Trump's 2nd Senate Impeachment Trial Begins Tuesday

You know you could really do with a lot of things, starting right now as this is my last time I'll respond to you. A: Never presume to know what words I'm using or what I'm saying. If I used precedence, I used that word in the context of the post. If you don't understand that context, ask. But never presume to know. And B: We're stating the obvious that Biden had nothing to do with it, in his views as he's stated numerous times its a distraction. But it also, for all time undermines the Senate.

Because they are NOT a part of the same legislative branch. The House writes bills, and the Senate votes on it(though bills sometimes can originate in the Senate). The Senate singularly votes on war declarations, not the House. The Senate, politically is viewed(or was viewed by me, until now) as the higher of the two branches of the legislature, thus different. Again, until now.

The Senate was not obligated to approve of the 'constitutionality' of the farce that the country is forced to endure due to the nature of the political incompetence that presently makes up our nation. It was 'obligated' out of the hours, they already wasted. And no, it's not "intelligence and knowledge", it's more accurately stated to be looking for a foot to stand on, for their own incompetent arguments.

So in line with the stupidity that's befallen our nation, let's discuss the difference between Secretary of War Belknap and the FORMER President trump. The main difference is that of title. Holding a trial for a former officer might be petty, might even be of irrelevance but no one would really care. Even if for a political vendetta, the scope of that vendetta would largely be limited.

This however is the former President. The former chief executive of the office, as well as since this is a political trial let's even say it's a former political leader. Would such a political trial be out of place in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia? No, in fact they were quite commonplace.

So let me repeat: No matter how many people defend the indefensible, and the all-time undermining of the American Government that undermining did in fact occur. We now have a Junta called the 'Senate', and a government that is further away from the framers than we could've imagined. The US having a junta system is something we never could've imagined.

Now, after obliterating the incompetence we've all been forced to endure the last vestige of argument for destroying the Senate has been: "We need to hold Trump accountable!" Except you won't, and you can't(among other factors involved here.). But you'll most likely undermine any attempts by the DOJ to do so. The Democrats aren't advancing the prosecutor's case, they're undermining it. The DOJ can't speak to this but you can bet privately these prosecutors are praying that they stop, lest the case is undermined in courts(which it will be.)


I've never seen anything like it: If crimes were committed, you're literally botching an investigation. Something no private citizen has the power to do(and yes, Congresspersons would be seen as private citizens during the course of an ongoing investigation). But ignoring that factor, the political upheaval of the Senate is confirmed for all time.

And for WHAT? A confirmed dog and pony show? Now, you can read every word here bit by bit and digest, but if you can't digest here's the reader's digest version: My words are my words, never again question them and that nothing can change that the US Senate is now a Colossal Joke.

And the joke's on all of us citizens.

 

What does that have to do with shady editing of a video?

 

They will fail to remove him on a 2/3rds vote, but, they may then disqualify him on a majority vote.

"disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.”​

If they break the link between removal and disqualification, and claim that they can disqualify Trump from holding office on a majority vote after failing to impeach him on a 2/3rds vote, then the GOP, if they return to the majority in the House and Senate in 2022, can impeach and disqualify BOTH Biden and Harris, making them BOTH ineligible to run in 2024 and ineligible to finish their terms of office, which, would make Kevin McCarthy acting President.

But, we'll wait and see how stupid they are.

 

The problem is the while he is on the record as saying those things (only one or twice) he is also on the record encouraging the protestors on multiple occasions. In other words calling for 'action' far more often than he is calling for calm. As for the BLM? applying the same rule you would have to have one or more Democrat politicians doing the same thing in the same proportion i.e. as an individual making lots of calls to action vs few if any calls for restraint. Or if you prefer 10 Dems being on the record as stating something once is not the same thing as 1 Dem stating it 10 times.

As to whether it could set a precedent? Possibly, albeit the circumstances (the riot) were rather exceptional. It would be hard to see any future outgoing President Democrat or Republican lending their weight/support similar kinds of protests. Trump is somewhat unique in that regard. Regardless of what you think of their politics previous Presidents for the most part have departed the White House with a sense of moment and decorum appropriate to the office that Trump seems to lack. IMO I don't think the majority of members on either side of politics see long term advantage (to the extent they ever think long term at all) in impeachment for impeachments sake every time your opponent leaves office.

 

I hope You are right but here is what I think:
GOP isn’t gonna get house and senate ever again
We are in a one party system now. Just like third world countries
They are flooding Texas with illegals to turn it blue and we saw in 2020 how easy it is for anyone to vote

they cancel anyone that disagree

we are gonna be like the Middle East in no time

 

So...you want to take your ball and go home? The Senate makes it's own rules on trying an impeachment sent to them by the House. The rules are made by a simple majority, which the Democrats have. Twice now they've voted for the trial to proceed. They've won both of those votes, which were actually bi-partisan, with 5 cross-overs on the Paul motion and 6 crossovers on today's vote. The pro-Trump Senators have LOST the procedural votes thus far. You may not like it, but that's the reality, the fact. And, that means the trial is moving ahead to a presentation of the evidence.

 

Yes it does when that was the factor of their vote and more than enough to acquit did so because they believed it was unconstitutional. The House Managers should have boned up on the history rather than listening to MSM who don't that about which they speak. Professor Turley was quite clear on it. And your having to resort to insulting people you don't know anything about once again proves you have nothing to refute the Constitution and the history.

 

And you think they do not have to adhere to the Constitution? They set procedural rules, times and dates and how many witnesses will be presented. They can't usurp and turn the Constitution on it's head in those rules. And yes the "pro-Trump" are going to lose every time because the Dems have a majority on majority votes and they have made up their minds. The PRESIDEING JUDGE has already made up his mind without seeing a scintilla of the evidence.

 

And as I said he would go public announcing his opposition and then you think Pelosi and Schumer would buck him. You're admitting he has no political leadership now? That Presidents can't and don't twist arms in Congress. They blew his inauguration with this nonsense, they are blowing his first 100 days with this nonsense that is going to gain them what exactly? They are actually making him a martyr to some and the let them eat cake while we try to satisfy our insatiable vengeance against this private citizen.

 

Yes more than needed to acquit. It's a lousy analogy but they have nothing else.

Yes they took it up and argued it was unconstitutional and it failed on that merit. Again not the case the Dems should be trying to cite.

He wasn't trying to "overthrow the vote" he was legally challenging the vote as was his right to so. This thing was planned well in advance the FBI says back to November and there is no reason to believe that Trump was conducting secret phone calls trying to orchestrate overthrowing the government.
And if he did it is a CRIMINAL matter not a matter for the Legislative Branch. The DOJ would prosecute through a grand jury and if the grand jury votes to indict then to a trial. Why are the Dems so afraid to have the proper branch do it's job?

 

The Belknap Case?

Your "talking point" sounds like Total BS.

On August 1, 1876, the Senate rendered a majority vote against Belknap on all five articles. As each vote fell short of the necessary two-thirds, however, he won acquittal. Belknap was not prosecuted further; he died in 1890.

Thus, I assume that you can furnish an EXACT Link that says that the Vote of Acquittal on ALL of the 5 Articles was because some of the Senate thought it "failed on the merit" and was "Unconstitutional".

I can find no reliable source that backs up your "claim".

Thus, please furnish the Exact Link (to your "claim") or admit that you have been posting BS.

Thx in advance.

 

Did you try Google?

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPREC-HINDS-V3/html/GPO-HPREC-HINDS-V3-26.htm

Wrong again.....

 

Here is a short summary of the vote in the Belknap case:

A majority of the Senate voted to convict Belknap, but not the required two-thirds, so he was acquitted. The vast majority of senators who voted to acquit did so not because they thought that he wasn’t guilty of the offense but, rather, because he was no longer an official.

^There is no mention (whatsoever) of the Senate's opinion of whether or not it was Constitutional.

And, OBVIOUSLY Deciding to Acquit "because he was no longer official" is Completely Different than acquitting because they thought the Trial was Unconstitutional.

Yet another Easily Derailed Pro-Trump "Talking Point" bites the dust.

Oh well, back to the drawing board.

 

Biden knows who brought him to the dance. And, they can walk and chew gum at the same time. I believe they've agreed to half days on the trial and the other half on legislation. There are a lot of people in all parties who want to see people punished for the attack on the Capitol. And, they know that's going to require more evidence than a video tape production. And, as I've already stated, whatever the result in the Senate trial, I would expect the current DoJ investigation to continue and currently be going on under a Grand Jury as of now.

 

Sorry...he was not. he lied to the crowd in his speech, telling them that when there is fraud, that changes everything and that the rules are different. Then he told them changing those rules was on Pence's shoulders. No. The rules don't change and Pence had already decided to follow the rules. Then he sent them off to the Capitol. After the break-in, he tweeted "mike doesn't have the courage to do what needs to be done (presumably that meant he didn't have the courage to break the rules). That's incitement and it can be sufficient for an indictment and trial. If Trump is not convicted on impeachment because of the Republican vote, a guilty verdict in a criminal court will finish the Republican Party.

 

With removal off the table, we are only here because the majority in the House of Representatives are terrified of facing Donald Trump as a political rival in the future.

Democrats are terrified of facing Trump again.
​

With 44 US Senators on record that the impeachment trial is unconstitutional and only 34 necessary for a complete exoneration of Trump on the trumped up "incitement" charge, acquittal is now virtually certain.

Tonight's vote tonight declares the trial both constitutional and effectively over. This may make any calling of witnesses even more difficult for the House.

These Senators are right. Impeachment refers to the removal of “the President” and other officials in office. The primary stated purpose of the trial is to determine whether “the President shall be removed.” The president is Joe Biden, not Donald Trump. So the Senate will hold a rather curious vote to decide whether to remove a president who has already gone. Moreover, Chief Justice John Roberts is not present to answer these questions because there is no president to try. Article I states “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” Who is being tried. Is he a president? Obviously not. Is he a civil officer? No, he is a private citizen. A private citizen is being called to the Senate to be tried for removal from an office that he does not hold.

Every other part of the Constitution using the term “the President” or such specific officeholders is a reference to the current officeholder, not anyone who has ever held that office. Otherwise, Donald Trump could still be issuing pardons.

The letter states the obvious countervailing argument that emphasizes the allowance for a future penalty in the form of disqualification from office:

Never was it held, in ratification, framing, or any time since that there is lifetime eligibility for an impeachment trial for anyone who serves in federal office. If impeachment applied to private citizens, one would have expected a substantive discussion given the anti-federalist mistrust of the Constitution and the rising hostility between the Federalists and the Jeffersonians. There is great danger of opportunism by Congress especially when the Speaker is a bitter enraged petty and angry person like Nancy Pelosi. With this, now a new Congress with a new majority can seek retroactive impeachments and disqualifications for figures in an opposing party.

There are only two American retroactive cases before the Senate. Only one truly resulted in a trial. That is not particularly strong precedent for the constitutional interpretation. In the case of William Blount, the Senate outright rejected the case. Blount did not even show up because he contested the very basis for an impeachment trial of a private citizen. This involved a former legislative official and the Senate refused to hold a trial. This rejection occurred when most signers of the Constitution were still alive, indeed, Blount was one of those signers. Others Framers like Justice Joseph Story also questioned the concept of retroactive trials. Story wrote

The second case is William Belknap. Senators argued that it was entirely inappropriate to try the former Secretary of War. Almost half of the Senate voted to dismiss the case on a threshold vote. Belknap was promptly acquitted though clearly guilty of the charge, which he freely admitted, as with Trump today, a great many of the Senators viewed the trial as unconstitutionally extending beyond removal. So all we have is one contested case that resulted in an acquittal. Soon we will have two.

For the first time in history, the Crazed House used a “snap impeachment” without the traditional hearing or formal opportunity for a president to respond.

The Senate will now hold a retroactive trial for someone who is now a private citizen.

Like with the filibuster, now any new Congress can come into power and disqualify opponents from public office despite their being private citizens.

https://jonathanturley.org/2021/01/...ls-a-response-to-the-open-letter-of-scholars/

I demand that the GOP, upon resuming the majority, disqualify every Obama official involved in illegally spying on Trump. And the Contemptible Eric "The With" Holder.

 

Laughable. Trump gave Democrats control of Congress and the White House in four years. There are some terrified people out there; not Democrats.

At least 180 people around the U.S. have since been identified and arrested on charges stemming from the [Jan. 6] violence, according to the Justice Department.

Feds add charges for 2 men arrested in Las Vegas in Capitol riot case - Las Vegas Sun Newspaper

 

The Senate accepted the Article of Impeachment from the House. The former President was impeached before he left the Presidency. The Senate rules, passed by a simple majority allowed the trial to continue. This suggests a "Star Witness" (or Witnesses) for the House Managers, who will testify against Trump and who is now unpardonable. Most likely, these people were in some way involved in a conspiracy to commit insurrection or sedition. And, will provide damaging testimony against Trump in return for a lower charge. But, that's just a theory...the next week should tell. I would expect both a Grand Jury indictment to be announced shortly before a final Senate vote on the House Article of Impeachment. Then, let the Senate Trumpees vote against conviction. And, it's probable that U.S. Congressional members will be called as witnesses and may testify against him for lesser charges in their own impeachment trials and criminal trials. Democrats could care less about Trump...they want the conspiracy nuts in Congress who were cooperating with him. This is, you might say, a House (and Senate) Cleaning.
This is the reason Pelosi held back sending the Articles to the Senate...they want to catch Trump "in the open" so to speak, without the power of the Presidency to hide behind...indictable and without pardon powers.

