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

There is no comparison between storming the capitol building and killing people with an NBA event. This is a Loony Tunes comparisons. What was highlighted? Trumps Mob was storming the capitol building as shown on the the footage for several days. How would you come up with a less highlighted video?. You must think it's unfair to show Capitol rioters doing what they were actually doing.. storming the capitol and forcing Senators and Congress-people to run for the lives. I guess if it was up to you you would edit out some of the violence which would make the Video into a lie. Trump did nothing to call off the rioters even though Chris Christy and others begged him to do so. After it was all over he called the participants special people. That he loved??????!!
.
Transcript: Trump sees special people, Biden sees extremists (yahoo.com)
"We love you. You’re very special. You’ve seen what happens. You see the way others are treated — that are so bad and so evil. I know how you feel, but go home and go home in peace".

I don't get it. What kind of psycho- president loves people who storm the nations capitol and commit murder and violence.
.

 

You mean like Project Veritas ??!!!

 

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

Lol most of the footage of the video has already been presented on the nightly news for the past several days. .Your criticism is unfounded since you're clueless as to how to make the Video less of a montage other than to edit out all the scenes that show the range of violence and destruction .. Let's face it you simply would hate any video that shows the results of Trump stoking his terrorists. Speaking of Soviets Trump has comradery with Putin who for years was a member of the Soviet KGB.

 

Sure... here you go.

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/

You Leftists ought to read it sometime.

This whole event is ridiculous and simple propaganda for those susceptible.

 

The Constitution is not evidence.

 

Yes I'll take that bet, $100 to the charity of your choice, what time limit do you want to set?

 

I have all the empathy in the world, your overuse of the thesaurus doesn't change the facts. Here's a new one for you, the DNC case is already stumbling;
Jonathan Turley: Trump impeachment – Lee-Raskin exchange reveals this glaring hole in the case | Fox News

 

NOT GUILTY!

Of course, the longer we keep the House and Senate focused on Trump, the less time they have to destroy our country doing stupid things Dems do!

 

Recap. Your initial post:

My response:

Your current claim:

The inconsistency: you do not demonstrate this supposed empathy in either of your posts. Therefore, the possibilities are:
1) You do not understand the meaning of, "empathy," which you claim to possess in abundance;
2) You know what it is, but your boast of your great empathy is a lie;
3) You know what empathy is, and do possess some, but your thinking is defective to the point of not understanding what act empathy would clearly dictate from you.

Actually, 1 & 3 can be combined, because, whether or not you know the word, if you possessed the capacity to understand things from another's perspective, & still have not acted accordingly, one must assume a mental deficiency.
The only alternative left, in which thinking is not your problem, means that lack of empathy is.

To know which is the case, Mr. Empathy, what would your initial reply be, which I emphasized to you in my reply (hint: it has nothing to do with thesauruses)? And what would be the follow-up for that, from even only the perspective of acting courteously?

 

Here is a montage for you.
https://citizenfreepress.com/breaki...deo-on-loop-during-the-entire-senate-hearing/

 

Every ounce of that video of what happened inside or outside of the Capitol that is related to riots is irrelevant.

You cannot say Trump made them do what they did unless you are willing to let them all go free for the same excuse. We say each individual is responsible for his or her action, but that is not what the liberals are saying. Let all of those rioters go free or sit down and be quiet Dems!

 

There is nothing unconstitutional about this impeachment trial.

 

You nor the Senate get to decide that. Only the courts can make that call.... where do you guys come from?

 

That's incorrect. The Senate did, in fact, decide that very issue on Monday.

I'm watching now. Trump's defense attorney seems to be basing his defence on two very important points about which he is completely incorrect:

1. He has said several times that much of the rioting was pre-planned and therefore did not result from Trump's words at his rally that day. He seems to have slept through the last few days, because the House has made no such claim. It's their contention that he's been riling up his base since last summer.

2. (And you seem to be under the same misconception), this is not a criminal trial. This is not a court of law. "Due process" does not apply as it does in criminal cases. Think of it more like a civil proceeding, in which there is no risk of incarceration, just a redress of whatever the plaintiff is suing for. In this case, the plaintiff is the House, and the defendant is Trump. What the plaintiff wants is accountability in the form of Trump being barred from ever holding public office again.

And in answer to your last question: I'm not a guy, and I'm from Torrance, CA.

 

I quit reading your response right there. I don't care what the Senate voted, then NEVER decide Constitutionality. That is for the Judiciary. They decided in their opinion that they could go forward because they thought it was Constitutional. There's a huge difference, they do not have the power you suggest and anyone taking a Civics 101 Class would know that.

 

There have been 2 major turning points in modern America Politics and not in a good way

Newt Gingrich and Trump

Both hell bent on helping themselves .............. not America

 

Newt Gingrich was a hero. The first man to Balance the Budget over decades. Any fiscally responsible American should praise him.

 

Newt was the first to turn a functioning Congress into a quagmire

Political scientists have credited Gingrich with playing a key role in undermining democratic norms in the United States and hastening political polarization and partisanship also resigned from Congress for having an affair

 

Obviously, you weren't watching. You remain quite wrong. Seriously, read at least item #2 in my post. The fact that you refused to do that in the first place speaks volumes about why facts aren't getting through to so many on the right.

 

Sorry, but the judicial branch determines constitutionality. Otherwise we would not have things like Roe vs Wade, or Brown Vs The Board of Education or the WKA decision, or the Heller decision. What you propose is that congress can write a law making slavery legal and because they all voted and signed off on it that makes it constitutional. Hint: it doesn’t.

So in the end, it doesn’t matter who is arguing what(or not arguing in this case)in the “impeachment trial that isn’t an impeachment trial” as constitutionality is decided by the courts.

 

You wrote a great deal but you actually said nothing except that you disagree with me. So once again, how do I not demonstrate empathy? And what initial reply do you refer to?

 

Well, the Democrats authoritarian fantasies came crashing down today as a reality check of the truth smashed them into the rocks when the Trump team delivered its case.

What an absolute waste of time by the Democrats. They never had a case... which explains their one day Impeachment with no witnesses, no evidence, and allowed for no legal defense for Trump. What an Abuse of Power by Democrats.

 

Due process always applies in all trials and prosecutions -- criminal, civil, and congressional -- in the American tenants of justice.

 

Impeachment is constitutional by default. Nobody is writing laws at an impeachment. It's a ridiculous argument. Congress has sole power over impeachment. If Congress decides only blonde congresswomen can decide guilt or innocence, that's what happens. All constitutional. You can be impeached for whatever the House wants to impeach you for. If the House decides wearing loafers is grounds for removal, and the Senate votes for removal, you're gone. Simple as that.