DEVASTATING ARGUMENT presented by Rep. RASKIN, et al, on DAY 2 of SENATE IMPEACHMENT

Not only stunning, but irrefutable.

 

I didn’t see anything but more clips of violence.

 

Lies, distortions, and vapid emotionalism. Prime LW bait.

 

The people peacefully walking between the ropes in the rotunda came in later, after the doors had been beaten or smashed open. They acted like they were on a tour.

The violent mob that broke in, beat the crap (and the life) out of Capitol police, shouted Trump's tweets in real time over a megaphone, trashed Pelosi's office, chanted "hang Mike Pence!", stormed through hallways looking for stenators and representatives with violent intent.

Have you really not see the videos? You didn't see them trying to pull a gas mask painfully off an officer's face? You didn't hear the screams of one officer being crushed in a doorway? Or the mob on one set of steps yo a door beating the crap out of officers with sticks, crutches, and even an American flag?

Do you really believe there was no rioting?

 

It's an open forum. What's stopping you?You can post your take withour being asked.

 

Trump using the word, "peacefully," 1 time, in a speech in which he said the word, "fight," (including with the suffix, "like hell,") 6 times, is not exculpatory evidence. It sounds like you might be getting your information from Breitbart & the like, but not the trial, itself. One needs look at the total story: before the election, Trump begins telling his throngs that, if he doesn't win, the election was rigged. Then, after the election, he makes all kinds of nefarious accusations about the Dems cheating, none of which are ever substantiated with evidence. All the while, though, he's telling people that this election was stolen from them. Trump had already spent the prior 4 years convincing his followers that they can't trust the news media, or government intelligence agencies, and now convinces them that even elections are crooked, bringing their agitation, from all this supposed manipulation, to a boil.

Also, during this time, Trump begins demonizing Republicans, to his base, who won't fraudulently alter election results (which, itself, is a crime). Having no luck on that arm-twisting front, he promotes a rally in D.C., on the same day as Congress is slated to officially award electors, strongly encouraging as many as possible to attend, adding, "it's gonna be wild."

Trump schedules the time that he will be speaking to them, just down the street from the Capitol building, so it overlaps with the certification of electors. He gives a speech telling them they were robbed, that he had actually won the election big-- which is a lie; over 50 courts & 80 judges, many of whom are Republican & some of which had been appointed by Trump, dismissed his cases due to lack of evidence-- and that if they don't, "fight like hell," they're not going to have a country, anymore. Lastly, he tells them of his intention, for them to all march down to the Capitol building, to, "Stop the steal," by strengthening the, "weak," Republicans (the type who put the law, election integrity, and a scruple for proper procedure, ahead of their allegiance to Trump), a.k.a., RINOS, & even traitors, as they are facing an elector total which would declare Biden to be the winner of the presidential election. What avenue is left for them, when their votes are not fairly counted, in a sham election? It's not hard to understand what Trump had in mind.

And, if you need more proof that this was Trump's intent, that is shown when the man entrusted with the safety of the nation, our Commander-in-Chief, finds out about the riot, gets calls for help from those in the Capitol (including the police), and does...NOTHING about it.

 

Your contention that this was unpredictable is belied by the fact that many Congresspeople were very apprehensive, & worried, about having this Trump, national rally, running concurrently with their certification of electoral totals-- it's a bit much, for a coincidence. I heard one Representative who called her husband on the eve of this event to make sure he knew where her will was, & go over any final arrangements.

But, on to your other assertion. Do I understand it correctly that you are trying to put the blame for this onto Antifa? So it was they who were leading, and largely participating in the sacking of the Capitol?

 

guys I think we should listen to this wisest of women instead . She has great discerning insight into this misunderstood man







This is my favorite quote of the last four years. Susan, you did yourself proud.

 

That is one of the reasons I'd been hoping for (& advocating, on PF) a longer delay before forwarding the article of Impeachment to the Senate: to allow for a more fulsome investigation & so an even more air-tight, undeniable case. Also, though Congressmen are always claiming to be able to walk & chew gum at the same time, the Senate's been having a tough time just chewing gum, lately, & with all the urgent Covid-related action that needs to be taken, all the Biden nominees that need confirming, not to mention the backlog of issues that McConnell allowed to die on the vine, after being passed during the last House session, I felt their plates would be full for at least a few months.

But I believe this timing is on account of Biden wanting to get past all this A.S.A.P., so Nancy Pelosi is obliging. There still is a very strong case. But the two-part question is, no matter how strong they made the case, would it make a difference to 1) Republican Senators, or 2) Republican voters, the majority of which are more committed to Trump than to the GOP, if polls are to be believed (& yet, didn't Republican candidates for other offices, generally, do better than Trump?).

It is really the answer to the 2nd part of that question which controls the answer to the first. I had been rather skeptical of it, like dgrichards--

-- but you (AmericanNationalist) are saying that it would make a difference to you. It looks like-- while Dems wanted witnesses last time, but couldn't get them-- now that they have the power of a majority, they are going to forego witnesses, this time.

So I'm asking you (dgrichards)-- and anyone else who wishes to weigh-in-- what you think; are there enough swayable Republicans out there that not calling witnesses is missing out on a real opportunity, or would it be a wasted effort of throwing good, available time after time that had been poorly used?

 

File that under "Nincompoop."

 

If you have some "exculpatory evidence," please show me.

 

There's no exculpatory evidence as it relates to the events of January 6th. They happened, we know they happened. This trial is about the semantics game. Did Trump plan, scheme or was aware of the attack? Can that be shown(Senate requirement), in the legal sphere it's beyond reasonable doubt.

I don't think they can get the beyond reasonable doubt, but apparently the second day they moved closer to showing it to the Senate.

 

While there is always hope that principles will triumph over personal interest, I have little confidence that 17 Republican Senators will vote to convict. Neither side of politics, even down here, give a stuff about principle.

 

I will say this about the reasonable doubt: Jurors don't have political interests. In a civilian court, Trump's actually pretty F'd because all jurors need is the statuary law and ask: "Does this match this" and if it does, well your goose is cooked.

 

A first year law student could win this case if the repubs were honest and had the courage to do their duty.

 

If the trial is fair and constitutional, then the vote in the end is fair and constitutional. Guilty or NOT Guilty! You don't get to have it both ways. Either the process is fair and constitutional or it is NOT!

What I state here isn't about me being right. It is about whether people believe the process to perform a trial against a private citizen is fair and constitutional. Again, if people say it is, then the results are fair and constitutional. People have to accept and live with the results as FAIR and CONSTITUIONAL. No cherry picking just because they didn't get the result they wanted!

 

Very true; but that is not the lay of the land. To paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, you go to trial with the jury you have, not the jury you wish you had. So, if you're them, who is your main audience: those recusant Republican Senators, or their constituents? Or are the Independents the big prize, here? Or are you really playing, primarily, to your own partisans?

 

This was nothing, this was flannelling, King Canute made a better argument than Raskin did. If you have any capacity for impartial thought surely you realise the spurious nature of these allegations?

 

They will substitute any made up fantasy or rationalization in order to pretend that Trumpism isn’t the anti democratic, racist mob that it is.

 

If you had any capacity for impartial thought, you would know (as I’m sure you actually do) that Rankin’s experience is true, accurate, documented and supported by obvious evidence.

If you had any capacity for impartial thought, there would be no question that the events of January 6th, represent the MAGA mob’s ultimate disgrace.

Trump and his inner circle spent weeks building this event up.

Of course, if you actually had a capacity for impartial thought on this subject, you would have no problem whatsoever with suspending the impeachment trial while further investigation is conducted into the organization of the riot itself.

I have no problem with such a pause, or investigation.

And since you’re trying to pretend that the obvious is spurious, then you should have no problem with continuing to inquire and dig through the wreckage of the Trump Administration.

Care to bet on how long it will be before direct evidence emerges that Trump’s inner circle was fully aware, and actively plotting with the various skinhead groups that were in that mob (the Michigan militias organized 19 bus loads, but that was all “spontaneous”!)

 

I've decided I'm going with the term "Failed American" for anybody who continues to support this person or his actions on 1/6.... Everybody born here automatically gets citizenship, there's nothing that can be done about that, but some people simply don't pass the ongoing test to deserve the term "American" for life if you cannot support the ideas that made it possible.

 

It is beyond belief that anyone, let alone a congressperson, suffering from verbiarrhea -- constipation of the brain and diarrhea of the mouth -- can be at all devastating.

 

If you have any awareness of consciousnesses outside of your own, understanding that other perspectives will necessarily differ from yours, and appreciation that this does not make them automatically wrong, then surely you realize the asinine nature of your question.

If your solipsism does not permit you to recognize alternate viewpoints, don't be too hard on yourself: not all animals have the capacity for comprehending other
intellects, or empathetically relating to other beings' possession of sentience, at least according to the experts. Still, you might make an effort to grasp the concept that your thoughts are not the only ones of any meaning or value in the world, since the list of creatures considered sentient & capable of empathy is growing by the day, & we wouldn't want you to be left standing alone, when the music stops.

 

The only people who even suggest that there is a reasonable doubt in this matter are the ones who will say and do anything to rationalize their continued devotion to their fuhrer.

The evidence of that is growing by the hour.

 

Well, that’s one way of looking at it.....