 

That's not something to celebrate. You might like our government being a junta-class system but it's so far removed from democracy that no one should ever again not even in passing call it a democratic form of government. If they want to play at passing 'judgment' on Trump, that's fine but their judgment is irrelevant to the larger judgment on the Senate, for all time for the rest of the nation's existence.

That's what you(and those 55-56 senators) are missing. No Historian with an appropriate appreciation of what's happening, will recognize it as anything but such. They basically turned the Senate into The Hague, and what a disgraceful performance for which history will record.

This isn't about Donald Trump, his political goose has long been cooked. This is about the Senate damaging itself forever, it can never recover from this point forward.

 

Trust the foundations of our nation. We are the longest surviving major nation in the world today, because we have an unusually sound system of government. Yes, we have ignorant clowns with national microphones, screaming all the time, but, did you notice that not ONE Republican House member lost their election this year? Not one. And we won so many State Legislatures that we will have control of redrawing far more election maps than the Democrats will, and these will be the maps that the 2022 election will be held on.

Crazy Nancy has only a 5 seat margin. She has the thinnest margin of majority, ever in the history of the nation. She is teetering by a thread. This is her last hurrah. The last time she uses the Speakership to crap all over the whole nation. We true up House seats every ten years. Once again, people in this great nation have been voting with their feet. They have been moving from Blue States and Cities to Red States and Cities. The Red States are going to pick up 7 House Seats as a result of the 2020 census, and the 2022 election will elect the representatives that will fill those seats. Along with these 7 House seats, the Red States also pick up 7 additional EC votes. Stated another way, the Blue States LOSE 7 house seats and 7 Electoral College votes.

Just get out and vote in 2022. We'll be fine. They can steal a national election by stealing the hell out of 4 Blue cities, but that isn't true in the midterms. In the midterms if they steal the hell out of a city, they only steal the city. They can't steal any other House seats. They could steal Senate seats. These are the States holding Senate Elections in 2022. We need to take ONE Blue seat to regain the majority: Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maryland • Missouri • Nevada • New Hampshire • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • South Carolina • South Dakota • Utah • Vermont • Washington • Wisconsin. Frankly I don't see any that will be easy to take. Map here: https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_elections,_2022

The GOP is now the party of working class, rural and religious without advanced degrees. Did you notice how much more strongly we pulled the minority vote in 2020? Do you know how many of the folks you are convinced will assuredly only vote Blue are rural, working class that take their religious views very seriously and don't have advanced degrees?

Of the cases where the Courts have actually heard and weighed the evidence, Trump has won 2/rds of them with another 25 still being litigated. By the next election, the judiciary will have issued far more decisions, and I expect elections to be cleaner than 2020, which isn't a high bar to clear. You can tell by how desperately Dems are trying to make sure they never face Trump again in an election contest, that they fear him. They fear him because they don't think they can beat him.

Americans are so fed up with the Authoritarian Left. We are nice folks, incredibly tolerant, but, there is a limit and these clowns are charging hard into it.

It's somewhat beyond belief the incredible piece of real estate we have the immense good fortune to control. Full Access to two oceans, essentially immune to naval blockade, A damn good neighbor to the North, a decent neighbor to the South. Farmland that can grow anything, hell we grow so much food that rather than being in danger of starving, we are all in danger of being too fat! All the energy we need, should we decide to go after it. People with a great work ethic, and warrior class that is the world's best. There is no other nation like us. We aren't going to become the "middle east".

Just stay cool, get out and vote, help your sensible neighbors to do the same. We'll work it out.

 

LOL! You are posting opinion and not fact.

 

For a Senate trial that 'doesn't matter' the right is sure worked up over it.

 

Somehow, I predict they will pick off 1 more R after the argument.... Perhaps Portman, perhaps Lankford...

I'm calling 57-43

 

I'll type slower and in BIG letters just for you...

SOLE

POWER

OF

IMPEACHMENT

That means Who, Why, When, and How... The Where is pretty much fixed...

 

Possibly true, very sad,

However, remember that YOU guys caused it, not D's....

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/10/us/politics/republicans-leaving-party.html