The Trump Impeachment Thread

January 21st, 2021 at 6:26:58 AM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
We had talked earlier, possibly in a different thread, about "counting the votes" in the trial phase.

Soopoo mentioned how sad that was, and that there were democrats who would vote no matter what.

Well, my point was there were so many republicans who are "no no matter what" that they shouldn't bother wasting their time, and certainly not start the trial within the first 100 days of the Biden presidency.

To support my point, here are some examples of republicans who are "no no matter what" who are supposed to be impartial jurors in the trial. I don't think the democrats should be "yes no matter what either"

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/01/20/politics/gop-senators-warn-mcconnell-backlash/index.html

I mention this because of the reasons, and implied threats they give:
If McConnell votes to convict, he shouldn't remain as leader.
McConnell will "take the temperature" of the senate and base his vote on the views of his colleagues.
"I think if any Republican-leader type who embraces that is doing a lot of damage to the party."
"What good comes from impeaching a guy in Florida?"
"No no no"
The party needs trump to be successful, and needs trump on their side. We can't win the presidency in 2024 without trump.
"I don't think we should be focusing on the Democrats' political retribution"
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
January 21st, 2021 at 10:27:34 AM permalink
SOOPOO
Member since: Feb 19, 2014
Threads: 22
Posts: 4157
Quote: Dalex64
We had talked earlier, possibly in a different thread, about "counting the votes" in the trial phase.

Soopoo mentioned how sad that was, and that there were democrats who would vote no matter what.

Well, my point was there were so many republicans who are "no no matter what" that they shouldn't bother wasting their time, and certainly not start the trial within the first 100 days of the Biden presidency.

To support my point, here are some examples of republicans who are "no no matter what" who are supposed to be impartial jurors in the trial. I don't think the democrats should be "yes no matter what either"

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/01/20/politics/gop-senators-warn-mcconnell-backlash/index.html

I mention this because of the reasons, and implied threats they give:
If McConnell votes to convict, he shouldn't remain as leader.
McConnell will "take the temperature" of the senate and base his vote on the views of his colleagues.
"I think if any Republican-leader type who embraces that is doing a lot of damage to the party."
"What good comes from impeaching a guy in Florida?"
"No no no"
The party needs trump to be successful, and needs trump on their side. We can't win the presidency in 2024 without trump.
"I don't think we should be focusing on the Democrats' political retribution"


I agree with you. Any Republican should be saying what McConnell originally said, which is that he is open to convicting, but hadn't made up his mind yet. No one has ever answered this to me.... is the standard for convicting.... 'beyond a reasonable doubt', or 'the preponderance of evidence'? If it is the former, I doubt that they will be able to prove a case to that level. I mean, Trump can say... sure, i was hoping they would make a scene outside the Capitol, but I never wanted them to storm it. I think that is true. If him not being able to foresee what his comments might lead to is just stupid, but not impeachable....

As I've said before.... I'd need a timeline of when it became clear that the Capitol police needed assistance, and when Trump became aware of it, and what he did when.... To me, the likely only impeachable offense if he intentionally did not protect the Capitol and thus the Constitution.
January 21st, 2021 at 10:43:20 AM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 188
Posts: 18633
Quote: SOOPOO


As I've said before.... I'd need a timeline of when it became clear that the Capitol police needed assistance, and when Trump became aware of it, and what he did when.... To me, the likely only impeachable offense if he intentionally did not protect the Capitol and thus the Constitution.


When Republicans were shot and shot at on the baseball field, both Obama and Bush were calling them within the hour to check on them. Did Trump even talk to his Vice President in the next few days?
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
January 21st, 2021 at 12:37:10 PM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
Quote: SOOPOO
I agree with you. Any Republican should be saying what McConnell originally said, which is that he is open to convicting, but hadn't made up his mind yet. No one has ever answered this to me.... is the standard for convicting.... 'beyond a reasonable doubt', or 'the preponderance of evidence'? If it is the former, I doubt that they will be able to prove a case to that level. I mean, Trump can say... sure, i was hoping they would make a scene outside the Capitol, but I never wanted them to storm it. I think that is true. If him not being able to foresee what his comments might lead to is just stupid, but not impeachable....

As I've said before.... I'd need a timeline of when it became clear that the Capitol police needed assistance, and when Trump became aware of it, and what he did when.... To me, the likely only impeachable offense if he intentionally did not protect the Capitol and thus the Constitution.


It looks like the standard of proof level required isn't in any law, and is decided each time.

https://www.rollcall.com/2020/01/21/impeachment-comes-with-its-own-rules-or-lack-thereof-on-standard-of-proof/
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
January 21st, 2021 at 1:30:42 PM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
An alternative to the opinions of a few trump lawyers

Quote:
Legal scholars, including at Federalist Society, say Trump can be convicted


https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/21/legal-scholars-federalist-society-trump-convict-461089
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
January 22nd, 2021 at 7:42:36 AM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
Looks like they are itching to get started.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/22/schumer-says-senate-will-receive-impeachment-article-on-monday-461305

I hope they aren't doing this right away out of spite, because McConnell/Trump asked for a delay for a few weeks.

I would have preferred that they wait, so they could get some important work done without distraction, such as filling cabinet positions.

The trial can still be delayed, but in the absence of an agreement ahead of time, they'll have to at least start the proceedings immediately and hopefully work out a time-sharing agreement (how much time they spend on the trial vs other work) before too long.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
January 22nd, 2021 at 3:16:13 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 188
Posts: 18633
Blaming Trump is apparently a good defense strategy for the Capitol rioters.

I can see that.

Trump was the official head of the executive. If the lawyers can argue the official arm of our government was directing people to act irresponsibly they have a better defense. No different than being able to point to your driving license department if the authority started suggesting it's okay to run red lights once in awhile.

Quote:
Attorneys representing people arrested in connection with the Capitol riot are focusing on Trump.
They're blaming him for inciting the deadly siege with his spread of disinformation about the election.
The allegations bolster House Democrats' impeachment case against Trump and expose him to more legal risk.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/lawyers-representing-the-capitol-insurrectionists-are-building-a-damning-case-against-trump/ar-BB1d0t4U?ocid=msedgntp

edit, I could see this also working out where these guys may not win their criminal trial, but still win a civil case against trump since the standard of proof is lower.
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
January 22nd, 2021 at 3:33:51 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 188
Posts: 18633
Actually I wonder if this could end up as a class action suit?
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
January 23rd, 2021 at 6:19:28 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: Nareed
It might pay for the GOP to leak some numbers on how much money Golden Boy's businesses are taking in from foreigners, especially from foreign governments, through emoluments which are clearly forbidden in the Constitution.

This sounds like filler for the impeachment, which should focus on the much more serious issue of obstruction, but it might be key to crack his base. Especially if such payments can be tied to broken promises as regards trade and such.


This thread was begun on May 17, 2017 only 17 weeks after the Presidential term began and over 2.5 years before the actual impeachment of Donald Trump on December 18, 2019.
January 23rd, 2021 at 7:50:54 PM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
Embezzling is stealing money from your employer.

I guess by today's logic, you can avoid prosecution by leaving your job before you go to trial.

After all, of you are no longer an employee, how can you be tried for stealing from your employer?
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan