then admonish them that it will be hard to be courageous when their state GOP Party is attacking them if they vote to convict.
Click to expand...

I just adore Eugene Goodman. When I first saw him on 6 Jan 2021 I thought him a fool, running backwards up the stairs. Now I know his playing the fool and shoving that thug in the shoulder to get him to follow him away from the Senators was sheer genius. It's like he had a spatial map of the building in his mind's eye, he knew where the rioters were and he pictured where the Senators were and made sure the twain ne'er shall meet.

He made a fool out of those angry thugs. High five!!
 
pgwenthold said:
So much for the "the senate acts as the jury in the impeachment trial."

No jurist would be allowed to participate in the verdict if they skipped part of the trial.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the absurd "anything goes" precedent has already been established. In the run-up to the first impeachment trial, McConnell said,
Everything I do during this I'm coordinating with the White House counsel. There will be no difference between the president's position and our position as to how to handle this ... I'm going to take my cues from the president's lawyers.
Click to expand...

Can you imagine a judge accepting a juror who said, during voir dire, "I've been coordinating with the defense attorney and I'm going to take my cues from him?"

To be fair, if this was a real jury trial, the entire Senate would probably have to be excluded as jurors because of their presence during the attack on the Capitol, even if a judge would accept them despite their strong political affiliations.
 
Vixen said:
I just adore Eugene Goodman. When I first saw him on 6 Jan 2021 I thought him a fool, running backwards up the stairs. Now I know his playing the fool and shoving that thug in the shoulder to get him to follow him away from the Senators was sheer genius. It's like he had a spatial map of the building in his mind's eye, he knew where the rioters were and he pictured where the Senators were and made sure the twain ne'er shall meet.

He made a fool out of those angry thugs. High five!!
Click to expand...

It was that shove that gave it away for me.
 
pgwenthold said:
Yep. And we have precident.

Charlie Manson was held responsible for the murder of Sharon Tate despite the fact he was nowhere near the scene of the crime.

The women were responsible for what they did, and they were held accountable. But so was Charlie.

(the analogy using the responsibility of the cult leader is not unintentional)
Click to expand...

I repeat, the "Nuremberg Defense" has never worked well in the US legal system.
 
dasmiller said:
Unfortunately, the absurd "anything goes" precedent has already been established. In the run-up to the first impeachment trial, McConnell said,


Can you imagine a judge accepting a juror who said, during voir dire, "I've been coordinating with the defense attorney and I'm going to take my cues from him?"

To be fair, if this was a real jury trial, the entire Senate would probably have to be excluded as jurors because of their presence during the attack on the Capitol, even if a judge would accept them despite their strong political affiliations.
Click to expand...

Impeachment is political process, pure and simple. Always has been.
 
crescent said:
That's the argument the Dems are making - but I don't expect the Republicans to engage that argument.



They'll provide things that they'll claim show incitement - at least, that's my guess. If they do that, expect some pretty tortured logic.
Click to expand...

Extremely tortured - meaning wild leaps where there are gaping holes in the logic. The main problem is that they'll not have any indication that any rioters are rioting "for Pelosi" or "for AOC", or whoever. Possibly someone claiming that it's "For <insert any one or more names of people killed by police>", but no orders there, since those people are, of course, dead.

They'll also find no evidence of any major democrat taking part in an Antifa rally (there aren't any, since the anarchists that do post tend to despise both political parties), any evidence of BLM chapters planning violence of any sort (people have tried, with no success - the few cop killers they've spoken to that reference BLM at all are those that talk about how they're too weak and nonviolent)."

And of course, there's the simple fact that none of the above is related to the impeachment to begin with - if Nancy Pelosi jumps off a cliff, it's still not a good idea for Toupee Fiasco to do it too.
 
I am concerned that Trump's acquittal will be taken as a victory not only by Trump but by his followersl and more violence will result because they have been emboldened.
 
I love the part where Trump says in his Jan 6 speech that "all of you" came up with the phrase "Stop the Steal". No they didn't. That was the invention of that POS Roger Stone back in 2016.
 
crescent said:
That's the argument the Dems are making - but I don't expect the Republicans to engage that argument.



They'll provide things that they'll claim show incitement - at least, that's my guess. If they do that, expect some pretty tortured logic.
Click to expand...
BLM and other progressive and left leaning organizations very wisely advised their supporters to stay away from DC on Jan. 6th. No doubt Trump's team will still try to tie the violence to agent provocateurs, but at least they can't blame a counter protest for inciting the mob.
 
Trump's defesne will be a lot of whattabutsim, with lots of footage of the BLM protests edited in such a way as to blatently appeal to the "All blacks are violent thugs" mentality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom