Impeach!
-
In some ways, I would hope that if a trial reaches the Senate, that part of the defense would be to either validate or invalidate the President's assertions. Thus, if he "won Georgia by hundreds of thousands of votes," his actions and those of his followers were appropriate to invalidate a "rigged election". If as the Republican Attorney General and judges assert that there were only a handful (i.e. less than 10) fraudulant votes, then he should be convicted and sent to prison for a reasonable period of time.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 19:36 last edited byIn some ways, I would hope that if a trial reaches the Senate, that part of the defense would be to either validate or invalidate the President's assertions. Thus, if he "won Georgia by hundreds of thousands of votes," his actions and those of his followers were appropriate to invalidate a "rigged election". If as the Republican Attorney General and judges assert that there were only a handful (i.e. less than 10) fraudulant votes, then he should be convicted and sent to prison for a reasonable period of time.
I'm no hothead, but if you put Trump in jail, you better be prepared to fight.
-
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 19:36 last edited by xenon 1 Nov 2021, 19:37
Contextualizing Watergate.
Nixon resigning (when sentiment and the impeachment math turned against him) and Ford pardoning him both take a certain amount of political courage to do.
Both actions seem unfathomable today.
-
In some ways, I would hope that if a trial reaches the Senate, that part of the defense would be to either validate or invalidate the President's assertions. Thus, if he "won Georgia by hundreds of thousands of votes," his actions and those of his followers were appropriate to invalidate a "rigged election". If as the Republican Attorney General and judges assert that there were only a handful (i.e. less than 10) fraudulant votes, then he should be convicted and sent to prison for a reasonable period of time.
I'm no hothead, but if you put Trump in jail, you better be prepared to fight.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 19:41 last edited bys the Senate, that part of the defense would be to either validate or invalidate the President's assertions. Thus, if he "won Georgia by hundreds of thousands of votes," his actions and those of his followers were appropriate to invalidate a "rigged election". If as the Republican Attorney General and judges assert that there were only a handful (i.e. less than 10) fraudulant votes, then he should be convicted and sent to prison for a reasonable period of time.
But since he is both certain the election was stolen and that he can prove it, he would have nothing to worry about. Only if he were lying would jail time be an issue.
-
It was certainly a tragic, idiotic raid of the Capitol, but the handwringing over it, and not over the wider spread and higher death/economic toll riots of 2020 strikes me clearly as special pleading and opportunism.
To think the raid isn't a clear and established loss for Trump and his supporters is ridiculous. To say "there must be consequences" and imply there aren't any unless an impeachment happens, is also ridiculous.
I wasn’t for impeachment at first. I was viewing Jan 6 as a singular event.
If you broaden your scope to his rhetoric on willfully misleading people on the election being stolen - then you can make a case that there should be political consequences for that.
If you tell people the election was stolen (especially when you have next to zero evidence to that effect) - it’s reasonable to expect some people will think an insurrection is justified.
Basically - you can’t kneecap peoples’ beliefs in the legitimacy of our elections on a selfish whim.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 20:00 last edited byIf you broaden your scope to his rhetoric on willfully misleading people on the election being stolen - then you can make a case that there should be political consequences for that.
Great idea, let's start punishing politicians for life if they try to spin a story to their favor.
There won't be a politician left standing.
OK, by me.
-
Do what you want Nancy but weigh the pros and cons of Biden being effective go forward.
In no case will Trump be impeached before he leaves.
So is it worth it to take up right after the inauguration or as Clyborn suggests in 100 days.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 20:03 last edited by -
In some ways, I would hope that if a trial reaches the Senate, that part of the defense would be to either validate or invalidate the President's assertions. Thus, if he "won Georgia by hundreds of thousands of votes," his actions and those of his followers were appropriate to invalidate a "rigged election". If as the Republican Attorney General and judges assert that there were only a handful (i.e. less than 10) fraudulant votes, then he should be convicted and sent to prison for a reasonable period of time.
I'm no hothead, but if you put Trump in jail, you better be prepared to fight.
wrote on 12 Jan 2021, 15:22 last edited byIn some ways, I would hope that if a trial reaches the Senate, that part of the defense would be to either validate or invalidate the President's assertions. Thus, if he "won Georgia by hundreds of thousands of votes," his actions and those of his followers were appropriate to invalidate a "rigged election". If as the Republican Attorney General and judges assert that there were only a handful (i.e. less than 10) fraudulant votes, then he should be convicted and sent to prison for a reasonable period of time.
I'm no hothead, but if you put Trump in jail, you better be prepared to fight.
Why? If the court system goes through the process and he is found guilty of some crime that causes him to go to jail, why would you fight for that?
(BTW, I do not think there should be impeachment. Let him "go into the sunset")
-
In some ways, I would hope that if a trial reaches the Senate, that part of the defense would be to either validate or invalidate the President's assertions. Thus, if he "won Georgia by hundreds of thousands of votes," his actions and those of his followers were appropriate to invalidate a "rigged election". If as the Republican Attorney General and judges assert that there were only a handful (i.e. less than 10) fraudulant votes, then he should be convicted and sent to prison for a reasonable period of time.
I'm no hothead, but if you put Trump in jail, you better be prepared to fight.
Why? If the court system goes through the process and he is found guilty of some crime that causes him to go to jail, why would you fight for that?
(BTW, I do not think there should be impeachment. Let him "go into the sunset")
wrote on 12 Jan 2021, 15:26 last edited by@taiwan_girl that man will never go into the sunset. (Impeaching him may make things worse, though). Some day it will be fascinating to look back at all of this. What we got right, what we screwed up.
-
@taiwan_girl that man will never go into the sunset. (Impeaching him may make things worse, though). Some day it will be fascinating to look back at all of this. What we got right, what we screwed up.
wrote on 12 Jan 2021, 15:59 last edited by@taiwan_girl that man will never go into the sunset. (Impeaching him may make things worse, though). Some day it will be fascinating to look back at all of this. What we got right, what we screwed up.
I'm worried the most about that. The people who are going to decide where we go next are us, not our leaders.
-
wrote on 12 Jan 2021, 16:35 last edited by
I have no agenda on Trump. Impeach, don't impeach, I don't care. I want him GONE, period.
GEE OH ENN EEE.
-
In some ways, I would hope that if a trial reaches the Senate, that part of the defense would be to either validate or invalidate the President's assertions. Thus, if he "won Georgia by hundreds of thousands of votes," his actions and those of his followers were appropriate to invalidate a "rigged election". If as the Republican Attorney General and judges assert that there were only a handful (i.e. less than 10) fraudulant votes, then he should be convicted and sent to prison for a reasonable period of time.
I'm no hothead, but if you put Trump in jail, you better be prepared to fight.
Why? If the court system goes through the process and he is found guilty of some crime that causes him to go to jail, why would you fight for that?
(BTW, I do not think there should be impeachment. Let him "go into the sunset")
wrote on 12 Jan 2021, 16:49 last edited by Jolly 1 Dec 2021, 16:49@taiwan_girl said in Impeach!:
In some ways, I would hope that if a trial reaches the Senate, that part of the defense would be to either validate or invalidate the President's assertions. Thus, if he "won Georgia by hundreds of thousands of votes," his actions and those of his followers were appropriate to invalidate a "rigged election". If as the Republican Attorney General and judges assert that there were only a handful (i.e. less than 10) fraudulant votes, then he should be convicted and sent to prison for a reasonable period of time.
I'm no hothead, but if you put Trump in jail, you better be prepared to fight.
Why? If the court system goes through the process and he is found guilty of some crime that causes him to go to jail, why would you fight for that?
(BTW, I do not think there should be impeachment. Let him "go into the sunset")
There is nothing that Trump has done that rises to the level of a crime. To try and convict him of such is pure power politics. Banana republic or Soviet style politics.
The Left is already trying to silence Conservative voices in any way possible. Convicting somebody, including a former POTUS, of nonexistent crines mere for show, is a tipping point.
You want armed insurrection? You want a hot war?
Keep kicking that can down the road...
-
wrote on 12 Jan 2021, 23:54 last edited by
Mitch McConnell, with nothing to lose, is pleased with impeachment:
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, has told associates that he believes President Trump committed impeachable offenses and that he is pleased that Democrats are moving to impeach him, believing that it will make it easier to purge him from the party, according to people familiar with his thinking. The House is voting on Wednesday to formally charge Mr. Trump with inciting violence against the country.
At the same time, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the minority leader and one of Mr. Trump’s most steadfast allies in Congress, has asked other Republicans whether he should call on Mr. Trump to resign in the aftermath of the riot at the Capitol last week, according to three Republican officials briefed on the conversations.
While Mr. McCarthy has said he is personally opposed to impeachment, he and other party leaders have decided not to formally lobby Republicans to vote “no,” and an aide to Mr. McCarthy said he was open to a measure censuring Mr. Trump for his conduct. In private, Mr. McCarthy reached out to a leading House Democrat to see if the chamber would be willing to pursue a censure vote, though Speaker Nancy Pelosi has ruled it out.
Taken together, the stances of Congress’s two top Republicans — neither of whom has said publicly that Mr. Trump should resign or be impeached — reflected the politically challenging and fast-moving nature of the crisis that the party faces after the assault by a pro-Trump mob during a session to formalize President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s electoral victory.
-
Mitch McConnell, with nothing to lose, is pleased with impeachment:
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, has told associates that he believes President Trump committed impeachable offenses and that he is pleased that Democrats are moving to impeach him, believing that it will make it easier to purge him from the party, according to people familiar with his thinking. The House is voting on Wednesday to formally charge Mr. Trump with inciting violence against the country.
At the same time, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the minority leader and one of Mr. Trump’s most steadfast allies in Congress, has asked other Republicans whether he should call on Mr. Trump to resign in the aftermath of the riot at the Capitol last week, according to three Republican officials briefed on the conversations.
While Mr. McCarthy has said he is personally opposed to impeachment, he and other party leaders have decided not to formally lobby Republicans to vote “no,” and an aide to Mr. McCarthy said he was open to a measure censuring Mr. Trump for his conduct. In private, Mr. McCarthy reached out to a leading House Democrat to see if the chamber would be willing to pursue a censure vote, though Speaker Nancy Pelosi has ruled it out.
Taken together, the stances of Congress’s two top Republicans — neither of whom has said publicly that Mr. Trump should resign or be impeached — reflected the politically challenging and fast-moving nature of the crisis that the party faces after the assault by a pro-Trump mob during a session to formalize President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s electoral victory.
wrote on 13 Jan 2021, 00:17 last edited byMitch McConnell, with nothing to lose, is pleased with impeachment:
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, has told associates that he believes President Trump committed impeachable offenses and that he is pleased that Democrats are moving to impeach him, believing that it will make it easier to purge him from the party, according to people familiar with his thinking. The House is voting on Wednesday to formally charge Mr. Trump with inciting violence against the country.
At the same time, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the minority leader and one of Mr. Trump’s most steadfast allies in Congress, has asked other Republicans whether he should call on Mr. Trump to resign in the aftermath of the riot at the Capitol last week, according to three Republican officials briefed on the conversations.
While Mr. McCarthy has said he is personally opposed to impeachment, he and other party leaders have decided not to formally lobby Republicans to vote “no,” and an aide to Mr. McCarthy said he was open to a measure censuring Mr. Trump for his conduct. In private, Mr. McCarthy reached out to a leading House Democrat to see if the chamber would be willing to pursue a censure vote, though Speaker Nancy Pelosi has ruled it out.
Taken together, the stances of Congress’s two top Republicans — neither of whom has said publicly that Mr. Trump should resign or be impeached — reflected the politically challenging and fast-moving nature of the crisis that the party faces after the assault by a pro-Trump mob during a session to formalize President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s electoral victory.
I'm not sure Mitch knows exactly what he is doing.
I understand he's feeling heat from the money people, but all the money in the world won't do you any good if your ground troops walk away.
-
wrote on 13 Jan 2021, 00:35 last edited by
With such a slim majority in the House, what's the likelihood that this'll pass?
I put it at something like 100%. Maybe 50% chance we’ll see up to a small handful of GOP votes.
Several senior House Republicans join efforts.
The push for an unprecedented second impeachment of President Trump took a dramatic bipartisan turn Tuesday, as several senior House Republicans joined the Democratic effort to remove Trump for his role in inciting an angry mob to storm the Capitol last week and the White House braced for more defections.
Rep. Liz Cheney (Wyo.), the third-ranking House Republican, and Rep. John Katko (N.Y.), the top Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee, both held Trump responsible for Wednesday’s violence. They were joined by Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), a frequent Trump critic.
“The president of the United States summoned this mob, assembled the mob, and lit the flame of this attack,” Cheney said in a statement, adding, “There has never been a greater betrayal by a president of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution.”
And this:
A senior administration official said the White House expects at least a dozen House Republicans to support impeachment.
-
Mitch McConnell, with nothing to lose, is pleased with impeachment:
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, has told associates that he believes President Trump committed impeachable offenses and that he is pleased that Democrats are moving to impeach him, believing that it will make it easier to purge him from the party, according to people familiar with his thinking. The House is voting on Wednesday to formally charge Mr. Trump with inciting violence against the country.
At the same time, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the minority leader and one of Mr. Trump’s most steadfast allies in Congress, has asked other Republicans whether he should call on Mr. Trump to resign in the aftermath of the riot at the Capitol last week, according to three Republican officials briefed on the conversations.
While Mr. McCarthy has said he is personally opposed to impeachment, he and other party leaders have decided not to formally lobby Republicans to vote “no,” and an aide to Mr. McCarthy said he was open to a measure censuring Mr. Trump for his conduct. In private, Mr. McCarthy reached out to a leading House Democrat to see if the chamber would be willing to pursue a censure vote, though Speaker Nancy Pelosi has ruled it out.
Taken together, the stances of Congress’s two top Republicans — neither of whom has said publicly that Mr. Trump should resign or be impeached — reflected the politically challenging and fast-moving nature of the crisis that the party faces after the assault by a pro-Trump mob during a session to formalize President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s electoral victory.
I'm not sure Mitch knows exactly what he is doing.
I understand he's feeling heat from the money people, but all the money in the world won't do you any good if your ground troops walk away.
wrote on 13 Jan 2021, 01:08 last edited byMitch McConnell, with nothing to lose, is pleased with impeachment:
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, has told associates that he believes President Trump committed impeachable offenses and that he is pleased that Democrats are moving to impeach him, believing that it will make it easier to purge him from the party, according to people familiar with his thinking. The House is voting on Wednesday to formally charge Mr. Trump with inciting violence against the country.
At the same time, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the minority leader and one of Mr. Trump’s most steadfast allies in Congress, has asked other Republicans whether he should call on Mr. Trump to resign in the aftermath of the riot at the Capitol last week, according to three Republican officials briefed on the conversations.
While Mr. McCarthy has said he is personally opposed to impeachment, he and other party leaders have decided not to formally lobby Republicans to vote “no,” and an aide to Mr. McCarthy said he was open to a measure censuring Mr. Trump for his conduct. In private, Mr. McCarthy reached out to a leading House Democrat to see if the chamber would be willing to pursue a censure vote, though Speaker Nancy Pelosi has ruled it out.
Taken together, the stances of Congress’s two top Republicans — neither of whom has said publicly that Mr. Trump should resign or be impeached — reflected the politically challenging and fast-moving nature of the crisis that the party faces after the assault by a pro-Trump mob during a session to formalize President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s electoral victory.
I'm not sure Mitch knows exactly what he is doing.
I understand he's feeling heat from the money people, but all the money in the world won't do you any good if your ground troops walk away.
Mitch is a human calculator. Usually a pretty good one. The example that always sticks in my mind is when he literally filibustered his own bill when the Dems unexpectedly went for it.
TBD. Maybe he knows more than we know.
-
Impeachment is 100% appropriate. But for him, Wednesday would not have happened.
The moral hazard problem is real.
We must impose real costs on Hawley and Cruz. We can’t be doing this every 4 years.
-
wrote on 13 Jan 2021, 04:04 last edited by Jolly
All guaranteed by the three Boxes.
The soap Box, the ballot Box and the cartridge Box.
-
the people you don't agree with,
That's the problem. You seem to want to frame this as a disagreement. Disagreements don't end with a police officer beaten to death. A woman shot. Another officer killing himself.
This wan't a disagreement and it wasn't the blitzkrieg. Quite obviously it's something in the middle and it has yet to be determined how to properly label what happened. This binary horseshit is how we stay on the road you keep talking about.
wrote on 13 Jan 2021, 04:06 last edited by@aqua-letifer said in Impeach!:
Another officer killing himself.
Wow, what did he ever do to the Clintons?
-
wrote on 13 Jan 2021, 21:51 last edited by
